Pull Down MLK's Statue And Why. Pelosi and Schumer Reject Concept of Amending. Racism Not Endemic. It Began In Cuba. Sensitivity training.

I asked my computer guru, who lives in Canada where they hate Trump but cannot verbalize why, what he thought about Trump's prospects for a second terms.  "He said "You can't argue with results" but  acknowledged Trump was his own worst enemy.  If results mean anything, as they should, he stated Trump is the only president, since Reagan, who actually gets things done.  He said when Obama went to China they would not allow him to come down the main stairs of his plane, when he went to Saudi Arabia they made him wait and then he bowed etc. They may talk behind Trump's back but they see him as a unique leader and someone they have not had to deal with in a long time."
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Buy American and the next statue that should be torn down is MLK's.  Why?  So he will not have to witness the antithesis of what he sought, preached and intended and would be ashamed to view.

Meanwhile, all former/old card decks must be burned and the "spades" suit must be replaced by something less racist

And:.

While we are at it , the game of Mah Jongg must be renamed so as not to offend Xi.

Finally:

A similar department to what China established must be created here so all white citizens (gun toting, bible thumping deplorables) are cleansed of their deep seated and hidden prejudices and that means they must undergo government sensitivity training. Al Sharpton would make an excellent starting Agency Head.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Subject: Kneeling in the halls of congress

Things that make you wonder are Democrats hypocrites?. 

I watched the Democratic leaders of Congress kneel in the halls of Congress for about 9 minutes for the death of a black man named George Floyd.

I have never seen them kneel for a fallen police officer.

I have never seen them kneel for a fallen soldier.

I have never seen them kneel for thousands of aborted babies

I have never seen them kneel for a murdered white man or woman

I have never seen them kneel for the thousands of black on black murder victims.

I have never seen them kneel for the thousands of elderly people that died in our nursing homes due to the Corona Virus.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 

I have to ask WHY are Democrats putting the life of George Floyd as more valuable than the lives of everyone else? In fact, Democrats have put so much value on the life of George Floyd they have allowed rioting, looting, arson and murder of police officers and mayhem in communities nationwide, and now some want to Disband Police Departments?

An Appeals Court tells Judge Sullivan drop charges against Flynn. About time.  Another set up tragedy by Obama's wing persons in the intelligence agencies and FBI.

The argument by Democrats now shifts to Flynn lied and thus, should not be exonerated.  Meanwhile, Hillary lied, destroyed her cell phone, hid documents that re-appeared mysteriously and yet goes free reinforcing the fact double standards are alive and well.

If Sullivan pursues should he be impeached and disbarred?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Now radicals have begun attacking  liberal and cowardly mayors and governors, tear down statues and are  moving further away from their initial demands. We are entering the second phase of experiencing what goes around comes around.  Only a matter of time before some high profile liberal icon is attacked etc. and then we will finally see calls/demands to end anarchy parading under the guise of  false claims America is an evil nation and inherently racist. It is called the boomerang effect.

Meanwhile,  a great black Senator from S.C is discovering Democrats would prefer to keep the pot boiling in order to win the 2020 election rather than begin the process of compromise so all lives can be protected. Democrats prefer blocking Scott rather than proposing  amendments and engaging in the Democratic process.  That is generally how legislation has historically been passed until Democrats decided to ignore history. Schumer and Pelosi are hypocrites but what is new?

Pandering always backfires but often too late.

And:

Another black op ed writer proposes racism is not epidemic.

Blocking Police Reform

Democrats may prevent the Scott bill from a debate or amendment. 

By The Editorial Board

Democrats are increasingly confident they’ll gain Senate control in November, and for evidence watch how they handle Republican Senator Tim Scott’s police reform bill this week. Democrats are signaling they’ll block the bill even from moving to the floor for debate, much less votes on amendments.

This is cynicism squared, and it can only mean that Democrats feel they’ll pay no political price for obstruction. Wide majorities of Americans in both parties want something done, but Democrats may be betting the media will blame defeat on President Trump and portray the GOP as unreasonable. They may be right, but that’s unfair to the Scott bill that is a good-faith effort to nudge local police departments toward better practices.

Policing is a classic state and local power under the Constitution, so the federal role is limited to using money to leverage change. The feds contribute a small share of police budgets—a mere 6% in New York City—but the money can matter if it’s tied to desirable policy.

The Scott bill sensibly stresses data collection, which shouldn’t be controversial. His bill would require state and local governments to report each year to the FBI’s National Use-of-Force Data Collection on police interactions that cause death or serious injury. Some police departments already report this information, but more data from more agencies could inform training.

Democrats want to go much further and require law-enforcement agencies to report traffic stops and pat-downs by the race and ethnicity of both the officers and civilians involved. Their goal is to use a paint-by-colors “disparate impact” analysis to show “patterns and practices” of policing. This will make it easier for the Justice Department to sue local police departments under the 1994 Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act.

Attorney General Eric Holder used this law to obtain court-imposed consent decrees that federalized law enforcement in the likes of Baltimore, Newark, Cleveland and Ferguson, Mo. Yet there’s little evidence that federal control has reduced racial tension or improved policing in the 20 or so cities under consent decrees since the early 1990s.

Harvard economist Roland Fryer has also found that crime rises in cities where the feds investigate in this fashion after a viral episode of alleged police misconduct. The Scott bill’s data will do more good.

Mr. Scott also wants to deter bad police practices while leaving ultimate discretion to local officials. Take chokeholds of the kind officer Derek Chauvin used against George Floyd in Minneapolis. Mr. Scott would condition federal grants to jurisdictions that restrict chokeholds to when deadly force is authorized. Democrats want to make them a federal civil-rights violation.

Many jurisdictions such as New York, Dallas and Minneapolis have banned chokeholds, but restraining men who are resisting arrests can be dangerous and difficult. A federal ban seems excessive.

Many cities also forbid “no-knock” search warrants that let police enter a dwelling without announcement. No-knock warrants in drug raids are intended to prevent suspects from hiding evidence or arming themselves before police searches. Since there’s little data on how often they are used or to what effect, it’s hard to know whether unintentional harm to civilians outweighs their public-safety benefits.

Mr. Scott’s bill would require states and cities to report data on their use to the Attorney General. The AG would publish a public report on their use so states and cities can decide for themselves whether and when they should be used. Democrats want to ban them.

Democrats also believe that police brutality against blacks is caused by systemic racism, though most evidence indicates that officers use excessive force due to panic or poor training. Mr. Scott’s bill directs the Justice Department to develop a program to train officers in how to de-escalate confrontations and respond to suspects with mental illnesses.

There are other differences, many of them worth debating. But that’s the point—debate them. A Democratic filibuster would prevent the Scott bill from getting to the floor where Senators could offer amendments and the Senate could work its will for a change. The GOP seems united behind Mr. Scott’s bill so it would prevail most of the time. But the House is also moving a more command-and-control bill that Senate Democrats favor, and differences could be worked out in House-Senate conference.

Most of the hard work of police reform has to be done by states and cities, especially reforming collective bargaining that makes it hard to dismiss bad cops. And that requires Democrats to take on police unions, one of their main political constituencies.

No one should think federal reform will end police abuses, but Mr. Scott’s bill goes a long way toward meeting Democratic priorities. It ought to be the basis for compromise—that is, unless Democrats think they can kill it, blame Republicans in the process, and ride the issue to November and control of all of Washington.

And:

No, Police Racism Isn’t an Epidemic

The data don’t show racial bias in police use of deadly force. A few viral videos don’t prove otherwise. 

By Jason Riley

So far, we haven’t seen a shred of evidence that George Floyd’s death in police custody last month was racially motivated. But for those looking to exploit the incident, that doesn’t seem to matter.

The violence in the streets, and the liberal commentary that toggles between justification and cheerleading, is fueled by assumptions that racial discrimination in policing is widespread, that low-income minority communities are overpatrolled, and that black men are targeted for their skin color rather than for their behavior. There’s no denying that there was a time—in the living memory of many Americans—when this was true. The question is how true it remains.

Activists and politicians with their own agendas have taken the Floyd episode and similar incidents and shoehorned them into a pre-existing narrative about race and policing, but the reality is more complex. Race relations and violent crime rates among blacks have ebbed and flowed over the decades, and policing has reflected these changes. In the first half of the 20th century, when black poverty was significantly higher than it is today, and it was not uncommon for police officers in the Deep South to belong to the Ku Klux Klan, black crime rates and incarceration rates were significantly lower than what they would become in later decades.

The criminologist Barry Latzer has noted that the homicide rate for black men fell by 18% in the 1940s and another 22% in the 1950s. It’s probably not a coincidence that black poverty declined by 40 percentage points over the same period, and black incomes grew at faster rates that white incomes. Safer neighborhoods help facilitate upward economic mobility, which is something that the “defund the police” crowd might keep in mind.

In the second half of the 20th century, these trends reversed. In the 1960s, violent crime rates doubled, and they continued to increase sharply until the early 1990s, when better policing and more incarceration helped bring crime under control. In his 2007 book, “The Great American Crime Decline,” Franklin Zimring describes violent crime as a “regressive tax whereby the poor pay much more” and observes that “because both victims and offenders are concentrated among the same disadvantaged populations, a major crime decline might produce a double benefit—fewer victims as well as fewer offenders arrested and punished for serious crimes.” Between 1990 and 2016 the overall homicide rate fell by 34%, and among black men it fell by 40%. Had the black homicide rate remained at 1990 levels through that period, tens of thousands of black men wouldn’t be alive today.

In response to the racial hysteria over Floyd’s death, the Democratic House and Republican Senate are hashing out a “policing reform” bill for the president to sign. This is being done out of political expediency, not necessity. There is no epidemic of black suspects dying in police custody, and a few viral videos don’t prove otherwise. Yes, cops sometimes abuse their authority, and firing bad ones can be much too difficult. But states and localities can address those issues more effectively than a one-size-fits-all fix from Washington. Moreover, Republicans should be wary of allowing liberal activists to speak for the public. We’ve known for years that groups like Black Lives Matter are out of step with most blacks, let alone most of the country.

In a 2015 Gallup poll taken after Michael Brown was killed in Ferguson, Mo., a majority of black respondents said police treat them fairly, and far more blacks (38%) than whites (18%) said they “want a greater police presence in their local communities.” Another Gallup survey, published last year, asked black and Hispanic residents of low-income neighborhoods about policing and found that these groups “aren’t averse to law enforcement—in fact, they are particularly concerned about crime in their neighborhoods.” Fifty-nine percent of both blacks and Hispanics said that “they would like the police to spend more time in their area than they currently do, making them more likely than white residents (50%) to respond this way.”

Democrats and Republicans seem to agree that more-uniform data collection among police agencies would be a good thing. They’re right, but it’s no guarantee that the media will report the additional data or put it in context. We have plenty of data right now. Police shootings have fallen precipitously since the 1970s. Upward of 95% of black homicides in the U.S. don’t involve law enforcement. Empirical studies have found no racial bias in police use of deadly force, and that the racial disparities that do exist stem from racial differences in criminal behavior. The problem isn’t a shortage of data but a race-based narrative that is immune to any data that challenge it.

It's about time:

Breaking: BOOM! Trump FINALLY Says it! Lays the SMACKDOWN on Obama – Calls Out His Crimes LOUD and Clear

And:

This Is How It Begins https://pjmedia.com/columns/juliodelmarmol/2020/06/23/cuban-freedom-fighter-warns-open-your-eyes-america-this-is-how-it-begins-n568548
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++.

Don’t Buy the ‘Annexation’ Hype

Applying Israeli civilian law to West Bank settlements wouldn’t preclude peace or violate Palestinian rights. 

By Eugene  Eugene Kontorovich

Israel is expected to announce as early as next week that it is normalizing the legal status of Jewish settlements in the West Bank by fully applying Israeli civilian law. The U.S. is expected to recognize Israeli sovereignty in these areas, marking the culmination of a series of pro-Israel Trump administration policies, as well as the first step in its vision for a negotiated process that could lead to a Palestinian state.

There are many misunderstandings about the planned move—starting with what to call it. It is widely described as an Israeli “annexation” of West Bank territory, also known as Judea and Samaria. But annexation has a precise meaning in international law: the forcible incorporation by one state of the territory of another state. The land to which Israel seeks to apply its laws isn’t legally the territory of any other state, nor has it been since Israel’s independence in 1948. Neither the U.S. nor the European Union recognizes the existence of a Palestinian state, and Israel’s sovereign claim to the territory is superior to any other country’s. Putting this move in the same category as Russia’s seizure of Crimea is entirely misleading.

There is no one-word name for what Israel plans to do because it is so technical and pedestrian. Israel already governs the territory in question, as it has since 1967, when it liberated the land from a two-decade Jordanian occupation. But at that time Israel didn’t fully apply its domestic laws there, leaving it under military administration. Israel expected the Arab states to sue for peace after the Six-Day War, and it was prepared to transfer some of the land to them. There was no point in hurriedly applying Israeli law to territory that might not remain Israeli after a peace settlement.

The current system of governance was intended to be temporary, but Israel retained it during decades of negotiations, all of which resulted in Palestinian rejection of internationally backed offers of statehood. In the Middle East, nothing is as permanent as the temporary.

Over the past 53 years, Jews have returned to Judea and Samaria, territories from which they had been, to a man, ethnically cleansed by the Jordanians in 1949. Today, more than 400,000 Israelis live in West Bank settlements, still governed by an odd patchwork of military regulations. As a result, property is governed by obscure Ottoman land law. Permitting for infrastructure projects is difficult and burdensome. Most Israeli environmental regulations don’t apply. After five decades of Palestinian rejectionism, it is hard to argue that the legal regulation of these communities must remain in limbo until a far-off peace deal is signed.

This doesn’t mean giving up on the possibility of a diplomatic settlement. Past peace efforts have been based on the morally repugnant and impractical assumption that the creation of a Palestinian state must be preceded by the expulsion of all Jews from its territory. The acceptance of an ethnic pre-cleansing was one of the reasons the U.S. had previously opposed the application of Israeli civil law: to make life harder and more uncertain for Jewish settlers and thereby encourage them to leave. President Trump’s peace vision rightly rejects this illiberal notion, which hasn’t been the basis of realized or proposed peace deals anywhere else in the world, from East Timor to Northern Cyprus.

The application of Israeli law wouldn’t affect the treatment of Palestinians. In the West Bank, they would continue to be governed by the Palestinian Authority. Israel’s Knesset wouldn’t rule over them. The Palestinian Authority would also still have a chance to make peace. While all evidence suggests the authority isn’t fundamentally serious about statehood, U.S. recognition of Israeli sovereignty in parts of the West Bank may help bring it to the table. It would show Palestinian leaders that turning down negotiations weakens their hand.

Some Middle East experts say the Israeli move could lead to violence, European sanctions or a reversal of Israel’s warming ties with Arab states. But the same predictions of doom were made before Mr. Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem and the Golan Heights, and they proved entirely hollow. Critics must explain why this one should be any different.

Others say Israel should desist because its actions would provoke a possible Biden administration. This is heads-I-win-tails-you-lose logic: Israel must accept Democratic policies when Democrats are in office and also when they aren’t. President Obama, by contrast, had no problem allowing the United Nations Security Council to pass an anti-Israel resolution even after President-elect Trump asked him to veto it.

U.S. recognition of Israeli sovereignty in parts of the West Bank comes along with upfront Israeli commitments. Israel has agreed to a temporary building freeze in areas of the West Bank that are under Israel’s jurisdiction but where Israeli law isn’t being extended. This goes beyond what the Trump administration’s Vision for Peace requires. Israel also knows that a future U.S. administration could repudiate support for Israeli sovereignty and recognize a Palestinian state anyway.

Israel’s friends are right to take such concerns seriously: The plan isn’t without risks for Israel. But these can be addressed through a formal memorandum of understanding that would commit the U.S. to recognizing Israeli sovereignty and not recognizing a Palestinian state until the detailed Palestinian prerequisites in the Vision for Peace have been met to America’s and Israel’s satisfaction. Such an agreement between the U.S. and Israel could be written to limit backsliding by the next U.S. administration.

The application of Israeli civil law to Jewish settlements isn’t an annexation or an imposition on Palestinians. It is a long overdue recognition of Israel’s legal and moral rights, a step that can no longer be deferred by the Palestinian refusal to make peace.

Mr. Kontorovich is director of the Center for the Middle East and International Law at George Mason University Scalia Law School.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Trump Haters call him an aspiring dictator yet he calls for freedom of speech, supports the Constitution, and consistently seeks to open access.Democrats support unions because they are a huge source of their funding. When Trump pushes for openness and choice he is constantly opposed.

Trump Wins in Hospital Price Transparency Fight

 
• by: TTN Staff

A U.S. Federal Judge has ruled against a challenge to President Trump's rule forcing hospitals to disclose the prices they have negotiated with insurers.

According to Fox News:

President Trump touted a "big victory" after a federal judge rejected the American Hospital Association's challenge to a Trump administration rule forcing them to disclose prices negotiated with insurers.

"BIG VICTORY for patients – Federal court UPHOLDS hospital price transparency," Trump wrote on Twitter on Tuesday. "Patients deserve to know the price of care BEFORE they enter the hospital. Because of my action, they will. This may very well be bigger than healthcare itself. Congratulations America!"

Judge Carl Nichols, a Trump appointee, granted the administration's motion for summary judgment on Tuesday, meaning it did not go to trial. The AHA said it will appeal.

"We are disappointed in today’s decision in favor of the administration’s flawed proposal to mandate disclosure of privately negotiated rates," the AHA said in a statement. "It also imposes significant burdens on hospitals at a time when resources are stretched thin and need to be devoted to patient care. Hospitals and health systems have consistently supported efforts to provide patients with information about the costs of their medical care. This is not the right way to achieve this important goal."

Several free-market groups filed amicus briefs in support of the Trump administration pointing to the price gouging that they say is rampant in the medical industry.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 
Kiddingly, why does he keep playing with a pig skin?


CB shared na algemeiner article with you: https://u3911344.ct.sendgrid.net/ls/click?upn=iO6SQgKkG56UiuK6m6Df2ZQQ6koTKa7CoAeLW23TZMZXL8jbVQv725bzYe-2FLTLHYwPfR3QCX8oFNy1Co-2Bo-2BefL4Yi45LytolF2Qqz4s4O2BG8i5VaK-2FTyQiPetdJVYy616xV66GHk0WteNLpuCoXfW8P-2B3fecBcnUREG7YLMAyw-3DQxq2_WnEiMVUvX1RAwfukq22VnYN6-2BLC0AX6nx7z5aExJpzIT-2FX1lyA4TcnY5757J29KDzFPs4BhgDg9kpxGdbS-2Fr-2FJ4bOB3IuKwoaErJfZlxERH0FupZKC4QFQWkZEcbdZveY0ulYpYJKMFa5fMbQM3SUkk-2BH2w7Np3qwiqmZNAULk5B-2BoDm-2FxyvOEFOo41uBpYPGLuKPVZU9W8p-2BN0j8Nzp5476OYoSP7xts1b9oPBr0d4-3D
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Ross keeps on ranting:

We now have the data to prove that consumers and corporations have a huge savings to spend. There has been a $2 Trillion increase in bank deposits since January.  It rose $825 billion just in April. It is a combination of a consumer savings rate of 33% during the past few months resulting from the extra $600 plus the $1200 subsidy checks, plus companies drawing down lines of credit, and then just leaving the cash on deposit so it was readily available, PPP lines of credit administered by the banks, but not yet used,  plus bond buying by the Fed from dealers and banks. There is an added $5 Trillion sitting in money funds earning almost nothing.

This is all very good news.  It means consumers and companies have loads of cash available to spend when they are back in a spending mode.  That bodes well for an economic revival once everything is open and people are back at work in more normal conditions. This is also good for the stock market because it means there is a lot of idle cash looking to do something. Banks are swimming in cash to lend, but there are not a lot of takers right now, plus banks are being careful who they lend to at the moment,  so interest rates on loans will remain very low for  a long time. Bank profits should be good since their cost of funds is extremely low, all that deposit money to lend, on which they pay zilch. All of that liquidity is unusual for just coming off a recession.

Hotels continue to suffer low occupancy, now only back to 40%. For many that is barely break even. For many others it is still a loss of cash flow situation. In Maui, the unemployment rate is 40% since that is almost entirely tourist driven. The big conference hotels remain shuttered or barely alive and that is not changing for  along time. Virginia Beach has the highest occupancy right now at barely over 50%, and that is due to people in the northeast and that area just wanting to go to the beach.

A recent survey of office space concluded the average large tenant has 4 years remaining, and 52 (14%)  leases expire this year. It is still unclear where all this goes, but it appears likely  what emerges is some workers will still work form home, and some in an office. Distancing may require more space per person, but that means pressure on rents due to less efficient space use. Open office is likely to go away over time. One major research firm forecasts vacancy in 2022 of 20% and remaining around that for a few years. Bottom line, this is a very risky period in which to own office space in any city. The trend to work from home is now set and likely to grow over several years. Distribution and industrial space seem to be far better for re- development uses than office, retail or hotels.

Residential will still be very good over a long time as there is a huge shortage of homes for sale. Sales of new to be built homes are skyrocketing, but builders can’t find the skilled labor they need. There are loads of construction jobs now available for anyone with any skills. This is very good for the economy as home building spins off lots of good wages and lots of related purchase from furniture, to supplies, to all sorts of other things. With rates so low housing will be very strong and drive the economy higher.

LA is planning to impose a tax on vacant apartments and land with the intent to force owners to rent quickly or build affordable housing. This is no different than price fixing in many ways and in the end it is a disincentive for development whose end result is less housing. The opposite of what the politicians were trying to achieve.   They just never learn from the past.

In NYC many construction laborers are not returning to work yet because they are getting the extra $600. That has many spinoff ramifications keeping others at suppliers of materials and service companies from working.  My Bayonne project, for example, needs the crushed concrete from demolition and from foundation digging to use as fill for our project.  It is not available because these people will not work until the $600 runs out. So our project is delayed. Everything has bad spin off consequences. So of course there is Schumer and Pelosi demanding the $600 payment be extended until December 31. Politics over intelligence. Luckily McConnell gets it.

The point being we are paying people with tax dollars not to work. That is what many poverty programs do as well. It was only when the last three years saw a booming economy which led to the lowest unemployment in history for blacks, that broke the chain of dependency. It was only a booming economy that made it possible for ex -criminals to get real jobs. Proof that a strong economy is the biggest help to blacks, and not more poverty giveaways, and not more useless government training programs.

In 1970, Daniel Moynihan wrote his famous study about race and trying to solve the race issue.  Here was his key line which the left and Dems never bothered to understand. What is needed is benign neglect. Affirmative action programs are creating dependency, and depriving them of initiative. That was 50 years ago.  Nothing has changed except they ignored him and created numerous entitlement programs, none of which worked to change the culture for the better.  Not all the civil rights laws and court cases, not all the subsidized housing,  not pre-school programs which are totally eliminated as to value by third grade, not busing, or job training.

Trillions of dollars later and 50 years,  we have created a dependent culture,  destruction of the family, and a refusal by Dem mayors and governors to allow more charter schools to give the kids a chance to succeed. It has all been a massive and very expensive failure. Exactly as Moynihan predicted. So now what is being demanded- more of the same failed programs. Nothing at all about personal responsibility. We have instead organized gangs rioting on Madison Ave to steal expensive clothes  and watches which will be sold.  In its wake are destroyed lives of small business owners who sank everything into their shops. So what is the response of Dem police chiefs and mayors.  It is only a building so we let it go. How ignorant.  In that building was a life effort by some small business person. They invested their life savings and hours of effort to make a success, but the mayor and police chief thinks “it was just a building not worth having cops save it.“  That pretty well sums up the political differences between the Left and the people who work to make a success,  and who create jobs.

Now they are trying to rewrite all of history. They not only destroy statues of historic figures, but are renaming buildings, streets, even states-Rhode Island,  and whatever they deem needs to be eliminated from history. Notre Dame covered a mural of Columbus fearing some snowflake will “feel uncomfortable”. Well I am uncomfortable having history demolished by vandals who have no education about history.  They even want to rename Columbus, OH. All of this type of demolishing of history and books is exactly what Hitler did in 1936. What Lenin did in 1917. Even Eskimo Pies has now been renamed because it was deemed racist. Utter nonsense.

A statue of Teddy Roosevelt was removed from  the Museum Of Natural History in NYC.  Columbus is being removed from everywhere. They even destroyed a US Grant statue, the guy who really freed the slaves, and Churchill in London. It is mindless destruction. Now professors are punished if they disagree with BLM. At Rice U, the blacks are demanding their own building, and hiring and admitting more blacks -no mention of did they deserve to be hired or admitted other than being black. No issue of segregation with a “black building”. At Google, as usual, there is a petition to have the company end all contracts with police, after they tried to end all contracts with the Pentagon. I am sorry to keep repeating this, but this is exactly why I kept bringing up what was happening on campus. It is here now on your streets and towns. It will now be vastly worse on campus this year.

Anyone who does not adhere to the orthodoxy will be socially destroyed, and if they speak up in class in a way that goes against the ideology, their grades will be marked down and likely they will fail.  This is really horrible for democracy and free speech.  You see this all over now with corporations, and governments racing to pander to the racial ideology, and it is just beginning. Campus speech codes are now into the press and companies. Social media censors what is online. BLM is not a simple organization seeking a better life for blacks. It is a radical Marxist based group with strong anti-Semitic, anti-white policies. They work with the Palestinians and adhere to the eliminate Israel groups.  These are very dangerous people.  Just look at CHOP in Seattle. So far two dead and four shot.

The huge spike in violent crime in major cities is now happening.  Shootings and burglaries are skyrocketing. In Chicago, 104 people were shot over the weekend and 14 died.  That is on top of the prior record breaking weekend. Do you hear this on the media.  The dead and wounded are all black. None were shot by whites or cops. Does any politician or celeb hold a news conference to say this is like a massacre. No.  That would go against all the anti-cop rhetoric.  It would show the defund cops rhetoric as utter idiocy. Where is BLM and the protestors trying to do something about it. Where is the Pelosi news conference condemning black on black shootings.

The bad guys seem to figure the cops are restrained, and the Dem mayors and governors let them out of jail quickly, so they are let loose. In NYC they disbanded the undercover special anti-crime unit, and have suspended several cops for perceived violations of proper procedure. The NYC commissioner said we are on the verge of a real problem. We now have a real problem, and it is big city mayors and governors who allow this to happen. It is insanity. Needless to say the cops feel abandoned, and unmotivated.  Maybe this will be like the South Bronx decades ago. That area was labeled Fort Apache it got so bad, but the result was, in the end, so many of the bad guys got killed, or badly wounded, that the cops were finally able to get on top of the situation. So many buildings were burned down it cleared whole blocks for urban renewal. Maybe that will happen in Chicago, NYC, Baltimore and Seattle.

Meantime, urban life is getting more dangerous, and less livable, and  blacks  are paying the biggest price in their communities. So of course the left wants to defund the cops, and set up even more wasteful spending programs. Giuliani proved when he was mayor,  the answer to achieving prosperity is to materially reduce crime. His broken windows policy, which caused the arrest of even the bums who washed windshields at stop lights and then demanded money, was proven very effective and crime and murders were reduced dramatically. NYC was resurrected and became a wonderful thriving city with one of the lowest crime rates in the world. People and business flocked to NYC.  That is all in reverse now under DeBozzo and Cuomo.

The key to raising the standard of living for all residents is cut crime. Then business returns and jobs are readily available, and that is what helps poor blacks far more than any poverty program spending. Reverse that, and people and businesses leave, and poor blacks suffer the most. NYC is  proof, but the left just cannot understand. The left answer is as always- spend more money on useless poverty programs that have not worked for decades. 

I believe millions of voters are now scared and very angry at what is happening. And they should be. The only thing between us and total crime and mayhem is the police who are being severely restrained and punished for doing their job. Universities will be teaching the BLM theology this year, turning out more brainwashed kids who think it is fine to shut down speech, and destroy any bit of history they deem not acceptable. Radicals and black activists will be hired and promoted into teaching positions they otherwise do not qualify for, and it will just get even worse on campus.

There is no sense of history, nor the vast progress blacks and Latinos have made over the past decade. Note that there are no Latino demonstrations and demands.  They seem to just go to work to get ahead. If all of this translates into the Dems and Biden getting control, look out. This is what happens when you pander, and when you say here is even more money from the government, here is a job you did not qualify for or admission to a school for which  you did not qualify. They are taught get violent and use censorship and get what you want , then just demand even more. For the leaders it is a lucrative, and power driven gig. This is why the polls do not show what the silent majority really think when it comes time to vote. It is also why the Dems want mail in ballots so they can vote harvest as the did in CA in 2018.

I have several times mentioned my friend who closely tracked the life and disease of Ruth Bader Ginsberg. For those who don’t know, they went to college together and got pancreatic cancer at the same time, and had the exact same treatments. He just passed away. Keep that in mind when you vote.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++