I have a series called That Was Actually The News, which examines crazy or hard-to-believe stories that make the news, sometimes with jabs at the outlets that consider these occurrences news. For the first time, I have my doubts that the category could do it justice. Wait ‘til you find out why.
President Elect Joe Biden has just appointed his health secretary. And it is a transsexual woman.
We’re really in for it, now.
Rachel Levine, who previously served as Health Secretary of the state of Pennsylvania, had been selected by Joe Biden as his Health Secretary. Rachel identified as a man for the first 50 years of her(?) life, before deciding she’d rather be a woman, breaking up with her wife over the delusion.
Rachel is also known for blowing her stack when an interviewer used the wrong pronouns on her, accidentally. I know that not every transsexual is militant about it, but there is an outspoken few who actually view misgendering as a form of assault.
And as though that weren’t bad enough, she was the one who ordered people who tested positive for COVID-19 into nursing homes, where they became surrounded by people especially susceptible to fatalities through complications. If you still haven’t figured out why that’s stupid, just read that last sentence again until you figure it out. No reader left behind!
With her new position of power, Rachel can be expected to spew intersectional propaganda under the guise of science, while shaping the medical world to the image of a sexual proclamation that only about 0.5% of people identify with, alienating the remaining 99.5% of people who are better in touch with reality.
Additionally, Biden wishes to impose 100 days of mask-wearing on all Americans, as though the results would be any different from the previous 300 days of doing the same.
Most of us would know that betraying one’s own family is an enormous no-no, so I don’t have to labor that point.
But it seems like not everyone is on the same page, because a Massachusetts woman outed her own family after discovering an online video of them from the capitol siege.
Her decision came after she was criticized by her family for her sexuality, and for wanting to participate in the BLM riots peaceful protests, probably because something about the rampant destruction civil protests made her feel left out.
“It was an emotional thing to decide to do this but at the same time if I did nothing I was, I felt that I was as bad as them,”
Oh, how hard it must have been on Helena to cause her family members to face possible criminal charges, and may have even cost her mother her job.
But at least she got something out of the deal, and that’s the feeling of self-satisfaction that comes with standing up for her freedom to get it on with a woman, even though she was a grown woman, and could make her own choices with her life, anyhow.
I’ve heard that Helena has since raised some money on crowdfunding. At this point, I think it’s clear that she could use as much help as she could get. After all, she betrayed her family, so unless she already has the means to support herself, she likely has a long future of being a drain on society ahead of her.
If you’re thinking of befriending her, you might want to be careful about that. To understand why, pay close attention to something she already said:
“It was an emotional thing to decide to do this but at the same time if I did nothing I was, I felt that I was as bad as them,“
Helena Duke, bold added
As bad as it is that she has treachery against her own family in her history, like many leftists, Helena Duke believes in guilt by association. If you slip up around her even slightly, she’ll feel an obligation to turn against you too, out of self-preservation.
We’ve been warned lately that the left eats their own. We can take their word for it when they warn us about it themselves.
Legacy media seems to be sticking up for Helena, and at this point, I doubt I’d be fooling very many people if I were to pretend to be surprised. If leftist institutions and their followers are in collective agreement that betraying family is okay, and they’re open about it, we can at least thank them for being up-front about their real values.
The author of the first novel in the new Star Wars setting, The High Republic, has told us not to purchase her new novel, and told us not to waste our time.
That’s not the full context, of course. But in light of that, it wouldn’t get any better, as it would demonstrate that a large faction of the Star Wars creative team and its leadership still haven’t learned their lesson.
The drama began when Ireland criticized a Twitter thread which involved a 9-year-old girl attempting to use a can opener. She was welcome to her criticism, and the routine sounds like it wasn’t my cup of tea. But hey, considering all the kids out there that think they understand the world better than grownups that have been around longer, there’s a place for yet more documented evidence of children failing to accomplish basic tasks.
However, that Ireland directed her vitriol towards white men in particular was an indication of a certain weakness, political in nature, that has been prominent among the low-information crowd.
You can read the exchange on Bounding Into Comics’ page, but succinctly, a commenter pointed out that it was still bad for business for content creators to continue practicing divisive politics, to which Ireland responded by doubling down hard.
Justina Ireland warned us about her book, telling us, “The problem is, if you don’t like my politics and my beliefs and my moral compass you aren’t going to like my books so let’s just go ahead and save everyone some time.”
When one uses their creative outlet as a vehicle to push their politics, there is a great potential for awkwardness, and a large portion of the audience is likely to be alienated, and discontinue participation. Sound like an expression in modern parlance?
Matters are not looking favorable for Ireland, considering that she’s apparently a far-leftist. If you’ve had to confront one, you’re already familiar with their tactics, which involves calling the other side names and and aggressively insulting their intelligence until their opposition (theoretically) bows down to their intellectual supremacy. What it comes down to is that either you’re marching in perfect lock-step with them, or you’re an X-ophobe, where “X” is a variable where they insert a descriptor for a supposedly-marginalized group, apparently at random.
We know that Disney is capable of producing excellent Star Wars content. The Mandalorian proved that by telling an interesting story with great new characters, and with cameos with established characters that people already care about. But it seems as though not everyone at Disney gets it, as Ireland is indicating that it’s reasonable to expect her books to become another reminder of the world’s problems, rather than the escape one might have preferred from fiction.
It’s gotten to the point that, if fans know that a writer has leftist politics, they’re quick to write off what they come up with. That’s because leftists are bad at telling stories without bringing in their politics. It didn’t take long for Justina Ireland to share her politics, and it doesn’t bode well for Star Wars: Glowstick Party of Friendship.
Because of the establishment position of the left in big tech, they have a certain capacity for silencing the opposition through deplatforming, a capacity that they have abused for years. However, establishment is not the same thing as proficiency, and by repeatedly deplatforming their opposition, they have incentivized their opposition to learn to overcome the barriers that have been presented to them.
The irony is that while the left fancies itself as gurus of tech, most of them don’t know much about tech outside of end-user experience, and they tend to become conditioned to ease. Meanwhile, the right becomes nimble, being forced to do so by necessity.
For a person to say that they are excellent with tech just because they use devices is as naïve as saying that they understand cars because they drive them, or that they are excellent artists because they’ve used an expensive set of paints.
When a person is censored, they don’t give up on their ideology. Rather, they adapt, finding different channels through which they can connect, and they continue to speak to an audience willing to listen.
Christianity didn’t vanish because it was censored by the Roman Catholic system, it was driven underground. In time, Christians came to operate printing presses, by which point, they became unstoppable. Christians could print the Gospels faster than the Catholics could confiscate them, and as a result, people came to see that there was something wrong with the Catholic ideology, as it was plainly out of alignment with the clear words of the scriptures, which became available for all the world to read.
It’s interesting to see those who have long fancied themselves as “liberals” celebrating as their intellectual superiors are silencing the opposition through censorship, making it clear that they are not the free-speech advocates they may have claimed to be. However, history echoes their failures, making evident what comes next.
“You’re not the first person to try to rule the universe with a sword of injustice. They all failed. And so will you.”
If you’re like me, daydreaming can take you to places with ninja ladies, Nintendo, and nachos aplenty. This is because the typical man knows what rocks.
What would a militant feminist daydream about? There’s a reason that no one asks them, and that’s because they aggressively beat us over the head with it, regardless of whether anyone cares to know about it.
They don’t have artistic merit among them, but the U.N. scraped up the best they could come up with to show us the feminist utopia. You pretty much already saw it above, but here it is again, submitted for your amused disbelief:
This locale, called Equiterra, threatens to unseat CWCville as Empress Regnant of deluded paracosms. It’s intended to showcase what an ideal society would look like in the eyes of an intersectional feminist.
It’s a huge, voluminous mountain of horse puckey, to the point that the prospect of making fun of it can take even a seasoned satirist aback. Honestly, I don’t even know where to begin. So I’ll pick an arbitrary point and then proceed on whim. Equiterra doesn’t proceed with sensible rules, so I’m under less pressure to do the same.
One thing I notice about Equiterra is the educational presence. This seems positive, until you realize that most degrees are consumer products, and most of them are absolutely useless. Most college towns fuel their economies with the debt of students that move into town, so Equiterra isn’t likely independent, especially considering Equiterra’s relative lack of production. Even if the education were “free”, who would be taxed to make this education possible?
Also, I’m noticing an emphasis on STEM. If women want STEM degrees so bad, they should just go for it. I’m not kidding. The college I went to was so serious about getting women into STEM that they even offered them private dorm rooms, something that men weren’t guaranteed. Even the fringe benefit of being surrounded by all the men they could dream of doesn’t seem to persuade them into STEM.
I noticed a wedding ad, a daycare, and reproductive services. Because Equiterra has no apparent source of food, how are its residents procreating?
There’s a “Violence-Free Alley”, as though violence weren’t already illegal everywhere. …grumble…
I noticed Hindus and Muslims co-existing peacefully near the Inclusion Square, which brings to mind just how well these groups get along in places like India. I did take notice of the lone Jew planting a tree, showing that at least one Jew survived the attempt to bring Utopia about, this time around.
But notice any signs of Christianity? Me neither. That’s kinda unrealistic, considering that it’s the most popular religion on earth. I suppose all the talk about sin, reconciliation, Natural Law, and superordinate principle made the untalented artist uncomfortable. Kinda like Hitler.
There’s a centre for recycling toxic masculinity, somehow. It’s pretty far from the only element that suggests that men are the only ones that need behavioral modification. While men have a view of women as idyllic, the fact is, women amongst themselves can be highly toxic, and sometimes even vicious. Don’t question how I know.
Also, we can do away with the notion that men are the only sources of sexual aggression, because women are certainly capable of the same. Though I suppose that not all men have made the same observation.
Equiterra has a government building, and to no one’s surprise, it’s filled with people sitting around, accomplishing not-a-damn-thing. When you’ve already screwed over all the freedoms that people already had, what would they have left to do?
Quick, how many vehicles did you notice in all of Equiterra? The recycling truck? And that’s it? Exactly. The already-dark environmentalist dystopia gets even darker with the implication that there’s no easy way out.
Not pictured is the wall citizens are climbing to escape, because people prefer a world where they can eat steak and have sex.
As ridiculous as Equiterra is, I almost want to see someone attempt it, preferably avoiding the bloodshed and genocide that precedes most failing utopias. If the U.N. thinks a town like this is such a great idea, let’s see them fund it. It’s hard to imagine they would, as the financiers of such a project would likely anticipate the return on their investment in a completely non-productive society. There’d also be an awkward moment in which they’d have to explain why they are turning down the pitch, in such a way that doesn’t explicitly confess that their professed political ideology is woefully insufficient for building a successful organized society.
“So, you want a few schools, a laboratory, your own government, oodles of reproductive services, a male toxicity treatment plant, and let’s not forget a fashion boutique. I’m double-checking; are you sure you’re not interested in any agriculture? Okay then, how many unicorns can we put you down for?”
The investment banker we all envy.
Maybe if it has a feminist tinge, socialism will finally be accepted as the real thing when it’s attempted, and we can finally apply the book-end to one of history’s most miserably stupid ideas.
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:
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 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.
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.
The site claims the information it provides is of “Americans who Give Money to Support a Racist.” Donald Trump has condemned racism, though the left likes to pretend that he didn’t.
The site’s information was made available due to the fact that those who make campaign contributions must share their full name and address. But there’s a further twist to a site that’s already substantially twisted: it abuses MapQuest by providing directions to their homes.
To the surprise of absolutely no one in the entire universe, the site’s registering company is based in California, which has a substantially different culture as compared to the rest of the civilized world.
It’s pretty obvious that the purpose of the site is intimidation. It’s existence is to make the point that if you donate to Trump, some violent out-of-control freaks are going to come for you.
As one could imagine, there’s so much potential for this to backfire. For one thing, Trump supporters and conservatives in general actually work for a living, and as a consequence, can get to be physically fit without even going to the gym. They might have dogs, too. Not those wimpy little comfort animals that weirdos take with them to grocery stores in their purses, I mean real dogs.
Then there’s the fact that they’re likely to have guns. Let that sink in, and you’ll realize that your usual Antifa pansy that’s about as lanky as those pictured above would do well not to antagonize their political opponents, as the resulting one-sided stomp-fest would be quite predictable.
Not that that’s any skin off the website maintainer(s) face, since its whole point is to make other people fight their battles for them.
The existence of the site provides an illustration of the worldview of the extreme left; they are polarized to the point that they actually believe that their political opponents are the worst people, and that anything they can do against them would be justified. They actually believe that attacking ordinary people is doing service to mankind because they convinced themselves that they’re targeting the worst of humanity.
While you’re asleep at night, or while you’re at work, or while you’re feeding your family, some creep in another state is conspiring against someone just like you, all the while performing psychological gymnastics to convince themselves that they are taking on Nazis and white supremacists.
But in their unhinged minds, they fail to comprehend that America would be measurably more peaceful if their own kind populated the prison system, where they belong.
The left’s finest weapon against the forces of fascism would be introspection, if they were to develop it.
Sometimes, it happens that a person says the wrong thing, but we all know what they meant. However, Joe Biden had just made (yet another) gaffe that has some people suspicious that it’s less of a mistake and more of a Freudian slip.
Here’s what the Presidential nominee had to say:
“We’re in a situation where we have put together – and you guys did it for our admi … the president, Obama’s administration before this – we have put together, I think, the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics,”
Interpreters the world over immediately got to work to figure out just what it was he said. However, one flub in particular stands out:
“we have put together, I think, the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics,”
It’s possible Biden meant to say something other than fraud, but Joe himself might be the only one who knows for sure, but even then, I have doubts. But because it’s difficult to place what he meant, it might actually be a case of accidentally saying the quiet part out loud.
It’s also possible that someone hacked the world’s most influential teleprompter. Our own guys really need to step it up, because it’s looking like the Russians are the only ones that are any good at hacking stuff.
(By the way, that was a joke, not a challenge. I know that American intelligence agencies excel at spying on Americans.)
What makes Biden different from your usual politician is the sheer number of gaffes that come right from him, such as this gem from just last night, when he forgot who he was running against:
‘Four more years of George, er, George, er, he – we’re going to find ourselves in a position where, if Trump gets elected, we’re going to be in a different world,’
His wife, who was present, appeared to silently correct him, but it’s amusing that he said the same name again as he attempted to correct himself.
FYI: George W. Bush hasn’t run for office since 2004.
What I find amusing is his sentiment that ‘if Trump gets elected, we’re going to be in a different world’. Nice try, Biden. But Trump was already elected. He’s up for re-election; he’s the incumbent.
This article is a criticism of a recent GQ article, titled, The Mystery of the Immaculate Concussion. Before getting into it, there’s a concept that I wish to bring to your attention which you may already be aware of: gaslighting.
Gaslighting is the act of causing a person to doubt their own perceptions, usually in an effort to make them easier to manipulate. In extreme cases, a victim of gaslighting may become convinced that they have a mental illness.
Another thing to know about is targeted individuals (TIs, for short). TIs are a community of people who believe themselves to be the victims of sophisticated gang-stalking. Some of them even claim to be the victims of unethical experiments or attacks with acoustic or electromagnetic technologies. Many of them have claimed that these attacks are the cause of headaches or various other maladies.
It’s a tad indulgent, but there is another thing to bring to mind, and that is Hitchen’s Razor. It goes something like this: “What is presented without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.”
The story featured a man who went to Russia to spy on Russia and experienced his first major migraine there. Either that, or he had one vodka too many. I know that sounds like a joke, but what he described was similar to what I’ve experienced from two daiquiris and a shot of strong rum right before bed.
Like a Hillary campaign staffer, he blamed the Russians.
But hey, why would a major publication like GQ have gotten the memo?
Of course, there are more major problems, including their repeated insinuations that Trump is cozy with Russia. What the author doesn’t seem to realize is the conflict of interest this creates: If the Russians were cozy with the President of the United States, it would be absolutely counterproductive to squander that goodwill by attacking Americans visiting their homeland, especially if they are government officials. To attack another country’s citizens is an act of war.
Because it’s conspiracy theorists we’re talking about, they probably already thought of some way to iron this out. And it’s probably quite complicated.
The article’s TI wasn’t without a plan to determine that the Russians were behind the attack: snubbing them on their holiday card tradition. He understood that exchanging Christmas cards was one of the ways Russian bureaucrats express respect, so he decided to withhold cards one year, and watch how they reacted.
And whaddaya know? When you disrespect someone, they get upset. What did this prove? That the TI would make a terrible diplomat, it seems.
You might be wondering whether I believe that there does exist the technology to attack someone with EM waves. And I believe it. One doesn’t have to look into anything classified to know it, since it’s been publicly known for a long time that something similar has been used to generate a sensation of heat as a deterrent, as the article points out.
However, in the article, the author jumps to conclusions, implying connections based on incomplete information. That is conspiracy theorism per se, and any smug sense of superiority over others who practice it on the part of the author is forfeit.
The reason I suspect gaslighting in GQs article is because there is a twisted message that it alludes to: that if you’ve been experiencing strong headaches, Russia may be to blame, and Trump doesn’t care. This makes the article out to be an attempt to prey upon vulnerable adults, weaponizing the TI community and others with paranoid delusions in an effort to swing an election.
If the apparent effort were not deliberate, and the article’s author was sincere, it offers yet another window into the thinking of a kind of person the left and the Dark State attracts: the conspiracy theorists that don’t like to be called conspiracy theorists, while accusing others of the same. Yet, their paranoid delusions are evident: they see racists as around every corner, and secret sexists all around them. Plots congeal in the shadows, and the Russians made them misplace their slippers. Trump! Russia! Possible collusion!
Obviously, the author isn’t stupid, as Julia Ioffe was able to construct a narrative in a lengthy article that’s an interesting read. However, the article was obviously authored in such a way as to try to get the reader to assume connections based on limited or missing evidence.
There’s no shame in engaging in conspiracy theories if you’re honest enough to admit that that’s what you’re doing.
“All things being equal, the correct hypothesis tends to be the one that makes the fewest assumptions.”
As the novel coronavirus (SARS CoV-2) spread early in 2020, the prevailing wisdom was “14 days to slow the spread”. We’re now over 200 days into the lockdowns, and there’s no signs that (mostly-left) leaders have any plans for life to return to normal, in spite of the extremely-low fatality rate of a virus that turned out to be mostly harmless.
“We in the World Health Organization do not advocate lockdowns as the primary means of control of this virus,” said WHO envoy Dr. David Nabarro. “The only time we believe a lockdown is justified is to buy you time to reorganize, regroup, rebalance your resources, protect your health workers who are exhausted, but by and large, we’d rather not do it.”
“We really do appeal to all world leaders: stop using lockdown as your primary control method,” said Nabarro. “Look what’s happening to poverty levels – it seems that we may well have a doubling of world poverty by next year. We may well have at least a doubling of child malnutrition because children are not getting meals at school… This is a terrible ghastly global catastrophe, actually.” (emphasis mine)
Those advocating the lockdowns are obviously not considering the doubling poverty rates or the child starvation that their irresponsible policies are causing. But considering that they have no idea how to run a society, how can you blame them for making such a mistake?
Recently, posting anything to social media challenging the WHO’s advice in regards to the coronavirus has been considered grounds on those outlets for censoring the same content, or perhaps even banning the poster. Now that the WHO is adopting a stance that challenges the thinking of these predominantly-left social media outlets, how these outlets respond to this new information remains to be seen.
As I’ve pointed out before, the economy isn’t just some abstract concept that only stockholders and smart people talk about, it’s something that matters to anyone who cares whether a box of pasta costs $1 or $5. Even if you’re one of those morons who believe that wealth should be redistributed while only a few people should actually work, it should make sense to you that a society doesn’t have a reason to eat unless they actually produce something. For something to be produced, businesses have to be allowed to actually conduct business.
If you do not understand this, you are in no position to tell society how to operate.