I doubt I’m the only one who noticed this, but there has been a surge of photographs in legacy media that depict Joe Biden as though he has a halo.
It seems deliberate. The picture puts Biden’s head directly within a circle in the background, usually yellow, that’s just a little larger than his head.
In classical art, when an artist wanted to ensure a viewer knew that a person depicted was a saint, a bright yellow circle (a halo) was placed behind their head.
Crafters of religious symbology were excellent early marketers. They understood what patterns and shapes that people responded more favorably to, and used this to get a desired reaction.
Are leftist media outlets conspiring together to get the American public to view Joe Biden with the same reverence and devotion as one would a religious figure? If so, what does this say about their fanaticism, or for that matter, their ability to speak impartially concerning him?
The Mandalorian Star Gina Carano posted to Twitter comparing the dehumanization of the political right to the dehumanization of Jews in 1940s Germany. As she pointed out, this dehumanization leads to a certain justification for atrocities to be committed.
The legacy media are currently working hard to ensure that Gina’s words are interpreted in the worst way possible, telling you how they want you to interpret them, but not telling you what she actually said. Speaking of, here is what she actually said:
“Jews were beaten in the streets, not by Nazi soldiers but by their neighbors…even by children. Because history is edited, most people today don’t realize that to get to the point where Nazi soldiers could easily round up thousands of Jews, the government first made their own neighbors hate them simply for being Jews.
How is that any different from hating someone for their political views?”
Gina Carano on Twitter
You’re free to tell me how it’s intolerant to point out that Jews were demonized to the point that their own neighbors were attacking them.
The Twitterazis, upon determining that someone had a thought not in lock-step with intersectional leftism, acted as predictably as sunset. But Disney took things much further: by firing Gina Carano.
Just to remind you, this same Disney has no problem with keeping a director in their employ who used Twitter to wish a violent and bloody death on children who disagreed with him, via wood chipper:
Which goes to show that if Gina’s opinion were to incite violent, deadly mayhem and be multiplied in insanity by a factor of 100, she’d still have a job if she had simply taken the other side.
Another cool Disney fact is that they filmed Mulan in the Xinjiang province of China, where the Uighur genocide was (and is) taking place. Disney then thanked the Chinese Communist Party in the movie’s credits!
In spite of, you know, the concentration camps, re-education programs, forced abortions, sterilizations, and torture. That boiling blood sound is probably coming from you.
Disney is now beginning to pay for their indiscretion, as #CancelDisneyPlus is now trending #1.
Come to think of it, why not cancel Disney Plus?
With how bad the sequel trilogy was, it really seems like Star Wars’ finest moments are behind them. Dave Filoni did great with The Mandalorian, but where does the series go, considering how season two ended, and with one of the most talented members of the cast no longer in Disney’s employ?
Then there’s Marvel. The big-bad of the franchise, Thanos, is no longer relevant. Wandavision is interesting, but I don’t have a strong attachment to it. I’ve watched each of the MCU movies that they have up, unless there’s some hid somewhere under Disney Plus’ menus that I’ve missed.
But what else is there? There doesn’t seem to be anything else Disney Plus has to offer that interests me. Does continued access to movies I’ve already watched justify a continuing monthly charge to my Verizon account?
At this point, it seems more appealing to turn to streaming anime. That was an attractive option to begin with, but gets even better when you consider that the Japanese won’t pollute their products with intersectional politics. Japanese animators are more interested in making quality products than activism, and as a result, the products that they produce are actually entertaining.
Is Disney even aware that they don’t have a monopoly on entertainment, and that alternatives exist? Japanese manga is destroying American comics (comucks?) as it is. Disney needs to come to realize just what activism is doing to their brands.
The Collector: Like suicide. Thanos: So you do understand.
If you’ve been watching the news your grandpa watches, you’ve probably already seen AOC’s recent rant in which she complains about her near-death experience at the Capitol building during the January 6th riot.
If you’ve been using the internet instead, you know that she complained that she felt threatened by the security personnel whose job it was to protect her, because even when it comes to perceived danger, it matters more to her how she feels rather than what she thinks. And she apparently thinks little of taking the people who protect her, and throwing them under the bus.
AOC has just been treated to a second helping of her foot. It turns out that she wasn’t even in the Capitol building at the time of the riot. When she said that rioters forced her to take shelter in a bathroom, she was making the whole thing up.
Having watched video of AOC already, I can tell you that she doesn’t come off as having the stability and confidence of a leader. She comes off more as an eccentric aunt trying to shoo an annoying boy out of her room, so she can retreat to some comfort animal that she takes with her to a supermarket in her purse.
She doesn’t come off as the kind of person who has ever faced any legitimate danger. I doubt that she’s ever been struck by a car. I doubt that she’s ever been attacked from behind with a skateboard. I also doubt that she’s ever gotten into a fight and left some guy in the mud, saved her best friend from drowning, challenged the neighborhood ruffians who were harassing a friend even though outnumbered, or stood up to kids who were bigger (multiple times).
But I have.
But as for AOC, she’s not for real. She’s not hard or street. AOC is only frontin’. She can take that fake stuff, and get out of here.
Over 11,000 energy workers were laid off in light of Joe Biden’s executive order terminating the Keystone pipeline, leaving climate czar John Kerry with the question of what becomes of these workers whose livelihoods became fatalities in the inexorable march of “progress”.
Thankfully, Kerry has an answer. After all, for a person whose plans involve a radical transformation of society to not have a carefully-laid-out and considerate plan would be irresponsible.
Here is what Kerry had to say:
“What President Biden wants to do is make sure those folks have better choices, that they have alternatives, that they can be the people to go to work to make the solar panels,”
U.S. Special Presidential Envoy for Climate, John Kerry (source)
Over 10,000 people were laid off? They should undergo career changes, likely involving a few more years of college education in a skilled trade, doing whatever it is they’re supposed to do to keep their families fed in the time it takes for that to happen, in the hopes of becoming inexperienced applicants in fields that will likely already be fully-populated in the time it takes to get their degrees! Isn’t it obvious?
Just how naïve can a person possibly be?
I wasn’t really expecting a career politician to have any idea what it’s like to have participated in the job market in the last decade, but certainly he could have given a better answer than the equivalent of “Just undergo a career change”, as if these thousands of workers weren’t already being made to compete with the millions of Americans sent to the unemployment lines during the lockdowns last year, on top of the millions of people who were already unemployed, to try to undergo a career change at a time when things are desperate.
Why does it seem as though John Kerry legitimately believes that the theory behind energy jobs carry neatly over from one energy field to another? There are many reasons why Petroleum Engineers and Electrical Engineers are not interchangeable, some of which involving that the type of energy is dissimilar, and the theory behind them is different.
Even strongly similar fields have a difficult time passing for one another. An Electronics Technician can pass for an Industrial Electrician without much trouble, while an Industrial Electrician would have difficulties attempting the same thing in reverse.
Whether you like it or not, our society is run by people who can terminate thousands of jobs at a time, not having any idea what the people who were employed actually did, and they are so out of touch that it seems valid to them to tell them, “just get another job”.
For one thing, I’d like to point out that I’m not your source of financial advice. I don’t know whether that disclaimer is necessary, but it seems safe. There’s also the fact that what some investors were recently doing might be highly illegal, seeing as it negatively impacts seriously rich people.
I’m not going to pretend that I understand how the stock market works. From what I can tell, a person who just picks random stocks in the hopes that some of them appreciate might actually be better off than someone who gives brokers the opportunity to eat up their profits. That either goes to show how little I know, or that there’s something wrong with the system.
An investment Reddit called WallStreetBets has encouraged users to buy stocks in underperforming businesses, including chain retailers, on the chance that they’ll turn out to be great investments. I can see how that might appeal: if the stocks devalue, they were cheap to begin with, so there’s not much loss, but if they appreciate, that’s great.
However, the concept quickly got out of hand when a number of users decided to collectively purchase stocks in huge quantity, particularly in businesses like GameStop, AMC, and Bed Bath & Beyond. And they just kept going, dogpiling on the stocks, causing them to skyrocket in value.
The media has no idea how to spin it, the establishment has no idea how to handle it aside from halting market activities (which would damage the markets further), and people who have been getting rich off other people’s work can do little but watch in horror as their wealth rapidly sublimates before their eyes.
Just because I don’t understand the stock market doesn’t mean I don’t find this hilarious.
What’s more, the enablers of WallStreetBets seem to know what they’re doing. It appears as though the demolition of hedge funds is their intention, though it’s hard to tell whether that was originally the case. It may very well be a simple case of people getting carried away in a frenzy of collective action. Still, it’s fascinating and terrifying how simple collective action could cause so much damage in such a short time.
Just remember, the elites have ways to make things that are bad for them turn out to instead be costly for people other than themselves. Remember when banks were failing, and they were bailed out with taxpayer dollars?
If 2020 was the year in which the elites did whatever they wanted, and left the commoners to cope with the consequences, then 2021 is quickly shaping up to be the year that the elites find out that the commoners could strike back at them, and could do some serious damage.
Thank you to WallStreetBets, and many investors, for making me laugh harder than I have in a long time. To think that 2021 is just getting started!
This is obviously bad news for the GOP, which would fall to third place up against the possible new party, expressing the disenchantment many conservatives and those on the political right have had with the established political party.
If Trump were to found the Patriot Party, the result would be a shaking up of American politics, and would likely push the GOP to the status of third party.
Onlookers have expressed concern, particularly those opposed to the shenanigans of Democrats and leftists in general. The concern is that, if the political right is fractured into two parties, Democrats would be nearly impossible to topple for the foreseeable future.
Personally, I wouldn’t be as pessimistic. I suspect that sentiment would further turn toward the Patriot Party if it were to become established as a serious political party, and in consideration of a right-wing alternative to the GOP, entrenched right-wingers might be less reserved in expressing dissatisfaction with the GOP’s establishment RINOs (Republicans In Name Only).
While Trump could hypothetically run the Patriot Party, if he were successfully impeached, this could prevent him from running again (which is possibly the reason for the impeachment). But even if Trump were impeached, this wouldn’t prevent someone else from running for office as a member of his party.
While the matter of impeachment is up, it begs understanding that Trump was impeached twice, not based on guilt for wrongdoing, but merely because in each case, a vote against him was successful. What’s more, a Republican has already proposed an impeachment against the newly-elected Joe Biden.
Personally, I think there’s something wrong with how impeachments are handled, as they are voted upon based on the reasoning of representatives, and a vote against a president can be made just because the representative doesn’t like the president in question. All this would be completely absent the determination of wrongdoing in a court of law.
Thus, impeachments can be proposed and voted on by hostile political adversaries, completely out of spite. And in the case of the more recent impeachment against Trump, it’s obviously a cynical and spiteful attempt to destroy what he and the around 75 million people who voted for him stand for.
Perhaps what’s needed is an amendment that would only make a president eligible for impeachment based on a determination of guilt in a court of law.
Oh, Kevin McCauley, you’re so adorable when your misplaced optimism borders on delusional.
Meanwhile, back in reality, Axios reports (21 Jan 2021) that trust in news media has fallen to an all-time low, as illustrated by the following graph:
At a glance, it appears as though the steepest plunge came when news outlets started lying about COVID-19, though correlation does not equal causation.
There are a few bullet points that served as takeaways:
56% of Americans agree with the statement that “Journalists and reporters are purposely trying to mislead people by saying things they know are false or gross exaggerations.”
58% think that “most news organizations are more concerned with supporting an ideology or political position than with informing the public.”
When Edelman re-polled Americans after the election, the figures had deteriorated even further, with 57% of Democrats trusting the media and only 18% of Republicans.
I can imagine that there is a desire among the curious to further study some of these trends, including the tendency of Democrats to drink the Kool-Aid when hearing what they want to hear.
According to Axios, “many news professionals are determined to do something about it.” To this end, and after brief consideration, I have the following advice to offer:
Stop lying to us.
I’ll grant that I seldom watch the news, except just to leave YouTube comments. I suspect that this has a lot to do with the fact that I’m not a diaper-wearing adult, and therefore fall well outside televised news’ key demographic. Much of my interaction with the news has to do with making fun of it, which isn’t that hard considering that the last few years of journalism has been characterized by obsessively going after just one guy.
If there’s one thing about this study that bothers me, it’s that as many people trust the news media as they do. Forty-six percent? That’s way too high! That suggests that 46% (nearly half) of all Americans will believe complete butt-slurry if it came from the mouth of a man in a suit. When I walk down the street, half the people I see don’t look like they’re drooling all over themselves or trying to bite their own ears, so I find it hard to picture half of Americans dumb enough to trust the three-letter networks.
But do you know what I do see? A lot of fat people. And lots of Americans eat at McDonald’s. Corporate left-wing media is like McDonald’s for your brain. That stuff makes brains fat, sluggish, and tired.
When people trust the news, they keep going back for more and more of that mental McDonald’s, and as they keep stuffing themselves, their bloated paunch distends.
The Jaffe memo, pictured above (source), is a table constructed from measures proposed by the eugenics movement in 1969. The proposals were never intended to be made public.
A word about the eugenics movement: people today are largely unaware of it. Those that are aware of it mostly seem to be under the impression that it’s no longer a significant factor in world events.
Eugenics came about in light of the Darwinian theory of evolution, and it was embraced by racist people because it provided a scientific basis for their racist tendencies. The earlier 20th century saw much of the world’s races proclaiming themselves the best.
After WW2, eugenics became highly unpopular. This had much to do with the fact that Hitler and his party of National Socialists took the idea to extremes, and became world famous for his inhuman behavior.
The popular perception today is that eugenics was defeated, and that the world has not looked back, since. In reality, ideas are nearly impossible to destroy, no matter how much they deserve it. In reality, eugenics was driven underground, resuming its dark designs outside of the public eye.
Among the beliefs of eugenics is that there is getting to be too many human beings, which is why the Jaffe memo above calls for measures to discourage people from procreating as abundantly.
At one point, the eugenics movement went crazy with the compulsory sterilization of those whom they deemed unfit. Today, it seems they are more about deterring family plans. This can sometimes have the appearance of allowing people to make their choices voluntarily, but considering the underhanded methods they have engaged in, it’s easy to see that there is no ethical way to deter family plans.
Let’s look at a few aspects of the memo to see just what ideas they came up with about five decades back. They’ll be interesting to think about considering how many of their plans have already come to fruition.
(Some points may be skipped for brevity.)
Restructure family: a) Postpone or avoid marriage, b) Alter image of ideal family size
Eugenics has declared war on the family, and their misinformation campaign is well underway. It’s easy to see that people are marrying later in life. For eugenics, this is a dream come true, as the result is people skipping their more fertile years.
Also of note is that their intent to restructure the public perception of the ideal family size. Traditionally, a larger family has been viewed as a blessing. In a sense, eugenics wishes to prop itself up, making themselves out to be gods, restructuring families as they wish, and taking it upon themselves to dictate to us a new set of values.
Compulsory education of children
Like the socialists and communists before them, the eugenics movement knows that children are the key to the future, and if they have your children as a captive audience, they can fill their minds with whatever mashugganah they please, and few would be able to resist or gainsay.
There is a bit of a sobering pause for thought to be had, here. Isn’t the education system highly establishment, these days? And don’t we currently have compulsory education? If the eugenicists did have sway over the education system, just how pervasive are they?
Encourage increased homosexuality
How well do you suppose this went? Homosexuals only make up about 2.5% of the population, but corporations and media are making it seem as though it’s more widespread.
How this would benefit their movement is easy to see, because homosexuals, when allowed to pursue their passions, don’t procreate.
Still, the suggestion that homosexuality can be encouraged, rather than be a natural occurrence in the human genome, appears to suggest that they are aware that it can be the result of external conditioning. It certainly flies in the face of the more cultivated perception.
The Jaffe memo doesn’t say anything about transsexuals, but it’s understandable that some similar principles apply. Interestingly, a transsexual has been appointed to the position of Health Secretary.
Fertility control agents in water supply
Here comes the people who have been pointing at fluoride. But the fact that a similar measure has actually been considered is food for thought.
Encourage women to work
One might wonder how this could possibly limit fertility. This has to do with a couple nuanced points.
For one thing, there’s the more obvious observation that a woman who takes on career pursuits at a young age may end up skipping out on the more fertile years of her life, and might not start a family until a later point when she’d likely have fewer children.
There’s also the point that women are naturally hypergamous, meaning that they tend to marry upward on the social scale. Recent times have seen many women ascend the career ladder, but upon doing so, they find fewer men that they find suitable for themselves.
Modify tax policies: (etc. etc.)
European colonists in America went to war over a tax of about 2 to 3 percent. Today, the federal government chows down on roughly 45% of a person’s income.
A recurring theme among the economic deterrents is the idea of penalizing parents who have children, particularly after a certain number. Today, mere economic difficulty seems to serve as a deterrent to family plans. The mobility of the middle class has long been a vexation of the upper class, but in recent decades, the gap between the upper and middle class has widened to a near-insurmountable chasm.
It’s hard to imagine that eugenics could ask for an approach for population control more effective than ensuring that the middle class joins the ranks of the destitute.
What happened to the middle class might have actually exceeded their expectations. Then there’s the fact that there’s fewer payouts involved when taking the routes of penalties and hardships than to provide incentives. Perhaps they’ve decided on a more cost-effective path.
The effects of depression on reducing a person’s motivation is easy to understand. But what methods would they be considering to induce depression on their intended victims?
Compulsory abortion of out-of-wedlock pregnancies
Compulsory sterilization of all who have two children except for a few who would be allowed three
Daaaayyyuuuummm… They’re getting into some Hitler territory, there!
What more do I have to say? They’re straight-up saying that some people deserve to procreate more than others, and they want to decide how many children people get.
Confine childbearing to only a limited number of adults
It wouldn’t surprise me if they wanted to carefully select who these people are, based on behavioral, genetic, and idealogical criteria. Or class criteria, for that matter.
One thing we’ve already seen is the one-child rule in communist China. Ted Turner was an outspoken fan of this rule, but Ted Turner himself has had four children.
The idea isn’t to place limitations on the wealthy, it’s to place limitations on you.
Housing policies: a) Discouragement of private home ownership
Millennials are often criticized for their hesitance to buy homes. What’s being overlooked is that economic factors are making home ownership for younger people cost prohibitive.
Older people who already got while the getting was good would do well to know that they’d be unlikely to replicate their previous successes in current conditions. They’d be better off holding on to what they’ve got for as long as they could manage.
No generation has become as heavily educated, and worked with as sharp career focus, just to get less compared to the preceding few generations. Obviously, this means that something is not right.
The eugenicists don’t want you to own your own home. It wouldn’t surprise me if the current housing market was the result of years of meddling by the world’s worst people.
Payments to encourage abortions
If you don’t have to have it explained to you why moral people would find rewarded abortions infuriating, you’re likely a moral person, yourself. Note the implication that abortions are so important to eugenicists that they actually considered paying people to undergo the procedure.
Eugenics, like abortion, is about murder. It’s about deciding who lives and who dies, hidden behind a veneer of civility. When the blood is hidden from the sight of ordinary people, it’s easy for them to pretend it’s not happening. But those who do the murder also kill an important aspect of themselves: their humanity.
Because humanity would not approve of what they’re doing, it’s easy to see why they’d desire to reshape humanity according to their own image.
In five decade’s time, a lot has happened. Obviously, the plan is a lot further along. In some ways, it has taken on different directions, and achieved successes that the original brainstormers hadn’t anticipated. Of course, the Jaffe memo is dated, what with it going back five decades. It stands to reason that the orchestrators behind the original memo have since revised their plans, in light of changing conditions.
But now that you’re aware of this memo, what do you think? Does it provide a surprising explanation for the direction of certain societal trends? Or perhaps you might be skeptical about it. Not everyone finds it easy to accept that a group of people like the eugenicists could have such a pronounced impact on society, though it seems they may have been more pronounced than we gave them credit for.
Personally, I think it reveals some possible motivations behind certain influential people whose decisions may initially seem to make no sense. If a “leader” makes a choice that might result in undesirable consequences, it’s possible that they might be undesirable for you by design.
Dave Cullen of Computing Forever has posted an important video to alternative video-hosting service BitChute. This video, titled “Sterilisation”, is a must-watch, especially if you’re thinking about getting the COVID vaccine, considering how quickly the vaccine has been rushed by certain persons interested in limiting the human population, who also have an established history of causing permanent sterilization through vaccines. Re-read that previous sentence, if you have to. Here is the video, embedded:
I’ve long been subscribed to Computing Forever on YouTube, even since his early days when when his channel was focused on computing, with a particular emphasis on bashing Apple products. In more recent times, he has switched gears to world trends, and has spread his presence to alternative media platforms, considering that his viewpoints aren’t in lockstep with the official narrative. Dave as recently been blocked from uploading new videos to YouTube, likely because his recent offerings rock the boat.
In the above-embedded video, Dave succinctly makes the case for why it’s obvious that the COVID vaccine was specifically-designed to damage human fertility. Some of the information was already well-established, but he does get credit for outlining the information available in a manner that is succinct enough for a quick watch, but with information compelling enough to help a person make up their mind.
I also believe he deserves credit for finding the Jaffe Memo, a 1969 document outlining population control tactics by Planned Parenthood. I’ve happened upon it before, but for some reason, it has since become notoriously hard to find. Here is a link to read it, where it can also be downloaded, which I recommend doing before that particular site were to vanish.
If you’re in the black community, you should take special interest, as the eugenics movement behind the population control measures have long looked down on your race. But even if you’re not, your attention in this matter is strongly advised. (Remember: Racism is bad.)
It’s not a pretty thought, but the fraudulent game is about artificially-induced natural selection, where the winners are those whom perverse scientism deems worthy, or at least those who are not gullible enough to get a vaccine more dangerous than the actual disease.
Considering this, it’s interesting that the big players in social media are working to prevent anyone from saying the wrong thing about the virus, in much the same way that we aren’t allowed to question the results of the election this time around. It’s as though the tech oligarchs have allied with the state to impose strict top-down controls to push an unethical agenda. But hey, that sounds like a conspiracy theory, doesn’t it?
Now that the establishment has selected their leaders, things will move along quickly, now.
House speaker Nanci Pelosi threatened to waste enormous amounts of time and taxpayer money in retaliation for Trump supporters’ entry into the Capitol building earlier this week. To this end, she threatened yet more impeachment proceedings against Trump if her attempts to coerce Vice President Pence into misusing the 25th Amendment fails to go through.
As this is going on, the political director of the ABC news network Rick Klein has called for the ideological cleansing (their word) of the Trump movement. Such an endeavor, if seriously pursued, would involve the targeting of the approximately 75 million people who voted for President Trump, who would make up about one-fourth of the U.S.A.’s roughly 331 million people.
Of course, the same news network already felt morally-justified in lying about Trump and his supporters for a half-decade, so where they go from here morally speaking is anyone’s guess.
“Cleansing the movement he commands, or getting rid of what he represents to so many Americans, is going to be something else,”
ABC’s Rick Klein
What he represents is called “Populism”, which is for the will of the people to be actively pursued by elected representatives. The problem that the establishment has with this is easy to see.
Historically, “ideological cleansing” involves murder, and lots of it.
By the way, Orville Redenbacher is owned by ConAgra, in case you were thinking of adding popcorn to your portfolio, and possibly benefit financially from all this madness.
While it’s not news that the Democratic Party is not thinking straight, since the Capitol siege, they’ve been running on emotions, and I think the case can be made for keeping them away from their usual duties until the time comes that they can approach matters more rationally.
In a way, they remind me of a guy who got punched by some random lunatic. The guy was normally rational and composed, but was not accustomed to physical altercations. But in the days after he was attacked, he was both nervous and inordinately vindictive, obsessed with retribution against his assailant. It took a while, but he eventually calmed down.
In a way, House speakers are kinda like him. While they have discussed resolutions that have had an impact on a great many people, as they have done so, they have lived in opulent ease. This week, they have experienced the perception of danger, in the case of some of them, for the first time in their decades-long lives. While they have waged war and destroyed life and livelihood through edict, they themselves were blissfully insulated from the disastrous consequences of their choices.
As it turns out, they can’t take it anywhere close to as well as they dish it out, as they have been faced with the prospect of personal backlash, in some cases, for the very first time.
To your average out-there leftist shill, the expulsion of their ideological opponents is a dream-come-true, as it would mean free-reign to do anything they wish, with all pretenses of unity and compassion for the downtrodden bring summarily defenestrated. But to those of us with clarity-of-mind, regardless of political affiliation, the escalation resultant from the very attempt is plain to see. That is why we recognize it for the insanely dangerous move that it is, and should not be attempted, regardless of how angry some insulated person feels.
What Pelosi and the rest of the house need is some immediate time off, for a few days. By then, their thirst for blood will have likely waned.