I guess if you don't call it gerrymandering, no one will notice.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/01/30/redistricting-new-york/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=wp_main
It's strange that I've been told that gerrymandering is a GOP practice, almost exclusively, yet we've now seen two egregious (although the DFL was apparently disappointed that NY didn't go further in their favor) examples of the DFL blatantly gerrymandering.
BLM raked in 90 million dollars in 2020, "distributed" 30 million and is sitting on 60 million currently. No one knows who controls the money, and very little has been reported about how the 30 million was used.
But, we're talking abut a 100% reputable, above board, and ethical organization, aren't we?
You'd think that with 90 million, they'd be able to hire a lawyer and accountant, to keep their paperwork updated, and file their tax returns. I'm sure that the Biden Administration will immediately appoint someone to look into the situation, and confirm that they aren't using their millions in ways not allowed by their tax status.
IMO, these folk just grifted millions from a bunch of while liberals who had no idea what they were throwing money at.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10449911/Black-Lives-Matter-not-confirm-controls-60m-funds-founder-stepped-down.html
if Biden's response to the situation in Ukraine is being influenced by the fact that Hunter has connections there. It'd be too bad if the Ukrainians didn't get anything for all the money they paid Biden.
"If my opponent wins, they're going to put y'all back in chains.
"Unless we do something about this, my childern are going to grow up in a jungle."
"Poor kids are just as bright and just as talented as white kids."
"I mean, you got the first mainstream African American who is articulate, bright, and clean."
"You cannot go to 7-11 or Dunkin Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent. I'm not joking."
"I do not buy the concept, popular in the 60's which said, "We have oppressed the black man for 300 years."
"We (Delawarians) were on the South's side in the Civil War."
Gerrymandering is bad when the GOP does it, and engenders all sorts of vitriol, when the DFL does it the response is somehwhere between muted and silent.
https://gerrymander.princeton.edu/redistricting-report-card?planId=rectT3e34TouwaqH0
https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/marylands-extreme-gerrymander
I don't know, but back in the day, getting an F in multiple things was pretty bad, and when something is called "extreme", it's usually not good.
I don't often write blog posts about my mistakes, but here we go.
At one point in my life, I uncritically and unenthusiastically allowed myself to be identified as an evangelical. I certainly agreed that evangelizing was a good thing, and really didn't go much deeper than that. I honestly don't know if I ever actually claimed to be evangelical in any sort of public sense, but I definitely allowed myself to be lumped in with them.
After a while I learned what the beginnings of evangelicalism were, and how antithetical the movement was to scholarship and education, and how much it focused on personalities and gimmicks. Even though that's changed to some degree, I still see enough of that to be concerned.
What this means for me is that I can now say that I am an exvangelical. Unlike most who've assumed this label, this doesn't mean that I'm rejecting most or all of the things that make Christianity distinctive. Nor does it mean that I'm deconstructing my faith. What it means is that I have no desire to be labeled as an evangelical, no more no less.
As I've always struggled with how to self identify, I'll probably go back to the term I'm most comfortable with and identify myself as Reformed, unless I find something that's a better fit.
This is the first time in my life that I've gotten in on a trend while it was still "cool", I'm not sure if I should be happy about that or not.
https://www.newsweek.com/democrats-voting-rights-agenda-isnt-us-its-them-opinion-1671250
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=StIUHKAVcRI
https://winteryknight.com/2022/01/31/racist-joe-biden-filibustered-black-female-court-of-appeals-nominee-janice-rogers-brown/
"It's one thing if it's a minor incursion and we end up having to fight about what to do and not to do. But if they actually do what they are capable of doing with the forces amassed on the border, it's going to be a disaster for Russia if they further invade Ukraine"
Sounds like an invitation for an incursion to me.
Much like Dean Acheson's speech in 1950, Biden's comments seem to open the door for the invasion of a sovereign nation.
BTW, look how well things are going in Afghanistan since Biden abandoned them.
https://ewerickson.substack.com/p/its-only-sensical-for-the-nonsense
This is one of the better explanations of why conservatives should not support Trump in "24.
I keep being told that I should pay attention to NPR because of how fair and unbiased they are.
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/01/19/supreme-court-gorsuch-sotomayor-masks-527369
If the "story" (as in fiction) by Nina Totenberg is any indication, then I'll pass.
What do:
Pat Leahy (D-VT)
Angus King (I-ME)
Mark Warner (D-VA)
Michael Bennet (D-CO)
Amy Kolbuchar (D-MN)
Bob Casey (D-PA)
Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH)
Sherrod Brown (D-OH)
Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)
Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY)
Brian Schatz (D-VA)
Cory Booker (D-NJ)
Maria Cantwell (D-WA)
Mazie Hirono (D-HI)
Jon Tester (D-MT)
Maggie Hassan (D-NH)
Tammy Duckworth (D-IL)
Martin Heinrich (D-NM)
Tim Kaine (D-VA)
Jack Reed (D-RI)
Ed Markey (D-MA)
Debbie Stabenow (D-MI)
Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI)
Bob Melendez (D-NJ)
have in common?
Let's get this straight.
A British Muslim takes hostages in a synagogue in TX, demands the release of Aafia Siddiqui, (knows as Lady Al Quaida for planning AQ terrorist attacks in the US, UK and Pakistan and shooting at US troops when they detained her), yet the FBI is stumped by what the motive could possibly be?
Could he be a Trump supporter?
A domestic terrorist?
Fomenting insurrection?
A parent trying to protest the actions of their school board?
But the one thing that an armed Muslim who invades a synagogue and takes Jewish hostages absolutely cannot be, is Anti-Semetic.
Anyt-Semitism, the one type of "racism", that the left will pretty much ignore or excuse.
How deep the Father’s love for us,
How vast beyond all measure,
That He should give His only Son
To make a wretch His treasure.
How great the pain of searing loss –
The Father turns His face away,
As wounds which mar the Chosen One
Bring many sons to glory.
Behold the man upon a cross,
My sin upon His shoulders;
Ashamed, I hear my mocking voice
Call out among the scoffers.
It was my sin that held Him there
Until it was accomplished;
His dying breath has brought me life –
I know that it is finished.
I will not boast in anything,
No gifts, no power, no wisdom;
But I will boast in Jesus Christ,
His death and resurrection.
Why should I gain from His reward?
I cannot give an answer;
But this I know with all my heart –
His wounds have paid my ransom.
In the parable of the Good Samaritan, many progressive christians love to focus on the social justice aspects of the parable. On the aspects of helping those in need. While that is certainly part of the parable, I'm not sure it's the whole thing.
Strangely enough, many progressive christians also deny things like the existence of an afterlife, the notion of a "Heaven" and a "Hell" (especially the latter), or the notion of a judgement. Yet, let's look at the question that was asked.
"On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. “Teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”
Let's start with the obvious, either the lawyer was lying, or he was acknowledging that Jesus was in fact a "teacher" or "rabbi".
But, the question is about what must be done to "inherit eternal life". This implies that there is "eternal life", and that one must do something in order to "inherit eternal life". I think that most people would argue that "eternal life" is the equivalent of "Heaven", or "Paradise" (as Jesus referred to it). I also thing that the question certainly implies that "eternal life" is something to be desired.
Jesus response is also interesting.
“What is written in the Law?” he replied. “How do you read it?”
Jesus seems pretty clear that the answer the lawyer seeks can be found in "the Law". Now, the Law could be referring to the part of the Hebrew scriptures that is known as "the Law", or it could be shorthand for the entire Hebrew scriptures. (The OT as we'd refer to it)
If Jesus was referring to only the books of the Law, also known as the Torah, he was referring to The what are now called;Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy. So, it's reasonable to conclude that Jesus is telling the lawyer (and the reader) that one can find all of the knowledge necessary for "eternal life". Given the reality that many progressive christians tend not to take these five books literally, instead consigning them to the realm of "myth", it seems strange that Jesus would say this. Of course if "eternal life"/Heaven doesn't exist or if everyone gets in, then it doesn't really matter, does it? Obviously, if Jesus is referring to the entire Hebrew scriptures (The Tanakh), then the basic point is still valid as the Tanakh contains the Torah.
Finally, the lawyer answers, and he goes straight for Deuteronomy.
"He answered, “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind’[a]; and, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[b]”
Jesus responds, “You have answered correctly,” Jesus replied. “Do this and you will live.”.
It's interesting, that the conversation should have ended right here. The lawyer got the right answer. He knows the secret. But he wants to "justify himself" and it goes on from there.
This seems pretty simple to me. Love God with every part of your being, and other people as much as you love yourself. The "who's my neighbor" question was a stupid and pointless attempt to get Jesus to say something that could be used against Him.
We know the rest, and Jesus hammers home His point by giving the lawyer a hypothetical that turns everything upside down. The reality is that when you follow the first commandment, the second should flow naturally.
A little confession here, even though I know this, I certainly don't love God with my entire being. Because my sin prevents me from the first, I often fail at the second. Which is why I thank God for his mercy and grace in redeeming me, and taking the burden away from my and my efforts.
Now, maybe that's really the point. That we CAN'T love God with our entire being because of our sin, which effects how we relate to others, and that the real answer the lawyer sought was standing right in front of him ready to pay the price for him.
It's interesting when opinion polls are offered as evidence of the Truth about any given subject, when it's convienient. But what about when it's not.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2022/01/12/bidens-approval-rating-new-low-covid-economy/9189510002/
https://www.newsweek.com/joe-biden-approval-lower-donald-trump-same-stage-presidency-poll-1668931
https://news.yahoo.com/plurality-americans-believe-biden-dividing-204047110.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS91cmw_c2E9dCZyY3Q9aiZxPSZlc3JjPXMmc291cmNlPXdlYiZjZD0mdmVkPTJhaFVLRXdqVzlxSzJ6cV8xQWhWdWpJa0VIWkhEQ0xBUXZPTUVLQUI2QkFnS0VBRSZ1cmw9aHR0cHMlM0ElMkYlMkZuZXdzLnlhaG9vLmNvbSUyRnBsdXJhbGl0eS1hbWVyaWNhbnMtYmVsaWV2ZS1iaWRlbi1kaXZpZGluZy0yMDQwNDcxMTAuaHRtbCZ1c2c9QU92VmF3M0RDOWZCM09FSUNWdl8weU5aN3VweA&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAI92XYSj9oFRXc3Cuu7e7u9wsxZmZlEunHG2jTTovI5BC0Uk979IBIUpFhadIMMDrsonHNvD_hEj4eyD5SOci4iPVWlYWuqltMoQk0CIXep7NpdsAVuj76uRetNI4_hFVqRUgYAQiuyDoAG1R8yo1bKCCK5f23PHDdKz-1kVDk0v
https://newrepublic.com/article/165002/approval-ratings-drop-midterm-2022
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/with-hispanic-support-more-bad-news-for-democrats/
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/biden-has-lost-support-across-all-groups-of-americans-but-especially-independents-and-hispanics/
https://www.newsweek.com/tucker-carlson-fox-news-marist-pbs-poll-joe-biden-approval-independents-latinos-1661591
I could have posted a multitude of additional links, but these should suffice. The reality is that Biden's approval rating is currently at 33% overall, and 23% among Hispanic voters. I'm not political genius, but those numbers seem pretty bad.
We have elections coming up soon and given these poll numbers and the historical trend in off year elections, I'd say that things aren't looking good for the DFL at this point.
What'll things look like if prices for things like gas and food continue to climb between now and the election? What'll things look like if we see more and more pictures of empty grocery store shelves? What if we get another "variant" that hits in September and peaks in early November? What if the DFL is unable to pass any more significant legislation between now and the election? What if the steady flow of Fentanyl across our southern border continues to kill more people that anything else between now and then?
Given the reality that the DFL has virtually nothing to tout as a significant accomplishment since Biden took office, and given the fact that "The GOP will make things worse." might not gain traction, the only thing the DFL has to run on is "Get us enough of a majority in congress that we'll be able to steamroll anything we want through.". I'm not sure that'll be very persuasive for the majority of folks who think that Brandon is sucking.
To those folks who predicted that Brandon would be a disaster, well you're kind of right, but he really hasn't done anything. If we get a GOP majority in either house of congress, then he'll either be completely stymied for his last two years in office, or he'll be forced to actually work WITH the GOP to come up with legislation that is actually a compromise (kind of a win/win, rather than the current scorched earth policy of the DFL). Personally, I'd be happy with two years of gridlock and a shot at a new administration in '25.
My final political thought for the post. I'm absolutely sick and tired of this notion that our only choices for POTUS are a bunch of old people. Seriously, this notion that the best we can do is 75+ is just absurd. C'mon GOP and DFL, do better. Give us candidates that aren't the "next in line" or old, you can't convince me that there aren't any people under 70 who are qualified to be POTUS. If y'all want to drive voters away, keep regurgitating the same old, same old.
My really final political thought.
How can people let Biden get away with his lies about the GA election law? And how shameless is he to use scripture to perpetrate his lie. The reality is that anyone can give food or drink to people in line as long as they aren't electioneering. Electioneering has been illegal for ever, but the notion that it's appropriate to pass out refreshments to waiting voters courtesy of one of the candidates doesn't seem like a great hill to die on. Or lie about.
Has anyone ever actually found a registered, eligible, legal voter who was completely and totally prevented from voting? It seems like the record turnouts would suggest that voters aren't being suppressed effectively.
UPDATE
Biden's last 24 hours:
OSHA mandate struck down
Election bill dead
Filibuster lives
33% approval rating
Inflation hits a 40 year high
and Kamala spews incoherent nonsense on an NBC interview
https://winteryknight.com/2022/01/11/new-study-white-progressives-are-more-racist-against-minorities-than-white-conservatives-2/
If this is True, then it explains a lot.
How can a political party calling for the abolition of the filibuster, the federalization of elections, packing the Supreme Court & the reconfiguration of the Senate, while advocating for policies coercing people into making certain medical decisions say that they are interested in protecting democracy?
Impressive.
"Democrats really went from "it's racist to need an ID to vote" to "you need an ID to leave your house".
"Remember that starting Saturday you will need these three things before heading out:
1 Proof of Vaccination (12 years +)
2. Proof of Vaccination and Photo ID (18 years +)
3. Mask"
Mayor Muriel Bowser
Is it really that much further before we need an Ausweis, and are required to show our papers to go about our lives?
"Fentanyl overdose deaths are now the leading cause of death in the United states for adults ages 18-45.
CBP has had a 1,066% increase in fentanyl saizures at our border in the past year alone.
This is a health crisis.
Where is Biden's mandate to close and secure our border?"
Two legitimate health concerns that should result in increased border security (COVID being the other), yet nothing from Biden, and Harris still hasn't even visited the border.
Kagan: "The government is paying for the medical services so they have the right to dictate the details of those services"
I guess it IS ok to let the government get between an individual and their doctor.
If anyone was ever in favor of turning health care over to the feds, this should cure that.
"For 2 years many of us doctors said that comorbidities matter, encouraging weight loss, vit D optimization, better management of diabetes etc.
Instead the narrative pushers offered Krispy Kream to folks at risk...
Now the CDC backpedals...really think a govt agency cares for you?"
Rupali Chadha, M.D.
It's strange that the CDC is finally acknowledging what some folks have been saying for months. Suff like dying with COVID should be counted differently than dying FROM COVID. Like the fact that 75% of those who died with COVID had at least 4 co morbidities. Clearly the 800,000+ claims about deaths from COVID were and are bullshit that have been hidden from us since Biden took office, or they expect us to believe that the CDC is just reallllllllly slow.
Strangely enough, with all the talk of a COVID surge, we still are firing thousands of health care workers, if hospitals are really that swamped doesn't firing people by the thousands make things worse?
It's amusing to see those on the left applaud AUS for barring one professional tennis player from their country, while simultaneously praising the US for allowing the unmonitored entry of record numbers of immigrants along our southern border with virtually zero attempt to screen/test/quarantine the flood.
How strange that SCOTUS justices seem determined to adjudicate a case before them on the basis of false information, and that they have no problem spreading those falsehoods far and wide.
1. The jab prevents transmission.
2. Omicron is as deadly as Delta.
3. 100K children are hospitalized with COVID, many on ventilators.
4. Vax mandate would prevent 100% of cases.
5. Hospitals are overrun (specifically with COVID cases)
I give you your political/media left.
https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2022-01-10/why-shouldnt-we-dance-on-the-graves-of-anti-vaxxers
It's hilarious to watch even more DFL elected officials playing the "Do as I say, not as I do." game. It's especially hilarious to watch 3 jab Cortez get the Rona.
Since I wasn't a teen aged girl back in the 90's, the whole Britney Spears phenomenon doesn't make sense to me. I don't know that I've ever heard her sing without some kind of effect on her voice, and I have no idea if she writes her own songs or not. As far as I can tell, she's a marginally talented singer, whose managed to ride exploiting her looks and sexuality to a degree of fame that her talent might not otherwise justify.
Given that, I will say that I found the whole conservatorship thing problematic. From what I've heard it sounds like her dad was able to use her mental breakdown from a few years ago as a way to keep his hands on her money and support himself. I think that the decision to remove the conservatorship was the right decision and that an adult woman who made money on her own, should be allowed to make her own decisions. If she makes bad decisions, then she's free to do so.
What I really don't understand is how the appropriate response to her newfound "freedom" is to take to Insta and post naked pictures of herself. Maybe I'm old fashioned, maybe I'm to tightly wound, maybe I'm just old, I don't know. But I don't understand how posting naked pictures of oneself for public consumption is an appropriate response to regaining control of one's finances.
I understand that I could be wrong about this. It might be perfectly appropriate to post naked pictures of oneself for public consumption as a way to show that you are ready to take control of your financial affairs. Maybe posting naked pictures of yourself is the newfangled way to show how much maturity and self control you possess, I just don't know.
I do know that I won't be posting naked pictures of myself anytime soon, and thankfully neither will most of the rest of us.
I'm surprised that the left doesn't look at the DC riots of 1/20/21 the same way they look at 1/6. I wonder why.
Or why the protesters/rioters of 9/28/18 weren't accused of trying to disrupt congress in the excercise of it's constitutionally mandated duties?
This doesn't even touch the riots in the summer of 2020, or Ferguson, or Baltimore.
It seems reasonable to conclude that there are two responses to rioting to effect political change. You can either condemn all rioting, or support rioting when you agree with the rioters.
As has been pointed out, the total number of people who have been charged with sedition, treason, insurrection, or obstruction is incredibly small. The number of people charged with things like illegal protesting and trespassing is really large.
Now, Reuters reports that the FBI casts doubt on the whole narrative that this was in "insurrection", or a "coup", or whatever.
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/exclusive-fbi-finds-scant-evidence-us-capitol-attack-was-coordinated-sources-2021-08-20/
Strangely enough, this isn't the first time that reality hasn't supported the narrative about the 1/6 riot. Remember all the reports that Brian Sicknick was killed by a protester with a fire extinguisher, well the medical examiner's report corrected that error, although CNN was determined to stick to the false narrative.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/brian-sicknick-death-strokes/2021/04/19/36d2d310-617e-11eb-afbe-9a11a127d146_story.html
https://www.thewrap.com/brian-sicknick-cause-of-death-cnn-media/
Today I heard some senator, I think Schumer but I'm not sure, Talking about the "political violence" of 1/6 and how evil it was. While I, and most normal people, stand opposed to "political violence" I can't help but wonder how the rest of the violence of 2020 (along with the violence in Ferguson and Baltimore among other places prior to 2020) can be described as anything other than "political violence". It was clearly the use of violence in pursuit of political goals. Just like we had groups of people standing outside court houses during trials who were threatening violence if they didn't get their preferred outcome.
Like Ted Cruz, I stand against ALL "political violence". Not just that which coincides with my political opponents agenda.
As I watched Biden's press conference, filmed at what amounts to a movie set of the Oval office, I couldn't help but notice his response to questions he found uncomfortable. When asked when the "free" COVID tests that Biden promised would be available by now were, Biden chose to sit silently ignoring the question, until saved by someone announcing the end of the press conference.
Of course Biden's approval numbers are in the tank. And his press secretary announced that you won't notice inflation if you don't buy things.
The jobs numbers are reported in a misleading way (compared with unemployment at the height of the pandemic, rather than Dec/Jan 2020/21.
Then there's the complete and utter failure to stop COVID as promised, the fact that Harris hasn't done anything about the crisis at the border (not even a photo op), and the bizarre attempt to lower meat prices by throwing money at the problem.
I think it's safe to say that Biden's first year hasn't been what he promised or what his supporters wanted.
It's only going to get harder after the midterms.
FYI, there's lots of talk about starting impeachment against Biden if the GOP takes control of the house after the midterms. I'd like to go on record now as saying that (in the absence of something beyond incompetence) it would be a mistake to do so. I understand that the DFL laid the groundwork for this with it's ridiculous attempt to impeach Trump after he was out of office, and I understand the desire to give them a dose of their own medicine, I think that it would be a mistake to do so. If the GOP takes control of either house of congress, they should spend their time in a conservative legislative agenda. They should flood the senate or the White House with legislation. Starting with an actual budget. That's how you differentiate yourselves from the DFL, you actually legislate. On some level it would be satisfying to impeach Biden, but on the off chance that it succeeds, do you really want to allow Harris to run as an incumbent in 24?
For those who might argue that the politicized impeachment trend started when Clinton was impeached, I'll simply point out that Clinton had actually found guilty of contempt and , and was punished with unprecedented legal penalties.
"In her finding of contempt of court, Judge Wright issued a scalding opinion saying the “record demonstrates by clear and convincing evidence” that Clinton at the deposition gave “false, misleading and evasive answers that were designed to obstruct the judicial process.”
Simply stated, Wright wrote, “the President’s deposition testimony regarding whether he had ever been alone with Ms. Lewinsky was intentionally false, and his statements regarding whether he had ever engaged in sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky likewise were intentionally false ….”
The penalty the judge imposed was unprecedented: No court had held a sitting president in contempt, as I note in 1995, adding that Wright also ordered the president to pay nearly $90,000 to cover legal fees and other expenses that Jones’s lawyers incurred as a result of the falsehoods he told under oath.” The lawyers had sought nearly $500,000."
Like it or not, Clinton had clearly been found to have been in contempt of court and to have intentionally tried to obstruct the legal process. I didn't support impeaching Clinton then, I didn't support impeaching Trump then, and I don't support impeaching Biden now.
I was blessed to experience the wonders of the miraculous Biden economic boom today. Went into a drug store looking for a particular item. Not only did they not have what I was looking for, they didn't have any of the equivalent items that might have been a good substitute. But, as I walked through the store I noticed that about 40% of the facings were empty. What the hell is this, the Soviet Union back in the day? How can we possibly call this economy better, when we literally don't have full store shalves?
