A Victory For Freedom Of Speech

Having been routinely shadow banned on Facebook (there is a Right Wing Granny group on Facebook, please join), I appreciate the fact that Texas is fighting the censorship that Big Tech has imposed on conservatives in recent years. It seems that there may be an end to that censorship. As I write this, a friend’s post has been thoroughly blacked out because Facebook didn’t think anyone should be allowed to see it.

On Tuesday, Fox News reported the following:

A federal appeals court upheld a Texas law on Friday that seeks to curb censorship by social media platforms. The ruling, a major victory for Republicans who charge companies like Twitter and Facebook are limiting free speech, is a step in a major legal battle that could end up at the Supreme Court.

The lawsuit is challenging HB 20, a Texas bill signed into law by Gov. Greg Abbott that regulates social media platforms with more than 50 million monthly users, which includes Google, Facebook and Twitter, and says they cannot censor or limit users’ speech based on viewpoint expression. 

In his opinion, Federal Judge Andrew S. Oldham of the Fifth Circuit said the platforms argued for “a rather odd inversion of the First Amendment” that “buried somewhere in the person’s enumerated right to free speech lies a corporation’s unenumerated right to muzzle speech.”

“Today we reject the idea that corporations have a freewheeling First Amendment right to censor what people say,” Judge Oldham continued.

The article notes:

Friday’s ruling created what is known as a “circuit split,” since the eleventh circuit struck down a similar social media law in Florida. A circuit split generally increases the likelihood of the Supreme Court taking up a case.

It will be interesting to see if the Supreme Court will take the case and what their ruling will be. It is also interesting to see if this case settled  before the mid-term election.

Is Anyone Surprised?

On Thursday, The Daily Wire posted an article about Joe Rogan’s recent interview of Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg. Mark Zuckerberg stated that he was approached by the FBI and told to be aware of Russian propaganda before the New York Post published the Hunter Biden laptop story.

The article reports:

“I mean, basically, the background here is the FBI, I think, basically came to us, some folks on our team, and was like, ‘Hey, just so you know, like, you should be on high alert. There was, we thought that there was a lot of Russian propaganda in the 2016 election. We have it on notice that basically, there’s about to be some kind of dump that’s similar to that. So just be vigilant,’” Zuckerberg said.

“So our protocol is different from Twitter’s. What Twitter did is they said, ‘You can’t share this at all.’ We didn’t do that,” Zuckerberg continued. “What we do is we have, if something was reported to us as potentially misinformation, important misinformation, we also use third-party fact-checking program, because we don’t want to be deciding what’s true and false. And for the — I think it was five or seven days when it was basically being determined whether it was false, the distribution on Facebook was decreased, but people were still allowed to share it. So you could still share it; you could still consume it.”

Zuckerberg said that the reduced distribution on the platform meant that the story was ranked lower in people’s newsfeeds “so fewer people saw it than would have otherwise.”

On Thursday The Western Journal reported:

His (Zuckerberg) admission of FBI involvement in Big Tech censorship follows whistleblower claims of an organized operation to prevent a meaningful investigation of Hunter Biden before the 2020 presidential election.

NewsBusters polling suggests that as many as 9.4 percent of Biden voters in swing states would’ve reconsidered their vote if they had had full knowledge of the Hunter Biden controversy.

We have ceded a tremendous amount of power to social media. Maybe it is time to take some of that power back and make sure social media is an open, unbiased place to express opinions.

Investigating Social Media Censorship

On July 14th, The Conservative Review posted an article about the ongoing battle between Twitter and free speech. For a real analysis of exactly who and what Twitter is, please read this article from The Conservative Treehouse.

The article at The Conservative Review reports:

Can Congress pass a law requiring that all platforms of speech censor any negative comment about Pfizer? “Well, of course not,” you will say, “it violates the First Amendment.” In that case, why should it be different when the executive branch works intimately with government-created and liability-protected monopolies to zap anyone’s Twitter account who is critical of Pfizer and its magical products? That is not free market or private enterprise; it is the worst form of fascism, and now a new federal court ruling might bring this point to life.

On Tuesday, a federal judge in Louisiana granted the request from the Louisiana and Missouri attorneys general for discovery to collect documents linking the Biden administration to social media censorship. Thanks to this important order, we might be able to discover the scope of collaboration between government and Twitter and Facebook to censor stories (and people) pertaining to the Hunter Biden laptop story, the origins of COVID-19, the efficacy of masks and lockdowns, and election integrity.

On May 5, Missouri AG Eric Schmitt and Louisiana AG Jeff Landry filed a First Amendment complaint against the Biden administration in the Western District of Louisiana alleging that the administration violated the Free Speech Clause by working with the tech giants to label all dissenting viewpoints on the aforementioned issues as “misinformation.” They alleged that this effort is being led by a “Disinformation Governance Board” (“DGB”) within the Department of Homeland Security.

The article concludes:

While the legal dispute plays out in court, it’s time for conservatives in the legislatures to hit back at the RINO governors for continuing to act as if anything COVID-related – be it a vaccine or mask mandate – is somehow coming from the private sector. The government mandated it for some, censored opposing viewpoints, absolved pharma of liability, paid for the product, distributed it, and marketed it. The notion that private actors endorsing these policies is an exercise in free-market capitalism is absurd. It is the responsibility of the state to interpose against such tyranny by banning companies from joining in with the federal policies.

We saw this done very effectively when the Florida Department of Health recommended against the baby shots and refused to distribute them. Publix actually decided on its own to follow the guidance of Florida rather than the federal government. It demonstrates that so much of this enforcement in the private sector is being done with the federal boot on companies’ necks. Those Republicans who hide behind affinity for the “private” sector and free markets to allow federal tyranny, censorship, and persecution to continue are complicit in the worst form of fascism.
The fact that private monopolies get roped into government fascism doesn’t ameliorate the pig; it makes it even more dangerous.

As I write this, I am restricted on Facebook because of posting articles about the effectiveness of the Covid vaccine and the health problems people have experienced as a result of the vaccine. I believe this information should be easily accessible to the public, but evidently Facebook does not. I am not telling people to avoid social media, but I strongly suggest that you find sources other than Facebook and Twitter for your news if you want to get all of the news.

Check With The Experts Before You Change Your Name

Some of us are old enough to remember when Chevrolet introduced its new “Nova.” It was a cute, compact car that was marketed to compete with the Ford Falcon. However, there was a small problem marketing the Nova in Spanish-speaking countries. “No va” in Spanish translates loosely to “it doesn’t go.” Not a great name for a car. Well, it seems as if Mark Zuckerberg has made a similar mistake renaming Facebook.

The Western Journal reported the following today:

Giggles, snickers and some awkwardness greeted Facebook’s decision to change its corporate name to Meta.

Jokesters poked fun at Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, who is Jewish, because “meta” is pronounced like the feminine form of the Hebrew word for “dead,”, according to the Times of Israel.

“In Hebrew, *Meta* means *Dead*,” Dr. Nirit Weiss-Blatt, a tech expert, tweeted on Thursday. “The Jewish community will ridicule this name for years to come.”

…Zuckerberg said the name Facebook does not cover “everything we do” at a time when his empire includes Instagram, Messenger, WhatsApp, its Quest VR headset, its Horizon VR platform and more. Zuckerberg explained that the metaverse is a form of the virtual world where everyone is connected by virtual reality headsets, augmented reality glasses and phone apps.

The article also notes:

In Portuguese and Spanish, the word is not so troubling because it means “goal.” In Brazil, however, the word has a sexual connotation, according to Bloomberg.

Zuckerberg’s announcement was a boon for Nova Scotia-based Meta Materials. The company’s stock rose 26 percent in after-hours trading on Thursday, when Zuckerberg made his announcement, and another 6 percent on Friday, according to Reuters.

The article concludes:

Name changes can often fail in translation.

Kentucky Fried Chicken learned that when it entered the Chinese market in the 1980s, according to the BBC.

The restaurant’s “finger lickin’ good” motto, when translated into Mandarin, came out “eat your fingers off.”

It’s probably a good idea to use a translation application of some sort before you make a significant name change. Sometimes mistakes can be very misleading!

 

Trying To Return Lost Property

Yesterday MSN reporting the following:

The Brevard County Sheriff’s Office in Florida is looking to reunite $2 million worth of marijuana with its rightful owner, according to a snarky post on the department’s Facebook page.

“If you happened to have lost or misplaced approximately 770 pounds of high grade marijuana and would like to have your property returned, please contact our Narcotics Agents and we will be more than happy to reunite you with your lost property!!” read the statement written by Sheriff Wayne Ivey.

…”Once we properly identify you as the rightful owner we will gladly return your property and also make sure that both you and your property are kept in a secure area so that no one can try to rip you off!!” Ivey’s post read.

The post ended by saying the owner of the marijuana would get an “all expenses paid extensive ‘staycation'” so the owner can “reflect for a while on exactly how much your lost property means to you.”

The Facebook notes that the Sheriff’s Office understands that all of us have misplaced or lost something at some time in our lives and wants to do the right thing by returning the missing property to its rightful owner.

Censorship Abounds

This morning as I was doing my research for this blog, I came across the following article, “Ohio lawmakers propose school choice for all students” at the Washington Examiner. In the morning when I come across an article I think I would like to post on my blog, I copy the link and post it in the Right Wing Granny group on Facebook. Imagine my surprise when it didn’t post and Facebook told me it did not meet the community standards. Wow.

Here are some excerpts from the Washington Examiner article:

Two Ohio lawmakers want to give all Ohio students the option of school choice and create K-12 education competition, which they say would raise the level of public and private education throughout the state.

The Ohio Backpack Bill, originally introduced in May and updated with a sub-bill to House Bill 290 , would allow all parents to send their children to public school or establish an education savings account. The state would send the money earmarked for that student to the public school or into the parent’s account, allowing it to be used for private school tuition or other education expenses.

…The state sends money allocated for each student to the public school district. If a student qualifies for school choice through income-eligibility, the local public school district sends the money to private school.

“It’s about students and increasing the education opportunities for all. This bill seeks to find the right educational opportunity for each of the children in Ohio,” Rep. Riordan McClain, R-Upper Sandusky, said. “It creates a true money-follows-the-child program. Money goes to public school if parents want, and if a parent wants an educational scholarship account, then the state has to put that money in that account, which the parent can use for education expenses.”

The bill addresses only state education funding. Local public school districts still would collect local and federal money. The average state expense per student is $6,600, according to Christian Education Network Executive Director Troy McIntosh. The legislation would allocate $5,500 per K-9 student and $7,500 for 9-12 students.

“This is not a bill intended to benefit the kids that want to run off and attend a private school,” McIntosh said. “We want this bill to benefit every student in Ohio. An overwhelming majority of parents are realizing and asking for this sort of program.”

The state treasurer would oversee the program. Educations savings accounts could be used for private school tuition, homeschool expenses, tutoring, books and other educational expenses.

“This model is not new. This approach is gaining momentum in Ohio and nationwide,” McClain said. “We want to fund students not systems. When parents have options, they are more engaged. When schools compete for students, children’s outcomes rise.”

The article concludes:

Center for Christian Virtue President Aaron Baer said the bill would give parents recourse in districts similar to Upper Arlington, which recently created single-sex bathrooms, or others that imposed mask mandates.

I suspect the previous paragraph is what caused the problem on Facebook.

Beware Of The Trojan Horse

The ‘Facebook whistleblower’ who appeared before a Senate subcommittee yesterday is probably not all she appears to be.

On Monday, The Washington Free Beacon reported the following:

The Facebook whistleblower who revealed herself in a 60 Minutes interview is getting strategic communications guidance from a top Democratic operative, according to a source with direct knowledge of the relationship, which was confirmed by another half-dozen sources with indirect knowledge of the partnership.

Frances Haugen, the former Facebook employee who has for the past 10 months fed internal documents to a top Wall Street Journal reporter, and who revealed her identity in a primetime broadcast on Sunday, is working with the political consultant and former Obama administration deputy press secretary Bill Burton and his consulting firm, Bryson Gillette. It is unclear when Haugen’s relationship with Burton and Bryson Gillette began, how big her communications team is, and whether it includes other political operatives.

…Burton’s involvement helping to manage Haugen’s public debut suggests that her argument is part of a broader Democratic initiative. A Facebook employee in the company’s now-defunct “civic integrity” division until May, Haugen is calling for the federal government to intervene against the company. Though she did not specify in the Sunday interview what sorts of regulations she might support, she is likely to be pressed on that when she appears on Capitol Hill on Tuesday.

Burton himself has also been an outspoken Facebook critic, likening them to tobacco companies that knowingly poisoned people and concealed the health risks of using their products — an analogy Haugen is expected to use in her congressional testimony.

The article also notes:

Now a public affairs consultant, Burton, the founder of the Democratic super PAC Priorities USA Action, also serves on the board of the Center for Humane Technology, a nonprofit organization founded in 2018 that has pit itself against technology companies like Facebook, arguing that they are incentivized to stoke outrage and polarization at the cost of human well-being. The organization produced the 2020 Netflix documentary “The Social Dilemma,” which explores the deleterious influence of social media on its users. Bryson Gillette has done communications work for the Center for Human Technology, according to an event agenda posted online by PR News in which Burton is expected to discuss his work to create a “cultural awakening around the impacts of social media on democracy and our daily lives.”

Haugen echoed that message on 60 Minutes, telling CBS’s Scott Pelley that because Facebook “can be hacked with anger, it’s easier to provoke people into anger.” She continued, “And publishers are saying, ‘Oh, if I do more angry, polarizing, divisive content, I get more money.’ Facebook has set up a system of incentives that is pulling people apart.”

The Center for Humane Technology’s “key advisers” also include Facebook cofounder and former New Republic owner Chris Hughes and is funded by left-wing charitable organizations including George Soros’s Open Society Foundations, the Ford Foundation, and the Robert Wood Johnson foundation.

Do you trust anyone who has even a loose connection with a George-Soros-funded organization.

So what is this testimony ultimately about? It will pave the way for more government control of speech and the eventual denial of a platform for conservative speech. Frances Haugen’s testimony is one of the opening salvos in the war against free speech.

Posted on Facebook today by Senator Rand Paul. Let’s not forget that although getting Americans out of Afghanistan has to be a priority, there are other issues:

Who doesn’t like a good piece of cheese? Whether its cheddar, Swiss, provolone, or simply American cheese, everybody has their preference. And thanks to USAID, your new favorite might eventually be from Sjenica, Serbia! That’s right! USAID spent part of a $22 million “Sustainable Local Development Project” training the staff at the Regional Center for Agricultural Development (RCAD) in Sjenica, Serbia, to follow the cheese standards of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and help producers adopt best practices. USAID reports the head of the center as stating, “Our ultimate goal is to be able to guarantee the Sjenica cheese standards and quality to the consumers in the EU, US, and further.”
What tangible skills did USAID help impart? Well, “RCAD’s staff was trained to introduce and implement ISO standards, to properly sample milk and meat products at local farms, to calibrate laboratory equipment, and to advise farmers on improving the safety and quality of their products,” a company that implemented the overall Development Project reported. “The project also trained 30 dairy and livestock farmers and processors on how to improve production practices and meet laboratory standards,” they noted, going on to also say it “engaged a local backstopping expert to assist the laboratory staff during critical phases of the accreditation process. …”
In recent years on the domestic side, the U.S. has been experiencing a massive, historic cheese surplus, one that would eventually hit 1.4 billion pounds — which NPR noted in its report “means that there is enough cheese sitting in cold storage to wrap around the U.S. Capitol.” So American dairy farmers dealing with the realities of this situation might be cheesed off to learn their government worked to strengthen competition and the European cheese market — using their own tax dollars to boot.

 

 

Facebook As A Propaganda Outlet

Yesterday The Conservative Treehouse posted an screenshot of a recent warning that has been posted by the people who control Facebook.

This is the warning:

The article notes:

It is easy to see where this ideological control mechanism is going.  Big Tech doesn’t want comrade citizens exposed to thoughts and opinions that might run counter to the approved worldview of the totalitarian state.   It’s actually quite remarkable to see this so publicly pushed, and see them so open about it.

Obviously a visit to the wrong website (your internet travel obviously being tracked by the command and control authorities) will likely trigger the warning.  Visit The Conservative Tree House and receive a warning upon exit “you have been exposed to harmful extremist content”.

I think back to that scene in 2001 A Space Odyssey when Dave Bowman is trying to stop the computer system HAL-9000 (artificial intelligence) from controlling his behavior, control his spacecraft, and ultimately killing him: “Dave, I’m afraid I can’t let you do that”…

The article concludes:

On the positive side of this, the effort is resoundingly going to backfire amid a larger segment of the younger population, they are already using subversive accounts like Fleebook, Flinsta and Fleet to avoid detection amid their online activity.   The rebel alliance will only become more slippery and more focused on the need to approach everything with the insurgency mindset.

Regardless of how much Big Tech, Big Intel and Big Government synergize in their efforts to control human behavior, the Rebel Alliance ultimately wins every long-term contest.   History proves this to be true.  The need for freedom is still an inherent and underlying human condition amid the majority.

As Mike Vanderboegh said so eloquently: “We will not go gently into that bloody collectivist good night. Indeed, we will make with our defiance such a sound as ALL history from that day forward will be forced to note, even if they despise us in the writing of it.  And when we are gone, the scattered, free survivors hiding in the ruins of our once-great republic will sing of our deeds in forbidden songs, tending the flickering flame of individual liberty until it bursts forth again, as it must, generations later.”

Stay strong, rebels.

How Freedom Of Speech Dies

On Friday Newt Gingrich posted an article illustrating the discrepancies in the censorship policies of Facebook.

The article reports:

The hypocrisy of Facebook’s so called internal “supreme court” decision to uphold former President Donald Trump’s ban from the platform is astounding. However, this decision will ultimately help President Trump because it makes him a martyr for standing in defense of constitutional American freedoms.

Every American should take note of this decision. If the Facebook oligarchs can silence someone who served as President of the United States and received nearly 75 million votes, then they can silence anyone.

But to understand the depth of the hypocrisy and anti-Americanism of the Facebook elites, it is more revealing to look at who they are not removing from the platform.

The article lists the people who have not been removed from Facebook:

Let’s start with the Chinese Communist totalitarian dictatorship. Xinhua News Agency– a state-run propaganda outlet – has 90.2 million followers on Facebook. The People’s Daily and the Global Times, which are Chinese Communist Party propaganda outlets, have 86.5 million and 62.9 million followers, respectively. The state-run television network, China Central Television, and its international arm, China Global Television Network, have 49.8 and 116.8 million followers. All of these organizations have been designated by the U.S. State Department as foreign missions.

To Facebook, a former American president is more dangerous than the Chinese Communist dictatorship, which is actively committing genocide and religious persecution, has taken over Hong Kong and threatened Taiwan, and openly says it intends to be the world’s dominant superpower by 2049.

The article notes that The “Movement in Support of Vladimir Putin” page has 3.1 million followers.

The list continues:

Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif, representing a country where its Congress openly chants “death to America,” has 883,829 Facebook followers. The corrupt Venezuelan dictator, President Nicolás Maduro, has 1.2 million followers on Facebook. Raul Castro’s replacement as the leader of Cuban Communist Party, President Miguel Díaz-Canel Bermudez, has 24,261 Facebook followers.

The article concludes:

This is just a sample. It is disgusting that Mark Zuckerberg – who was made a billionaire by the freedom found in the United States, who has relied on the stature of this country, and whose business exists because of the freedom of speech – would preside over this phony, dishonest process in order to keep President Trump off of Facebook, while allowing real dictators to post freely.

This should be a national scandal. Zuckerberg and the Facebook oligarchs have violated fundamental American freedoms and betrayed their own country.

The Silicon Valley is looking a lot more like the Silicon Swamp—hostile to Americans and friendly to dictatorships.

One wonders if those responsible for making decisions on banning people from Facebook have thought through the implications of those decisions.

Preparing The Way For “The Ministry Of Truth”

One America News posted an article today with the following headline, “White House supports social media’s ability to silence ‘misinformation.'”

The article reports:

According to the White House, social media companies have the responsibility of shutting down misinformation. During a press conference Wednesday, Press Secretary Jen Psaki was asked about Facebook’s decision to uphold its ban of President Trump.

The obvious question here is, “Who decides exactly what is misinformation?”

The article continues:

Specifically, she was asked if Big Tech oligarchs can muzzle a former president, what’s to stop them from silencing anyone? Psaki said she had no comment on Trump, but said Joe Biden’s view is that the major platforms have the job to stop amplifying “untrustworthy content.”

“His view is that there’s more that needs to be done to ensure that this type of misinformation, disinformation, damaging, sometimes life threatening information is not going out to the American public,” stated the press secretary.

Remember–this is the same press secretary that has stated that President Biden is simply cleaning up the mess at the southern border that President Trump created. Has anyone bothered to censor her misinformation?

 

Censored Again

I have never actually spent time in Facebook jail. Even the Right Wing Granny group on Facebook where I post has never been blocked. From what I can tell, I and the group have on occasion been shadow-banned, but never actually blocked or put in Facebook jail. Unfortunately, there are legitimate mainstream news sources that cannot make that claim.

On Friday, Dan Bongino reported that Facebook had prevented users from sharing the recent article in The New York Post about the real estate purchases of the head of Black Lives Matter.

The New York Post responded in an editorial:

On Thursday, Facebook decided its users should not be able to share a New York Post article about the property-buying habits of one of the founders of Black Lives Matter.

This is the third time we’ve tangled with social media giants in the past year. In the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, we published a column that suggested the virus could have leaked from a Chinese virology lab. Facebook’s “fact checkers” decided this was an opinion you weren’t allowed to have and blocked the article. Today, it’s a commonly discussed theory, with officials from former CDC Director Dr. Robert Redfield to CNN’s Sanjay Gupta saying it can’t be discounted. Even the head of the World Health Organization (WHO) has said it can’t be ruled out.

In October, we published a series of articles about a laptop Hunter Biden left at a Delaware repair shop. Twitter suspended our account. You probably know how that ended. Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey admitted to lawmakers months later it was a “total mistake.”

We were right both times. We’re right this time, too.

Please follow both links above to read both articles. Unfortunately, neither the American press or social media is doing a reasonable job of reporting in an unbiased manner or of keeping Americans informed. That is dangerous to our Republic.

 

Banishing Political Opposition

We have all seen the news that President Trump has been banned from Twitter and Facebook. There are some people who see that as justified, but how many people have to be banned before those people become concerned?

Legal Insurrection posted an article today about Facebook banning the “Walk Away Movement” page. The page consisted of personal testimonies of people who have left the Democrat party discussing their reasons for leaving.

The article quotes a Washington Examiner article:

“FACEBOOK has removed the #WalkAway Campaign and has BANNED ME and EVERY MEMBER of my team!!!” Straka, founder of the #WalkAway movement, tweeted Friday morning.

“Over half a million people in #WalkAway with hundreds of thousands of testimonial videos and stories is GONE,” he added. “Facebook has banned everything related to #WalkAway.”

Straka also included screenshots of messages from Facebook, including one that said the page was “removed for violating terms of use.”

Straka confirmed to the Washington Examiner that his Facebook group, the business page for the nonprofit group, and his personal account were all shut down Friday morning.

He added that people merely associated with the page were also removed from Facebook.

“Every volunteer, every paid employee, banned,” Straka said.

The article at Legal Insurrection notes:

How can this be perceived as anything other than political?

As long as we have people in Congress that take large donations from big tech, no action will be taken to hold Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, etc., accountable. It is unfortunate that somehow the Republicans didn’t get to that when they held the Senate.

 

Houston, We Have A Problem

The problem with election fraud is that when it is left unchecked, it continues. I am not optimistic about overturning the fraudulent presidential election, but I am concerned about what that fraudulent victory will mean for the future of America. I strongly suspect that last night’s election in Georgia had some of the same problems that the presidential election had.

A friend on Facebook posted the following picture:

I can understand how a lead might shrink because votes from the other candidate came in, but I can’t understand how 5000 votes could suddenly disappear. I think this is a problem. I also think that if we don’t deal with the fraud now, we will never again have an honest election in America. We will be ruled by the elite political class who will eventually destroy the middle class and our way of life. We are already seeing the attitude among many of our politicians that the rules do not apply to them. I fear we will only see more of that in the future by those who are willing to cheat to win.

The Following Was Posted On Facebook By A Friend

 

Some of these goals are very worthwhile goals; however, we live in a representative republic that is supposed to be governed by the people. Using a disease to jam through policies without the approval of the people is not acceptable. There is also the aspect of the viability of some of these goals.

I love the idea of no poverty. However, people make decisions that result in their living in poverty. Does it help them for the rest of us to continually bail them out, or should we help them learn from their mistakes?

Clean and affordable energy is a great idea, but how realistic is it with the current technology? How clean is it? What about the children working in the Lithium mines? Are they part of clean and affordable energy?

Reduced inequalities also sounds like a great concept. The Pilgrims thought so too until they almost starved to death. People have different levels of ambition. Those who work the hardest need to be rewarded the most. Otherwise no one will bother to work hard. Read the history of the Plymouth Colony for further illustrations of that point.

Peace, justice, and strong institutions also sounds great. Who would be in charge of those institutions? Does justice include freedom of speech, the right to bear arms, freedom of assembly? Who determines what justice is?

This little chart of wonderful ideals actually illustrates the wisdom of the Founding Fathers of America. All of the ideals listed in the chart are possible under the government our Founding Fathers created. Poverty is still with us because people have the freedom to make their own decisions. A number of years ago, an American author pointed out that there are three things that you can do that will give you a 90 percent chance of avoiding poverty–finish high school, get a job, and get married before you have children. Statistically if everyone did that, we could end poverty.

The chart above is simply an illustration of the wonderful-sounding concepts those who would take away our freedom would use to advance their agenda. Don’t be fooled.

Senator Blumenthal Needs To Read The First Amendment

Yesterday The Gateway Pundit posted an article about some recent comments by Senator Blumenthal.

The article reports:

On Tuesday Senator Dick Blumenthal questioned Mark Zuckerberg on why Breitbart, The Gateway Pundit and Steve Bannon still have accounts on his platform.

Obviously, Blumenthal and today’s Democrats show NO REGARD for the US Constitution.

Conservative publishers have been censored and put out of business by Facebook since the 2016 election.

But this is NOT ENOUGH for these fascists.

The article includes a video clip of Senator Blumenthal calling for the removal of Breitbart, Eric Trump, Donald Trump Jr., and The Gateway Pundit from Facebook. There are also other videos requesting that other people be removed from Facebook.

Senator Blumenthal swore in an Oath of Office to support the Constitution.

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances

Asking Facebook to kick people off their platform does not encourage free speech. A law prohibiting free speech will not be far behind if the Democrats manage to take control of the government.

 

The Role Of The Media In The 2020 Presidential Election

Yesterday The Washington Times (the link is to the article posted on outline, as I don’t have a subscription to The Washington Times) posted an article about the role of the media in the 2020 Presidential election.

The article reports:

A new post-election poll conducted by the Media Research Center reveals that 36% of voters who chose presumptive President-elect Joseph R. Biden were not aware of the evidence linking him “to corrupt financial dealings with China through his son Hunter Biden,” noted an analysis of the findings released Monday.

“Thirteen percent of these voters (or 4.6% of Biden’s total vote) say that had they known these facts, they would not have voted for the former Vice President. Such a shift away from Biden would have meant President Trump would have won the election with 289 electoral votes,” the conservative press watchdog noted.

The greater implication: Press coverage was at fault.

“It is an indisputable fact that the media stole the election. The American electorate was intentionally kept in the dark. During the height of the scandal surrounding Hunter Biden’s foreign dealings, the media and the big tech companies did everything in their power to cover it up. Twitter and Facebook limited sharing of the New York Post’s reports, and the liberal media omitted it from their coverage or dismissed it as Russian disinformation,” says Brent Bozell, founder of the center.

Remember that The New York Post was shut out of Twitter for posting an article about Hunter Biden’s business dealings. Any articles dealing with Biden family corruption are immediately fact-checked by Facebook. My right wing granny group on Facebook has been charged with sharing false information (anyone can join, please do). There is a mass exodus from Facebook right now. I am not sure how permanent it will be. As much as it is nice to communicate with old friends, it is not so nice to be brainwashed. Actions have consequences, and Facebook may be facing those consequences.

Those Pesky Fact-Checkers Are Driving People Away From Facebook

Yesterday John Hinderaker at Power Line Blog posted an article describing his recent experience with the fact-checkers on Facebook. The bottom line is that the fact-checkers need to be fact-checked.

The article includes a screenshot stating that the original post had false information. Yet when Mr. Hinderaker explored the items that the fact-checkers claimed were false, those items were not even in the article.

The article notes:

The explanation given for Facebook’s “fact check” is that “Wisconsin turnout [is] in line with past elections, didn’t jump 22%.” But my Facebook post said nothing about Wisconsin turnout jumping by 22%. Neither did my Power Line post, which I doubt anyone from USA Today or Facebook actually read. According to Wisconsin officials, that state had a record turnout in 2020, not one that was “in line with past elections,” so Facebook’s “fact check” is blatantly false. Also, obviously, it doesn’t even attempt to deal with anything I wrote in my Power Line post, which, among other things, explained why some observers have made exaggerated claims relating to Wisconsin’s 2020 turnout numbers. Nor does it try to explain why there is something wrong with what I wrote on Facebook, which was that “the numbers suggest” that there was major voter fraud in Wisconsin–a claim that, as far as I know, stands unrebutted.

So Facebook is a Democratic Party platform that will do all it can to help Joe Biden cling to his tenuous electoral lead. No surprise there. But the extent to which the internet platforms that control most avenues for the distribution of facts and opinions are willing to lie and cheat to support one political party is alarming. We live in a world that the Founders never contemplated.

Parler is looking really good right now. Please follow the link above to read the rest of the article. Facebook is no longer simply a neutral platform–it is a Democrat campaign site.

I Know This Is Simply An Incredible Coincidence…

Yesterday The Conservative Treehouse posted an article about Anna Makanju. Ms. Makanju is currently working for Facebook as the executive in charge of “election integrity on the platform.” Her last job before that position was special policy adviser for Europe and Eurasia to former US Vice President Joe Biden.

The article contains the following screenshot:

The article notes:

That’s right folks, the Facebook executive currently blocking all of the negative evidence of Hunter and Joe Biden’s corrupt activity in Ukraine is the same person who was coordinating the corrupt activity between the Biden family payoffs and Ukraine.

This is called the ‘deep state,’ and it has a lot of tentacles.

So Why Is This Required?

Yesterday The Gateway Pundit posted an article about a statement from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

The article reports:

On Tuesday Tucker Carlson opened his show by questioning the CDC rules and data on mask wearing and the COVID-19.

Earlier this week the CDC confirmed that mask wearing was ineffective and over 50% of US coronavirus cases were patients who were habitual mask wearers.

The article quotes a Breitbart article:

Mass communications are now controlled by a tiny number of people, all of whom have identical agendas. There is no modern Anti-Mask League, there couldn’t be a modern Anti-Mask League. Facebook and Google would shut it down the first day. The governors of Michigan and New Jersey would indict its leaders.

Dissent used to be a defining feature of American life, but no more. Now, we have mandatory consensus. Masks are good. Anyone who questions the utter goodness of masks is bad…

…So what is the science on masks? Well, as it happened, we have the latest for you tonight. And the science comes interestingly from the CDC whose Director has told you that masks were magic, more effective than vaccines.

But the numbers from the CDC suggests otherwise. A new study conducted by 11 medical institutions analyzed a group of people who tested positive for COVID during the month of July. Here’s the interesting part.

Among those who were infected, more than 70% reported they had quote, “always worn a mask” for the preceding 14 days. Another 14.4% said they had quote, “often worn a mask.” In other words, almost everyone, 85% who got the coronavirus in July was wearing a mask and they were infected anyway.

So clearly this doesn’t work the way they tell us it works. Clearly, someone has been lying to us, many people actually. How did this happen? Well, the short answer is we’re not sure how so many people got the coronavirus were wearing masks, but there are clues, clues that our leaders appear to be ignoring.

We are always hearing “Trust the science” from those who want mandatory masks. Well, this is the science. Why are we still wearing masks.

Just for the record, when Tucker Carlson posted the CDC statement that masks were ineffective, Facebook censored his post. At some point you have to wonder why the establishment is so determined to keep us masked.

 

When You Realize That What You Said Is Ridiculous

Scott Johnson at Power Line Blog posted an article today about a recent directive from the City of Minneapolis that has since been modified. When I first saw the directive posted on Facebook, I wasn’t sure if it was real. Evidently it was.

Here is the original directive:

Yesterday the message was updated (per alphanewsmn)

Wow. Just wow.

The following was pasted on Facebook by a friend of mine who does very good research:

Just the Facts:
Before you attack anything in this post please understand that I did research at the Smithsonian Institute and the US Census Bureau. I also researched from several historical publications, Harvard university, Oxford university, the transatlantic slave trade database, slavevoyages-org, and a few others.
Information regarding the current slave trade came from the US Department of Defense, the US State Department, the united nations, amnesty international, and a confidential paper on Russian mining.
——
History:
The historical African slave trade operated from the discovery of the New World until 1808 with a recorded exception being the slave ship “Clotilda” in 1860. There were more than 32,000 voyages that delivered more than 10 million captive slaves to the Americas.
Of the more than 10 million captive African slaves, less than 310,000 were brought to North America in what is now the USA and Canada. The vast majority went to South America and the Caribbean. More than 900,000 went to Jamaica. The first delivery of captive slaves in North America was in 1619 but slaves had been brought to the Caribbean for about 100 years before that time.
The largest slave importer in Jamaica was an ancestor of Senator Kamala Harris. Ms. Harris, contrary to her claims, does not have any verified American slaves in her ancestry. But she has at least five slaveowners in her ancestry.
Of all the Black people living in America who were born here, less than 6% can document their ancestry to people who were slaves in the United States. That is less than 1% of the current US population.
More than half of black Americans claiming to be descendants of slaves trace their slave history back to the Caribbean, including to Kamala Harris’s Jamaica.
——-
In today’s world the countries exporting the most slaves are North Korea and China. North Korea sends about 20,000 people to Russia every year to work in the Russian mines. China sends about double that amount. Of all of the people sent every year to Russia from North Korea and China the only documentation I could find showed less than 10 people (eight) ever returned to China.

The Double Standard At Work

There is a meme going around Facebook that misquotes Joe Biden as saying, “The things I did while in elected office should not be made public while I am seeking a higher public office.” The meme is close, but not exact. In the interest of truth, I am posting a portion of the interview that the quote is based on.

On May 1, 2020, Breitbart reported:

Co-host Mika Brzezinski asked Biden why he did not grant open access to papers from his Senate career that he had given to the University of Delaware. The following exchange ensued:

Brzezinski: The first [question], about the University of Delaware records. Do you agree with the reporting that those records were supposed to be revealed to the public and then they were resealed for a longer time until, quote, after you leave public life. And if you agree with that, if that’s what happened, why did that happen?

Biden: The fact is, that there’s are a lot of things — speeches I’ve made, positions I’ve taken, interviews that I did overseas with people, all of those things relating to my job. And the idea that they would all be made public, and the fact while I was running for public office, they could really be taken out of context. The papers are position papers — they are documents that existed, for example, when I met with [Russian President Vladimir] Putin, or when I met with whomever. And all of that to be fodder in a campaign at this time — I don’t know of anybody who’s done anything like that. …

Brzezinski: I’m asking why not do the same [as the National Archives] in the University of Delaware records, which have raised questions because they were supposed to be revealed to the public, and then they were sealed for a longer period of time. Why not do it for both sets of records?

Biden: Because the material in the University of Delaware has no personnel files, but it does have a lot of confidential personal conversations that I had with the president about a particular issue, that I had with the heads of states of other places. That that would not be something that be revealed while I was in public office, or while I was seeking public office. It just stands to reason — to the best of my knowledge, no one else has done that either.

Oddly enough, at the same time Joe Biden was refusing to release his records, he was demanding that President Trump release his tax returns. Disclosure for you, but not for me!