Does MAGA have an ideology? Does MAGA hate Europe? And why does MAGA love Putin?

The US was founded on the concept of self (but limited) government, individual rights and Judeo-Christian values; the principles, including the rule of law (a legal system based on statute law, meaning there has to be a law forbidding or commanding an action for the action to be illegal) which are the founding principles of our Constitution and Bill of Rights (prior to Democrats appropriating the term it was called a liberal worldview). This is what MAGA (or traditional liberals) will not compromise on. As Barry Goldwater said "Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue.”

MAGA ideals realize you can't have a stable society without a common culture and in America our common culture is based on our Constitution (the reality is both WWl and certainly WWll were a result of uncontrolled immigration and a lack of assimilation in Europe, and nothing apparently has changed). Europe does not have a Constitution or Bill of Rights, so they have "allowed" speech, not protected free speech. Further the European legal system has degraded so they now have a system of men, not laws (the opposite of equal protection) based on Post Modernism and the fear of being branded a racist. It also has made no sense that we allow equal trade with countries with a much lower standard of living and non- reciprocal tariffs (for some reason other countries can have tariffs on US goods, but the US is not allowed to do the same); these type of trade agreements is what Ross Perot called the Giant sucking sound, as American manufacturing has left the US to countries were manufacturing can be done cheaper. Trump doesn't really think tariffs are a good thing at all, but they are bargaining chips to bring American manufacturing back to America. Since WWll, the US has subsidized the Western world, as world economies were made interdependent as a strategy against future worlds wars, but this system has become too draining on US resources as other countries have contributed less and less, made even more vulnerable as they starve themselves of energy under the auspicious of the Net Zero fallacy.

Finally the idea MAGA has some affection towards Putin, ignores 75 years of the Left in the US, apologetics of the USSR and later Putin's Russia; I guess those that make such a claim forgets President Obama literally handed Crimea to Putin, breaking his promise to defend Ukraine from Russia if they disarmed. The fact is Russia was the darling of the Left, up until the time Trump became President and the lie of Trump Collusion and TDS was created. Trump speaks glowingly of Putin because he wants to make a deal with him, but he also bombed Russian soldiers in Syria during his first administration, and has threatened new and renewed sanctions, if Putin walks away from negotiations to end the Ukraine war.

Is there an ideology, hell yes. It's called America first, recognizing American exceptionalism and Making America Great Again and this is done by mitigating waste of tax dollars and corruption, bringing manufacturing jobs back to America, end starving the country of energy, ending the anti science, anti biology, anti parent, anti child, anti women trans lunacy, controlling the borders and immigration, building back our military, end the institutional racism that has infected the country through DEI, end the antisemitism that is rampant in colleges and universities and make elections secure, hopefully by returning to paper ballots and in person voting, where mail in voting is the extreme exception and ballot harvesting is not allowed.

Los Angeles Fires Resulted in Progressives Failing the Primary Responsibility of Governance

 In Los Angeles, if one lives in a tinderbox or even if global warming is to blame for wildfires, it is our representatives responsibility to do everything humanly possible to mitigate the fire danger/ damage. First and foremost job of government is public safety, meaning funding the most extensive firefighting infrastructure possible, massive brush removal, cutting fire breaks, build a water infrastructure capable of supporting massive fire fighting endeavors anywhere in the City/ County all year round (one of the issues is California does not fund the private fire fighting infrastructure to be on call out side fire season). And probably the most important, put the most qualified people in charge, IOW scrub DEI and return to hiring people based on merit; Los Angeles, and California has failed these responsibilities in total and the result is a failed state, that can literally do nothing as it is consumed by wildfires.

Greg Gutfeld explained this succinctly, conservatives are about practicality, where progressives are about platitudes. When you have a crisis you need practical solutions, something progressives are incapable of, so California is left in crisis of competence, which the left created by replacing competence with complexion and sexual identity. By definition progressives tend to respond emotionally in their governance, which is okay until there is an actual crisis that requires practical solutions but then they become paralyzed because they have have none, falling back on blaming political platitudes like climate change, which is nothing more than phoney virtue signalling.

And a caveat. Wouldn't it be incredible if California had leadership whose primary concern is not, it wasn't my fault or responsibility and not always pointing fingers at someone else (while simultaneously telling critics now is not the time for finger pointing). The reality is if you are the governor or mayor it is your responsibility, making it your fault. Your job is not to abrogate responsibility, but take charge, take responsibility, first stop the bleeding and then problem solve. The reason poor leaders won't accept responsibility is because by doing so, it makes them responsible for fixing the problem. Good leaders gladly take responsibility and find solutions (eg the necessary trade offs) that will save lives and property in the future. 

In other words, the message to California politicians, you had one job, keep the citizenry safe, and you failed miserably.

Genie Leaves Critical Homelink Programming Step Out of Manual

 I installed a new Genie 7055D garage door opener so I needed to reprogram the opener buttons in my cars. The cars hav Homelink that allows you to sync up garage door opener (s). The process involves clearing any other previously programmed garage openers and then programming the buttons to the new opener (the entire complete procedure is linked below) The vehicle manual and garage door opener manuals both have instructions for this; the problem is the Genie manual is missing a necessary step. Basically it uses a Genie remote already programmed to the garage door opener to program the button in your car. Then there is a  second step where you have to put the opener itself in train or learn mode, to program in the rolling code encryption but the Genie manual completely leaves this necessary part out ( I noticed this part of the manual shows in italics, "abbreviated "). Not only that it doesn't explain that the opener's "program mode", used for programming the Genie remotes and setting the travel limits, is also the "train/learn" mode for the second step of the Homelink programming procedure explained in the vehicle manual (in older Genie models there is a designated "train" or "learn" button). Anyway after several web searches and numerous people complaining about the issue, I found the solution, but it never ceases to be amazed at how poor the documentation in manuals can be.

Lowe's has this PDF manual posted on the Internet that explains this in detail in the programming section Genie Homelink Programming

Why GenZ and Millennials are so Unhappy

From my perspective, man has always been the most satisfied removing himself from the equation; IOW serving something bigger and more noble than himself. In a small way this is what a traditional family is about. When you marry you form a trusting partnership, where suddenly your wants and needs are divided with the wants and needs of someone else; this is defined by the fact that love is a choice and an action, not a feeling. When a child is introduced to such a relationship, the vast majority of parents say they reach an epoch where for the first time in their lives, they encounter something that is more important than themselves. One should also keep in mind that social norms (that are the bain of Progressive thinkers) are not arbitrary, they evolved, discarding negative trade-offs and instituting net positive positive trade-offs. When we discard social norms with limited consequential knowledge, we do so at our peril.

We now have several generations that can't understand this because social media does not demand you communicate and share ideas, rather one embraces a Nietzsche dystopian worldview, that since we killed God, I will create my own since of morality. The problem with this is we are all too selfish to even attempt such a feat. The end result is the worship of self and the constant demand for joy (and if I am not joyful all the time in my relationships or marriage, I must trash my marriage and/or relationships until I find the perpetual joy that everyone on TikTok has apparently found) but that is not how life is. Look at the result the last two generations are the most anxious and depressed generations on record; many state they literally don't know how to form relationships. I believe this is the bases for everything from fentanyl epidemic, to gender theology. The more pain you are in the more self absorbed you will become and you will forever be trying to define the cause of that pain (which will probably be wrong) and find some way to alleviate the pain.

Life is impossibly hard and we all suffer an endless succession of one unfinished circumstance after another. If you make joy your moment to moment goal you will be doomed to constant failure. Rather true enlightenment comes from toiling and caring for others and as you work, you will encounter peace and moments joy.

We are Due a Christian Revival

The US is due another Christian revival. We rely on technology to solve our problems, which is something it is not capable of doing; as Jesus said there will always be the poor. The woke theology is literally the same as Maoist theology. It wants to destroy the past by judging it by contemporary standards. Gender theology is based on the lie that if you are unhappy, there is something wrong with you, a partial byproduct of social media were people show a false life devoid of it's harsh realities. As Thoreau said, most people live a life of quite desperation, desperately seeking it's meaning (the song that is within them); the curse of being sentient is the life long search for the reason we exist. The answer can not come from human centered philosophy such a as Marxism, it can only come from recognition that life is impossibly hard and we need to seek a power greater than ours to survive it. Most psychologist will begrudgingly admit that there is a psychological need for religion, a void in our psyche that can only be filled by something greater than ourselves; this what Nietzsche meant when he described the result of eliminating God from our lives.

God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it?

— Nietzsche

Nietzsche describes the void of eliminating God and how we must become God's ourselves to fill it. But history has shown the impossibility of mankind creating it's own morality (the basis of Marxism) because it assumes a fantastical malubility of humanity that simply doesn't exist and ignores that mankind is too absorbed in itself to create it's own morality. God did not give us a moral code to control us (he did after all give us free will), instead it was to protect us from the wages of sin. IOW, God does not punish us for our sins, it is simply the result of our selfish behavior that causes more pain and hardship. We also live in a broken world were even those that try to live an unselfish life will suffer, but without God and fellowship we all suffer alone.

Shall we gather at the river?

Where bright angel feet have trod

With its crystal tide forever

Flowing by the throne of God…

Living in a World of Gender Dysphoria/Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy

The vast majority of what goes for transgenderism today is of course nothing of the kind. The basis of transgenderism is gender dysphoria, which is a psychosis; dysphoria meaning the psychic belief that some part or parts of your body that you were born with don't belong; as an example a person suffering from dysphoria might believe their left arm is a a foreign body and some have gone so far as amputing the limb. Also keep in mind that a symptom of dysphoria is clinical depression. However what passed as pseudo dysphoria today seems to fall under one of two categories. The first is depression (to date no study has shown that gender affirmation of any kind cures their depression or suicide ideations), and second a feeling of alienation which is usually directly related to social media; sometimes called the Facebook syndrome. With the Facebook syndrome, young people are led to believe that everyone else is joyful and leading a fulfilling life but them. This often combined with the symptoms of puberty which leads teenagers and young adults, experiencing the confusion and discomfort with their changing bodies,  creates a natural feeling of alienation. Add to that being an adolescent in a world where social media has caused chronic alienation,  results in the false belief they are experiencing something unique and there is something seriously wrong with them, and the woke zealots default diagnosis is of course gender dysphoria by proxy.

The second category is even more troublesome and that is parents that push a gender dysphoria diagnosis on their children. While I said parents, more accurately I should have said parent as the vast majority of parents that seeks gender affirmation for their children are single mothers. Further at least one study has shown the vast majority of single mothers seeing gender affirmation for their child suffer from a personality disorder*; the most common is Borderline Personality Disorder**. The point being these parents are wanting the attention that goes along with being a parent of a gender dysphoria child, a form Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy*** (something that should be of no surprise since Munchausen Syndrome by proxy is a symptom of a personality disorder). The primary problem here is the symptoms used to diagnose gender dysphoria in children are completely arbitrary and generally fall under the category on normal child behavior. Keep in mind that one of the main attributes of a child is their unending desire to please adults and their parents in particular. So significant is this desire that police investigators have to go to specialized schools to learn how to interview children. The reason the child is seeking the approval of the investigator and will agree with almost any premise if they believe that it will result win their approval. This was made remarkably clear in the McMartin preschool sexual child abuse investigation and trail in the 1980s, where the children agreed with the most outrageous accusations introduced by the investigators including underground tunnels and satanic torture chambers that existed only in the imagination of the investigators. The point being if a parent wants a child to be transgender, a child will more than likely agree with whatever premise the parent will offer up. IOW a child is just as likely to agree they are a dragon that lives in the body of a three foot tall little boy, as to agree they are a little girl with a penis, if a parent tells the child either is possible and/or the child believes it is something desirable by their parent.

*"A personality disorder is a type of mental disorder in which you have a rigid and unhealthy pattern of thinking, functioning and behaving. A person with a personality disorder has trouble perceiving and relating to situations and people. This causes significant problems and limitations in relationships, social activities, work and school."

**"People with borderline personality disorder may experience intense mood swings and feel uncertainty about how they see themselves. Their feelings for others can change quickly, and swing from extreme closeness to extreme dislike. These changing feelings can lead to unstable relationships and emotional pain...People with borderline personality disorder also tend to view things in extremes, such as all good or all bad. Their interests and values can change quickly, and they may act impulsively or recklessly."

***Munchausen by proxy -- is a psychological disorder marked by attention-seeking behavior by a caregiver through those who are in their care...  The person with MSP (usually the mother) gains attention by seeking medical help for exaggerated or made-up symptoms of a child in their care. As health care providers strive to identify what's causing the child's symptoms, the deliberate actions of the parent or caretaker can often make the symptoms worse.

There is also a third category that has nothing to do with gender dysphoria, that being transgender women (men protraying themselves as women) to compete against biological women in sports activities. The vast majority of these men appear to be frustrated they are not competitive in their chosen sport when competing against fellow men, so they announce they are actually women in men's bodies and go on to dominate women's sports. In essence this is sexual misappropriation and demonstrates that progressives have never really embraced women's rights, instead they are simply anti convention to the extreme and will latch onto any belief system (outlandish or legitimate) if it challenges the status quo. IOW, progressives only advanced women's rights until it became main stream and now they've supplanted (and are excluding) women's rights with transgender rights, pretty much eliminating 100 year fight for women's rights and simply handed those hard fought for rights over to a minority of men who can't except their physical limitations as male athletes. Almost by definition woke theology was abandoned any and all suffering of biological women, because they are seen as the enemy of transgender women (men protraying themselves as women) because they represent reality, something transgender women can not tolerate, because the reality is you can never change the sex you were born as.

Woke Theology; the End of the Morality Play

It's inaccurate to believe that love conquers all is a proper theme. Practically every thing ever written (including movies and games) are not about love, rather they are morality plays. Certainly love is a part, but the central theme is not love, it's about what love drives you to. Do you do the right thing or the wrong thing and if you do the wrong thing, do you repent (meaning change your mind) and make things right? The purveyors of woke philosophy, such as the new Disney wants to change this by presenting woke theology and transgenderism, giving up everything you know is right and pretend the world is as every person individually wants it to be, ignoring science, biology and critical thinking, because they all show the folly in such a world view where all areas of pathology are celebrated as a life choices and anything curative is viewed as hatred and labeled a phobia. In essence woke theology is just giving up on reality because it is too painful and creating a dream world to replace the harsh truths of reality and the struggle of being alive.

"We are a decade into the largest epidemic of adolescent mental illness ever recorded.

Why the Mental Health of Liberal Girls Sank First and Fastest

"We are now 11 years into the largest epidemic of adolescent mental illness ever recorded"  Interesting how this tends to also align itself with gender affirmation, especially amongst adolescent females. At first there was a denial that transgenderism was a form of mental illness (dysphoria). However that changed to gender affirmation medical intervention/ surgery as being the cure for dysphoria. However it turned out there is literally no scientific empirical evidence this is true; it was literally made up (practically every study done on transgenderism shows the vast majority suffering from transgenderism turn out to be either homosexual or will grow out it). The reality is one of the primary symptoms of dysphoria is depression and having suicidal tendencies, and while affirmation and medical intervention tends to cloud the depression temporarily, due to being caught up and distracted by the misguided belief they are curing themselves ( pushed by over zealous advocates), eventually the depression and suicidal tendencies return, often within 6 years of medical intervention, which is often exasperated by being abandoned and ridiculed by the transsexual community, if they start to question whether affirmation was the correct course to truly make their lives better. IOW transgenderism affirmation is unfortunately nothing more than a cruel trend, that is leaving devastated women permanently sterile due to hormone therapy and mutilated by surgery. What I found profoundly sad was most transgender men and women were most regretful because they realized they simply could never actually change their sex, that they were surgically altered to appear to be the opposite sex (and would have to take powerful drugs their entire life to continue the illusion), but it would forever be an illusion; and they will always remain the sex they were born as.

 

My experience reloading 357 Sig

 The following is my experience with reloading 357 sig. A little background, the 357 sig was designed to be a law enforcement round that replicated a 357 mag ballistics; specifically 125gr bullet traveling at 1450 fps. To do this the designers at Sig Sauer necked down a slightly shortened 10mm case to 9mm (the 40 cal S&W is also based on a shortened 10mm case, and while close in length, if you neck down a 40 cal shell case it will be about half a mm too short). A 357 sig round is not that difficult to reload, but there is a learning curve. First, because it is a necked down round, it is best reloaded like a rifle cartridge (I'll explain this in more detail later). One issue that needs to be dealt with is the neck of the 357 sig case is very short, so bullet design over 115 grains, is very important; as an example the bullet should be short (IOW "squatty" for lack of a better term) with parallel sidewalls, often referred to as "Truncated cone flat point bullets", 124gr.  * . That way the bullet uses the maximum inner surface of the neck of the case without being too long. On the other hand 9mm/380  bullets 115 grains or lighter are much less problematic as they maximize diameter over length. Along with this, it's best not to bell or flair the case mouth prior to pressing in the bullets similar to reloading some rifle rounds with boat tail bullets. This allows you to press in the bullet without the need to crimp the shell, as crimping the shell mitigates how well the neck of the shell holds the bullet.   

 

Dies for the 357 Sig come in 2 flavors, because the 357 sig is a necked down cartridge, like rifle cartridges, most the dies only come in steel (not carbide; carbide allows for sizing shells without case lube).  Now there is a common work a round for not using case lube. Since the bottom half of the 357sig shell is 10 mm, you can use a 10mm/40 S&W carbide die to size the bottom and decap and then follow up with the 357 sig steel sizing die for the neck; because the neck is so short I've found it's not necessary to use lube with sizing the neck with 357 sig steel die. Now Dillion has a die that combines these two features, a carbide ring for the bottom and a steel portion to form the top the neck of course its twice the price of an RCBS die set and they still recommend using case lube, though it's probably not necessary.

 

One issue I ran into is the RCBS 357 sig forming die does not work well. Here we are back to sizing the case like a rifle cartridge. Most necked rifle cartridges use the shoulder of the cartridge for proper head spacing, that is how the bullet fits into the chamber, based on the length from the shoulder to the rim. This is opposed to rimless pistol cartridges that headspace on the case mouth.  RCBS die forms the 357 sig case to headspace on the case mouth, (not the neck) which after a few reloads will increase the length from the base to the shoulder so the base of the round end up ending out of the chamber so the slide wont completely close (IOW, don't use the RCBS forming die). The reason for this is every time you resize a necked shell casing it gets a little longer. If the die is designed to head space on the shoulder, it will keep the shoulder position relative to the shell base the same. However if the die is designed to headspace on the case mouth, the shoulder position relative to the shell base will lengthen farther every time it is formed, until the slide will not be able to close on the round. Yes, like a rifle case you will need to trim the the 357 sig case to length, but if the distance between the shoulder and rim is too long, trimming the mouth of the shell will not solve the fitment problem

 

 Powder wise, 357sig is not real picky as long you can load enough in the relatively small shell. I have used Unique (not recommended but will work), Accurate #7/#9, Power Pistol, Silhouette and Blue Dot; a big positive about 357sig is the increased pressures lead to most powders burning very clean and due to the limited case capacity it is rare you will find a load that will allow a double charge.

 

When I first decided to reload for 357 sig, I bought some RCBS 357 sig dies. The RCBS dies have a ball mouth expander in the forming decapper die, but not a separate expander die, which it turns out is for good reason. When I first started loading 357 sig I used the 357 mag expander die, but I found using a flaring/ bell style expander die is problematic because it mitigates the how securely the necked of the shell holds the bullet. This is because a 357 mag flare die is designed not to just bell the top of the shell, but to open a channel, which reduces the short necks ability to hold onto the bullet. What I eventually ended up with is a hybrid Lee/ RCBS forming die, using a Lee carbide 10mm forming die, but replacing the Lee decapper pin with the RCBS expander ball decapper pin. What this does is forms the die with the headspace at the shoulder, and opens the case mouth enough for a 125gr truncated cone flat point bullet to be pressed in without and further expansion of the case mouth. This is important due to the issues explained in the following paragraph.

 

Another issue that plays into the forming and loading of 357sig rounds is something called rebound deformation. As I mentioned, it better to not use a belling or expansion die when pressing in the bullets of the 357 sig due to the short neck, this is less of an issue with a longer neck  or straight wall shells because there is more surface to hold the bullet. The reason is, expanding a shell and then crimping the shell around the bullet compromises the friction that holds the bullet in the case, due to rebound deformation. When brass is deformed or sized with a die, it rebounds, meaning it expands or contracts larger or smaller than the die, depending on whether you are expanding or constricting the shell. Because of this when you bell or flare open the end of the shell to accept the bullet, the walls of inner surface of the shell that holds the bullet will no longer be parallel, which comprises the holding strength of the inner sidewalls. Usually with other calibers this only affects a small portion of the interface between the bullet on shell, but because the 357 sig neck is so short, anything that mitigates this interface is problematic.This issue can cause what is called "bullet setback" or extraction, where recoil changes how the depth of bullets in shells of the rounds in the pistol magazine. This is why I replaced the decapper in the Lee 357 sig die with the expander ball from an RCBS 357 sig die. This ball expander is actually less than .9mm/ .355 (I believe it is .353"), which makes it easier to press in the bullets without using a more extreme expander die. I have found that using the RCBS expander ball holds the bullet better than expanding the mouth of the case and then crimping it closed. Bullet setback/extraction in a 357sig round is enough of a problem that most manufacturers fill the entirety of the case with powder and/or use a bullet adhesive/sealant, but when using the expander ball without crimping I have not had any problem with setback or extraction.

*There are some other bullets out there including a JHP/ notched 147 gr 9mm bullets that were fairly easily to load without belling the case mouth. 

Why Hydrogen Cars Are Silly and Why Using Hydrogen as a Battery May be the Holy Grail of Renewable Energy

Elon Musk has said hydrogen cars are silly and this is why he's right. First there are two basic types of hydrogen cars, one in which a car's internal combustion engine is fueled by hydrogen similar to a propane fueled vehicle and the other is a hydrogen fuel cell cars, which is an electric car that used hydrogen to create electricity. Using hydrogen as a fuel for an internal combustion still relies on the extreme inefficiency of any 4 stroke engine and without the energy dense properties of gasoline, meaning it would need much larger quantities of hydrogen to operate. 

So let's first look how hydrogen is obtained. Pure hydrogen is very rare on earth, so it has extracted from water, which is one of earth's most stable molecules. There are two methods, one uses electrolysis and the other steam. The electrolysis method is very energy dense, meaning it takes almost as much electricity to extract the hydrogen as the amount of energy potential in the hydrogen itself (and of course most electricity is still produced using fossil fuels), this is why this process is not usually used commercially. The steam method is more efficient but again fossil fuels are used to create the necessary heat, so it's a renewable resource either. A hydrogen cell takes hydrogen and runs it through a hydrogen converter or cell, that converts back it into electricity and water. And while wind and solar electricity can be used to extract hydrogen from water, currently such renewable energy resources are overtaxed just trying to keep up with the current demands of the electrical grid and with standard power plants being shut down and no new ones being built, and with ever increasing demand for electricity in general, there not a whole lot of extra electricity available for making hydrogen for cars, let alone money to create the necessary infrastructure.

So hydrogen cars are silly because of the process of extracting hydrogen from water using electricity (electrolysis)  and then using a hydrogen cell in the car to convert the hydrogen back into water (hydrolisys) and electricity is incredibly inefficient. No matter how sophisticated the hydrogen technology becomes, simply using the electricity that would be used to extract hydrogen from water to propel an electric car will always be more efficient. As an example it takes 50 kWh to extract 1 kg of hydrogen, this is enough to drive a hydrogen cell car about 100 km. OTOH a 50 kWh charge will likely propel a Tesla Model 3 about 230 km. The reason is due to the energy loss of extracting hydrogen from water and then converting the hydrogen back into water and electricity, the 50 kWh is reduced to less than 25 kWh of real world useable electricity. These figures are often debated because the overhead of hydrogen production by electrolysis and then reversed back into electricity is based entirely on the quality of the devices. While you will often see efficiency data much higher than this, they are usually referencing extraordinarily efficient laboratory devices used under very controlled conditions, while the devices commonly found in operation, for this process, such as in hydrogen cell vehicles are far less efficient. 

It's also a misnomer that the explosive danger of hydrogen is even similar to that of gasoline. In it's natural state gasoline is a liquid and while highly flammable is not explosive unless it's vaporized with a very narrow margin of percentage of oxygen to be explosive. Hydrogen OTOH in it's natural state is an extremely explosive gas with a very wide margin of percentage of oxygen to be explosive. Further because of it's properties it is cost prohibited to store hydrogen as a liquid in small quantities, unlike propane or natural gas, so it would be transported in cars in it's most volatile state.

Now that is not to say electric cars are the answer either. As many have said electricity is only clean at the users end. Right now the US is on the verge of a dire electricity shortage that will probably bring electric car mandates to a screeching halt. Michael Shellenbuger (the scientist who oversaw the renewable resource infrastructure in California in the 1990s) explains that the electrical grid requires electricity as needed which is the fatal flaw of renewable wind and solar. The problem is there is no way to store the excess electricity from wind and solar, so at night or when there is little wind, the grid can be starved of electricity. Imagine then, when tens of millions of electric cars being plugged in at night to recharge their batteries for the morning commute at very time all the solar farms stop producing electricity (you can build as many solar farms as you want, but they still can't produce electricity at night). Wind and solar require large areas of land, usually in the desert, which is hundreds of miles from large population areas, this require s a large investment in infrastructure simply to get the electricity to users in far off cities that have the greatist demands for electricity. Building wind and solar farms are also having a devastating affect on the desert ecology, eg wind turbines are the now the leading cause of the deaths of predatory birds. Solar farms builders have been unable to prevent the whole sale deaths of endangered desert tortoises as they clear the desert floor for their solar array.  Until the powers that be realistically plan and build the necessary infrastructure for a tripling of electricity demand, hybrid and gas powered cars will be around for a long time to come. 

Now this does bring up the point, why not build  hydrogen generating plants at solar farms? That way when solar farms are working at maximum efficiency on clear sunny days, they could divert the electricity not demanded by the electrical grid into hydrogen. Then when the power grid is in need of electricity, day or night, they could convert the hydrogen back into electricity, in affect creating a hydrogen battery to store electricity that is usually wasted when there is no demand for it by the power grid. Yes it's still inefficient in regards to lost electricity as a result of the conversation to hydrogen and back to electricity, but in this case the electricity was literally being thrown away, so any means of storing it is better than it being completely wasted. I have not seen this mentioned anywhere, but it would seem to me to be the answer to the inconsistent production of electricity that is the current fatal flaw of renewable energy, however it still doesn't address the destruction of the desert ecology, that pretty much seems to be the inevitable unintended consequence of renewable energy. 

Liberals; the Definitive Creators of Unintended Consequences.

Jordon Peterson brings to light that most ideas for change are bad. The main reason is we forgotten why we do things they way we do. Liberal Progressive believe not only that change is good but needs to be done continuously, without any thought of why what they want to change is being done the way it is being done; the end result is almost always a disaster of unintended consequences for which they take no responsibility. Further they are intellectually lazy, or simply don't care because they are agenda rather than result driven. A typical example is the constant false rationalization that correlation equals causation. In it's absurd form, they would say that carrots cause heart attacks, because the vast majority of people having heart attacks eat carrots shortly before their heart attack; this of course ignores that carrots are a staple in most diets, and nothing at all to do with heart attacks. In a more subtle way the same can be said for sending people to jail for so called minor crimes. Data correlation tells us that those sent to jail for theft crimes generally emerge more antisocial than when they went in. The Liberal Progressive would say we should than not send thieves to jail. The problem is that theft is antisocial by definition, so without punishment, the same person will continue to steal and become still become more antisocial; at least when the thief is in jail they are not continually re-offending, until their crimes become serious enough to warrant incarceration. Further, the lack of punishment for theft encourages others to commit theft as well.  In other words the unintended consequences of not addressing theft crimes, is the criminals will continue to offend with impunity, meaning whether incarcerated or not, they will still become more antisocial, with the addition of creating many more victims and it will result in massive increase in others taking up thievery. Of course the left now measures success only in the term of equity and since criminal behavior tends to be overrepresented by minorities, the view fewer incarcerations as a success unto itself, regardless of the harm and wholesale destruction it does to society. 

There are those that claim that theft is a form of reparations, again from a world view based on equity. Even if this were true, the unintended consequences of that is entirely regressive, as the end result will be lawlessness in the poorest of communities and a massive increase in retail costs. This of course goes along with defund the police, which is another regressive policy that is only popular with those that live in otherwise protected communities and do not face crime on a daily basis; in other words, the poorest among us. While decades of indoctrination has convinced urban blacks that the are the constant victim of police violence and anti-black racism, they also know that the police are the only barrier between them and violent crime committed almost entirely by other blacks. Murder is so prevalent in Black communities, it is one of the primary causes of deaths of young black men. liberal Black activists often rationalize away black on black crime, saying white criminals generally victimize whites also; what they conveniently ignore is blacks are victimized by blacks at ten times the rate of whites by white criminals). Yet it is so ignored by Democrats and the mainstream press, that the moment the suspect of a mass shootings and/or killing or violent act is identified as black, all reporting is immediately stopped, just as all black on black crimes are never reported on, no matter the body count or the viciousness of the crime. To the black communities, regardless of how much they hate the police, they still want their presence in as large numbers as possible, as without them they are without any protection from the violent black gangs that otherwise control the segregated ghettos controlled solely by Democrats, they are forced to live in. 

Science Should Not be Used For Public Policy

Anothony Fauci head of the NIH, has said that arguing with him is arguing with science. While many berated him for being so ritious, the fact is in many cases he was right. Now he has also admittedly lied, such a when he said that masks were unnecessary to prevent the spread of Covet 19. He explained later this was to stop people from hoarding N95 masks, which he felt were better utilized by hospital workers than scum citizens they were forced to treat. He also said the BLM demonstrations we're not the Covet super spreaders they turned out to be, based solely on his progressive political views (many have stated this was the point where they started to to doubt government policies on Covet, as they were apparently based solely on the political postering of Liberal Progressive s. However, one could argue that at many times Fauci could point to some scientific study to back up his claim that he is following the science; and there lies the problem (the fact is science is always changing, because it a mechanism of proving hypothesis wrong). Science is a process, not a gauge or judge of the ligitimacy of public policy. And while Fauci may be following the science, science by definition needs be open to all possibilities and be defined as open debates and free discussions at all levels, or it is simply religious dogma. Since Dr Fauci had made a career of shutting down any dissenting view point other than his official position, he has simply become an anti-science autocratic.

The point here is there are just as many scientists and peer reviewed scientific studies that are counter to what Fauci and the progressive left are claiming is they only true science. Not only has Fauci declared his science is better, he has actually conspired to discredit esteemed and highly regarded scientists in the immunology and vaccine fields; this certainly shows he has abandoned science in the name of progressive politics. Many forget Fauci falsely claimed AIDS was a hetrosexually spread disease and he discredited was is now one of the primary treatments for AIDS related pneumonia. The question has to be asked why does a government scientist have more credibility than a non-government scientists with similar or more expertise? And should we give government scientist the power to discredit and ridicule non-government scientists that disagree with them; something always the case with past authoritarian governments.

What appears to be the reasoning behind all this unscientific rhetoric, is the powers that be behind the Biden administration, went all in, that vaccines would stop the Covet 19 epidemic. In doing so, they ignored, outlawed and ridiculed any alternte stradegy. As mentioned prior to Covet 19, the normal medical procedure was to pretreat diseases with various protocols, and then agressively treat the symptoms of the disease when symptoms first appears. However with Covid, patients are told the only pretreatment are vaccines, and if symptoms appear, to go home and wait for the symptoms to become so serious, they require hospitalization. Then, once in the hospital, many Covid patients were put on ventilators and drugged with opiates, where they usually wasted away and died. The reasoning again is if you go all in on vaccines, you can't have any other factors complicating the approach; this includes for the first time in medical history, ignoring naturally aquired immunity, which interestingly is the basis for vaccines. The Biden administration and the progressive left media did not want any alternate belief system, other than this is an epidemic of the unvaccinated; in other words as said by both President Biden and the progressive left media, get the jab and your protected, period. Any other information, facts or opinions, regardless of the source had to be banned, censored and/or ridiculed. The reasoning being there could only be one truth, because people are too gulable and not intelligent enough to make this decision based on any other information that was available. It is the Case Sunstein "Nudge Principle" on steroids.

Of course, Fauci and the Biden administration now have a problem; the new mRNA vaccines don't prevent being infected by Covet, not do they stop the spread; at best they reduce severity of the symptoms if you are infected. This has led Biden to pretty much abrogate federal responsibility (although interestingly not federal authority), when he stated that the Covid epidemic could not be stopped at the federal level. 

All this harkens back to my original point; science should never be used for the bases of public/governmental policy. For one thing it is too compartmentalized and can be oppressively authoritarian as it ignores the consequences of poorly thought out policies such as quarantining the healthy which destroyed the lives of millions and led to more deaths from depression (suicides and drug overdoses) and economic destruction that revered 50 years of gains against poverty. There is a reason we have elected officials and not autocrats ruling our nation, and it's time we realize that many of our elected officials (who are often seen ignoring the mandates they have forced on the populace) have abrogated their responsibilities by claiming they are following the science, when in actuality they are are simply grasping onto a rationality for authoritarianism without accepting any responsibility for their actions. 

The Narcissism of The Woke Worldview

Even a cursory view of the woke worldview shows it is bases in narsism. Narcissist do not understand lateral love, they only understand adulation. This further exacerbated by social media where one can create an infallible personna that lives in their smartphone, which is often their only connection to the outside world. The problem is we are human beings and by definition fallible and hopelessly flawed. This results in the need of the woke to continually isolate themselves for fear that any personal contact will lead to the destruction of the facade they have created to conceal their true fallible selves.

The truly views themselves as inclusive; as a matter of fact the woke movement is based on the concept of radical inclusion. But like all things on the fringe, end up being the opposite; that being discriminatory and exclusive. The reason is rather than looking to be inclusive, they instead search out those that are flawed and and in there warped worldview,  non-inclusive, which at some point is everyone

This is the idiocy of the woke cancel culture, which is based on ignoring we are all flawed and broken and is perpetratored by a vocal minority, who are just as guilty as anyone else of violating their woke worldview, such as attacking racism using the most racist means imaginable, which blindly lacks any forgiveness and /or redemption; it is simply  a denial of what Carl Jung said is the need to integrate one's shadow. Further the haters, with little to no life experience, use contemporary values to judge the past without realizing they will be judged  just as harshly for their current behavior which will be deemed completely unacceptable in the future by the next generation of self-aggrandized wokesters . In other words its a live and die by the sword existence, where people are so frightened and ashamed of their hidden anti-social and racist feelings, they must lash out at others thinking it will somehow square things with their refusal to accept their own shadows.

Unfortunately the woke /cancel culture ends up harming a lot of good people who most of these purveyors of woke are simply unworthy to judge. In essence the Democrat woke/ cancel is based purely on narcissism. It is a bizzaro take on the Christian parable, that if they cast stones it will somehow absolve them of the fact that they are human and therefore imperfect and irredeemable broken.

Transgender Women Live a Life of Gender Misappropriation

I find it horrorific that after over a century of hard fought women's rights, the left has  decided these rights should now exclude woman and now belong to men who simply identify as women. This also includes women's hard fought equity in sports programs that are also being invaded and sometimes taken over by trans men. It has literally become the case that Democrats have decided the rights of men with gender  dysmorphia (and those faking gender dysmorphia to victimize women) take presidence over the rights and safety of women. In other words, the left, like it did with the working class, has completely abandoned women rights for the privilege of a minority of men; if ever there was a war on women this is it. 

The other issue facing the transgender war on women is the fact that women in most societies are protected and for very good reasons. First women are weaker than men, they also bear children; neither is true about transgender men. If a male has gone through puberty, he will have all the muscular and skeletal advanges of a male for the rest of his life, even with testosterone blockers and reassignment surgery. In essence transgender men illegitimately misappropriate the protections society has given women. Unlike Transgender misappropriation, cultural misappropriation is fallacy, the actions it pretends to definite are nothing more than mankind's incredibly strong desire to imitate what it sees as productive or pleasurable; in other words if is one of the driving forces of biological evolution, but transgender misappropriation steals from women and by doing so eliminates any possiblity of equity.

This has also been part of the way Critical Race Theory is being taught in both universities and K12. CRT is being used to discount and demonize science and math. Particular to this discussion CRT teaches gender and biological sex are the same, both being purely of social construct, resulting in the demonization of the science of biology and those stating simple biological facts, who are being declared transphobic and ostracized from schools, academic and even non-academic employment. It is literally become a form of totalitarianism where people are being forced to renounce reality; if you can force people to deny what they know is factual, you will have complete control over them. ‘Power is in tearing human minds to pieces and putting them together again in new shapes of your own choosing.’ George Orwell 

Women are being told they should accept intact males (in one poll 23% of transsexuals said they are heterosexual*) into their previously safe places. Specifically lesbians are told to accept (even as sexual partners) intact trans men that identify as lesbians, and women of all ages and sexual persuasions need to just deal with being in close proximity to naked men with penises. In essence we should all be TERFs** in order to protect the women in our society.

*https://www.thetaskforce.org/wonky-wednesday-trans-people-sexual-orientation/

**Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminist.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Conservative/comments/b6cig1/the_transgender_war_on_women/

The Lie of Democrat Inclusion

Since President Obama, the Democrats made what appears to be a permanent turn to the extreme left; the days of the party of the working class and Bluedog (aka fiscally conservative) Democrats simply disappeared in a puff of progressive smoke. Interestingly the Democrats made no secret of their abandoning of the middle class worker, which is literally neocommunist saying they no longer cared about the proletariat; instead they were about inclusion and developing a collective of minorities and the oppressed. But something strange happened along the way, instead of being inclusive, they became exclusive to only those with a similar world view. And like the Communist Party of the 1950, you are either all in or cast out as a hater and racist.

What quickly has become apparent is Democrats now judge any and every identity as political. In other words, you are not black due to the color of your skin, but by your political worldview. Blacks that don't kowtow to the the primarily white Democrat political worldview are labeled black white supremacist; homosexuals with a conservative political view are homophobic and racist; conservative women are misogynist and racist, conservative Hispanics are called white Hispanics and even those that believe in human sexual biology are transphobic and of course racist. 

The point being that Democrats are not inclusive or even invested in identity politics, they call anyone, regardless of their identity racist if they vary in the lest from the new Democrat political worldview and further redefine identity by the same worldview. In other words you can not be black, Hispanic, female, homosexual, or transsexual if you don't think like they do. I really believe most Democrats think this is insane, but most must think they must play along or be ejected and have there political lives ruined forever.

 

Understanding Opiate Addiction

Many, even doctors do no understand why people become addicted to opiates. First it's important to understand that taking opiates mimics what the body does naturally. Opiates can disrupt this natural process which can lead to addiction. The natural system that opiates mimic is primarily the Dopamine system. Simplified, Dopamine is a neurotransmitter that your body uses to reward, reinforce positive behavior and relieve pain (it can also be the agent of feeling awe and belonging). Again simplified your body has a reservoir of Dopamine and a number of Dopamine/ opiate receptors. When you do something that is positive for your body (eating, exercising, having sex), your brain rewards you by releasing Dopamine which is absorbed by your Dopamine/ opiate receptors and you feel good; the Dopamine will then be recycled back into the reservoir. Interestingly, your brain also releases Dopamine when you listen to music, meditate and pray among other things we really don't understand. As I said it also relives pain. If you have ever stubbed your toe or caught you fingers in a door, you will remember after about 30 seconds to a minute, you will have a warm feeling and the pain will subside for a short while; this is the Dopamine system at work. It is also worth noting that opiates are a narcotic, which means it systemically slows down the workings of the body, including the heart; take too much and the heart will stop. To counter this a substance called NARCAN is available. What NARCAN does is block the Dopamine/ opiate receptors which counters the affect of the opiates.

When you take opiates, they mimic Dopamine but it flushes your Dopamine/ opiate receptors with a massive amount of a Dopamine like chemical, you feel very rewarded, and the pain goes away. The problem is your body is designed to be very efficient and frugal. Because opiates create an excess amount of Dopamine, as you continue to take opiates, your body reacts to what it sees as an overabundance, so depletes it's reservoir of Dopamine and starts shutting down receptors; this is what causes a tolerance to opiates requiring you to take more to get the same effect. 

If you stop taking the opiates, you will then go through a withdrawal period as the remnants of the opiates you are taking is processed out of your body, refereed to as detox. If that were all there was to opiate use and addiction would not be the problem that it is. First, this is a physical addiction. After the detox period, there is still the issue of your body returning to homeostasis, eg normal. Your body does not immediately refill it's reservoir with Dopamine and turn the opiate receptors back on; this can take, weeks, months and even years and is referred to as PAWS or Post Acute Withdraw Symptoms. During this time, your body will not be able reward you for almost anything, this is the misery of withdrawal. Nothing that you do will result in your feeling good, just the constant pain that goes along with being alive with no positive reinforcement for anything that you do. The two exceptions seem to be the relief of extreme pain and submersion in "hot as you can stand" water; the relief of/by extreme pain response can result in self injury simply to reduce the withdraw or PAWS.

Further there is also the physiological addiction, where the user even after their system has returned to something approaching normal (the tolerance they developed may never completely go away), will forever want to experience the initial high the had with their first opiate use. I also find it disingenuous to say opiates are safe when taken as directed. Again the problem is tolerance and dependency can begin almost immediately, and if the doctor is not monitoring the patient, their opiate use can quickly spiral out of control. In other words, a prescribing doctor should assume if not properly monitored, a patient will start abusing their medication, simply because of the known additive nature of the drug.

I have heard that addiction is nothing more than weakness or a lack of self control; well yes and no. First of all, as I explained there is a physiological reason for addiction that goes beyond simply taking opiates to feel good. Most that become addicted to opiates  do not start off as drug abusers, they are usually prescribed opiates by a doctor to relive pain. However, since many doctors don't really understand the nature of drug addiction, they do a very poor job of monitoring their patients whom they have prescribed opiates, which can lead to opiate dependence and addiction. People also react to opiates in different ways. To some opiates cause them to be drowsy and out of touch, however others react in an opposite way. With many people opiates cause a feeling of exhilaration and added energy, these are the people most likely to become addicted. Further, people vary greatly in their ability to withstand withdrawal symptoms and/or PAWS. This is not really a matter of will power, but more a matter genetics and/or environmental factors. Further, the use of opiates also reduce ones ability to withstand low level pain without the use of opiates; in other words, ones pain threshold is significantly reduced with the use of opiates, because the body has fewer resources to deal with low level pain. 

To put all this in prospective, as a result of the Covid-19 lock downs, more than 100,000 people a year (2020 and 2021) have died from over dosing of opiates (an increase of 28% over 2019), making opiate addiction approximately the number 8 cause of deaths in the US. While the increase of fentanyl (fentanyl is 50 times more potent than heroin which makes dosing much more difficult and potentially fatal)  laced drugs is partially to blame, but the Covid-19 lock downs have caused universal increases in drug and alcohol use/ abuse, depressions and other mental breakdowns, suicides and domestic violence. To say that these overdoses by drug addicts are all simply the lack of self control would seem to be based on ignorance as it completely ignores the physiological causes and the lack of opiates being properly administered by seemingly clueless medical professionals.

Mainstream Media Forced the Riddenhouse Narrative so Hard it Broke

In my last blog I showed how practically everything that was written by the mainstream media about the Riddenhouse trial was a lie. What has also become obvious is this was to force their white supremacy narrative for which they have few if any real examples to report on.

Here are some examples I posted earlier; "Riddenhouse is a white supremacist"; the truth is Riddenhouse is not associated with any groups at all, other than idolizing police officers. "Riddenhouse carried his AR-15 across state lines"; no Riddenhouse Ar-15 was bought for him by a friend who lives in Kenosha and was kept their by his friend (every lying account says he crossed state lines with his AR-15,  as if there was something wrong or illegal about it, but neither is true. The lie is likely looking for a nexus to a federal violation so the FBI and DOJ could charge Riddenhouse with a federal violation). "Riddenhouse was a vigilante"; no, Riddenhouse went to Kenosha to protect property and provide first aid to those who were injured in the rioting (prior to the shootings he was filmed discussing this very thing as he showed off his first-aid kit).

 Riddenhouse actually spent the previous day removing graffiti from a school in Kenosha. 

Probably the worst attempt to force the white supremacist narrative was several mainstream reports that Riddenhouse shot three black men, even though they were white; one was a child rapist, one had a history of domestic violence and the surviving subject was pointing a hand gun at Riddenhouse, when Riddenhouse shot him. 

There is also the fact "The riots were sparked by the officer-involved shooting of Jacob Blake, a black man. Blake is still alive, though everyone on the left thought he was dead. This was the first sign that liberal America has no clue what's going on." From Townhall.com 

There are also those playing the what if game. What if Riddenhouse had been black? Would the outcome had been the same? The left says no, but they reality is we don't know. First and foremost, race was simply not a fact in this case, but the left can't let it go. As my dad used to say, if the dog would not have stopped to shit it would have caught the rabbit; or would it have? Rabbits are fast and live in holes in the ground. What didn't happen, didn't happen; there numerous scenarios that could have played out from a murder conviction  to tha DA not even filing charges, but the outcome can never be known so the speculation is nothing more than race  baiting.

Finally we have a slew of elected Democrats villianizing Riddenhouse, calling him a white supremacist and vigilante, before any facts were known and even after he was found not guilty. President Biden is especially guilty of this, saying he was angry at the verdict even though he admitted not following the trial and refused to comment on his earlier and unsubstantiated accusation that Riddenhouse was a white supremacist. 

Fortunately, as a result of the press coverage of the verdict, at least the fact the subjects shot by Riddenhouse were white is becoming more common knowledge, and people are finally starting to question, how a white kid, shootings three white men is the act of a white supremacist.

The Blood From Kyle Riddenhouse Acquittal Riots On the Hands of the Lying Media

This post contains large parts of an article reposted by Bari Weiss. Since the post is available only to those that pay a fee, I can't link to it directly, but have included the title and a link to substack.

The Media's Verdict on Kyle RittenhouseWhy so many got this story so wrong.

https://substack.com/profile/2067309-bari-weiss

The left has sceamed to anyone that will listen, Kyle Riddenhouse is a "17 year old white supremacist domestic terrorist drove across state lines, armed with an AR 15. He shot and killed 2 people who had assembled to affirm the value, dignity, and worth of Black lives"; most of this is a complete fabrication. As shown below, the mainstream media lied and lied and lied and lied ... about what really happened.

"First, the idea that Kyle Rittenhouse was a white supremacist.

There was zero evidence that Rittenhouse was connected to white supremacist groups at the time of the shooting. He was a Trump supporter, yes, though he wasn’t old enough to vote. He was an admirer of police and firefighters, also true. He was a lifeguard. He’d been part of a “police explorer” program, and was also a firefighter/EMT cadet with the fire department in Antioch, Illinois, where he lived with his mom and two sisters.

That Rittenhouse had no connection to Kenosha.

In addition to having a job in Kenosha, Rittenhouse testified that much of his family lived there: his father, his grandma, his aunt and uncle, and his cousins. He also testified that on the morning of the shootings, he went downtown with his sister and friends to see the damage done by rioting the night before, and spent about two hours cleaning graffiti off of the local high school.

That Rittenhouse drove across state lines with a gun that night to oppose the protests.

This was a line that we heard constantly—never mind that Antioch, Illinois, is about 20 miles from Kenosha, Wisconsin. As the trial has shown, Kyle Rittenhouse did not travel to Kenosha to oppose protesters. He testified under oath that he had traveled to Kenosha for his job the night before the shootings, and was staying at a friend’s house. 

So what about the gun?

Rittenhouse didn’t bring the gun to Kenosha. The gun was purchased for Rittenhouse months earlier by a friend and stored in Kenosha at the home of that friend’s stepfather, as then-17-year-old Rittenhouse was too young to purchase it.

But it was illegal for him to even have the gun given that he wasn’t yet 18 years old, right?

That is not true. Under Wisconsin law, 17-year-olds are prohibited from carrying rifles only if they are short-barreled. The weapon Rittenhouse was carrying was not short-barreled. Which is why, during closing arguments, the court threw out the charge.

He was out there looking for a fight, and he got one: He killed two people and severely wounded a third.

Unless there’s evidence we haven’t seen, there’s no clear indication that Rittenhouse sought to kill anyone. What we know is that he showed up with a first aid kit and an AR-15-style rifle. Video evidence, and Rittenhouse’s own testimony, indicates that he offered medical assistance to protestors and ran with a fire extinguisher to try to put out fires—and that later, after being pursued, he killed two people, Joseph Rosenbaum and Anthony Huber, and severely wounded a third. Both video evidence and the only living person that Rittenhouse shot that night, Gaige Grosskreutz, undermined the idea that Rittenhouse was simply an aggressor looking for a fight. During cross examination Grosskreutz acknowledged that Rittenhouse shot him only after Grosskreutz had pointed his own gun at Rittenhouse. Here’s how it went down:

Prosecutor: When you were standing three to five feet from him with your arms up in the air, he never fired, right?

Grosskreutz: Correct. 

Prosecutor: It wasn't until you pointed your gun at him, advanced on him with your gun—now your hand’s down pointed at him—that he fired, right? 

Grosskreutz: Correct.

Had the people Rittenhouse shot, as Pressley claims, “assembled to affirm the value, dignity, and worth of Black lives”?

Watch this video of Joseph Rosenbaum and ask yourself if that is how you would describe this person:

Rosenbaum, 36, had spent years of his life in prison because he was a convicted sex offender. The morning he was killed, Rosenbaum was released from a Milwaukee hospital where he had been admitted after a suicide attempt. Ryan Balch, another witness for the prosecution, testified that Rosenbaum threatened both Balch and Rittenhouse saying, “If I catch you guys alone tonight, I’m gonna fucking kill you.”

The point is the left has a message and it will lie and destroy lives to try and push their agenda. So bad is their propaganda, they have resorted to callings blacks white supremacist if they do not parrot the world view of their self appointed old white Democrat masters; yes Democrat Jim Crow never died and is still alive with  the main street media and CRT that demands the return of segregation a the reason is the same as was voiced by the racist Southern Democrats; it's for their protection.

CRT Nuance Does Not Belong in K12

I recently watched a podcast were an elitist progressive countered a parent's argument regarding having a say in their child's education, by saying the parents don't understand  the nuance of being an educator. It made me think that there really is no, or should not be any nuance in K12 education. The children need to learn reading, writing, arithmetic, history and civics. Nuance only enters the picture when teachers try to interject indoctrination and social engineering. This of course is from the Democrats that have a history of racism that goes back to their inception. And all anyone has to do is read the racist statements President Biden has made throughout his career to know it has not stopped (when candidate  Obama first came on the scene Biden remarked  on how remarkable it was he has an articulate and clean black man; apparently viewing other black politicians as inarticulate  and dirty).  A good example is CRT, which is one of the most racist theories ever created. It reverses MLK Jr dream of a color blind society where people are judged by the content of their character,  to a hellish world where one is only judged by their identity and assuming all individuals  within any group all think the same and are constantly being assailed and subjugated by the white race. This goes along with the Democrat skewed version of identity politics, where minorities are defined not by the color of their skin, sex or sexual preference, but by their political worldview. As then candidate Joe Biden said, if you don't vote Democrat, you're not black. IOW, unless you kowtow to the old white Democrat elite, you can not even define yourself by your own skin color. The point being, in most ways, the Democrats only play identity politics if the person identifies as a Democrat, other wise they do not have the right to identify themselves by their sex, skin color sexual preference; you either kowtow with the Democrat elite or you are a white supremacist, regardless of your skin color (nothing brings out Democrat's blatant  racism than a black conservative; it is truly appalling to listen to such vile and naked hatred that the left has for blacks that don't kowtow to old white liberals thinking; its black liberalsthat are the true ventriloquist dummies. And this is what CRT teaches.

The Extreme Racsim of CRT and the Left

 Proverbs 24

30 I walked by the field of a lazy person,

the vineyard of one with no common sense.

31 I saw that it was overgrown with nettles.

It was covered with weeds,

and its walls were broken down.

32 Then, as I looked and thought about it,

I learned this lesson:

33 A little extra sleep, a little more slumber,

a little folding of the hands to rest—

34 then poverty will pounce on you like a bandit;

scarcity will attack you like an armed robber.

 

If one is to take CRT  (Critical Race Theory), as it is being taught in K-12, the question needs to be asked, what do the positive social behaviors of western culture with the accusations of“white-supremacy"; examples are showing up on time, the STEM fields (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) “worship of the written word,” “individualism” and “objectivity” "competence". "merit", "integration", equality,  and even "diversity". CRT is a race obsessive belief system, that started in US Law Schools, but quickly expanded into the humanities and is now being forced in public schools (K-12) that teaches racial hatred and  tribalism, where one's identity or tribe defines them, resulting in white supremacy and racial; one could actually say that CRT creates a white supremacy worldview where it did even exist before. And this is not even necessarily of social construct, but a result of your birth, or a birth right so to speak.   It also teaches that western culture has rigged society from it's inception in a way to keep the white race in power and  oppress minorities, specifically blacks. The idea that one can be born an oppressor is the same argument Hitler made about the Jews, so you have CRT and groups like antifa and BLM, embracing the most chilling aspect of NAZI fascism.

Much of this is warmed over Marxism Critical Theory where economic inequality, is replaced with racial oppressor vs the oppressed; in essence it's about giving up individual freedoms in the name of the security and fairness rabbit hole; IOW everyone be economically reduced to the lost common denominator with equal oppression. What has been added is the racism that has always been endemic in leftist intellectualism, specifically against blacks.. The fact is the left views blacks as inferior, so any argument of  equality of opportunity is moot in the mind of the left Intelligentsia. What is the point of a level playing field if one the of the teams is so inferior that are simply incapable of winning, regardless of any advantage or lack there of. If one looks at the history of western culture, there has always been a emphases on intelligence, aka cognitive ability. But if you are of the belief that blacks lack the cognitive ability of other races, than one could say, as does the left, that the deck is always been stacked against blacks even when equality of opportunity exists. BTW, I say blacks because the left has concentrated on the black race for the majority of their rhetoric (eg BLM) and it is the black race that is the primary victim of Democrat and left wing racism.

In many ways CRT is simply a hyper version of what has been called the soft racism from the left (BTW there is no such thing as soft racism, it is just as hard core racist as southern Democrat slavery). For years, Democrats in the US have insisted that blacks simply can not compete against whites, with or without a level playing field, hence affirmative action and black studies,  programs designed to circumvent the lack of preparedness for higher education, much of which is due the poor education and the lack of socialization of blacks in Democrat run cities. These government run ghettos, where gang warfare, rampant drug use, poverty,  and a lack of family structure, has lead to a lack of education and a predisposition towards the lack of personal responsibility, based on ones victim-hood. For decades blacks have been told they are not to blame for their anti-social behavior, yet their anti-social behavior is the primary barrier that stops blacks from becoming part of mainstream America and economic prosperity. This is true, even though the leadership demographics of these run these cities, are almost always a large black majority, yet the social justice warriors of CRT blames the oppression of  blacks is the result of them having been excluded from positions responsibility and power. This history of the destruction of the black family and culture due to the lefts belief in black inferiority was well documented by Lawrence Soloman   Systemic Racism Exists

So what does CRT offer? The answer is chilling; social disintegration and racial hatred in the name of fairness. The end game is of course Communism; make western culture the scapegoat of the fact that life lacks fairness, lie about the fact that blacks are excluded from power and decision making and offer up totalitarian forced equality (aka equity) as the answer. In other words fairness at all costs, even if it destroys the free world and makes everyone hate each other to do it. But even worse, by creating the myth that one can be born racist solely on ones identity,  CRT  teaches children how to be racists, instilling in them something akin to racial hatred in the name of indoctrination toward a political belief system that has always been based on lies. "They knew what they were doing was a lie. I knew what they were doing was a lie. Everybody here knows what they were doing is a lie. They know that we know they’re lying and yet they continue to lie and they lied and they lied and they lied." If the 20th century taught us anything it is the end result of totalitarian utopia is worse than death, it is living hell