We are advised to NOT judge ALL Muslims by the actions of a few lunatics, but we are encouraged to judge ALL gun owners by the actions of a few lunatics.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
DUH!
Are blacks so stupid they are incapable of realizing Democrats treat them as if they are stupid and incapable of being anything else but dependent on government largesse?
Atlanta proper is a predominantly black city and now has lost a sporting event that would have brought millions to that city because cowards bought lies.
Even Biden congratulated Corporate America's management who sided with the sleazy decision by the MLB's Commissioner in hope they could avoid an economic threat similar to what they experienced during the Civil Right's boycotts.
Their collective decision had nothing to do with morality or Delta, Coca Cola and all the other sycophant executives would cease operations in China, the world's premier racist ration.
Blacks simply remain pawns in the radical's efforts to retain power.
And:
|
+++
Black America Is Being Sold Victimhood
Actor Siaka Massaquoi entered Hollywood with big dreams. However, after witnessing racism firsthand and seeing colleagues lose roles because of their skin color or political ideology, he began to ask questions. This is his story of breaking free. Watch his story.
The C-Suite
Converts to the New Political Religion
Today’s CEOs are like Thomas Cranmer, the 16th-century archbishop with his finger to the wind.
By Gerard
Baker
Easter Week, as the culture wars rage on, is a timely moment to reflect on the religious nature of the modern ideology our leaders seek to impose on us.
Astute
historians have observed that the wars of religion that seemed to define
pre-Enlightenment history never really went away; the religions just got new
labels. Secular ideologies that supplanted the old confessions seized the mind
with the same sense of spiritual mission. The loyalties they demanded were more
divisive and even more destructive than anything organized religion ever
managed.
In the 19th century it was nationalism. In the 20th, communism
and fascism. In the 21st woke cultural nihilism is the dominant confession, and
a fanatical one.
The modern secularists who deride the hagridden mysticism of
traditional religion are now the most devoted congregants in the First Church
of Antiracism. Penitents line up to be shriven for their white privilege,
bending the knee before the altar of justice and equity. They present pendants
of the martyred St. George of Minneapolis for blessing from Hollywood prelates
and Ivy League divines, solemnly chanting canticles from the Black Lives Matter
breviary.
The history of religious war offers warnings for all of us, but
most of all for those late converts to the new religion in the big corner
offices of American corporations.
The men who run Major
League Baseball, Delta Air Lines, Coca-Cola and
other giants have been quick to mouth the required antiphony of the modern
liturgy. After long careers in which they seemed happy to let their talents
propel them to unimaginable wealth, they’ve now discovered that the society
that elevated them was founded in evil.
But instead of doing the honorable thing, and stepping down in favor of some less-privileged underling, they demonstrate a commitment to the faith by denouncing others. Here you have the essence of the new faith and morals of the woke classes, the truly privileged people in our society: I’m not to blame, you understand; it’s all those other white folk.
Rank in infamy as one of the most cowardly, cynical and socially destructive moves in modern American history.
There’s no need to rehearse all the arguments about the law. Suffice it to say it expands opportunities to vote well beyond what existed even two years ago and that it is more permissive than the prevailing laws in many blue states.
But to some religions facts are irrelevant, and bowing to the
pressure from the media and Democrats, these titans of private enterprise
quickly submitted to the collective will.
Since they’ve now been drafted into the army of the woke, these
CEOs might want to acquaint themselves with other historical figures who’ve
made accommodations to the prevailing religious orthodoxy. It doesn’t always
end well.
My favorite example is Thomas Cranmer. He was the 16th-century
archbishop of Canterbury who rose to prominence as a loyal cleric under Henry
VIII. When the king forced him to choose between his faith and his head, he
jumped aboard the reformation bandwagon and denounced Rome. Unfortunately for
Cranmer and other religious opportunists, their world changed awkwardly when
Queen Mary, the vengeful daughter of Henry’s discarded wife, came to the throne
and reinstated Catholic primacy. Cranmer, like these modern-day CEOs, quickly
pledged his loyalty to the new order.
Mary’s response was to thank him for the recantation, publicly
parade it as an important endorsement of her new regime, and proceed to have
him burned at the stake anyway.
The woke enforcers don’t burn heretics—not yet, anyway—but our
infinitely flexible modern clerisy don’t have to look back to the Middle Ages
for a sobering lesson.
Even as they’re
prostrating themselves before their new masters in Georgia, next door in
Alabama there’s a cautionary tableau on display. There may be no one as
culturally compliant as Jeff Bezos. He’s pledged Amazon to the woke
cause. He’s turned a once-great newspaper into a lectionary of cultural
correctness.
But in Alabama, his company is fighting efforts from its workers
for higher pay and better conditions, and his apostasy has earned him the
opprobrium of the high priests.
Last week Sen. Elizabeth
Warren, after an unusually sharp Twitter exchange, actually told the company
she would seek to break it up because his minions had dared to mock her on
social media.
The lesson of Mr. Bezos and Cranmer is the same: Don’t think
appeasing the religious tyrants will win you more than a reprieve, if that.
These contemptible so-called leaders are knowingly, for the sake of
self-preservation, stoking the flames of a cultural war.
These days, thank God, the fire is figurative, but it may still consume a CEO or two.
And:
CEOs vs.
Shareholders
Corporate
execs are assisting an agenda that will hurt their business.
By The Editorial Board
Companies have long sought to influence policies that affect
their business, and rightly so. They have the First Amendment right to petition
the government. And as the reach of the state has grown, the success or failure
of a firm or industry can depend on defeating political predators in Washington
or state capitals. We wish it were otherwise, but this is today’s reality.
The CEO intervention into Georgia
election law is different. It concerns a matter that doesn’t directly
affect Coca-Cola or Delta Airlines, to cite two
companies whose executives condemned the new law. The CEOs are instead
injecting themselves into a heated debate over election law and the tension
between ballot access and integrity.
This is about the rules of politics, and it means taking sides
in a debate between the electoral interests of the two parties. Republicans in
Georgia tightened what they regarded as loose rules that accommodated the
special circumstances of the pandemic. Democrats claim the rules are too
restrictive and want to stigmatize them as “ Jim Crow 2.0” to help them pass a
national election law (H.R.1) that would impose voting rules they prefer.
This is the kind of brawl that most CEOs typically avoid as too
polarizing, and even business lobbies like the Chamber of Commerce tend to
steer clear. Not this time.
By endorsing the (false) claims that
Republicans are denying the franchise, the CEOs are supporting the direct
electoral interests of the Democratic Party. If H.R.1 passes, it will impose
rules on all 50 states that will make it easier to elect more Democrats. That’s
why Nancy Pelosi, Chuck
Schumer and President Biden are so intent on passing it.
This is all the more remarkable
because it is happening when the Democratic Party has taken a sharp left
turn—on economics as well as culture. These aren’t Bill Clinton’s New Democrats
who will raise taxes here or expand spending there. Joe Biden may be the most anti-business
President since FDR. His Administration is implementing, under the guise of
“unity,” a Bernie Sanders-Elizabeth Warren agenda that would vastly expand
government control over business and the economy.
This is where the interests of shareholders come in. The
House-passed PRO Act is the most far-reaching labor legislation since the 1935
Wagner Act and would give union organizing a huge advantage. It bans
right-to-work laws nationwide. It would reduce hiring flexibility and make
companies less competitive.
The Biden tax increases would reduce the after-tax return on
investment and make U.S. companies less competitive globally with the highest
combined state-federal corporate tax rate in the developed world. The coming
vast regulatory expansion will raise costs by directing investment through
political intervention rather than via projected returns on capital.
None of this is in the interests of shareholders as commonly
understood for decades under corporate law. It isn’t even in the interests of
“stakeholders,” in the Business Roundtable’s definition, since lower profits
mean slower wage increases for workers and higher prices for consumers to make
up for higher costs.
Perhaps these CEOs think they are buying cheap insurance against
the growing political pressure from the left by siding with Democrats so
publicly. They may also think they can appease the woke factions among their
employees and the public pension funds that are increasingly trying to direct
business to side with Democratic priorities.
They are fooling themselves. What the CEOs are doing is helping
Democrats pass legislation that will solidify and expand their majorities in
Congress. This will not co-opt the left; it will embolden them.
The CEOs are also
playing into the hands of the Republican Party’s growing anti-corporate wing
that is already making hay with Big Tech’s free-speech restrictions. The ultimate
harm accrues to shareholders, who expect CEOs and corporate boards to represent
their interests but are watching them do the opposite.
++++++++++++++++++++++++
When China starts advertising how they control Biden, even I am unwilling to buy their brazen effort to propagandize. That said, I have no doubt Biden is not free of their influence because of his son's questionable connections, the wealth Biden accumulated while in Congress and his many established Chinese connections.
China Brags It Controls Joe Biden!
(PatrioticPost.com)- A shocking new report just revealed how the Chinese Communist Party’s Cyberspace Administration just boasted of having major influence over the United States, with “bombshell admissions” being revealed by the National Pulse.
The outlet revealed how admissions by the Cyberspace Administration connect organizations like the Berggruen Institute, a Los Angeles-based independent think tank, with the Chinese Communist Party and Chinese government officials.
“A 2017 report effectively claims – on the CCP’s behalf – that CNN host Fareed Zakaria, Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey, Facebook Oversight Board member Helle Thorning-Schmidt, NeverTrump philanthropist Pierre Omidyar and many others “co-operate” with the CCP and its goals,” the report added.
It comes from an unearthed press statement published on the Cyberspace Administration of China website, entitled, “Holding High the Banner of Party Media and Fulfilling Its Duties and Missions.”
The report admits to engaging in “online propaganda and public opinion work” and promoting its “Socialist core value view.”
And then, it goes on to brad of the propaganda efforts pushed by the Chinese Communist Party, describing how they have purchased ad placements in the Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, and New York Times. The Washington Post, the National Pulse notes, published a weekly opinion column by Fareed Zakaria.
It then brags about its work with former British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, a series of U.S. politicians, Big Tech names like Jack Dorsey, and think tanks like the Berggruen Institute.
“Through cooperation with think-tanks such as the Berggruen Institute in the United States, the Canadian Center for International Governance Innovation, and the Australian Lowy Institute for International Policy, we have attracted nearly 200 overseas think-tankers as special commentators on China Daily,” it continues.
So China pays for commentators to promote China in the Western press. Got it.
And, according to the National Pulse, a “collaborative effort between former Soros counsel Rosa Brooks and Berggruen executive Nils Gilman, TIP (the “Transition Integrity Project”)littered the U.S. media with commentary about how Joe Biden should refuse to concede in the event of an apparent election night victory for President Donald Trump – which is precisely what happened.”
The National Pulse’s full report describes in detail how CPP-linked think-tankers assisted the Biden transition team, helped Biden security a victory (legitimate or not) over Trump, and promote the “Never Trump” alliance.
If China is already bragging about its control over the United States, then how can President Joe Biden take on the communist, authoritarian regime during his time in office?
+++++++++++++++++
More regarding Manchin:
Will Manchin Cave?
(RightWing.org) – In an evenly divided Senate, every Democrat vote matters. If one Senator defects or goes rogue, it’s lights out for any piece of legislation. That’s an incredible amount of pressure on one person who could face the wrath of the far-left intent on radically overhauling America’s governmental, economic, and moral foundation. It’s also a great opportunity for one Senator to portray himself as something he’s not.
Sen. Joe Manchin
(D-WV) is the cog that can insert himself into the wheel anytime he sees fit.
However, he can be a metamorphosis, or perhaps it’s just smoke and mirrors?
After all, he is still a Democrat, and Democrats tend to stick together, one
way or another. It’s not often that one bucks the party’s leadership. So, will
Manchin cave in light of his most recent break with the party, or will he stay
true to his word?
Manchin Hints at
Moderation
While Manchin often
states publicly that he doesn’t agree with some of the Left’s agenda, his
actions are a bit dubious. He rarely votes against his party, even on far-left
cabinet picks and legislation.
Yet, there are times
he takes a stand. For example, he rebuffed the $15 minimum wage effort by the
Left in the COVID-19 relief package in March. However, he didn’t need to get
far into the trenches because the Senate parliamentarian offered him cover when
she ruled that the provision didn’t qualify to be part of the reconciliation
package.
In addition, Manchin
was largely responsible for Biden pulling one of his most controversial cabinet
picks. Neera Tanden couldn’t gain support to lead the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB). However, Manchin’s objection wasn’t her radical policies. It was
her previous personal attacks on himself and some Republicans. If it weren’t
for that, he likely would have voted for her.
After all, he voted
for Pete Buttigieg for Transportation Secretary despite having no experience
and espousing a radical Green New Deal view of infrastructure. Or, what about
Beccara Xavier for Health and Human Services secretary? He has some radical
abortion views.
So, Manchin appears
moderate, but is he?
Manchin Pushes Back on
Biden’s Tax Plan
On Monday, April 5,
Manchin said he opposed Biden’s plan to raise corporate taxes. Note, he doesn’t
oppose Biden’s or the Left’s radical green initiative. He opposes how to
partially pay for it. He doesn’t want taxes to go up to 28% for corporations
and make them globally anti-competitive. He said he’s for a corporate tax
increase from 21% to 25%, and closing tax loopholes on the rich.
So, there you have it.
He looks moderate from a distance. However, Jupiter doesn’t look very large in
another galaxy either. A closer look reveals that Manchin is still a Democrat
and that he will often give them what they want if he can manipulate deep-red
West Virginia into believing he represents their interests.
Will Manchin cave?
Politics is a shell game. The senator won’t be perceived as caving if he
presents himself properly. Meaning, he might prevent taxes from going too high.
However, he won’t stop the final intended result. So, in the end, what’s the
difference?
Don Purdum,
Independent Political Analyst
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
No comments:
Post a Comment