Supreme Court Upholds Religious Protections in Face of COVID Lockdowns

In a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court of the United States blocked the state of New York’s restrictions on in-person attendance for religious gatherings. This was among the first major rulings which involved the newly-appointed Amy Coney Barrett, who sided with the Constitution on this matter in what is now a 6 to 3 conservative-majority Supreme Court.

The ruling seemed an obvious consequence of interpreting the first amendment of the Constitution, the first of a list of Bill of Rights that collectively act as the superordinate principles that govern the relationship between the U.S. government, state governments, and individual members of the population.

While it’s no surprise that the three “liberal” judges ruled as they did, it’s disappointing that a conservative judge, Chief Justice John Roberts, sided against the Constitution in this regard. Considering the value of the Constitution in American society, none of the judges should side against the Constitution in any case.

The text of the first amendment reads as follows:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

The law specifically precludes the U.S. government or the states from favoring one religious organization over another, and protects the right of the people to assemble peaceably. This is especially relevant to the Orthodox Jews who complained of the restrictions, and also claimed that they were specifically targeted. Recent restrictions on the number of people allowed in religious gatherings in light of the coronavirus epidemic limited religious gatherings to 25 attendees, or more recently, to ten.

As a personal observation, as I read the language of the first amendment, and see the common themes of the activities and parties mentioned, I get the idea that the government is not to be involved in ideological influencing of any kind towards the population. Protections for religious groups and the press carries a strong implication of this. If this is the case, this would mean that psy-ops historically conducted on U.S. citizens should be strictly illegal. Though, to be fair, private organizations go much further in this regard than institutions of the U.S. government. Anyone who cares to name some examples are free to do so in the comments below.

The Supreme Court pointed out that “even in a pandemic, the Constitution cannot be put away and forgotten. The restrictions at issue here… strike at the very heart of the First Amendment’s guarantee of religious liberty.”

As the BBC pointed out, the ruling won’t have an immediate impact, as the parties that filed the complaint are no longer under the restrictions that they contested.

Disturbingly, as the coronavirus lockdowns demonstrated, it is possible for state governors to enact orders that are in direct violation of the constitution, and for the unlawful orders to be carried out over the course of months, in which time the courts debate the legality of the orders. Yet, even once state governors are determined to have broken the law, the damage has already been done, including to the assets and enterprises of the people, and these governors face little to no personal consequence for their illegal orders, with the possible exception of Gretchen Whitmer, who may face impeachment for her defiance of a court order.

Since the beginning of the coronavirus restrictions, U.S. citizens have found out that state governors have the ability to cause substantial damage to their livelihoods, and face little consequence for their misuse of power, which in some cases is illegal.

The United States is widely regarded as a country of rebels. There is a reason for that, which has much to do with the fact that our founding fathers figured something out about government: that what makes a leader is a following, and that no one can govern an individual without the individual’s consent. Our proclamation of religious liberty was a direct challenge to a king who claimed that his position of authority was a matter of divine mandate. Today, the religious people of America are being challenged by a different sort of tyrant, the kind who possesses less power, authority, and consequence than a king. Our indignation towards them is unquestionably appropriate, as many of our state governors are loathsome individuals with no respect for the religions or faiths of the founders.

If you’re among the many Americans who, on this Thanksgiving day, are gathering together with family and friends in defiance of the will of certain debased governors, you are doing so with the true heart of an American. If these so-called governors have the hearts to understand it, maybe they’ll eventually figure it out.

But if someone doesn’t have the capacity to understand why a person would want to gather with family and friends, they’re truly unfit to lead.

More New Evidence of Widespread Voter Irregularity

Earlier today, new evidence was presented of widespread voter irregularity. The information was gleaned from Republicans who were polled and were phoned concerning their absentee ballots. The poll was of a sample of populations, it’s still an indication that something seems amiss, and therefore, an investigation is merited.

The following is a short video presented by Tim Pool, who explains what’s happening very well.

Over the course of this election, I’ve noticed a few trends that seem odd. Any one of them by itself might not seem too troubling, but as they add up, they collectively seem more suspicious.

Among these are:

  • A strong insistence on mail-in ballots, in spite of the fact that several European countries have banned them because they are rife with fraud,
  • The mistaken idea that the Associated Press decides the winner of the election,
  • An unawareness that the election is still ongoing, as votes are still being tallied, and electors still haven’t cast their votes,
  • The presumption on the part of the corporate media that Joe Biden is president elect, in spite of the previous point,
  • A hesitance to recount votes, in spite of the fact that it would hurt literally nothing, and lay concerns to rest,
  • That Republicans observers were barred from observing, and windows were obstructed when an assembled crowd attempted to observe for themselves,
  • Corporate media outlets are repeatedly insisting that the election went just fine, after years of going on about a baseless claim about Russian interference,
  • Repeated denial of evidence of irregularities or fraud in spite of the fact that this evidence is available to the public, and we can plainly see it,
  • The chairman of the Federal Election Commission said that fraud is taking place,
  • Software developed to monitor the election found that votes were flipped.

There’s a lot more, but that seems more than sufficient to get people thinking.

If anything, leftists should be eager to do a recount at the request of right-wingers, if they are so confident that they actually won. That way, if it turns out to be the case, they could say, “That proves it, you happy?” The only reason I can think of that they’d be afraid of a recount is if it turns out that they didn’t win, either because they didn’t muster up enough votes, or there was enough improper or nefarious activity to sway the election.

Why is it that it’s the left-wingers who seem so afraid of the truth?

TWAT News: Hair Dye Banter Keeps Morons Busy While Grown-ups Are Talking

Hair gel, in one of the many forms recognizable by those who maintain their appearance.

It used to be that you’d have to go to the trouble of fishing out the keys, jingle them, then you let the kids play with them. This distraction buys a surprising amount of time to accomplish something that the kids have no idea is significant, like signing a lease or paying for the food that they end up eating.

Today, you don’t have to do anything, because they are easier to amuse than they’ve ever been.

This is the inescapable conclusion that millions of adults have come to after an RNC press conference in which Rudy Giuliani’s “hair dye” came dripping down, at which point their 17-year-old Minecraft savants took to Twitter to shoot inanities into a digital abyss.

For adults, it’s a sobering moment, as they realize that once these Fortnite legends grow up, they’ll be in a position to change society, and evidently, there’s almost every chance they’ll screw it up. For parents, it’s even worse, as it’s becoming increasingly difficult to deny that these half-wits came from their own genetic material.

On the bright side, they got to do something fun with their genitals nearly two decades ago.

TWAT News: PA Governor Wants You To Wear Masks In Homes

It used to be that if something was too stupid to be true, it probably was. But this is the year 2020.

In a move that would have had him declared eugenically unfit a century ago, Pennsylvania governor Tom Wolf has laid out new coronavirus rules, including for wearing a mask in your house.

Pennsylvanians, you voted in someone you should never have.

In addition, they are asking that those entering the state be tested within 72 hours, or self-quarantine for two weeks. However, there’s no plan to enforce this measure, which means it may as well not exist.

For those who may be curious, Pennsylvania pretty much despises Tom Wolf. So much so, that someone put up a billboard along the turnpike that says something like, “Don’t blame me, I voted for (someone else).” To understand the spite behind this, consider the fact that the PA governor chair won’t be on the ballot for another couple years, and Wolf is on his last consecutive term.

Someone bought a billboard just to say that Wolf is doing a terrible job.

Governors such as Tom Wolf are becoming more invasive in their demands. It used to be that calling a Democrat an authoritarian was a snarl word, but they are now literally living up to it.

On the bright side, defying Tom Wolf has never been more simple.

That Was Actually The news.

Panic-Buying Round 2 is Underway

This photo was taken earlier this year.

Just a few days ago, I warned my readers that they have an opportunity to prepare for a possible new round of lockdowns. It would appear that I’m not the only one with my ear to the ground, as people have started prepping for a next round of lockdowns, which seems to be turning into another bout of panic-buying.

While Biden’s guys are flip-flopping on whether to institute a nationwide lockdown (which federal judges in Michigan and Pennsylvania have already found unconstitutional), Gretchen Whitmer, governor of Michigan, has decided that she just couldn’t wait and decided to institute a three-week lockdown (ignoring those federal judges). Leftists are itching to lock everything down, and they can hardly contain themselves.

The World Health Organization (WHO) has already opposed lockdowns, citing the economic damage that they do, worsening the problems of poverty and child starvation.

Not that left-wing governors care.

With them, it’s about power. And the lockdowns are yet another way they can express their power over you. Want to physically attend college so you can build career connections? Governors have their own aspirations. Want the income you need to buy that house? Governors care about their own income. Have family plans? Governors have their own plans for the future, and they don’t care about you.

While mass-hysteria fueled by corporate-media sensationalism was the main driving factor of early 2020 panic-buying, the panic-buying of late 2020 is being driven by sheer distrust of left-wing governors, at least one of which is ignoring a court ruling and the law of the land just to do as they please, and more chilling still, they’ve been able to avoid accountability for it until now. That may soon change with the possible impeachment of Gretchen Whitmer, but I’m not counting on it.

Just days ago, a handful of Northeast governors have met up in an emergency meeting to conspire against us discuss further coronavirus restrictions in light of an increase in the number of new cases. Among the points discussing involved more limitations on the number of people who can gather together in one place, which just so happens to be something a Pennsylvania federal judge directly ruled against.

Wow, I had no idea that a federal judge could be simply ignored. Life hack!

Michigan Governor Faces Impeachment Over Lockdown

(I would have put an image of Gretchen Whitmer here, but my readership probably doesn’t want to look at her.)

Michigan representative Matt Maddock announced on Twitter that he is one of several Michigan lawmakers that will be pursuing the impeachment of Michigan governor Gretchen Whitmer.

The impeachment motions would be coming in light of Gretchen’s announcement of new coronavirus restrictions, which she intends to last three weeks. Earlier this year, a federal judge ruled that Gretchen’s previous coronavirus lockdowns were unconstitutional, similar to another ruling in Pennsylvania.

Not only is Gretchen’s lockdown unconstitutional, it is in direct violation of a court order. What’s more, as Matt explains, she ignored due process and “Weaponized [contact] tracing databases to aid democrat campaigns”.

Of course, it’s also relevant that Gretchen is a dangerous, irresponsible fanatic, for reasons Matt gives in his Twitter post.

Personally, I applaud Michigan lawmakers’ pursuit of the impeachment of Gretchen Whitmer, as I believe that there should be consequences when leadership damages the livelihoods of ordinary citizens in violation of the law of the land. Considering the extent of the damage Gretchen has caused, impeachment is not enough. She needs to be held financially responsible for the damage she caused, as determined by a class-action lawsuit, out of her own pockets.

It would seem as though Gretchen was one of many children who believed that being governor meant that you could do whatever you want, but didn’t at some point learn that the U.S. of A. is a very rule of law kinda place.

Because Gretchen Whitmer thinks it’s okay to ignore the ruling of a federal judge, perhaps Michiganders should ignore her.

TWAT News: Burger King recommending McDonald’s?!

It would seem like the Coronavirus Apocalypse is getting serious, because now Burger King is recommending eating at McDonald’s in an effort to keep the fast food industry going.

If you’re like me, then you’ve been eating at home more lately, or just eating healthier in general, as it’s much less expensive than dining out. Of course, I’ve been downing ramen lately, which isn’t the healthiest thing around, but is inexpensive, and accessible.

It would seem like the fast food industry is feeling the pinch. There aren’t many Burger Kings in my neighborhood, and the one I’ve visited on the way to church has closed down since the onset of the Coronavirus Apocalypse. Not that I’m feeling especially bad for the fast food industry, considering the tricks that they play to keep people addicted, which includes adding sugar to their food, as Subway does with their bread.

As an article from BoredPanda pointed out, not everyone was buying the corporate shilling. As commenters on Twitter duly noted, it’s smaller businesses that more desperately need attention. They have a point, considering that it’s the small businesses that were hit the hardest during the lockdowns, with some of them closing down, never to open again. In fact, during the lockdowns, it was big business that was better off, especially with less competition from smaller business.

People are going to big box stores like Walmart and Target, getting more in fewer stops in an effort to limit travel. People who aren’t leaving their homes are ordering through sites like Amazon. Are these the kinds of businesses that need help?

Yet, people are finding it more difficult to frequent smaller businesses, as many of us have lost our jobs, and others still are squeamish to spend lots of money, considering that more lockdowns might be in the near future, and it’s hard to predict what some state governors might do.

When it comes to food, I’ve taken an interest in shelf-stable items, including canned food, flour, rice, dried beans, and even ramen. I even have some food left from one of those Auguson Farms buckets, which has simple-to-prepare food items that can last on the shelf for years. What I got was mostly cheap, and has the potential to last a little while, which can help in the event that things get challenging. It’s not a bad idea to secure some of these items while they’re still relatively easy to find.

When facing the possibility to fighting for your life, fast food loses much of its appeal. But it wasn’t so much the virus that brought us to this point as it was the response to it.

Burger King recommended McDonald’s. That Was Actually The news.

Can We Believe the Chairman of the Federal Election Commission When He Says that Fraud is Taking Place?

Trey Trainor

Current President Donald Trump has been met with skepticism when he claimed that massive fraud had taken place in the 2020 U.S. Presidential election. But can we believe that when the same is said by the Chairman of the Federal Election Commission?

That’s just what’s happening, as Trey Trainor, who holds that position, says that fraud is happening in states still counting ballots.

According to Trainor, the state of Pennsylvania is an especially egregious offender, as it has failed to have poll watchers present for the ballot counting process at a distance of 6 feet.

He has pointed out that the Trump campaign has some valid accusations, which could end up at the Supreme Court.

Wow, the corporate media is largely failing to cover what could be a significant story. These are developments that could have an effect on who holds the office of the President of the United States, and the continuation of these developments is not at all contingent on whether the corporate media covers it, or whether people are paying attention.

Instead, the media is going along with Biden’s claim to be the President-Elect, even though the votes are yet to be cast by the electors, and there are states still counting votes (or recounting, as the case may be).

How interesting it is that the same news outlets that obsessively cried “Russian interference in the 2016 election” for years, only for these claims to be determined to be false after a two-year investigation that cost $30 million, are now turning down the opportunity to cover events that would blow the previous allegations out of the water, and actually has evidence behind them?

I suppose you can’t expect much better from media outlets who have a clear horse in the race, especially when they professionally prey upon adults that wear diapers.

Has DuckDuckGo been compromised?

A couple years ago, I took interest in DuckDuckGo while looking for alternatives to Google’s products and services. DuckDuckGo’s appeal was that it was a search engine that protects the privacy of its users, and that search results from DuckDuckGo faced relatively little censorship.

That last point is particularly important when looking for news outlets, as mainstream search engines usually prop up corporate information media with a clear left-wing bias. When a search engine is being trusted to provide information sources, and the corporate entity providing the search engine has a left-wing bias, there’s a clear conflict of interest, and they cannot be trusted to provide honest, unfiltered results.

While privacy is important, what’s especially important to me is that search results, particularly news results, remain unfiltered by the political biases of those presenting the information. In recent times, it has been especially challenging to find search engines that aren’t only pro-privacy, but also free speech.

It’s because of this that it’s disturbing that DuckDuckGo has been making donations to far-left groups, as was pointed out in the following video:

If you’re trusting a search engine such as DuckDuckGo to keep you informed as to what’s really happening in the world, it should be relevant to you that the same search engine may be making substantial donations to groups focused on ensuring that news outlets are presenting exclusively left-wing perspectives.

If you’re interested in something more tangible, I’ve conducted a simple, trivial experiment to see what sources pop up when running the search term, news, then opening the “News” tab. I performed this experiment using the DuckDuckGo search engine, and the following list is of the first ten sources:

  • CNN
  • ABC
  • TechCrunch
  • Business Insider
  • Forbes
  • Washington Post
  • Business Insider
  • Reuters
  • ABC

All of which are corporate sources, typically propped up by big tech, and whose appeal is to your parents and grandparents, who remember with rose-colored glasses the days of old when corporate media had uncontested control of information.

Next, I did the same with Yippy, a search engine that provides relevant results by grouping results into clusters. Here are the first ten news sources:

  • InfoWars
  • OANN
  • NY Post
  • Breitbart
  • Washington Examiner
  • Fox News
  • Media ITE
  • Townhall
  • InfoWars
  • OANN

InfoWars is pretty far from my first source of news. But putting that aside, I notice that this is an eclectic mix from a broad spectrum of political positions. Better still, these are mostly new media outlets, more relevant in today’s more connected world.

Out of curiousity, I decided to do the same with Google.

  • The Guardian
  • CNN
  • NPR
  • BBC News
  • Business Insider
  • NBC News
  • Seattle Times
  • BBC News
  • CNN
  • The Guardian

More of the three-letter networks, all presenting the exact same product with the exact same bias.

The internet, as it was in the 2000s, was a huge, free-and-open marketplace of ideas, permeated by diversity of thought. Today, if the internet were to be presented by to you by DuckDuckGo and Google, you’d be hearing the same idea over and over again, continually delivered by the same professional liars.

Because big tech has long-since been subverted by the far left in a manner reminiscent of Hydra’s infiltration of S.H.I.E.L.D., it’s easy to be black-pilled into thinking that any attempt to make a free speech platform would be self-defeating, considering an inevitable subversion funded from the enormous wealth of the hot-tub elites of big tech. As they are today, the free speech advocates of the intellectual dark web don’t have the kind of sophistication as those looking for any excuse to silence them.

Rather than lose hope, what we should take from developments like this is that, as the free-speech advocates and diverse thinkers of the digital age, we have to be willing to change things up when one platform loses its viability.

Similarly, if a church-goer discovers that his church has doctrines that are in direct contradiction of the Scriptures, would he continually attend, knowing full-well that the sermons are lying to him? Would he continue to tithe, knowing that he was funding deceit?

As a preventative measure, free-speech platforms should make a policy of gatekeeping when it comes to positions of influence in the company, to ensure that those who can influence the direction of the company has the company’s philosophy in mind. After all, if a company’s philosophy is lost, that company loses its reason to exist, and becomes yet another corporate husk that justifies its existence solely through profits, competing with dozens of other media companies offering the exact same product in the short time they have left.

Fauci: “Do what you’re told” because science

Anthony Fauci, looking more like Hannibal Lecter by the day.

Dr. Anthony Fauci has been a proponent of muzzling Americans with facemasks. Now, it’s apparent that his own facemask is tight to the point of depriving his brain of oxygen, because now he’s literally telling Americans to “do what you’re told”.

Don’t believe me? Here’s what Fauci had to say, provided by NBC New York:

“I was talking with my U.K. colleagues who are saying the U.K. is similar to where we are now, because each of our countries have that independent spirit,” he said on stage. “I can understand that, but now is the time to do what you’re told.”

He actually said that.

He also said that “science” was being politicized, rather than trusted. That’s interesting, because it was “science” that governors trusted when shutting down states, causing unemployment to skyrocket, poverty to soar, and exasperating child starvation, all while not asking Americans themselves whether they objected.

And, what do you know, it turns out that scientists don’t have any idea how to run a society. For that matter, neither do doctors. Why not ask economists? And sociologists? And, for that matter, the people themselves? Even the WHO has come to understand that lockdowns were a bad idea.

Anthony Fauci sounds close to understanding that Americans don’t listen to authoritarians like him. But if he figured that out, he’d promptly shut up, get off the stage, and go where we don’t have to look at him.

If Anthony Fauci does not end up at a bus station somewhere begging for change, he has not experienced the damage he himself has caused.