Wednesday, July 21, 2021

Wow! ER On A Roll Again!

Self explanatory. This first one is disturbing, both for its substance as well as for the stupidity of jumping on the lockdown bandwagon just as Americans are finally wising up:

This next one I really loved--Wake up Americans!


  1. I don’t believe Greg Abbott or Ron DeSantis will go for lockdowns again….

  2. The gop has the Nickname the stupid party for a reason…

  3. I'm not particularly fond of the atheist bashing from Emerald. I could go on rants for days about the neocon Christian progressives pretending to be conservatives... Mitch McConnell is only proving my point on that with his vaccine lunacy.

    Most atheist I have met/know are hard core conservative or slightly more libertarian leaning, being that we're only 3% of the US population I think it's a unfair jab.

    Yes I am atheist, atheist doesn't equate to being disingenuous or disrespectful of others beliefs. It's also doesn't make us ignorant of religion. I don't care if you Christian Mormon, Islamic or Jewish I can hold my own in respectful knowledge of all of them.

    Also, and FWIW this has been one of the very few forums on the internet that I've ever felt comfortable stating the above.

    Most of the liberal progressives I know and I oddly seem to know a lot of them, especially teachers, identify rather strongly as Christian. Very few of them even identify as agnostic and are, at best... very wishy-washy about that.

    Agnostics are also only about 3% of the US population.

    I see Emeralds comment as unfair shot across the bow of religious generalization. To be clear, I'm not offended, it's just IMHO ignorantly inaccurate and unfair.

    1. Would it be unfair or just grossly ignorant and inaccurate to point out that you've misread what ER actually said?

      NO atheist is actually conservative. It's a contradiction in terms.

      That doesn't mean I have to take self ID of any sort--including Christian--seriously.

    2. I would add that it's a tweet, with all the limitations that entails.

      I take atheist in this context as a catch-all for non- Christian. A bit unfair perhaps, but atheists aren't the audience.

      Marxists always seem to be atheists. Not claiming any sort of exhaustive knowledge in this respect, but I imagine that an atheist must either be a "live and let live" libertarian or an "execute everyone who stands in the way" utopian.

    3. It seems like pretty basic common sense: If you want your kids to grow up Christian don't send them to be taught by atheists. Which increasingly means, Don't send them to government schools, since your government is increasingly hostile to Christianity.

    4. Obviously there are still Christians teaching in government schools, but that's pretty much an undercover occupation, due to SCOTUS.

    5. @mark

      I can confirm your last thought. My daughter teaches in a county school in a blue county between Dc and Baltimore and she feels tremendous pressure to keep her non-conformist thoughts to herself, even to the point of not talking too loudly w me in local restaurants in case the informants are near. She is a believer and could likely work elsewhere but you know the story--- pay and generous health care benefits.


    6. Only 3 percent? Hard to believe. Just judging by the size of the pro-abortion crowd its more than 3%.

    7. @ Mark, Mister, Anon

      Can you elaborate please, honestly trying to understand your POV / statement. "NO atheist is actually conservative. It's a contradiction in terms." On its face I disagree, I don't want to assume but I believe you are saying that "politically conservative" equals religious and that the two are inseparably intertwined?

      I don't see ones political beliefs, leanings, morals, etc as part of a religious sect and/or vice versa. They can be shared equally.

      "If you want to raise children who are Christians, then you must give them a Christian education."

      That seems (as you stated) pretty straight forward or logical.

      "What you must not do is allow them to be educated by atheists from kindergarten to college, and then be surprised by the result."

      I take issue with the use of word atheist as atheist does not equal "other than Christian" as being applied by Mister, the word for that is "secular". It also does not equal "anti christian". Either she misspoke or using a generalization but unequivocally it was implied that you're going to end up with something bad from your children.

      Sorry, I strongly object to that!!!

      Marxism, liberalism, progressive, etc are not "atheist", Marx relied heavily on individual spiritualism in much of his early writings, he just saw "the Church (s)" as a enemy of his own brand of quasi freaky religion of state. The two sides can't exist in that vacuum of dumb.

      Mister and Anon are both lending to why I made my post / have taken exception to the use of the label. (I'm not offended)

      @ Mister,

      "live and let live" libertarian or an "execute everyone who stands in the way" utopian."

      Maybe more so "to thy own self be true", I can only speak for myself of course. "Live and let live" I think applies to any conservative for the larger part. Let people be and do their own thing, if it doesn't effect me or you as a person why do I?, should I care?

      Individualism, not as a absolute may be a better way to say it. I am accountable to myself, I have no excuses for my mistakes or transgressions. Our country wasn't founded on everyone plowing off on their own agendas. However it also wasn't founded on collectivism forced into a bottle, there is a WIDE grey area there. Many of our forefathers were judao/christian but also deists.

      "Execute everyone who stands..." I would say is way off base and lends to progressive thinking. That can be found on both right and left sides of the spectrum. Everyone *opposed* needs to be shot, jailed, killed or ran off.

      Neocon= constitutionally speaking, from the point of progressive ideology.


      "Only 3 percent? Hard to believe.."

      Keep in mind that you may connect your faith to pro/anti on that subject but that doesn't mean others do. I know many christians who are Pro and I know some atheist who are very Con. To connect the idea of "life being precious" (or not) isn't indicative to ones religious beliefs.

      But yes, atheist are only about 3% of the population.

      Where it may be surprising to some, we home school our daughter (7), part of her curriculum is religious studies.We teach them from a standpoint of knowledge, morals and historical value.

      Why do we do that?... Because no one can deny the values found there. Being atheist doesn't mean you are "anti religious". It is important to us that she understands everyone's beliefs, what they are and why they have them.

      In closing (on this post at least), I enjoy these conversations but it's rare I have them online. It's too easy to strike a nerve in misinterpreting something.

      I think atheism gets a bad wrap and is very misunderstood in general or gets misapplied where it doesn't belong.

    8. @devilman,
      I appreciate the willingness to pursue these topics in this forum.

      Just to clarify a bit: I know that it is not only atheists in the "execute" camp and did not mean to suggest otherwise. Plenty of history there..

    9. @mistrc,

      No worries at all, I didn't take it black or white.

      I've come to learn here that sans a few oddities this forum is made of up very good people seeking to understand and share ideas, not project them.

  4. OT - re Trump's lawsuit against BigTech...

    Barnes is on a rant about the grifter lawyers who are working with Trump - a bunch of real estate lawyers, Greta van Sustern's husband, etc...

    According to Barnes and Frei, the suit is designed to fail...

    They completely ignore Justice Thomas's outline of what would succeed...

    this is an outtake (19 mins) from one of Barnes and Frei's conversations:


    1. I heard the same discussion between Barnes and Rich Baris last week on their "What are the Odds" podcast. I think Trump is past his sell by date. I know that the movement wants him back in the WH, but it seems pretty clear to me that he hasn't learned much of anything for years. Yes, he was backstabbed. Yes, he had enemies on all sides. Granted. However, his handling of Covid was disastrous. He let Fauci, Birx, and the WH press corps destroy his presidency. Why no outside experts like Ionnidis, Bhatacharya, Kuldorff, Gupta to offset the poisonous bureaucrats? Now Trump is still advised by Bill Stepien, Justin Clark and other losers who allowed the totally chaotic response to Nov. 3rd. Trump continues to endorse bad candidates at his advisor's behest.

      We have all lamented the lousy hand that Trump was dealt walking into D.C. surrounded by hyaenas. At some point a leader has to take responsibility for the mistakes. Read Patrick Byrne's "Rigged," look at what Trump is doing and saying now, and ask yourself if this is the guy you want to save the country.

      I don't know who the alternative is right now, but the bloom is off Trump's rose for me.

    2. @PDQ. I guess in this information age we must all make our decision about how much to trust the expertise of those who provide information to us, and our own expertise in evaluating it. I think you are spectacularly wrong about Trump, for almost precisely the reasons you give for losing faith in him. I think we risk massive over-simplification to presume that the determinative factor in Trump's decision about which candidate to support in a race is the recommendation of Bill Steppian. If you don't recognize by now that it's both parties and all their infrastructure that Trump is fighting for control of the government and that Trump is actually fighting them while you and I sit and watch and carp about his performance, and at the same time pretend there is no fight, then I imagine you are a bit disappointed in Trump. Me I'm grateful that he is willing to fight. Mark A

    3. He was never the guy I wanted. He was just the guy who answered the call.

      You admit you can't think of anyone else. And, really, no one will be able to effect meaningful and lasting change until there's 60 America First senators.

      I'm not holding my breath.

    4. @quig

      Heard that too and some of their criticism is unfair, but one point Barnes and Baris make that rings true is that Trump's best and highest use is doing what he does best: showman, marketer, charismatic standard bearer. Don't ask him or expect him to be an architect or engineer needed to reset and restart the American republic. That's not his strength. But we absolutely need someone who can rally patriots around a common cause and common identity. No one else out there even comes close. Trump is uniquely positioned to appeal to all classes, races, and callings. But leave the policy details and staffing to people gifted in those areas.


    5. that old saying comes to mind:

      every hero has feet of clay


    6. Look, Trump is a great marketer and a fighter. Both are required, but that is not enough. I don't suggest that Stepien et al are guiding all his decisions. If they were, it would be easy to fix. I am nowhere near the first person to lament his awful personnel decisions. My point is that it kept happening THROUGHOUT his administration. Aside from the back stabbers like McMasters, Mattis, Tillerson, Cohen, and Bolton you had veritable freak shows like Omorosa, Scaramucci causing constant distraction. Who hired these morons? Who put up with them?

      I know all the excuses for why the buck didn't stop with Trump. I know that he has no replacement on the near horizon. I'll just say again that I have little confidence in his demonstrated ability to learn from his own major mistakes. In real estate when you eff up big time, you go BK and start over again. Well, he went BK in 2020, but do you really expect me to accept that he spent November and December profitably? Worse yet, how many freaking tweets did I read of his complaining about how mail-in ballots was going to invite fraud? And what kind of legal response did he marshal against that? Pretty disjointed from what we could see on the surface.

      I'm sorry things ended the way they did. If it's Trump in 2024 I will be walking my precinct for him here in AZ. All I am saying is that if he doesn't get some new talent--and listen to them--I will not be surprised to see fatal mistakes repeated. (note to PDJT: fire every single person that it is possible to fire on Jan 20, 2025. Go as low into every organization as is legally possible).

    7. Yep. I get it.
      We're very much between a rock and a hard place.


    I have been looking for THE SCIENCE™ that shows masks are effective for over a year now. The only RCT of which I am aware is the one from Denmark where 6,000 subjects were followed. It went unpublished for months because the medical cartel decided that its results were unhelpful to the cause. It showed a "possible" miniscule value for masks at best. The CDC's own meta study from 2020 about masks and influenza showed no value in mask wearing. WHY IN THE HECK AREN'T REPUBLICAN POLITICIANS SCREAMING FROM THE ROOFTOPS TO SEE THE SCIENCE behind the ongoing craze?! Where are the receipts? This drives me bonkers. Correlation doesn't mean causation, but LACK of correlation sure as heck means LACK of causation! Mask mandates vs. infection curves show zero correlation everywhere around the world and in all 50 United States. Why do Fauci and an army of unnamed 'health officials' get to keep rationalizing g mask mandates based on ‘scientific evidence’ that HAS NEVER BEEN ADDUCED? WHERE IS IT? WE WANT TO SEE IT? WHY ARE GOP POLS NOT DEMANDING TO SEE IT?

    This is beyond insane. This is demonic. This is evil.

    1. I was thinking along similar lines on my walk this morning.

    2. Share your outrage quig buuuut...

      I think we all *know* deep down why no Republican (in Congress i think you mean) says anything. They are in on it. They are quiescent. They either benefit from the criminal enterprise that is federal government or they are persuaded to keep silent for whatever reason.

      The real question is what can be done? No one has a good answer to this yet except maybe throw sand in the gears at every opportunity. Grind this thing to a halt so no one is getting the benefit of our labors and assets. A general strike would not be out of line. They seem to have a wonderful effect in France where it's practically a national pastime. You have to hand it to Martin Luther King jr. and the civil rights movement of the 60s w nonviolent resistance. They forced a serious change that nobody in dc wanted. It may have gone off the rails and been hijacked later but they got change.

      What about ordinary Americans?


    3. Yeah, of course they are quiet for the same reason that they allow themselves to be played in spending negotiations and everything else. They would rather be in the minority because the opportunity for graft is so much greater (the majority has to offer sweeteners to the minority) and the responsibility is so much less.

      I've been saying for quite a while that the perfectly legal solution is for the right to take to the streets en masse and shut down the country for a day. Then, if no changes ensue, shut it down for a week. After that it's hard to imagine how even the deep state would be crazy enough to keep the totalitarian pressure on.

      What have we got to lose?


      Shows masks are garbage.

    5. "A Covid viral particle is around 100 nanometres, material gaps in blue surgical masks are up to 1,000 times that size, cloth mask gaps can be 500,000 times the size."

      Medical Advisor to SAGE (the so-called experts running the Covid thingie in the UK)

      Been wearing my mosquitoes through the chain-link fence this past year, but now I see I'm exaggerating the size of the mosquito compared to the gap in the chain-link fence by beteen 1,000 and 500,000.

      My bad.

      Great blog Mark. You've become my go-to.


    6. I guess you didn't like my comment, Mark?

      I thought it was very descriptive and a useful graphic for arguing with drones.

  6. I'm not locking down, and I'm never wearing the mast again or getting any experimental gene therapy. I'll forego services, even medical services, if that's what it takes. I can provide my own food. I don't need or want anything from the Government.
    If I die, then I die. I don't want to live on my knees. If they come for me, then we'll see how it goes. I don't care.

    1. My wife and i talked about this. If our state reimposes lockdowns etc this fall we are selling the house and moving to TN or FL, somewhere not yet authoritarian.