Words Matter

The news on Sunday morning reported that the bodies of six of the hostages taken by Hamas had been recovered by the Israeli Defense Forces. Much of the mainstream media reported that the hostages had died–not that they had been murdered by Hamas.

Breitbart posted an article on Sunday about the misleading reports.

Breitbart reported:

Mainstream media outlets, including CNN, NBC, and USA Today, are facing intense backlash for what have been called misleading and “vile” headlines about the brutal murder of six hostages held by Hamas in Gaza.

On Sunday, IDF spokesman Rear Admiral Daniel Hagari announced the hostages had been cruelly murdered by Hamas as Israeli soldiers closed in on their location, possibly based on intelligence provided by a hostage rescued last week.

The six hostages, whose bodies were found Saturday in a tunnel underneath Gaza — including American Israeli Hersh Goldberg-Polin — were discovered in Rafah, the same city that Vice President Kamala Harris had told Israel not to enter.

But mainstream media outlets, including CNN, NBC, and USA Today, covering the recovery of the bodies, sparked outrage by initially reporting that one of the victims had “died” rather than had been “murdered.” 

The cause of the hostages’ death was not clear for about 90 minutes after Hersh Goldberg-Polin was first revealed to be among the victims, which is why some outlets may have been reluctant to use the word “murder.” Mainstream media headlines currently reflect reports by Israeli authorities that the hostages were murdered. However, screen grabs of the initial headlines continued to spark outrage after reports emerged on Sunday that Hamas terrorists had shot each of the six hostages in the head before Israeli soldiers could rescue them.

The war that Israel is fighting against Hamas is as much of a public relations war as it is a kinetic war. Some Israelis who want the hostages released (assuming they are alive) are protesting to pressure Prime Minister Netanyahu into a peace deal which would leave Hamas in power and pave the way for another October 7th attack. Those protests are totally playing into the hands of Hamas as are the calls for a cease-fire from some western countries. You don’t make peace with terrorists unless you want more terrorism. Israelis used to know that. I am disappointed in the Israeli leaders who are using the hostages to try to topple the Netanyahu government. You don’t do that when your country is fighting for its survival–you put personal ambitions aside temporarily at least.

Just for the record, the hostages were murdered to avoid Israel celebrating their release. That illustrates the nature of Hamas.

The article concludes:

Though some headlines have since been corrected, the damage had already been done. Meanwhile, U.S. President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris both affirmed the hostages were brutally murdered by Hamas terrorists.

 

A Warning From Someone Who Knows

It is disturbing (to say the least) to see college students chanting, “From the river to the sea….” I wonder if they understand (or care) that they are calling for the genocide of Jews. There seems to be no recognition of the fact that there are still American hostages being held or that the ‘war’ began with a terrorists attack (aka war crime) committed by Hamas.

On Sunday, Townhall posted a warning to those who sympathize with Hamas. The warning comes from Mosab Hassan Yousef, the son of one of the founders of Hamas.

The article quotes reports:

He has called the terrorist group a religious movement “waging a holy war” under the guise of a political party. He has not shied away from criticizing the group in the aftermath of the Oct. 7 attack after seeing how some in the U.S. have responded with protests on college campuses and pressure in Congress to end the action in Gaza before Hamas has been eliminated. 

“Bending to terrorists will have consequences,” Yousef said. “We are sending the wrong messages. These people don’t receive our statements or our action as a form of tolerance that we are trying to reach peace.They perceive it as weakness. “The more we continue sending the wrong messages, the more we complicate the situation,” he added. “We have to stand firmly regardless. … Hamas is a designated terrorist group in the United States, according to the American law, so it’s a ridiculous thing of any lawmaker not to be able to distinguish this group. Via Fox News Digital.

We have been warned.

Money Talks–We Need More Of This

On Monday, Breitbart reported that Robert Kraft, the owner of the New England Patriots, will end his donations to Columbia University due to the violence against Jews.

The article reports:

The billionaire NFL owner noted that he is thankful that Columbia helped him start his adult life with the opportunities it offered him so many years ago. Still, now the university is “no longer an institution” he recognizes, Fox News reported.

“It was through the full academic scholarship Columbia gave me that I was able to attend college and get my start in life, and for that, I have been tremendously grateful. However, the school I love so much – the one that welcomed me and provided me with so much opportunity – is no longer an institution I recognize,” he wrote in a statement released Monday.

Kraft added, “I am deeply saddened at the virulent hate that continues to grow on campus and throughout our country. I am no longer confident that Columbia can protect its students and staff, and I am not comfortable supporting the university until corrective action is taken.”

The article concludes:

On Sunday, the White House issued a statement in response to the ongoing anti-Israel protests and encampment taking place at Columbia, describing them as being “Antisemitic, unconscionable, and dangerous.”

White House Deputy Press Secretary Andrew Bates issued a statement acknowledging that American citizens have the “right to peaceful protest” while adding that “calls for violence and physical intimidation” against the Jewish community are unacceptable.

Where are the protests for the people who have been held hostage or killed by Hamas since October 7th?

Peaceful Protest?

On Sunday, Hot Air posted an article about the pro-Hamas protests outside the White House on Saturday. The protests were not peaceful.

The article reports:

The thousands of people screaming about peace and ceasefires outside of the White House yesterday certainly weren’t acting as if peace was important. In fact, as Fox News reported, many of them were becoming overtly violent. The speeches and chants gave way to attempts to break down the security fencing that had been erected to keep them out. They also began hurling things at the Metropolitan Police as well as the United States Park Police. The tone of the chants coming from the rioters shifted a bit also. Instead of only decrying Israel and demanding a ceasefire in Gaza, they were demanding that the United States stop striking back against the Houthi militants in Yemen. The potentially violent situation was bad enough that some White House staffers and journalists were temporarily “relocated” to keep them safe. The situation was completely out of control.

I have some questions for the protesters. Does the ceasefire include returning the innocent hostages that have been held for more than three month? Will reparations be paid by Hamas to the families of the innocent civilians Hamas killed or the families of the hostages? Why isn’t Hamas being tried in the World Court for the purposeful killing of civilians and the use of civilians as human shields?

The article notes:

As Bob Hoge pointed out at RedState, there were more than the normal Palestinian flags on display. People were hoisting ISIS flags as well. Yes, that would be the same ISIS terrorists that are so famous for their peaceful, humanitarian efforts around the world. Making things all the more bizarre, the person the protesters were attempting to influence (Joe Biden) wasn’t even there. He was already at Camp David. Also, Andy Ngo was on the scene as usual, filming the action and later posting it to Twitter.

Some of the protesters were protesting the attack on the Houthis, another terrorist group.

Please follow the link to read the entire article–I wonder if the people protesting truly understand what they are supporting.

An Interesting Fact About College Protests

On Thursday, Hot Air posted an article about the pro-Palestine protests that are happening at some of our elite colleges.

The article notes:

TV host Mike Rowe said that eight years ago, he was switching the news channels on his television and saw several college students setting fire to the American flag and dancing around a pile of burning flags. They were telling reporters in interviews they were disgusted with Old Glory and “fearful” of the flag.

“It wasn’t lost on me in the moment that all of these events were happening at what is considered the best of the best elite universities across the country,” Rowe told me. Among supposedly non-elite students, though, the situation wasn’t and isn’t as bad.

Rowe said it didn’t take long for him to figure out why those “elite” students drew those conclusions about Old Glory: The idea of associating fear with the flag came from the very people who were supposed to be instructing these privileged students.

Rowe said the evidence was crystal clear when Jonathan Lash, then the president of Hampshire College, chose not to assure the students that no country offers more liberties to their people and therefore there was nothing to “fear” from the flag. Instead, he spoke up in ways they understood to validate their fears.

“Lash actually removed any traces of the American flag from the campus and said in a statement that removing the flag from the campus ‘will better enable us to focus our efforts on addressing racist, misogynistic, Islamophobic, anti-immigrant, antisemitic, anti-LGBTQ rhetoric and behaviors,’” Rowe explained.

Lash, a former Peace Corps volunteer, federal prosecutor, Harvard graduate, and president of a Washington-based environmental think tank, left the college in 2018. Hampshire College, under Lash in 2015, was one of the first elite schools in the United States not to accept SAT scores from applicants, in part because Lash said SATs were strongly biased against students of color.

The article notes that Mike Rowe has observed that these protests are not happening in community colleges and trade schools. Generally speaking, students at those schools are concerned with graduating and making a living–they are not from homes that guarantee their future.

The article concludes:

The Department of Education tallies show there are nearly 4,000 colleges and universities across this country with 40% of their students holding some type of job while attending school.

In contrast, there are just a little over 1,000 community colleges and 7,407 trade and technical schools as of 2022 with 80% of those students employed while attending school in the former.

Rowe said that when the protests at the elite universities started to unfold after the Oct. 7 massacre, he wondered what seemed so familiar. “And the answer isn’t because it’s familiar in terms of bad behavior. It was familiar because it’s another thing that never happens at schools where people go to learn a skill.”

Unfortunately, the students at the elite colleges often go into politics and attempt to shape national policy.

When Law Enforcement Forgets The Rights Of The People

There is new information coming out in the video footage of January 6th that has been recently released. There are a lot of things that are not being reported about January 6th, but on November 20th, The Gateway Pundit posted a disturbing article about the events on that day. I don’t know exactly what got the Capitol Police so riled up at the protesters, but their actions were not appropriate for the threat level presented.

The article reports:

You will want to bookmark this post for future reference.

Recent footage released by InvestigateJ6 reveals police officers started firing on unsuspecting Trump supporters on January 6, 2021, without warning.

The footage also reveals that DC police continued their fire on the protesters with rubber bullets, explosive munitions, and gas canisters.

The Trump crowd that gathered on the west side of the US Capitol had no idea they were going to be fired on.  There was NO WARNING.

Four Trump supporters were killed that day, including Benjamin Phillips and Kevin Greeson, who were killed when police started firing munitions on the crowd.

The fake news reported the two men had heart attacks – without adding that the men were being bombarded with exploding munitions without warning while they stood in the crowd with tens of thousands of fellow Trump supporters.

…The Trump supporters also had no idea that federal officers, and undercover police had inserted themselves inside the pro-Trump crowd that day.

The article concludes:

InvestigateJ6 has several videos posted on Rumble of the police violence on January 6.

We link to the videos below:

J6 1:18 PM Proud Boys Shot by Less Lethal Team Third Shots on the West Plaza.

J6 1:07 – 1:10 PM Crowd Helps Josh Black on the West Plaza after First Shots.

J6 1:18 PM Proud Boys Shot by Less Lethal Team on the West Plaza.

J6 1:12 PM DC Police Arrive on West Plaza and Spray and Fight with Protestors.

1:10 PM Friendly Fire Second Shots by Less Lethal Team on the West Plaza.

J6 1:21 PM First Explosive Munition on West Plaza Heard on Officer Bodycam

J6 1:24-1:25 PM Second and Third Explosive Munitions Thrown Into Crowd on West Plaza

J6 1:32-1:36 PM MPD Cop Throws 13 Explosive Munitions In A Row Into Crowd on West Plaza

Capitol Police Fire Munitions into J6 Crowd: Est. 1:18pm

The actions of the police on January 6th remind me of the protest scenes in the movie “Doctor Zhivago.” The actions of the Capitol police were much more in line with the Russian police handling the protests in the movie.

Only Some People Get Arrested For Doing Illegal Things

In July 22, there were weekly protests in front of Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh’s house, despite the fact that under 18 U.S.C. 1507, it is a federal crime to protest near a residence occupied by a judge or jury with the intent to influence their decisions in pending cases, and this case remains pending. The protests continued.

One of the protesters was arrested at one point for being armed and threatening to kill the Judge. He was arrested, but the protests were allowed to continue despite the law.

On Saturday, The U.K. Daily Mail reported:

Up to 100 protesters have been arrested at a Pro-Palestine demonstration outside the Brooklyn home of Jewish Democrat Senator Chuck Schumer.  

The protesters called for an end to US aid for Israel on a day of mass protest in New York and around the world after the leader of Hamas called for a global ‘day of outrage.’ 

Hundreds of people, organized by Jewish Voice for Peace, gathered at the Grand Army Plaza before marching a short distance to the senator’s Park Slope residence and blocking the street.

Protesters were arrested in the street, after blocking the flow of traffic, and placed on two MTA buses. 

The demonstration comes as Schumer prepares to depart for Israel this weekend, where he will lead a delegation of senators to show support for the country’s government, a spokesperson announced on Friday. 

It isn’t illegal to protest in front of a Senator’s house, yet these protestors were arrested. Our justice system has become totally politicized. Currently you are only protected if you believe the right things.

 

Our Role Model?

On November 27th, I posted an article reporting that Klaus Schwab recently stated that China Will Be a ‘Role Model’ in the ‘Systemic Transformation’ of the World. I really don’t like the idea of China as a role model. Currently Chinese protestors are being beaten in the streets, and many will be jailed and tortured for their protesting. The protests began in response to the draconian lockdowns (supposedly due to Covid) that resulted in people in an apartment fire dying because they were locked into their apartment building.

On Tuesday, The Washington Free Beacon posted the following:

Uyghur activists are demanding that the Biden administration extract details from China about the fire that the Chinese government says killed 10 people trapped in a building, alleging that the true number of deaths is far higher due to China’s coronavirus lockdowns.

“The Chinese government officially recorded 10 deaths,” said Salih Hudayar, who heads a human rights group focused on China’s genocide of the ethnic minority group. “Photos suggest the number of Uyghurs slain was much higher.”

Social media posts and photos place the death toll at 44, said Hudayar, who on Monday led a protest outside the State Department in Washington, D.C. Residents reportedly couldn’t escape their homes because their doors were bolted and barred for quarantine. Barricades at the building prevented fire trucks from getting close enough to fight the fire—video of the incident shows firefighters spraying water that failed to even reach the building. Huyadar said it took hours for help to arrive.

“Residents stated firefighters arrived three hours after the fire began,” Hudayar said.

The deaths have sparked unrest across the country, with residents calling for the easing of restrictions and the resignation of President Xi Jinping. Chinese authorities have tried to clamp down on the protests, searching residents’ phones in Beijing and Shanghai for use of illegal messaging apps. Chinese bots on Twitter, meanwhile, tweeted pornographic content to drown out posts about the protests and criticism of Xi.

It takes a lot of courage to protest in China. Free speech is not a way of life. Prison and torture are likely to be the results of protesting. China is not a role model we want to follow.

Labels Matter

On Sunday, John Hinderaker posted an article at Power Line Blog about the double standard used in reporting protests.

The article notes:

The Left has a rather schizophrenic attitude toward protests and demonstrations. Some are wonderful, like the George Floyd riots, which were not, in fact, protests at all. Or like arson and other destruction committed at pro-life facilities. Others are detestable, like the Dutch farmers’ protests, or the French “yellow vests,” or the Canadian truckers. Some protests, too, can only be ignored, like when hundreds of thousands of pro-life citizens show up for their annual march in Washington.

Currently the Left is “demonstrating” against the Supreme Court justices who concurred in the Dobbs decision. A few nights ago, as Scott has noted, left-wingers harassed Justice Brett Kavanaugh and other diners at the Morton’s steak house in D.C. Liberals viewed this effort as a triumph–Kavanaugh reportedly had to exit out a back door–and a pro-Democratic Party organization is now offering cash bounties to anyone who sees a conservative justice out in public in time for a flash mob to assemble.

When asked about such tactics, White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre was nonplussed. These are peaceful demonstrations, she replied, the very essence of democracy!

Creating an intimidating environment for political opponents is a sign of a tyrannical government. Protesting political figures at private locations that have nothing to do with their jobs is a form of intimidation.

The article concludes:

And, of course, all of this discussion takes place in the context of at least one assassination attempt against Justice Kavanaugh, the same man who was falsely and relentlessly smeared by the Democratic Party during his confirmation hearings. I think the leaders of the Democratic Party are well aware that their over-the-top attacks on conservative justices, and the kinds of harassment we have seen in recent days, are likely to lead to more assassination attempts. I think leaders of the Democratic Party hope that one or more conservative justices will be assassinated while Joe Biden is still (at least nominally) president, so that he can appoint a left-wing successor. I think this is why Attorney General Merrick Garland refuses to enforce 18 U.S.C. § 1507, which bans demonstrations at the homes of judges that attempt to influence their decisions. And I think this is why the Biden administration cheers on the mobs who harass conservatives in public places.

If this assessment seems harsh, ask yourself: what other hypothesis is consistent with the Democrats’ actions?

So, are protests and demonstrations good or bad? I think they are good–that is to say, consistent with our Constitution’s framework of ordered liberty–when they are peaceful (not “mostly peaceful”), when they are conducted in public places with proper permitting, and when they do not explicitly or implicitly threaten anyone. Citizens have a right to assemble peaceably, not to form themselves into mobs. They do not have a right to commit mayhem, to destroy property, or to threaten, menace, or unreasonably inconvenience others. Unfortunately, the “protests” that the Left likes most usually fall in the latter category. Let’s just hope they don’t result in even more catastrophic violence than we have already witnessed.

So far, the violence we have witnessed seems to be mainly on the liberal side–January 6th was not a totally peaceful protest, but did not include lighting fires, burning business, throwing molotov cocktails into police cars, or killing those trying to protect their businesses. If the violence on the political left, including antifa, BLM, etc., is not reined in, I fear that there will be violent pushback from the political right. That is a recipe for the destruction of America.

Losing Civility Courtesy Of The White House

On Thursday, The Daily Wire reported the following:

White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said Thursday that there was no “official U.S. Government position” on where protesters chose to gather, even if that meant they were publishing the home addresses of sitting Supreme Court justices.

After congratulating Psaki’s incoming replacement Karine Jean-Pierre on being named President Joe Biden’s next press secretary, Fox News’ Peter Doocy turned to the topic of planned protests over the recently leaked early opinion draft indicating that the Supreme Court could be poised to overturn landmark abortion cases Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey.

The article reports the following dialog:

“Not about yesterday, just about moving forward — these activists posted a map with the home addresses of the Supreme Court justices,” Doocy said. “Is that the kind of thing this president wants to help your side make their point?”

“Look, I think the president’s view is that there’s a lot of passion, a lot of fear, a lot of sadness from many, many people across this country about what they saw in that leaked document,” Psaki replied, saying again that the White House supported peaceful protest.

“He doesn’t care if they’re protesting outside the Supreme Court or outside someone’s private residence?” Doocy asked.

“I don’t have an official U.S. Government position on where people protest,” Psaki replied. “I want it — we want it of course to be peaceful … I think we shouldn’t lose the point here, the reason people are protesting is because women across the country are worried about their fundamental rights that have been law for 50 years. Their rights to make choices about their own bodies and their own health care are at risk. That’s why people are protesting — they’re unhappy, they’re scared.”

When does protesting become harassment? How much violence is the political left willing to tolerate to move their agenda forward (think riots of the summer of 2020)? When the political left disrupted the Senate during the Kavanaugh hearings, how is that different from January 6th? Is anyone protecting the rights of American citizens simply trying to do their jobs?

Getting Fired For Doing Your Job

On Friday Guy Benson at Townhall posted an article about the recent firing of the police chief in Portsmouth, Virginia. The police chief was fired for doing her job.

The article reports:

This story out of Virginia is really quite something. If I’m understanding it correctly, it very much appears as though the city’s (Black, female) police chief was placed on administrative leave and then fired as retaliation for her investigation and attempted prosecution of criminal activity related to “Black Lives Matter” protests in the wake of George Floyd’s killing. The only attempt at a justification for the firing I’ve found is that perhaps she was overzealous in the charges she pursued, and even that critique is disputable. There is also “an unspecified conflict of interest” that has not been established or expounded upon. Her real supposed transgression, it would appear, is that she sought to hold prominent people accountable for illegal acts — resulting in punishment for her because said prominent people believe, apparently correctly, that they’re above the law.

The article quotes an NBC report:

The police chief of Portsmouth, Virginia, was fired Monday in what she suggested was a politically motivated move moments before criminal charges were dropped against a prominent state senator and several local Black leaders accused of conspiring to damage a Confederate statue during a protest this year. The latest twist in the case involving state Sen. Louise Lucas, a high-ranking Democrat who is Virginia’s most senior Black legislator, drew praise from members of her own party who condemned the charges. Portsmouth police in August charged Lucas and 18 other plaintiffs, including a school board member and members of the local NAACP chapter and the public defender’s office, with conspiracy to commit a felony and injury to a monument in excess of $1,000.  When Greene, who is Black, later announced the charges, she said Lucas and others “conspired and organized to destroy the monument as well as summon hundreds of people to join in felonious acts.” According to the police version of events in a probable cause summary, Lucas was with a group of people who were shaking cans of spray paint, and she told police that they were going to vandalize the statues “and you can’t stop them … they got a right, go ahead!”  At the Portsmouth protest, demonstrators managed to rip off the heads of some of the city’s Confederate statues while toppling another statue, which police said fell on and critically injured a demonstrator.

Here we see another example of laws that only apply to the ‘little people.’ The person who should be fired (impeached, actually) is the State Senator, who should be charged with inciting violence. The police chief was merely trying to administer justice equally–something many Democrats strongly oppose.

Something To Consider Before You Vote

Yesterday Fox News posted an article that included some recent statements by Vice-Presidential nominee Kamala Harris.

The article reports:

Peaceful protests against racial injustice are critical for the nation’s progress and help to keep law enforcement in check, Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., said Friday.

That is a perfectly valid statement. The original civil rights marches in the 1960’s were non-violent on the part of the protesters. Unfortunately I cannot say the same about some of the police. Now things seem to be reversed. Protesters think they can smash windows, steal things, and set things on fire. That is not a protest–that is a crime.

The article continues:

“Nothing that we have achieved that has been about progress, in particular around civil rights, has come without a fight, and so I always am going to interpret these protests as an essential component of evolution in our country — as an essential component or mark of a real democracy,” the vice presidential nominee said during the NAACP’s national convention.

She added that protests were “necessary” as “the people’s voices must be heard, and it is often the people who must speak to get their government to do what it is supposed to do, but may not do naturally unless the people speak loudly — and obviously peacefully.”

Harris also praised the “brilliance” and “impact” of “Black Lives Matter,” which has received media praise but also come under fire for promoting left-wing stances like opposing the nuclear family. “I actually believe that ‘Black Lives Matter’ has been the most significant agent for change within the criminal justice system,” she said.

Black Lives Matter has recently scrubbed their website. However, on September 8, I wrote an article that included some quotes from a “What We Believe” page that was then on their website. I apologize for not taking a screenshot (it didn’t occur to me that they would take down the page)–I just copied the quotes. That page no longer exists on their website. When you read the following quotes from the page, you might make an educated guess as to why:

We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.

We foster a queer‐affirming network. When we gather, we do so with the intention of freeing ourselves from the tight grip of heteronormative thinking, or rather, the belief that all in the world are heterosexual (unless s/he or they disclose otherwise).

It has been widely reported that the people behind Black Lives Matter have Marxist roots. That is true. It is disturbing to see a candidate for one of the highest offices in the land support an organization that has Marxist ties. This candidate belongs to a political party that falsely accused President Trump of ties to Russia and tried to remove him because of those charges. Now they want us to vote for someone who openly supports a Marxist organization. That kind of double standard makes my head hurt.

Political Impact

In May, George Floyd died, allegedly at the hands of a police officer who used excessive force. The nation agreed that his death was due to over zealousness on the part of the police. Recently, the full videos came out of the incident which cast doubt on what was initially reported. The coroner’s report also casts doubt on what was initially reported. Nevertheless, the death of George Floyd set off riots almost instantly in a number of cities in America. Oddly enough, the cities most affected were controlled by Democrats and in many cases minorities. The rioting made no sense. More than that, the fact that you had large groups suddenly appear almost out of nowhere in these cities was also troubling. Well, we have had three months of rioting in many cities. It’s not protesting when people are throwing bricks and setting things on fire. I am not sure why the media is still calling these events protests. So what is the political impact of this chaos?

Breitbart posted an article today that provides some interesting information.

The article notes:

In a statewide poll conducted between June 14 and June 18, the Marquette Law School Poll showed 61 percent of Wisconsin voters approved of the Black Lives Matter protests, while 36 percent disapproved of those protest. By a margin of 25 points, more Wisconsin voters approved of BLM than disapproved of BLM.

That same Marquette Law School poll conducted in Jun showed Joe Biden leading Donald Trump by 6 points in the state, 50 percent to 44 percent.

In a subsequent statewide poll conducted between August 4 and August 9, the Marquette Law School Poll saw approval drop 13 points, from 61 percent to 48 percent, while disapproval jumped by 12 points, from 36 percent to 48 percent. Stunningly, the net margin of approval versus disapproval among Wisconsin voters of BLM has dropped from plus 25 to zero in just two months.

That same Marquette Law School Poll conducted in August showed that Joe Biden leads Donald Trump by 5 points in the state, 49 percent to 44 percent.

The article concludes with the following:

In June, 59 percent of white voters approved of the Black Lives Matter protest, while 38 percent disapproved. In August, approval among white voters dropped precipitously to 45 percent, while disapproval increased to 51 percent.

In contrast, there was virtually no change of approval for Black Lives Matter among black or Hispanic voters between the June poll and the August poll.

In June, 77 percent of black or Hispanic voters approved of the Black Lives Matter protests, while 19 percent disapproved. In August, 78 percent of black or Hispanic voters approved of the Black Lives Matter protests, while 20 percent disapproved.

There was also a significant disparity of voter attitudes by geographic region within the state.

If black lives matter to Black Lives Matter, why are they burning down black businesses and the businesses of people who claim to support them?

The First Amendment Only Applies When It Is Convenient

Red State Observer posted an article yesterday about some recent actions by Mayor Lori Lightfoot of Chicago.

The article quotes the Chicago Tribune:

Lori Lightfoot defended the Chicago Police Department’s ban on protesters being able to demonstrate on the block where she lives, telling reporters Thursday that she and her family at times require heightened security because of threats she receives daily.

Lightfoot refused to elaborate on the specific threats, but said she receives them daily against herself, her wife and her home. Comparisons to how the Police Department has protected previous mayors’ homes, such as Rahm Emanuel’s Ravenswood residence, are unfair because “this is a different time like no other,” Lightfoot told reporters.

“I think that residents of this city, understanding the nature of the threats that we are receiving on a daily basis, on a daily basis, understand I have a right to make sure that my home is secure,” Lightfoot said.

Doesn’t anyone else have the right to make sure that their home is secure? It seems to me that the mayor’s job is to protect all of the citizens–not just herself.