This is just one comment to the video. ‘Translation: Let’s shut down the first amendment make American reprogrammed again. This guy was always socialism with a happy face. Once people were on to him his popularity went down. With all this crap going on now with Dominion et al, I’m beginning to wonder if he even won the Oval Office legitimately in the first place.’
‘A group of protestors were arrested on a public sidewalk outside of University of California San Francisco’s (UCSF) Zuckerberg Hospital in San Fransisco last month, and are now being charged with trespassing despite not stepping foot on hospital grounds until after their arrest.
In video footage shared by the organization Pro-Life San Francisco, protestors are seen being arrested by local authorities and then walked into the hospital, where they began chants intended to draw attention to the hospital’s use of aborted fetuses for publicly funded experimental studies.
Martin Cannon, senior counsel at the Thomas More Society, is representing one of the protestors, Terrisa Bukovinac, executive director of Pro-Life San Francisco. Cannon said he believes it was local sheriffs, not hospital staff or security, who walked Bukovinac and others into the hospital after arresting them for stepping past an arbitrary barricade outside.
Does the following really surprise a true conservative?! ‘A prominent LGBT rights group is trying to persuade former Vice President Joe Biden and his presumptive administration to adopt guidelines that could lead to the closing of private Christian colleges and universities.
Activists at the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) have written a document titled Blueprint for Positive Change, which gives 85 pro-LGBT policy and legislative recommendations for a potential Biden administration to enact.
Acts 22:28 And the chief captain answered, With a great sum obtained I this freedom. And Paul said, But I was free born.
‘Well known Christian leaders today remind people that we’re not on earth to sustain America, but to serve God and His kingdom. It’s true. How does that thought change evangelistic efforts right now? Does it stop parents in churches from thinking about how they will educate their children? Does that mean ignore the deluge of sewage that comes through the media and the easy accessibility to it? What if your people don’t have a job because the economy is shot? If the church budget shrinks, what does that do to mission support? When you go to plan your week, how will you do church with the shut down or new regulations? How is hospital visitation? How does your church relate to the fast downward slide of Christianity? How will your church relate to “wokeness”? There are at least two countries right now. One country thinks there was fraud in the election even if no one hacked the computer voting systems. Ballot harvesting, a modern kind of stuffing the ballot box in the age of Covid-19, isn’t “voting.” I’m not going to review all the other issues. One country covers this. The other doesn’t. One calls the election and titles someone president-elect and moves on. The other says that counting only legal votes, he won in a landslide. Both cannot be true. One says the Biden family enriched themselves all over the world and are owned by the Chinese. The other just ignores that. One says Trump was a Russian agent and the other says the government spied on a political campaign. These cannot both be true. One side says they want the liberty to label someone a Sodomite and call that activity sin. A high percentage of the other sides says they want that speech to be illegal and punished. One side wants to treat transgenderism as legitimate, legal, protected, and promoted through affirmative action. Let’s put transgenders in positions of authority among other affirmative action. That same side wants to keep killing babies. The other side wants both of those last two eliminated. I’m not going to keep going. It would be a book length treatment to characterize the two countries. To obey the Bible in this culture, a church must take a stand against what is happening not only in the culture, but also in other churches. In this country, that also means attempting to do something about it. This is part of being salt of the earth. Salt in Matthew 5:13-16 is mainly a preservative. That doesn’t mean that the church stops being the church, but the church still must stand against sin. It must not allow sin and false doctrine in the church, but it also much stand up against it in the culture. If not, what’s going to happen is that very soon, people are going to be in jail and starting a new prison ministry. Any one of us can gladly and happily say that we would welcome a prison ministry and call on the Apostle Paul as an example. The world was already deeply in that condition when Paul began. Starting in the 16th century, the world began to change. True Christians were still being persecuted and killed in Europe, but that was changing. Then a boatload of Christians came to the new world and that impacted everywhere. Wouldn’t you say that they weren’t ignoring the country to serve God and the kingdom? The two went together. That move that culminated on November 11, 1620, just over four hundred years ago, made a lot of difference to our world history in the proceeding exactly four centuries. Would you agree that we’re at the precipice of just throwing that away or at least allowing it to disappear? The way to preserve freedom that would allow for continuation of biblical church activity is not by ignoring differences and learning to get along with them. One of the two sides will not allow for that. Getting along will mean subjugating biblical teaching and practice to their views. Maybe you think it would be good for the church to go underground. Pastors and other church leaders preparing their people for persecution and operating underground is not just ignoring the country to serve God and the kingdom. We’re already to a place where these forces cannot be ignored. We’re not there yet, but I’m writing here saying that we’re close to that and we should try to postpone it at least. Both postponing the loss and then total loss of freedoms necessary for a church to function according to scripture can be done while participating in a wholesale obedience to biblical church life. All the evangelism, discipleship, edification, building, worship, discipline, and growth can occur at the same time as attempting to defend freedom. Capitulation should not be a strategy. Biblical principle can be relied upon to do both. If we’re going to pray that we can live peaceable lives (1 Timothy 2:1-2), then we should do everything we can do to live those lives. Faith without works is dead. Priorities should be kept. The church should still be the church. It isn’t the government. The church, however, should not sit back and try to remain neutral and straddle both countries. That’s what I see John Piper, Tim Keller, Mark Dever, most of the Southern Baptist Convention, the Calvary Chapel type of churches, almost all of evangelicalism, and now much of fundamentalism doing. Warnings come from pseudo-Christians that we won’t be a good enough testimony to evangelize if we support one side in the culture war. They long ago capitulated to the culture in numbers of ways and are attempting to write a theology into the Bible that fits with their compromise. They think that is the best future, because a bridge will still exist to one of these two countries to bring them into the church. Every time I write something about the subject matter of this post, I get attacked by multiple anonymous commenters ridiculing me and attacking me as misrepresenting Christianity. This is the “love is love” crowd. This is the Christianity of the leftist value sign. They attempt to create an environment of fear that will scare someone from saying anything. Virtually all of the Bible clashes with one of the two countries that exist. Much of the Bible also clashes with most of the other country too, but the second one of these two would like to allow someone still to keep and preach all of the Bible. Much of this side still thinks absolute truth should exist. That’s where we’re at right now. What can we do? We must do all the normal things, like vote, speak out, write, even give money, and show support for the right side. I don’t know what else is going to be necessary. Right now, when you are threatened by someone and insulted, you can’t let that stop you from your support of the right side. Some are using the “S” word, secession. I don’t know how that will occur. It wouldn’t be the secession of states likely, but the secession of counties. You’ve seen the red map.
The red part and the blue part each has two very different views of the world. Sure, the red people live in blue parts and blue people live in red parts. That will likely continue. However, the sides are so separate, I believe two countries are necessary now. The two view can’t coexist. I don’t know how this split is going to take place, but true Christians should be prepared to know what they will do, depending on how it’s going to occur. Let me give you a thought experiment. Let’s say that Texas wins this lawsuit against the four swing states that didn’t follow their own election law, violating the Constitution. In other words, let’s say that the Supreme Court turns the election to the legislatures of Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin, which happen to all four be Republican majority. All four of them choose Trump electors. Trump wins, because that’s enough to give Trump 270 plus electors. Do you think violence will result? Should the Supreme Court ignore the Constitution because it knows that violence will occur? The blue media is just calling the Texas lawsuit crazy. Haven’t you heard that argument before? Anti-abortion just crazy. Pro-boundary crazy. Anti-transgender crazy. If not crazy, then wacky conspiracy theorists, who are overturning an election and disenfranchising inner city voters. This is a right wing coup, that kind of thing. These are the Russion hoaxers speaking. They say a girl can be a boy and vice versa. That’s the country they envision. They defend a man wearing a poofy woman’s gown as normal. I think the Texas lawsuit is legitimate. I believe they are right. The left isn’t saying they are not giving a good legal or Constitutional argument. The left is just saying they are crazy. If the Supreme Court is still too woke to vote according to the meaning or writing of the Constitution, its actual text, what does the red side do? Do they just be super nice and let it go. They know what happened. Their side was too scared to vote according to the law. What will this mean? This seems like a precipice to me. I don’t mind being an evangelist in a blue region. However, I don’t want the country by necessity to become blue. It shouldn’t. Churches can’t and shouldn’t ignore this. They can tell their people the truth and that’s not being a “bad testimony,” something we’re being told by woke evangelicals, because they think that will work. When I’m out preaching the gospel, politics themselves do not enter in. It doesn’t relate to that. We need to know that serving the kingdom or working at protecting liberty isn’t binary. Yes, that word, binary, is useful here. We can keep these two thoughts in our brain at the same time, not disparate. They are connected thoughts. We can defend from scripture keeping this two ideas in our heads at the same time. When someone mocks us or attacks us, we don’t have to capitulate to “be a good testimony.” That’s just a strategy on their part. They’ve studied us and think it will work. They know how we tick. Don’t listen to it. It’s a lie.’https://kentbrandenburg.blogspot.com/2020/12/no-christian-in-united-states-is-going.html
Sleepy Joe Biden doesn’t have too long on this earth and what time he does have should be in an old folks home bothering the nurses but there are some thinking Creepy Joe can save the planet! Whatever! ‘Writing in The Diatribe (formally The Conversation) a non-climate-scientist named Edward R. Carr who nevertheless serves the IPCC in a scientific advisory capacity says while the election of Joe Biden will save the planet because we know what to do, it might not because we don’t know what to do. After listing all the things the next President “can do quickly” while bypassing Congress, advice he probably didn’t give Donald Trump, he says “One of the big challenges – and the place where Biden needs to start – is the lack of understanding of systemic risks, opportunities and costs of both climate actions and inaction.” What? You don’t know what’s happening, what to do about it or what it would cost? You used to sound so sure. But not now. And why? Because (gasp thud) “Right now, there is no federal agency tasked with developing a systemic understanding of climate change impacts across society.” Right. Other than the 13 agencies that prepare the US National Climate Assessment every four years. But what we need now is more bureaucracy.
Whatever one thinks of the proposed solution, the admission of ignorance is important. And certainly true. We do not know nearly as much about climate change as we wish we did or, indeed, many people shout that we do. For instance, to take just one small settled piece of the settled science, namely Greenland glaciers, researchers at Hokkaido University just declared triumphantly that the long-hypothesized 1,000-km-long river of meltwater deep within the ice might exist unless it doesn’t.
We ask your leave to quote a lengthy passage here because it gives some insight into what science does, and does not, actually say. “Radar surveys have previously mapped Greenland’s bedrock buried beneath two to three thousand meters of ice. Mathematical models were used to fill in the gaps in survey data and infer bedrock depths. The surveys revealed the long valley, but suggested it was segmented, preventing water from flowing freely through it. However, the peaks breaking the valley into segments only show up in areas where the mathematical modelling was used to fill in missing data, so could not be real.” So a survey of actual data suggested a segmented river because models filled in gaps. Which is the opposite of actual data. But now another model says if we erase the gaps inside the computer then something we can’t name might happen unless it doesn’t. “’The results are consistent with a long subglacial river,’ [co-author Christopher] Chambers says, ‘but considerable uncertainty remains.’” And that’s just about whether one thing inside one part of Greenland is even there.
Consider also that recently German’s Potsdam Institute made a highly-touted prediction based on its superior El Niño model that fell flat on its ocean. And it was only for one year and only for one aspect of the extraordinarily complex phenomenon of ocean currents. The state of our understanding even of the bits and pieces of climate is not merely fragmentary but often so deficient as to be anti-knowledge. And yet a great many people persist in saying that we may not understand what the parts are doing now, or will next year, but we know what’s going to happen to the whole in 80 years.
Carr is not in that category. Or rather, he is and isn’t. Which means there is much to criticize in his piece. And not just that “If his administration focuses only on what is politically possible and fails to build a coordinated response that also addresses the social and economic ramifications of both climate change and the U.S. policy response, it is unlikely to succeed.” He may tout his experience forging consensus in Washington: “I have spent much of my career working on responses to climate change internationally and in Washington. I have seen the quiet efforts across political parties, even when the rhetoric was heated. There is room for effective climate actions”. But his insistence that the President must not just do what is “politically possible” makes us wonder if he knows what those words mean. But never mind. If you’ve done six impossible things before breakfast, why not discuss climate over dinner at Milliways?
Well, because apparently we don’t really know anything about it, due to the lack of One Big Agency to… uh… add to what all the other agencies are doing. And if such an agency is crucial, and missing, how do we know we must act, and act now, given how much he admits we don’t know?
We would also ask whether science is not best done by decentralized researchers critiquing one another’s work independently rather than a giant agency focused on massaging a consensus at the behest of its political masters. Like, say, the IPCC. And also for what purpose the U.S. government has expended tens upon tens of billions of dollars on climate research if at the end of it we face this “lack of understanding of systemic risks, opportunities and costs of both climate actions and inaction” or of “a systemic understanding of climate change impacts across society”.
Systemic is such a sophisticated word. We feel wiser just transcribing it. But being yokels at heart, we can’t shake the feeling that the reason we don’t have systemic understanding of systemic risks is that we don’t understand the bits and pieces very well. Thus we’ve been told the science was settled since at least 1997. The debate has ended repeatedly. We know all and see all. And then suddenly Biden would save us if only we knew what was happening and what to do about it but he doesn’t.
How did it get this way and how does it continue? Is it only going to get worse if ‘Biden ain’t my President’ gets the WH? Probably!
‘In one of its most flagrant election-related censorship moves to date, YouTube has announced that from today, it will start removing any videos alleging that “widespread fraud, errors, or glitches changed the outcome of any past US presidential election.”
For the 2020 US presidential election, YouTube is applying this policy to all videos uploaded on or after December 9. It will then start issuing strikes to videos that are uploaded after Inauguration Day (January 20, 2021) and then removed under this policy.
YouTube also revealed that it has already removed more than 8,000 channels and thousands of “harmful and misleading elections-related videos” under its existing policies.
This change means that any videos sharing or agreeing with President Trump’s official legal argument, which alleges that Trump won the election and that there is evidence of widespread voter fraud that changed the result of the election, will now be purged from the platform.
YouTube has made this change while the President’s legal team still has active legal challenges to the 2020 US presidential result, meaning that simply covering the arguments presented in these ongoing challenges could now be a violation of these rules.
YouTube claims that these changes are part of a longstanding “Presidential Election Integrity” policy that prohibits making similar allegations against any past US presidential election.
Yet mainstream media outlets on YouTube have been given free rein to question the 2016 US presidential election results and even allege that Russia hacked the election.
“*THIS* is the kind of censorship you would see in Russia or Communist China,” journalist Kyle Becker tweeted in response to YouTube’s announcement. “Don’t think just because you’re in ‘America’ that this isn’t the same kind of thing. It is. Down-pointing red triangle.”
YouTube revealed that it has already removed 8,000 channels and thousands of “harmful and misleading elections-related videos” for violating its existing policies. It added that its enforcement of this new policy will “ramp up in the weeks to come.”
The mass, one-sided censorship that is likely to come about as YouTube enforces this policy follows other policy changes that have prohibited content that opposes mainstream narratives on topics such as coronavirus treatments, lockdowns, and more.
‘The honor code at the United States U.S. Air Force Academy states: “A cadet will not lie, cheat, steal or tolerate those who do.” However, recently the Air Force Academy and Air Force leadership have carved out an exception to the honor code — False, woke political correctness is permitted.
In July, the Academy football coaches produced a three minute video that is posted on an Academy website featuring head football coach Troy Calhoun speaking about racism. In the video Calhoun and other coaches repeat the phase black lives matter seven times, they speak about “racism, Jim Crow laws and police brutality.” Some half truths, the rest outright lies.
Black Lives Matter is an avowed radical Marxist organization whose intent is to overthrow our democracy. BLM protesters, read rioters, are responsible for millions of dollars of damage this past summer; they blocked traffic chanting “death to the pigs,” and famously “pigs in a blanket, fry them like bacon.” As a retired Los Angeles Police sergeant: I am outraged and every American who cherishes this great country should be as well.
My next-door neighbor, USAF Lt. General Rod Bishop, retired, USAFA Class of 74, is leading an effort to get the offensive and false video removed from the Academy’s website, thereby removing the impression the Academy endorses Black Lives Matter.
Lt. General Bishop is joined in his efforts by other graduates of the Academy, all retired senior and general officers, and a number of deeply concerned citizens (including me). Dozens have called and hundreds of emails have been sent to the former and current superintendents and others in the Academy leadership. Their plea originally was — just take the video off the internet. To a man and woman, we condemn the evil of racism, something all of us have fought against in our daily lives.
BLM claims to advocate for African Americans, yet they have done nothing to stop the killing of African Americans from babies to the elderly in Chicago and other major cities. Any suggestion that the Black Lives Matter organization is endorsed by the USAFA is intolerable (“…nor tolerate those who do.”).
Our common sense objections fell on deaf ears at the Academy. Ultimately, a formal complaint written by a USAFA graduate and attorney was submitted to the U.S. Air Force Inspector General. The concerns were first reviewed by four former Air Force lawyers who all were in agreement — the BLM video violated Department of Defense regulations prohibiting political activity, “…even the appearance of…”
The USAF IG found no merit to the complaint and therefore the appearance of the USAFA endorsement of the radical and violent BLM remains available to all on a USAFA website; unbelievable.
Consider the very real danger to our republic — woke, politically correct lies are supported and even being taught at the USAFA.
This is not only a clear violation of the honor code, but can only lead to further divisiveness— something that can destroy “good order and discipline” in our United States Air Force.
‘Nasdaq on Tuesday announced it asked the Securities and Exchange Commission for permission to require companies listed on its United States stock exchange to increase board diversity by having at least one woman and one person who self-identifies as underrepresented or LGBTQ and to publish board diversity reports, which would make it the first major exchange to demand companies disclose more than the legal requirements.’https://www.judicialwatch.org/in-the-news/nasdaq-diversity-requirements/
whatyareckon 