State of Mind: What’s Next?

What’s next?

With the ever more present awareness and now acceptance of homosexuality and transgendered individuals, has any one else noticed the change in children’s cartoon love stories? Children’s cartoons and the love stories in them have not gone so far as to show homosexuality, oh no. The rest of the public would have had too much of an uproar over that. The LGBT and their supporters know that, and are working in a rather intelligent way to still push their agenda. Instead they have decided to venture into a whole other realm. That being two different species being “in love” and make it look like it works out just fine. There are several obvious problems with that and some maybe not so obvious.state

The most obvious problem to any one who knows how sex works, is just that, how would sex work in those relationships? That is not something I want to go into though. It is not even  state1something people should be worrying about, as it is a perversion. The first and probably most popular example is the donkey and dragon from Shrek 2.  There is no way that that “relationship” would work. But not according to Dream Works.  They go all the way to show that they can make babies and be a happy family. There are now even costumes of the dragon/ donkey babies that parents can dress their children in, further showing them that it is okay for two different species to get together as long as they are in “love”. What a wonderfully stupid culture we now have.

The next is from the TV series Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles airing on Nickelodeon. In Season 4 Episode 12: The Evil of Dregg, Raphael one of the the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles is portrayed to be in love with Monet, the salamander princess. At least they are both reptiles, but obviously still different species. Raphael is heartbroken in the middle of the episode when he finds out that Monet has betrayed him and the rest of the Turtles in hopes of saving her planet. She lures the turtles to a foreign planet saying she needed help and that her father was in trouble. Then once they arrive the turtles are captured and the betrayal is revealed. Raphael is so broken that he can’t even fight. Then in the end all is made right again because Monet tells Raphael that she loves him and they kiss and hold hands and forget that anyone else exists. How sweet, right? The sequence of events makes sense and is a common theme that humans deal with in love so its very relatable. This brings me back to how clever the LGBT group is and how they ever so subtly sneak in things that will slowly train our mind to accept it, to be comfortable with it and even support it.

Next and possibly a little more familiar since it has been around the longest out of all the examples given, is Pearl Krabs from Sponge Bob. In Sponge Bob, they do not show different species being in love, but they do show the product of two species that got together if you know what I mean. Peal is the daughter of Krusty Krabs the crab that owns the burger place, but the catch is Peal is a sperm whale. This I find especially interesting that her name is Pearl, because a pearl is the product of a clam or oyster, beautiful and valuable. Pearl Krabs is somewhat of a big deal when she comes to Bikini Bottom (the town where Sponge Bob and friends live) and I guess you could say she is pretty. So, with this example it is telling the viewers, mostly children, that different species can get together and make a family. Translate this into more applicable terms for humans and you get the message that people can fall in love with whoever and still have a family with children and it all will work out just fine.

Lastly I have the example from the movie Madagascar where the hippo and giraffe are lovers. It doesn’t show them to be “married” but more like boyfriend and girlfriend. Now there is a sequel as well with those two, the zebra and of course the lion. When I first watched Madagascar, I thoroughly enjoyed it and didn’t really think anything of it. I did think it odd that the giraffe and hippo were romantic “friends”. state2Now, as I further examine what is going on I am appalled. I didn’t catch the problem. I accepted it as just a cartoon. Well, that is the dangerous thing about it. People all over the world, most likely, have seen this and watch it over and over. Its funny, fun and clean. Well so everyone thinks. I no longer view this movie as clean or child appropriate. The media is telling children and subtly conditioning them to accept perversions of “love”.

One of the more pressing problems is as the title of this article suggests, what is next? What will we be teaching children is okay next? That question leads me in three different directions, all with disastrous ends.

The first direction I want to look at is the potential to bring in beastiality. I don’t want to look at it first because I necessarily think that it is more relevant than the others, but I do think that it is worse than at least one of the others. I believe our media outlet is going there and much sooner than any of us realize or would like to admit. There is a commercial by Marmot Mountain out door apparel of a man and a beaver camping and doing many fun things together.  As the commercial draws to a close they are both gazing into each others eyes as they sit on a rock enjoying the vast beauty of the mountains. Then to really bring it to a booming end, the man, feeling state3the moment, tries to kiss the marmot which then slaps him and says he or she is not that kind of marmot. While not directed to children and not in a children’s movie or story it is still out there and is the beginning step our media has taken to open the doors to all kinds of evil. To be honest I do not know what message this out door clothing and supply store was trying to display, but whatever it was, failed. I do however believe that they were intentionally displaying a man “falling in love” with an animal. They are going far beyond loving nature and the typical “tree hugger” ideas. They specifically show a man falling in love with an animal and trying to make a move on the poor thing. Apparently the uncut commercial is far worse than the one on television, and has smooching noises going on while a poor woman and her child watch in horror.

Why does this exist? A company spent good money creating this ad. They wanted to get a message out there. I firmly believe it was a message that you can fall in love with whatever you desire at that moment, whether it is another human, no matter the gender or age, or even an animal. There would be no reason to deny a man or woman his or her desires even if it is engaging in sexual relations with an animal, right? They can’t help it that their “heart” longs for an animal, right? Wrong. That is so wrong for so many reasons. Listing those reasons would make for a full article all on it’s own. Thus, the reasons will not be listed here.

The second direction I want to take a look at and I believe is the worst possible thing that can be displayed and accepted, that being pedophilia. If a man can fall in love with a marmot, then why can he not fall in love with a child? There is no reason not to accept it [in the media’s eyes] if the parents consent and the pedophile “loves” the child. After all it would be cruel to deny the pedophile his or her desires he or she can’t control. Doesn’t he or she deserve to experience love as well? NO! The answer is no. They do not. I can expound on that another time if so desired though because that too can become a full length article as well.

As mentioned briefly before, if the parents of the child give their consent what is to stop them? Legally, there will be nothing IF media takes this position and begins showing that love truly makes no sense and anyone can be in love with any one or thing else. I say IF, but be warned it IS coming. There already are psychologists that are of the opinion that homosexuals and pedophiles can’t control themselves and that is their sexual orientation so it is inhumane to deny them of their desires and love. It is only a matter of time, my friends, until the media gets a hold of stories like that coming from the “professionals” and begin to cram it down every man, woman and child’s throat.  If that statement brings about many emotions in you, you’re not alone. A sexual orientation is a preference. It is the gender, species, or age someone prefers to be sexually intimate with. Yes, that is controllable and no it should not be allowed. We must protect our children.

The third direction I want to look at is this awful new theme that can and most likely will take place that being “traditional” homosexuality. I believe this while currently the most accepted perversion of sexual intimacy, will be the last to emerge in our children’s movies and stories. I am of that opinion because after displaying the cross species love relationships, and the fact that pedophilia is already on track to next be accepted, homosexuality will seem like baby’s milk compared to them all and will have no problem entering the the screens we all watch. As I state previously, the LGBT group is acting highly intelligently. As long as they are able to cram their agenda down the gaping throats of American’s they don’t mind what course things take to get there.

Then there is one more angle that the LGBT group has taken. In the recent movie Zootopia there is a young fox that just wants to be an elephant when he grows up, so he wears an elephant costume all the time. Well the quote from the police officer bunny says it all.  As the bunny places a badge on the fox, wanna be elephant’s, state4chest she says, “This is Zootopia, where anyone can be anything.” Well my friends this is NOT Zootopia. This is the United States of America; this is the Planet earth. You are what you were born. No amount of “feelings” and surgeries is going to change the person. Sure in America you can conquer brave new worlds, change your genitalia, and set out to pursue happiness however you see fit, ONLY until in encroaches on/ impedes someone else’s pursuit of happiness. However, here in America we can not make opinion fact, and that is exactly what the transgendered group is trying to do. They feel like being the opposite sex, so they are. Well, my friends that is just as ludicrous as saying “I feel like the sky is green, that is my favorite color after all” and then the rest of the American population confirming it and saying, “The sky is whatever color you want it to be, baby! You just feel that way.” I am truly and deeply sorry for the people that feel like they are trapped in the opposite sex’s body. I can’t even imagine what that must feel like. However, what I do know is, people were created to be the sex/ gender that they are for a reason. Let me assure you that reason is not a cruel joke or so that that person can be any part of the LGTB.

It seems as though America is forgetting, maybe willfully, that love is not an emotion we feel for one another. Love is an action we choose to act on or not. Passion is a much better word for the feeling we have for one another. It may be familial or friendly or romantic, passion is a much better word to describe that. I would like to emphasize that love is a choice and an action. We as a people, as a culture and a nation can not be run by emotions. We must be run on morals, standards, and do what is best for the nation as whole. We can not let the few dictate the lives of the many, meaning the few that actually align with the LGBT group dictate the lives of the rest of our nation.

I want to urge everyone that has the slightest problem with any of these topics being accepted to take a stand now. Our country has already started on the path that will lead to all of these topics, being endorsed, taught and accepted. If you are fearful for your children, or even yourself to be in a culture like that then speak out against it now. I urge you, do not partake in any movies or TV series that portrays any message other than that of traditional, one male and one female love stories. Do not own the movies, do not allow them in your homes, and speak out against them when ever you can. Do not let the schools teach your children something you disagree with. You do not have to put up with this. You as an American citizens have every right to make this impossible in your nation, not only do you have the right, but the obligation to protect your children and the children to come. That begins with you taking an active stand against things you disagree with now. Then it goes to how you vote. I encourage you to vote for someone who most closely represents what you believe especially in these areas. As the election process begins, take a long hard look at every individual on the ballot. Become familiar with their stances on these subjects. Are they for these things becoming accepted? Are they neutral? Or do they make a brave stand to keep these perverse topics out of our nation?  Remember we must protect our children and we must protect our nation.

Hughes, Anny

Six Degrees of Knowin’ Nothin’: [Untitled]

And on the 8th day, God made bears. Lots and lots of bears.

Does this era need introduction? Or, rather, may a suitable introduction be written? I report, you deride.

1: In any rational era, the sudden appearance of lurid photographs of well-known public figures tends to happen without the consent of those captured in the images. Jennifer Lawrence, Kate Upton, Anthony Weiner, et al. Notable exceptions to this are of the celebutante variety who sport last names such as Hilton and Kardashian, but then, their deliberate release of self-incriminating material isn’t indicative of a rational era.

That there’s a Stairway to Heaven but a Highway to Hell is indicative of expected traffic volume.

The great Jerry Falwell, Jr., well his undeniable greatness as an Evangelical Christian minister and university president is so ineffable, so vast, that he was no longer able to be confined by any notion of modern decency. If that’s still a thing, that is. Either way, the photograph posted containing the erstwhile head of Liberty University (and descendent of the late and decent Jerry Falwell) is disturbing on several counts. Let’s take a look:

Now, I’m not sure if it’s the ghastly attempt at humor (yeah, “black water”, haw haw haw!), the self-caricature of the gut and the unzipped pants combined with the awful rug on his counterpart (who is not his wife, for those keeping score at home), the fact that students of said Evangelical university get expelled for drinking and/or extra-marital sexual encounters, or that this wasn’t a leak at all that makes this such a disgrace. He could’ve just said it was a faux Black Dog in his glass and been done with it.

The man (so-called) “leaked” it via his own social media aperture, and then delivered a truly abysmal mockery of an apology on-air, and I quote: “I’ve promised my kids I’m going to try to be…I’m gonna try to be a good boy from here on out.” Rock and Roll, Jerry!

Oh and Mrs. Falwell, when your marriage does end, remember: you [expletive deleted] your rebound, and that’s it. You don’t permanently abscond from reality and keep [expletive deleted] them long-term and/or marry them. Especially, I might add, if you plucked them from the extras of “The Walking Dead.”

Silly me. But seriously, though: booze and Evangelicals and social media shouldn’t mix.

2: At times, the headlines write themselves. In their own attempt to swing loose with reality, as it were, Iran has a fabricated aircraft carrier resembling one of those wielded by the United States Navy. “Why”, you ask? An entirely unscripted and well-placed question. For their own propaganda purposes that is, until the entire experiment blew up in their faces. Living out their own version of “delirium tremens”, Iran was so successful in this charade that their accidental destruction of a prop US Navy aircraft carrier poses a threat to a major thoroughfare in the oil trade. Posing an existential threat to traffic in the Strait of Hormuz, and things apparently unbeknownst to Iran such as tides can shift the wreckage, endangering oil tankers.

Give the Ayatollah our best. Speaking of “the best”, if you’re going to challenge the world’s preeminent naval power, you’d better come correct. The Battle of Evermore this is not.

3: Biden must face Trump in debate(s). Yes, it’s answering a “double dog dare” from the POTUS and no, you don’t want to give in to the whims of a bully. But if you don’t follow through then it looks like you’re hiding in a basement and afraid to face Donald J. Trump on the stage. What’s the worst that could happen? They then “triple dog dare” one another to a lindy hop dance-off to the “Misty Mountain Hop” or hand out four sticks (one to both members of each ticket) to swing with? Why would you be afraid of that if you’re in the Biden camp unless, per the Trump camp’s assertions, the former Vice President will be unable to remember whether he’s going to California, or another, “y’know, the thing” that the Founding Fathers said? The great equalizer is the human ego. They’ll debate.

This is an event waiting to go wrong. Don’t hang out with bears. [image credit to Daily Caller & Barstool Sports]
4: Meanwhile, the National Park Service has posted a warning urging American adventurers not to confront bears but, if they do, to not take advantage of their slower companions. And no, this is not made up. Nor is the response of a pack of humans, recently, to a bear arriving in their midst. They didn’t flee or otherwise attempt to discourage the bear; instead they took pictures of their merry band whilst feeding the bear. Good call, ‘Murica.

5: Bill Barr’s appearance was a disgrace for everyone except the Attorney General. For committee chairman Nadler, to open the hearing with that statement was an outrage; and Jordan, thanks for the monologue on things that happened before Barr was back on the job and for God’s sake put your damn coat on!

6: Stat of the Week: the POTUS’ campaign is knocking on 1 million doors a week; the former VPOTUS’ camp is knocking on 0. As in ZERO. Z-E-R-O. This sort of nonsense only seems like nonsenseuntil the time when the levee breaks. Underestimate the mad media genius of The Donald at your peril.

Y’know what? Let’s just cancel everything. If everything’s priority one, then nothing is priority one.
Read More

Contrast: Black Lives Matter v. All Lives Matter (et al)

Black Lives Matter: Let’s cut through the fat together, shall we? Yes or yes? Good. With that, we have a problem in America. Several, actually. We live in a police state, for one thing, and for another, paramount now, is said police state taking a particular interest in African Americans.

Let’s also consider the unbelievable, highly-classified powers of FISA courts to spy unopposed on our own people without their knowledge indefinitely, the ability of the Federal government to suspend the Constitutional rights of American citizens suspected of terrorism via the Patriot Act and the inexplicable repeal of the Smith-Mundt Act (which forbade the Federal Government from using propaganda on American soil). Are you drinking what I’m pouring?

With no malice in my heart toward the many fine police officers across the land (a few I’ve known personally), I say again: we live in a police state.

Over the past decade alone, we have seen increasing examples of the use of excessive force on a disproportionate number of black Americans. Data clearly shows that Whites compose 76.5% of America’s citizenry while Blacks make up 13.4% of it, the former were shot to death by police 370 times versus 235 for the latter.

For those who want to bring out FBI data displaying prevalence of crime amongst inner city black neighborhoods, recall the negligible difference in drug use between whites and blacks and the parity in gun culture between the two.

America glorifies violence, and that crosses ethnic lines. Don’t believe me? Look at what I call “Dollar Voting”, in essence, what we value and spend our money on. What does our art and culture reflect? If we’re being real, it ain’t peace. Does hip hop culture lend itself to violence? Listen to the top ten hits of the genre and get back to me; but before you get back to me, let me know what Johnny Cash, Waylon Jennings, Jerry Reed and “The Dukes of Hazzard” were all about while you’re at it.

As for the movement itself, “Black Lives Matter” is driving home a simple point: yes, every house in the neighborhood matters but only one of them is on fire.

We hardly need a hashtag for Blue (Police) Lives Matter; they roam about largely unopposed, vested with a badge and lethal weaponry, and we provide a safety net (union, pension, et cetera) and, in general, blanket support to include the high probability that bad actors aren’t held accountable in court.

All Lives Matter? Do they? Maybe I’d be more decisive in answering these questions if every new episode of “Death By Cop” didn’t always star a black man.

– Jack DeViney

*************

 

New Orleans Police Department preps for ongoing confrontation and protest throughout downtown.

All Lives Matter(?): Two things can be true at once. In fact, very few things in our world are mutually exclusive of themselves. One can, for example, be in favor of the events in the George Floyd case never happening again and find the phrase “Black Lives Matters” offensive. They are not mutually exclusive. Both can be true. This depends on your definitions of words. Words matter. Words have meaning. Facts matter. Facts have meaning.

If by any definition, one is not a racist, but they will not stand shoulder to shoulder with Black Lives Matter signs, or they won’t kneel down in front of a mob of protestors, they become….what? Insensitive? Divisive?

To be true to this point, I believe “All Lives Matter” or “Blue Lives Matter” are equally asinine. We don’t protest on things we agree upon. We don’t stand outside and shout “the sky is blue”!

Are things worse now than the mid-1960’s? Or do we see public discord in 3D now? We report, you deride.

The assertion that a black man can not step from his home without fear of imminent death from a racist ‘Mericuh is as equally preposterous as the media’s “1619” narrative that America is as systemically racist as at any time in our history. Really? Where’s the poll of young, black men asking them if they’d rather live in 1865, 1965 or 2020? I must’ve missed that astute revelation.

Instead of regurgitated statistics that the left/media refuse to acknowledge anyway, how about we come at this from a novel approach. [So] what is your suggestion? I mean, with all of the statistics stating the exact opposite of your point, what are we doing wrong? Are our hiring standards too low? Is training being swept aside to fast-track officers onto beats? Do we provide immunity to officers that is unnecessary and counter-productive? Let’s get to the “nut cutting” as they say.

If we want to turn this into another narrative where the right just refuses to admit there is a substantial issue and is instead hiding behind years of conservative practices…show me! Where are the statistics that support any of this nonsense? That show America is systemically racist and prejudiced against black Americans? Where are the politicians that you are particularly citing as responsible for these aggressions? Or is it just “orange man bad”, with his “basket of deplorables”?

“You’re killing your father, Larry!”

Once again, the left/media have overplayed their hands. We were told millions of Americans would die if we didn’t shut the world down indefinitely. Now if you have a small business and want to re-open smartly so that you don’t lose everything, you’re killing grandma! We were told that if we would just allow LGBT marriages, all examples of bigotry would be history. Now if you’re a Millennial male that won’t go out with a trans-woman (a man by all scientific facts and definitions), you’re a homophobe! And now, if you won’t march to the beat of this drum, well, you’re just a racist. Or worse, an “Uncle Tom.”

It’s tiring. It’s divisive. It’s unnecessary. This issue is one we must agree on, or we don’t have a country. You cannot have law and order if one group is being systematically hunted down and killed by those sworn to protect us.

Facts matter. Statistics matter. Two things can be true at once.

– Michael R. DeViney, Jr.

Read More

Fabriqué en Babylon: Meanwhile

With the majority of public discourse non-existent and what discussion does occur usually ending acrimoniously, I recalled a lesson (from the past) learned the hard way: in life, there are times the rules are such that, indeed, sometimes the only way to win is not to play.

Politics is considered the art of the compromise, or “the game of compromise,” to suit the lesson. Now, I don’t know if IQs dropped, if we forgot, if the entire paradigm changed despite the entire pantheon of examples (of public discourse), or if it’s an all-of-the-above that’s closer to where we’re at, but we’ve forgotten. One way or another, it’s that simple.

As “The Great Experiment”, that means that this is a failure as a nation. A failure to even try to communicate and find some semblance of common ground, to find a way to even try to be civil and respect one another’s time to speak, to actually listen to a message before deciding what it means and how we view that meaning, to even agree to try and communicate at all.

You see, the trick is in self-control. Before picking up your pitchforks and torches or, worse, leaving altogether, let the damned man have a few final words.

Fistfight breaks out in Turkish parliament

I say “self-control” is the key, if there is one, because in order for public discourse to function where there’s debate, dialogue and (hopefully) resolution at some point, we must individually approach this forum with the intention of conducting one’s self in a civil manner no matter what the opposition says or how they say it.

The first impulse is outrage, I’m aware, followed by some variant of, “So what do we do when [insert example of national Democrats and/or Republicans] start acting the fool?” And that’s precisely where, following my abandonment of my personal Facebook and Twitter accounts that the lesson learned previously (“sometimes the only way to win is not to play”) I remembered that silence isn’t always concession. Sometimes, it might be easy to think, “Ahp! Yep, see, DeViney’s silent so he’s conceding,” when, the truth is, I’ve also come to embrace another tactic summarized best as, “Let them talk; most people will hang themselves given enough rope.”

CNN was really on to something when they debuted the policy debates, featuring an epic duel between Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) versus Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) engaged in an actual, substantive, non-campaign debate. Too bad they didn’t keep the series alive.

In order to pull this off, one must listen to their opponent’s words and, I don’t have chapter and verse from Harvard or Little Sister’s of The Poor and this that or the other study to cite, but I do know that it is humanly impossible for you to absorb as much of what someone else is saying while you’re running your piehole. An easy life “hack” for this (I’m trying to meet you halfway, my fellow Millennials) is to engage in one of America’s most obvious traditions and gently shove, well, pie or any other food one prefers into their gaping maw, which should, advisably, prevent the pie-eater from interrupting while someone else is speaking.

Another idea, and I only mention it in passing, is to teach your children these same concepts so that there’s a generational sort of reboot here, if you will.

Another really good concept, and this brings me back to what we’ve lost in terms of public dialogue, as a nation, as a people, is drop the assumptions. Do I really need to say that, as a Federal republic of 325 million-plus people scattered across 50 nation-states over 3 million-plus square miles, people come from different backgrounds and therefore automatically have their own way of doing things?

Apparently. Just remember: how good is it? Really good.

“Why does any of this matter?” one might ask, certainly a wise and reverent question, and unscripted at that!

As I face the active task of delivering closing remarks that are dually comprehensible and comprehensive, my personal political platform has never stood out more and conversely never kept me directly out of the fray as often. That’s weird. We’re living in a weird era.

As a centrist, I see, for instance, the keen insight President Trump into the general failings of a bloated Federal bureaucracy that feeds right into the national angst of an alienated body of followers who argue the value they get for their investment as taxpayers isn’t worth spending in excess of $4 trillion annually. However crude one views his “one-in, two-out” policy regarding regulations, he was onto something. Specifically, the broader argument that, not because of lack of desire and hardly because of lack of money but because of the inadequacies and failings that are part of the very fabric of a bloated, administrative state; in short, our Federal government is a monstrosity. A monstrosity, I might add, that needs to be shrunk, not given more money.

On the other hand, I also see the benefits of a strong, but limited, leaner Federal government with a decisive Executive having multiple opportunities for reform in bipartisan areas (fringes on both sides notwithstanding) with Congress, and I see those very same opportunities going wanting right now. And that is where, yes, I can see the personality crises stemming from being willing to be at odds with anyone, anytime over anything bringing about, indeed, a sort of “Trump Fatigue.”

That cuts both ways as well: while the people grow weary of the constant drama President Trump’s approach relies upon, they also tire of every single failing in DC being laid at his feet.

The same President who picked a fight (via social media, but of course) with an Autistic foreign teenager over climate change he maintains doesn’t exist to begin with also felt like the status quo that denied opportunities to felons post-release was unfair (See: “The First Step Act”). The very same POTUS who inexplicably disavowed support (however briefly) for our Kurdish allies also did what every Administration since Carter had threatened to by being the American Executive who stood up to Communist China’s underhanded trade practices and illegal valuations of the Yuan (their currency), which gave them unfair advantage(s) in imports/exports against other countries.

I don’t blindly support any politician, and I’m leery of ideologues. I don’t have any heroic, holistic advice on how to approach the President or his (many) conflicts, some contrived and some born of circumstances outside of his control.

These thugs didn’t issue executive orders that restricted travel from other countries into their own. They killed people they didn’t like and/or want. Perhaps a bit of caution, then, before ascribing the President Trump to the ignominious league of names like “Hitler” and “Stalin”, methinks?

But I do know this: the sooner we can get one extreme to stop canonizing every wacky idea the President utters and convince the other side that, no, Sugar, dictators don’t ask other countries to stop immigrants, they just have them shot. Dictators don’t ask, and they don’t Tweet about being treated “very badly” by the judiciary and the media. They don’t have to.

Look at the big picture, and tell me where you’d rather be that would be a better country from which to launch Endeavor A or stand up for Civic Cause B, et al. So, you don’t like the President. I don’t know how much the President likes the President. But you ought to be able to know the difference in there being room for (bigly) improvement in our mixed capitalist system, and in living in a concentration camp as you and your fellow undesirables are systematically exterminated by an authoritarian state.

A dictator? Hitler? Really? See: “Godwin’s Law”

Sound extreme? So do y’all.

Read More
Radical Centrism at its worst.