Self Own

Alright, I can't copy the jpeg, so I'll recreate what it says.

HOW CAN A POPULATION BE CONVINCED THAT A LIE IS THE TRUTH?

21% of Americans are illiterate.

54% of Americans can't read beyond the level of an 11 year old.

57% of Americans have no education past high school.

America ranks 36th in the world for literacy levels.

White US-Born adults are the largest group with low literacy.   

This is a graphic posted by my high school band teacher.  He had a lengthy career and I've been able to maintain a friendship with him to this day.      He is politically extremely left, and very vocal about his politics on social media.  Most of the people he interacts with echo  his positions.  

I suspect that he posted this graphic to own someone, without realizing the message it was sending.    Assuming these numbers are correct, and most of what I've seen makes this look less somewhat better,  then there is a glaringly obvious series of questions to ask.  

What federal department could have some responsibility for these dismal numbers?

What union also might have some responsibility here?

What profession might have some responsibility here? 

What political party are teachers unions most closely affiliated with?

What political party controls the majority of urban areas with poorly performing schools? 

Now the 57% have no education past high school is interesting.   Especially when you consider how many billionaires/successful people don't have an education beyond high school.   Also considering that is is totally possible to have a high earning potential without a college degree.    

Of course, the spin is that people without college degrees aren't very intelligent.    Yet, we see plenty of evidence that the education industrial complex is happy to take students who's test scores indicate a likelihood that they won't succeed in college and can't afford college and saddle them with loans that they have to repay even though they didn't do well in college.   There is a sense of credentialsim on the left that prizes the credential of the degree above all else.  

As for the last point, US born whites are (for now) the largest demographic group in the US.   This is a situation where it'd be nice to look at the per capita breakdown of the raw numbers as a way to determine what this "statistic" really means.   If that raw number is in line with the per capita/percentage then it means nothing.   If not, then we can talk.  

Personally I don't think I'd be touting the failure of the education system, and my political party,  if I was a retired teacher

 

Predictions

 

"Here’s an excellent article from Daily Signal by famous black economist Walter Williams, who explains the connection:

As reported in The New York Times (Aug. 1969) Stanford University biologist Paul Ehrlich warned: “The trouble with almost all environmental problems is that by the time we have enough evidence to convince people, you’re dead. We must realize that unless we’re extremely lucky, everybody will disappear in a cloud of blue steam in 20 years.”

In 2000, David Viner, a senior research scientist at University of East Anglia’s climate research unit, predicted that in a few years winter snowfall would become “a very rare and exciting event. Children just aren’t going to know what snow is.”

In 2004, the U.S. Pentagon warned President George W. Bush that major European cities would be beneath rising seas. Britain will be plunged into a Siberian climate by 2020. In 2008, Al Gore predicted that the polar ice cap would be gone in a mere 10 years. A U.S. Department of Energy study led by the U.S. Navy predicted the Arctic Ocean would experience an ice-free summer by 2016.

In May 2014, French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius declared during a joint appearance with Secretary of State John Kerry that “we have 500 days to avoid climate chaos.”

Peter Gunter, professor at North Texas State University, predicted in the spring 1970 issue of The Living Wilderness:

Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable: by 1975 widespread famines will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include all of India, Pakistan, China and the Near East, Africa. By the year 2000, or conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine conditions. … By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine.

Ecologist Kenneth Watt’s 1970 prediction was, “If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000.” He added, “This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.”

Williams concludes:

Today’s wild predictions about climate doom are likely to be just as true as yesteryear’s. The major difference is today’s Americans are far more gullible and more likely to spend trillions fighting global warming. And the only result is that we’ll be much poorer and less free."

 

 

It used to be that one of the keystones of science was repeatability.  That if you combine X,Y, and Z in the same proportions that you will get the same result every time.   This then leads to the conclusion that science has a degree of predictive ability.   So, if one does the same experiment multiple times in exactly the same way, and the results aren't the same that you have no way to predict what the results would be the next time you did the experiment.  

Except when it comes to climate change.  I can't think of a field of study with a worse track record of predicting outcomes than climate studies.    Given that they base everything on models, many of which are based on faulty or incomplete data, it's no surprise that the predictions are wrong.  Not just wrong, but spectacularly wrong.   Strangely enough some folx are convinced that eventually they'll get it right someday and that we need to spend trillions of tax dollars on the low chance that they might be right.  

H/T WK

An L foe Feminsim?

 US Rep Brittany Snow seems confused.  She seems to think that the rules on voting in the House should be changed to accommodate her.    I'm a little confused.  Was she not aware of the whole in person voting rule when she decided to run for congress?   Was she unaware of this when she got pregnant?   Was she unaware of the fact that millions of women with children go to work on a daily basis?   Was she unaware of things like hotels and babysitters?   It appears as though she feels so privileged that she can demand that the rules be changed for her.    By all means, let's open up remote voting for everyone in congress.  That means that they don't even need to bother rolling Pelosi's corpse onto the floor and make one of her aides lift her hand up to mash the button.   What's to stop an ancient congressman or woman from staying at home to hide their Alzheimer's and "vote" remotely.  

I get it, children are a wonderful blessing and we absolutely need to raise the birthrate ( I guess we should be glad she didn't un-alive the fetus), but why try to get a job if you are just going to demand that things be changed to accommodate you?   Sounds selfish as hell, and the message it sends to the millions of working women with children doesn't seem like one that's in line with the feminist manifesto. 

Last One For Today

Lately there's been a bit of a controversy on social media about men relate to and act around women.  It's started with women complaining that men in the workplace either are strictly formal with them and don't interact beyond specifics about business, or that they treat them like one of the guys (insults, off color jokes, arm punches, etc).   Then we started getting women complaining that men won't hold the door for them, or won't give up seats on public transportation.   Personally, I think it's pretty obvious.  It's women getting what they said they wanted, equality.   If men and women are equals then why wouldn't a man treat a woman as he treats other men in the workplace?   Yet, given the very real fear of a complaint, why wouldn't men err on the side of caution and of not doing anything that could be misconstrued?   Finally, if you wouldn't hold a door or give up a seat for a man, why do it for a woman, if they're really equal.  

It sounds like (some) women want an unequal equality.   They want an equality that's biased towards them.  They don't like the term chivalry, but they sure do like the effects of chivalry. 

This Deserves it's Own Post

 https://x.com/autocorrect2_0/status/1905410441381130674?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw

 

 "She walked into the Roman arena where the wild beasts awaited her. She trembled not from fear but from joy. Her name was Vibia Perpetua. She was just 22, a young mother singing hymns as the crowd jeered and a lion, leopard and wild cow encircled her. One of the beasts attacked, hurling her to the ground. She covered an exposed thigh with her bloody robe to preserve her modesty and groped in the dust for her hair pin so she could fix her disheveled hair. And when a Roman executioner approached Perpetua with a sword, her last words before collapsing were aimed at her Christian companions: “Stand fast in the faith, and love you all one another and do not let our sufferings be a stumbling block to you.” History remembers Perpetua because she kept a diary during her imprisonment entitled "The Passion of Perpetua and Felicity" (Felicity was a pregnant slave girl arrested with Perpetua). Her diary is one of the rare and oldest-surviving documents written by a Christian woman. The emotion in the diary is almost unbearable. Perpetua describes the pain of leaving her infant son, who she was still nursing. She describes a prison visit from her weeping father, who kissed her hands while pleading with her to renounce her faith. A narrator picks up the story in the diary after Perpetua was sent to her death. He wrote in the diary that Perpetua’s faith was so inspiring it caused the prison’s warden to convert. The narrator also describes Perpetua's death. While she was imprisoned, Perpetua says God gave her visions to reassure her. After one, she wrote: “I understood that I should fight, not with beasts but against the devil." If only we were so wise!"

 

 https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/maps/primary/perpetua.html

I doubt that many progressive christians would act thus.  I doubt that the number of conservative Christians would be as high as we think it would be.

 

 

BoT

 https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/29/opinion/democrats-strategy-2024.html

https://x.com/historyboomer/status/1905961652006047877?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw

 

 “Last year’s election was close, despite President Trump’s hyperbolic claims about his margin of victory. Still, the Democratic Party clearly lost — and not only the presidential race. It also lost control of the Senate and failed to recapture the House of Representatives. Of the 11 governor’s races held last year, Democrats won three. In state legislature races, they won fewer than 45 percent of the seats.” “Voters also trusted Republicans more than Democrats on immigration, crime, government spending, global trade and foreign policy. Among the few exceptions were abortion and health care. As the headline of a recent Times news article summarized, “Support for Trump’s Policies Exceeds Support for Trump.” Only 27 percent of Americans now have a favorable view of the Democratic Party. It is the party’s lowest approval rating in decades.” “Even today, the party remains too focused on personal identity and on Americans’ differences — by race, gender, sexuality and religion — rather than our shared values. On these issues, progressives sometimes adopt a scolding, censorious posture. It is worth emphasizing that this posture has alienated growing numbers of Asian, Black and Latino voters. Democrats who won last year in places where Mr. Trump also won, such as Senator Ruben Gallego of Arizona and Senator Elissa Slotkin of Michigan, adopted a more moderate tone. They were hawkish about border security and law enforcement, criticizing their own party. They did not make the common Democratic mistake of trying to talk about only economic policy and refusing to engage with Americans’ concerns on difficult social issues. Third, the party has to offer new ideas. When Democrats emerged from the wilderness in the past, they often did so with fresh ideas. They updated the proud Democratic tradition of improving life for all Americans. Bill Clinton remade the party in the early 1990s and spoke of “putting people first.” In 2008, Mr. Obama, Mrs. Clinton and John Edwards offered exciting plans to improve health care, reduce inequality and slow climate change. These candidates provided intellectual leadership. Ms. Harris failed to do so in last year’s campaign, and few Democrats are doing so today. Where is the Democrat with bold plans to cut living costs? Or fight the ills of social media? Or help aimless boys who are struggling in school? Where is the governor who does more than talk about an abundance agenda and actually cuts regulations to help America build? New ideas should come from both the party’s progressives and its centrists.”

 

 

 https://x.com/bgatesisapyscho/status/1906005485414752294?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw

Absolutely worth reconstructive surgery to film for your OF.

 

 https://x.com/wesyang/status/1905976455990751677?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw

This just makes too much sense to be totally false.  

 

 https://x.com/cremieuxrecueil/status/1905700210690687275?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw

" The USDA occasionally publishes data on what sorts of things food stamp recipients use their benefits on. Here's data on what they purchase compared with households that do not use food stamps:"

 

   

 

It's not great, but I though it'd be worse.   

https://x.com/msmelchen/status/1906733827742957616?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw

 "Dems really need to stop taking the 20 side on 80/20 issues. Stop simping for terrorist sympathizers and literal gang members. Most Americans will never step foot on the hallowed grounds of an Ivy League campus. They expect non-citizens who have that privilege to behave well. Condemn and prosecute actual CRIME like riots, looting, and the recent attacks on tesla owners and dealerships. Stop giving repeat offenders joke sentences and letting them out early. Abandon the trans in womens sports crap. It's not even necessary to abandon core democrat cultural issues like abortion and gun control to do all of this. Just shitcan the radical antifa left and elitist anti-family causes of the last decade and we will have a functioning left again. Supply-side liberalism which is championed in Abundance is a great start"

 

 

 https://x.com/msmelchen/status/1906852331682971812?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw

 

 "What is the point of this? Why flirt with nonsensical ideas that are clearly barred by the constitution and are not going to work, and wouldn’t really be advisable even with legal tinkering? If you’re going to sow chaos there better be a point. If not then this childish bullshit meant to troll the libs needs to just stop. Just govern FFS"

 

 

 

 

 

Maher and Gervias Stuff

 https://x.com/citizenfreepres/status/1906732861882822659?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw

 https://x.com/vigilantfox/status/1905812830382686493?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw

 https://x.com/vigilantfox/status/1905845437749215305?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw

 https://x.com/farmgirlcarrie/status/1905856902535196919?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw

 

Bill Maher and Ricky Gervais  are not afraid to push back on the liberal narrative.