Important Details, continued

 https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2022/02/a_decade_of_deceit_and_division_what_trayvon_wrought.html

The above is a link to an article at AmericanThinker.  It provides some more recent details that aren't revealed during this special month, details which stand as reasons for a great deal of death and destruction which has plagued our nation over the last decade.  It also provides examples of that which leads some of the wiser Americans to justly regard the leftist mainstream media as enemies of the state.

Once again, I have no problem with discussions about revising how and what is taught to our kids with regard to the history of this country.  Sadly, too many are intent on focusing only on the bad, particularly with regard to race-relations, and it's killing the nation all by itself (not that there aren't other leftist actions constantly perpetrated which do as well). 


UPDATE:  MORE INFO

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2022/03/how_slavery_should_be_taught.html

This link is to another article speaking to details of slavery the "white privilege" and "1619" crowd ignore or diminish as less important than merely "White Man Bad".

Important Details Left Out Of The 1619 Project

 Like Morgan Freeman, I never favored a "Black History Month".  (I totally oppose the Perv Pride Month every June, but that's another issue altogether).  American History is all we need, and frankly, it makes no sense to national unity to divide, does it?  And that's the effect of any month that honors one segment of society.  

Now, I have no problem with the notion of reviewing how we teach American history.  History is expanding all the time.  Events of importance can be supplanted by more recent events whose impact on America are greater than those supplanted events of importance.  The same is true of people, as the impact an individual or group has on the direction of our culture can be of greater benefit to the nation than the work of some previously regarded as great.  There's a degree of subjectivity in determining any of it, and again, it's a worthy debate to decide which is essential in teaching our kids about this nation.  I'd say the same is true of world history, but I'm beginning to stray from what I intended to say.

We're constantly inundated with reminders of just how evil America has been when the subject of race relations comes up.  Few would disagree with the fact that how black people have been treated throughout American history has been less than honorable, less than equal, less than Christian.  But unfortunately, this usually comes with the charge that such treatment of one race against another is one-sided or unique to the white race.  There is no shortage of examples throughout human history which prove this is untrue.  Just as unfortunately is how those examples are ignored in order to focus on the behavior of a single race, which is then exploited by the unsavory, resulting in the scabs being constantly picked and the wounds never fully healing...the division never fully narrowing.  While doing so, certain aspects of Black History in America is ignored.  Whether this is intentional or not I won't attempt to discern at this time (if ever). 

 https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2022/02/black_history_month_is_appropriate_time_for_the_truth.html

The link above is to an AmericanThinker article I found fascinating and illuminating.  More so the links with in it, particularly the second one.  It's rather lengthy, but it references sources which one who cares can search out to confirm what it contains.  And what it contains are aspects of Black History I don't believe those who promote the concept care to know or reveal if they did.  

My point in highlighting this information is not necessarily a "what about" ploy.  But upon reading the article I am wondering if those who continue to lambast the white race are willing to put alongside white atrocities the atrocities of their own.  We hear all the time...ad nauseum... of how badly whites behaved throughout history.  The crimes of the white man against non-whites are well known, to say the least.  Indeed, they can't shut up about it.  The fragile, self-loathing white-guilted can't stop begging forgiveness stupidly insisting all whites are responsible somehow and obliged to make good for the misdeeds of people long dead. 

So if all that is true, then it seems quite reasonable, just...indeed "equitable"...to expect those descended from the non-whites described in the article and its links (as well as those who look like them regardless of whether or not their families were around during that time...mine having come to this country only two generations before me) to acknowledge their role in the suffering of those who are the only people who have any right to suggest they're the progeny of the oppressed.

One can easily see how this complicates the whole notion of "reparations".  What should be seen is that the widespread dissemination of this unspoken history has greater potential to dissipate the racial divide, as it demonstrates how race has no real effect on man's inhumanity to man and to constantly harp on racial differences is to constantly focus on that which is irrelevant, insignificant and only useful for keeping the flame of hate burning.

VERY IMPORTANT ADDENDUM:

The following link showed up in an AmericanThinker article today.  It's from 2019 right after the destructive 1619 Project came out.  It's a good analysis of the stupidity of the whole thing, as well as of those who find it compelling...the progressives.  Reading through it, one will find familiar BS which one particular progressive...a "proggie" as the author labels them...perpetuates routinely on the blogs:

https://www.bookwormroom.com/2019/08/26/the-1619-project-reframing-history-redefining-racism/

The Lawyers Had To Be Salivating

 https://www.theblaze.com/news/remington-settles-with-sandy-hook-parents?utm_source=theblaze-7DayTrendingTest&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=The%20Blaze%20PM%20Trending%202022-02-15&utm_term=ACTIVE%20LIST%20-%207%20Day%20Engagement

The above link is to a Blaze article reporting on the 73 million dollar settlement Remington Arms paid to nine families of Sandy Hook murder victims, their lives taken...not by Remington...by Adam Lanza back on Dec. 14, 2012.  He murdered a total of 26 people that day at the school, and his mother, who legally owned the weapons he took with him to do the deed.

I find the settlement to be incredibly problematic, especially since a lawyer for the families now proudly asserts this settlement can lead to more easily putting the arm on other firearms manufacturers should anyone abuse their products.  And this is what makes this settlement so wrong.  Remington had nothing to do with the murders of those people.  Not one thing.  They had no contact with Lanza.  They did not conspire with him in any way to murder anyone.  In fact, they did not sell the weapon to Lanza.  They didn't even sell it to his mother, so far as I've been able to ascertain, who owned all the weapons the bastard used that day.  And according to an article from the New York Times which appeared three days after the murders, it seems she bought the weapons for herself, a gun enthusiast in a community of gun enthusiasts, with nothing stating she intended them for Adam, who was mental.  

The suit against Remington on behalf of the families suggested they marketed their products in a manner which somehow provokes consumers to arm up and shoot up schools or some shit.  And of course, they refer to the rifle as a "weapon of war", despite the fact that actual "weapons of war"...otherwise known as the guns the military uses, are fully automatic, while the civilian version is semi-automatic, as are so many not referred to as "weapons of war" or the perennial favorite, "assault weapon".  (One's fists are assault weapons)

In any case, that anyone would dare stick their hands in Remington's pockets over this mass murder is about the most unjust attack on a company's rights as any one could imagine.  As noted above, the company had absolutely no involvement whatsoever.  They are innocent of any charge against them in connection with the murders.  That being painfully, blatantly and absolutely obvious, on what basis could they have lost a lawsuit other than due to money-hungry, gun-grabbing lawyers and judges not acting like honest Americans?  Adam Lanza stole the guns from his murdered mother.  How is that Remington's fault?

In various comments sections after articles about this travesty of justice, some mention suing auto manufacturers every time an accident involving one of their products occurs.   But that's not an apples to apples analogy.  This is...

On August 17th, 2017, James Alex Fields, Jr. drove his car into a crowd of people murdering one person and injuring 35.  Heather Danielle Heyer died.  The weapon used was Fields' 2010 Dodge Challenger.  Chrysler Motors is just as responsible for the death of Heather Heyer as Remington is for the 27 murdered by Adam Lanza.

On Nov. 21, 2021, Darrell E. Brooks drove his 2010 Ford Escape into the Christmas parade in Waukesha, Wisconsin, killing five people and wounding 48 others.   Ford Motor Co. is just as responsible for those deaths as Remington Arms is for Sandy Hook.  

As I mentioned, the lawyers who squeezed Remington believes their success will lead to other pots of gold for them.  I hope the next victim of these pigs refuses to give in and forces the judge to rule.  If they should lose, I hope they appeal.  If they lose the appeal, I hope they take it to the Supremes.  There's no way these types of cases should even be heard in an American court of law.  I feel for the victims' families.  This is not the way to go.

More Child Abuse

 http://jsmmds.blogspot.com/2022/02/slippery-slope.html

The above link is to a post at Craig's blog, wherein he refers to further evidence of the "de-stigmatizing" of pedophilia, which like with the cases of "de-stigmatizing" of homosexuality and "transgenderism", is more likely to result in more widespread acceptance of the practice.  Dan, being a defender of deviancy, immediately jumped in to argue the point (actually arguing that which was only mildly related to the point...because he's Dan) and use the post as an excuse to presume right-wingers are more likely to be child molesters than lefties.  But even the title of the post suggests the point was referencing the so-called "slippery slope" argument and how the current climate regarding pedophilia validates the argument quite well.  

And far more relative to the point than who is engaging in such vile behavior are those who promote or enable it by their pseudo-psychological, quasi-philosophical discussions about "de-stigmatizing" the urges which lead to bad behaviors.  I get that having a desire for some non-traditional, unChristian, immoral form of sexual gratification doesn't guarantee indulging in the desire.  But the desire is still as vile, immoral and unChristian nonetheless and "stigma" doesn't enter into it.  That is, except that it is deserving of the stigma.  It should be vilified for the contemptible sin it is.

The sin of child abuse is among the worst sins, even according to Christ Himself.  And to pretend there is any other group than leftists (and those who wish to simply say they are "socially liberal" are no different) who have pushed all manner of behavior which have harmed or will harm our children is a lie.  What follows is a report from AmericanThinker.com which illustrates another way in which lefties are harming our children (and jeez, there are so many ways!):

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2022/02/tony_school_in_dc_forces_5_yearolds_to_parade_around_chanting_black_lives_matter_for_the_cameras.html

This is pure indoctrination.  The lefty teachers pretend their promoting goodness...that differences are normal and not a reason to hate.  They do this with the bullshit claim of promoting diversity, identity and inclusion, which lefty-speak for "what we consider worthy of including".  

The particular chant these kids are forced to repeat over and over is especially egregious for a couple of reasons.  It is NOT promoting diversity, but promoting the lies that the BLM movement promote regarding race relations.  It is NOT promoting inclusivity because it necessarily EXcludes those who are not black.  If the chant was "ALL LIVES MATTER", they could make their claim as that is undeniably inclusive...not to mention absolutely true.   But would this school have these little ones chant, "FETAL LIVES MATTER"?  I doubt it.  Why aren't they promoting respect for the police with their chanting and marching?  BLM does not provide for that respect at all.  

The left exploits kids and to argue they aren't the only who do is irrelevant.  To argue they aren't the worst perpetrators of child exploitation is a straight up lie given how often we hear them (particularly Nancy Pelosi) expect us to believe "it's for the children" every time they struggle to get some bill passed.  A proper understanding of the the Constitution and the Bill of Rights is that it promotes the individual.  But not the self-centered understanding of the leftist (assuming they give a flying rat's ass about the Constitution in the first place).   

This post focuses on one specific example of leftist child exploitation.  It isn't the only example. 

Our Butthead In Chief: Part Zwei---Disregarding The Constitution

Since the election of Joseph Robinette Biden ("Robinette"???  WTF???), I've been trying to put together a post which began with Our Butthead In Chief:  Part the First and promised a series presenting what fools were those Americans who didn't vote for Trump for an incredibly well deserved second term.  The blatantly obvious stupidity of those who withheld voting or worse, actually voted for Biden...or anyone else not named Trump, for that matter...has not weakened the contempt in me which that stupidity provoked.  That contempt welled up from the moment the fraudulent results were announced, and it's grown exponentially with each passing day since that day which will live in infamy along side Pearl Harbor.  We have only the hope of the midterms to abate our national suffering those unprincipled/low principled/principle-confused voters have wrought. 

 

And the avalanche of horrors this moron has brought down upon us shows no sign of stopping.  It's like flood waters which won't recede and we continue to seek ways to keep our heads above water and from being swept away by it.  Too many have lost businesses and jobs because of this man and his policies.  Too many have lost their lives because of them, too.  And while lefties falsely (as in blatantly lie) about Trump and the GOP trashing the Constitution to rule over America, Joey Plugs ignores the Constitution repeatedly like it's his job. 

 

Among the many examples of the aforementioned disregard for the Law of the Land is the debacle at the border.  His reversal of Trump's border policies have resulted in hordes of illegals flowing into our nation without vetting, and worse, being sprinkled around the nation in the dead of night so no one can see it happening.  In the meantime, he and his Dem whores dare tell us we need be concerned about the sovereignty of Ukraine????  Since when does the sovereignty of the Ukrainian border mean more than our own?  This dipshit is ready to send troops for the purpose, but won't send any to aid border control officers in Texas, Arizona and elsewhere!  No.  Not Joey Ice Cream Cone!  Joey Ice Cream Cone is going to assume reports of them whipping Haitians is true (note to readers...I have absolutely no problem with whipping invaders if that's all it takes to get them to go back to the other side of the border they had no right to breech).  

 

Butthead Biden is Constitutionally obligated to defend our borders.  He would rather keep citizens righteously pissed at the shoddy and fraudulent election results than to continue building a wall to keep terrorists and cartel mules carrying deadly drugs from coming over the border.  

 

But our "president" is not concerned with the Constitution any more than any other lefty is...Dem or otherwise.  The Constitution to these people is a punchline as well as an obstruction to their desire for total power and control.  And where else have we seen this kind of crap from this guy some actually believed would be a better president than Trump?  To name a few, we have:

 

---Forcing citizens to take experimental drugs without their consent.

 

---Denying landlords the right to evict tenants for non-payment of rents.

 

---Selecting cabinet members, and now SCOTUS nominees on the basis of race, sex or sexual perversity. (This obviously is a rejection of all who do not check the boxes so important to the deviant, despotic left).

 

---His recent comments to a group of cops suggesting he once again wishes to impose gun control laws, while pretending doing so in no way violates the 2nd Amendment.  

 

https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=568842711036574

 

Louisville lunkheads like to puke on and on about how corrupt Trump was as president without citing any corrupt action he's ever taken.  Yet, in all the above cases...and those I failed to mention...Biden has demonstrated a willful disregard for our Constitution and laws, both of which he swore to defend and enforce.  Indeed, it's his job as chief law enforcement officer of the nation.  But like all leftist LEOs, he intentional craps on our laws and in doing so, craps on us. 

A Kind Of Book Review

 I'm not the reader some people are.  I do have my moments, though.  When it comes to novels, I've been focused for the last couple of decades on "classics", such as anything by Dickens (maybe my favorite), Alexandre Dumas (the Musketeer trilogy and The Count of Monte Cristo), James Fenimore Cooper (I need to get his other Hawkeye stories), Herman Melville (I really have to finish Moby-Dick, and I need to get Billy Budd---loved the movie). 

I also like to read books by people I follow who have a solid understanding of the current events and the political scene, like Mark Levin.  I'm hoping to get to his latest book "American Marxism" eventually.  At my current pace, it might be out of print by the time I'm ready to get it, or the country may be totally given over to leftist stupidity and his books burned and his ass jailed.

And while I have books on any number of subjects, the third favorite category is history/biographies.  I've read bios (autobios, actually) of several rich people which pretty much contradicts what lefties say about their motivations and attitudes toward everyone else.  But mostly, I favor historical figures, particularly American historical figures.  I'm less than two hundred pages away from finishing a sizable biography by a Yale history professor named, David W. Blight.  He's also their Director of the Gilder Lehrman Center for the Study of Slavery, Resistance and Abolition.  The book is "Frederick Douglass:  Prophet of Freedom". 

As I say, it's a fairly sizable tome, 764 pages of print small enough to compel me to buy readers with greater magnification than what I now use.  It's one of three books I have regarding Douglass, the others being a new book by Brian Kilmeade, "The President and the Freedom Fighter: Abraham Lincoln, Frederick Douglas, and their Battle to Save America's Soul", and Douglass' first autobiography (I think there's three), "Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave".   I bought the last and Blight's work together late last summer, and the Kilmeade book I got for Christmas, along with Brett Baier's book on U.S. Grant.  (Where will I find the time?  I'm way to busy wasting it.)

I was going to wait until I was finished with the book before posting anything on it, though that could be late next summer at the rate I'm going.  But as I was knocking out a dozen pages, I came across something which came up several times throughout my reading.  That's the political leanings of the author.  Blight is clearly a lefty.  Now, for the most part, I can't really say that it has tainted the entire book.   I'll need to read the other two to get any sense of whether or not that's possible.  But the dude does insert his left-leaning opinions now and then.  He's taken the liberty to castigate modern Republicans with little asides which do not truly reflect modern Republicans so much as the left's false opinion of them.  I wish I had highlighted them in some way, but there aren't so many that with each one I found, I didn't believe I'd come upon another.  Here's one I somehow managed to go back over one hundred pages to find:

"The freedmen's needs would require what the orator called 'all the elevating and civilizing institutions of the country.' Modern Republicans, eager to find a black spokesman for personal responsibility, have not bothered to read deeper into Douglass."

What in the wide, wide world of sports is THAT supposed to mean?  That Republicans only care about black people who make them feel better?  What an asshole!!  This isn't reflective of Republicans or conservatives I've ever known!  It does resemble the patronizing so typical of the modern Democrat/progressive, that's for sure!  

Here's the one which made me stop reading to publish this post:  (pardon the length of it)

"This is a prototypical case of a prominent black spokesman whose forthright statements about his people's behavior and self-criticisms were appropriated by racist forces.  Douglass was a worried, ambivalent man in the mid-1870s, and feeling his sense of authority dissipating.  A year after the Hillsdale speech, he still found himself defending it to the American Missionary Association.  In a letter to that organization's journal, Douglass reasserted his desire for 'justice...more than alms,' even as he welcomed their aid.  Above all, he did not want the violent white-supremacist Democrats using his words to their ends any more than he could stomach the 'sectarian and selfish purposes' of the 'hungry class' out to life the destitute Negro of their imaginations.  We have watched this scene so many times in modern American politics: current Republicans, some of whom love to appropriate Douglass, lifting him out of context to use him in service to causes he would abhor."

Like "what"?  He provides absolutely nothing in the way of examples.  It's clearly a lefty thing.  Dan will love this guy!!   He's probably among the historians who gave Dan the tingles in his lady parts by trashing Trump in presidential rankings (what a joke that was!).

But why do that?  Is this an attempt to draw a parallel between then and now?  Should authors just assume the reader gets whatever he's trying to reference.  Surely he has something specific in mind, so why be coy?  Isn't the whole point of such books to teach and enlighten?  David McCullough is a fine historian and biographer.  I've read his books "1776", "John Adams" and "Truman".  I can't recall anything like this in any of them.  I've read Kilmeade's book "Andrew Jackson and the Miracle of New Orleans".  Nothing like that at all in his book, and Jackson was a Democrat!  I've read books on Lincoln, even Cap't freakin' Bligh and no injection of partisan hackery has ever been present to my recollection.  (One exception is raving atheist Christopher Hitchens' dinky...188 pages...bio of Jefferson, "Thomas Jefferson:  Author of America".  It seemed the book was an excuse to highlight what Hitchens wanted to believe was Jefferson's own atheism.  He simply had issues with organized religion...not religion itself.  But one can't get past a few pages without another reference to how Jefferson allegedly had no use for religion.  In Hitchen's case it was a blatant lie, given the rich bounty of source materials which prove otherwise.)

Again, perhaps I'll find in reading the other two books that which takes me back to something I read in this one which further taints it.  Conceding that possibility exists, I still would recommend the book.  It does have tons of details about the guy and his life and work.  Aside from Blight's indiscretions, I've enjoyed it immensely.  There was a time when I would have lost several hours reading it, so it does tend to hold one's attention while informing.  I just wish Blight would either have elaborated on his cheap shots about today's GOP, or provided legit examples that justify them as well as make the connection he pretended was obvious.