The Left's Embarrassing Ignorance: Who Sits, Who Stands?

So the Left is pushing this insane idea that elon Musk is the real power in Washing ton and that Trump is subservient to him.  It's probably more a calculated provocation than ignorance but for some it is no doubt ignorance.  Vecause in the latest attempt to prove it their ignorance is so transcendaent it's embarrassing.

Supposedly a picture sows that Musk is standing while talking to trump who is sitting down and that is supposed to prove tht Musk has the dominant osition and that trum p is subservient to him.

I kept waiting for someone to point out the obvious.  We aren't a monarchy so mayb we are less sensitive to this than a monarchy's citizens ould  be, but no, actually it applies here too, even in this classeless society.

That is, that it is the subservient one who stands in the p;resence of the monarch.  It is a breach of rank to sit in the prsence of a king or queen.  Some servancts must always remain standing in their presence.  that's what waiting on them means.   Others may sit when the monarch sits.

In America we stand when the judge enters the courtroom and sit when the judge tells us we may.  It is the same in other venuies when peopel of rank ener a room.  the others stand for their entry and do not sit until they sit.  

this should be so well knownn that these crazy ideas couldn't have survived half a minute, but crazy ideas hav an unfortunate shelf life these days.

h I just thought of another example..   In the series Downston Abbey, which was pretty popular here in America, thereere is a scneein which the cook has to come upstairs to speak to the earl for whom she works.  He gives her some information which makes her nearly faint and she suddenly apologiz3es to him for having to sit down or shell'll fall.  Not normally allowed to sit in his presence.  See?

Of course this has nothing at all to do with Trump and Musk because we are a classless society and the scene in question is not a cereminial situation in which rank might matter, although even oin tht case I don't think it applies.   Anyway in the scene in the picture it absolutely does not apply.  We sit when we need to a dn stand when it's appropriate for other reasons than rank.

Actually I suspect that in England's clas society the cook would most likely simply faint dead away and wouldn't even try to sit down.   Or if it was permissible in the time covered by Downston Abbey maybe things were just liberalized enough, on the brink of the breakup of the aristocracy, that at least she could apologize and grab for a chair and kjnow the earl woudl forgive her.

More on HCR

 Oh goo grief, I just can't stand what this woman is saying.  I'ts hard to stop listening to her because she is so maddening and she obviously has some influence if what some of her interviewers have said is true, that she has two million followers.  I suppose she isn't the only purvery or of these things of course, there must be lots of sources for those crazy people out in the streets yelling against perfectly legtiimate actions by the Trump administration.  What's scary of course is that this sheer evil could win in the end bujut because of the aggressive volume of their voices.  It doesn'[t take many sometimes, just noicse and idsruption.  

Anyway, following on from my comments in the previous post I find her saying thta the government is a part of our gross national product.  What?  What on earth is she talking about?  the governmetn?  this is so bizarre I don't know what to say, it's just craziness.     Then she goes on to say that the tazx cuts by Reagan, and rgulation cuts, that supposedly built up the economy of the country, and yes they dcertainly did as I've said before, doublint ghte tax revenue for starters, but she says that between regan and Biden what "really" happened was that fifty trillion, yes I' msure she said trillion but it's so absurd I'm going to have to check again, any wy  anyway, fifty trillion tdolloars supposedly went from the bottom ninety percent of American cictizens to the top ten perscent or something like that.  How this happened of course she doesn'[t bother to try to explain such just asserts it althoyughjt it's got to be just about the most crazy thing she's said so far.  

Cheked again.  Yes she said fifty trillion.  Yikes.  And says that supposedly all those tax cuts and regulation cuts were supposed to redistribute welath downward but instead reidistributed it upward, and she said to the ONE percent, not to tht ten percent as I had it abov3e.  Well, the funny thing is that there is actual IRS information available that saiys clearly that Regan's tax and regulation cuts grew the economy to the extent that the tax revenue doubled in his term in office.   that means that more people were working, wages were higher, mjore buinesses were created and all that.  That's not exactly "recddicstribution downward" but the right doesn't talk that way, it's growing the general wealth of the whole American economy from which all benefit.   No, nothing went from the lwer income brackets to the upper income brackets.  And of course she doesn't bother to tggive any evidence anyway, because of course there isn't any.   Lefties always think it's enough just to announce something to make it true, and if it seems to their challenged logical ability that if you cut taxes on the rigch it is the rich who will benefit facts don't matter anywayk, , itjust means that therefore the rich benefited.    I'll say it again, the evidence is that the whole national economy ebenefited and that means for everybody.

I can hardly believe what she saysx next.   She mentions that the different Protestant sects that underlay each of the original thirteen colonies wer  often at odds in such as way that Madison in particular wanted to be sure that "mjorality" didn't dictate things in the new federal ctgovernment.  I'm always rolling my eyes at what she says and this one is a real eye roller.  No, it was specifically the theology of the Protestant sects tht wasn't to dominate the federal goverfnmetn, meaning you couldn't choose one ovder the others.  Morality and theology are not the same thing, and in fact we know tht morality exists without religion at all, although of course it can be argued, as george Washing ton did in his final address to the natuion, that morality shold not be separated from religion.  Christianityh is founded on a set of morals that he and the other founders regarded as superior and very definitely wanted to see motivating the citizens, and of course the representatives in government as well.  QhaR AN ABSOURE DIEA THAT MORALITY WASN'T TO HAVE SUCH A ROLE IN THE GOVERFNMENT.  tHERE IS DEFINITELY SOMETHING WRONG WITH hcr'S THINKING.    rELGIOUS SECT AS ESTABLSIHED CHURCH OF THE REALM, NO, BUT MORALITY AIS SOMETHING ELSE AND IT DOES not DIFFER FROM SECT TO SECT.  tHEOLOTYGY DIFFERERS, BUT NOT MORALITY.

wHEN SHE MAKES SUCH ERRORS AS THESE SHE SHOWS THAT SHE REALLY SHOULDH'T BE IN A POSITION TO GIVE ADVICE TO ANYONE, BUT THE AD THING IS THAT APPARENTLY SHE HAS A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO TAKE ER SERIOUSLYH.  vERY SAD.

fORGOT THE POINT i USUALLY LIKE TO MAKE ABOUT THIS, THAT jOHN aDAMS IS FAMOUS FOR SAYING THAT OUR FORM OF CONSTITTUIONAL CGOVERNMENT IS NOT ADEQUATE FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF ANY OTHER THAN A MORAL AND RELIGIOUS PEOPLE.  bOTH MORAL AND RELIGIOUS.  aND HE MEANT cHRISTIAN.  aLTHOUGH OTHER RELIGIOUNS ARE NOW INCLUDED IN THE FEREEDOM OF RELIGION AND THERE WAS EVEN SOME CONFUSION ABOUT THTA IN THE DAY OF THE FRAMERS,  THE ORIGINAL COLONIES WERE ALL cHRISTIAN, THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE WERE SERIOUS cHRISTIANS, AS TOQUEVILLE NOTED A CENTURY LATER, AND WE SHOULD THINK OF OURSELVES AS A cHRISTIAN NATION.  iT IS ONE OF THE REASONS WE ARE ALWAYS ON THE VERGFGE OF ISASTER i AM SURE, THT WE DON'T HOLD TO THAT BASIC PRINCIPLE.

nOT JUST GENERIC BIBLICAL RELIGION BUT cHRISTIANITYH ITSELF WSAS TO BE THE GUIDING PHILOSOPHICAL FRAMEWORK OF THIS NATION.  aCCORDING TO cHRLIE kIRK AS i UNDERSTAND IT, EVERY CONSISUTION OF EARVERY ONE OF THE COLONIES REFERRED TO jESUS cHRIST.  tO FORM A FEDERAL GOVERNMENT WITHOUT THAT BASIC FOUNDING MENTIALITY IS SOME KIND OF CRIME, A BETRAYAL.  tHERE ARE ENOUGH REFERENCES IN THE DECLARATION OF iNDEPENDNENCE TO HOLD ONTO TO MAKE THAT CASE, BUT THE FRAMERS THEMSELVES DIDN'T HOLD ONTO IT AS THEY SHOULD HAVE AND OF COURSE TSINCE THEN ANTIChciriSTIAN THINKING HAS TAKEN HOLD.   wELL, THIS IS A FALLEN WORLD AND IT ISN'T GOING TO LAST FOREVER.  i SUPPOSE WE'LL NEVER BE ABLE TO GET BACK OUR ORIGINAL FOUNDING  PHILOSOHY.  i JUST HOPE WE DON'T FAIL TO KEEP UP THIS PRESENT RETURN TO BASIC RIGHTEOUSNESS, BECAUSE THE FALL WE WERE HEADED FOR BEFORE TRUMP WON THIS ELECTION WAS PRETTY TERRIFYINGLY TOTALITARIAN UGLY.

fRIA fEBRUARY 14  hAPPY vALENTINE'S DAY AND ALL THAT.

lISTENING ON FROM THE ABOVE.  wANT TO TRY TO BE VERY BREIEF ABOUT IT THOUGH.  nEEED TO SAY ABOVE THAT mADISON'S OBJECTION TO AN ESTABLISHED RELIGION IN THE GOVERNMENT WAS REALLY A CONCERN TO PROTECT THE cHURCH AND NOT THE GOVERNMENT.  wE'VE GOR IT ALL TURNED AROUND NOW, ALONG WITH THE GENERAL MISUNDERSTANDING THAT WE'RE NOT TO HAVE ANY cHRISTIAN REXPRESSIONS WHATEVER IN THE SOECIETY, ESPECIALLY IN CONNNECTION WITH INSTITUTIONS SUCH AS PUBLIC SCHOOLS.  tHIS IS not WHAT THE FRAMERS HAD IN MIND.  THE INAUGURATED THE PRACTICE OF OPENING cONGRESS WITH PRAYER AFTER ALL.    uNFORTUNATELY NOW THEY OPEN cONTGRESS WITH ALL SORTS OF PRAYERS FROM ALL SORTS OF RELIGIONS THAT GOD CONCDEMENDS.  THAT CERTAINLY CAN'T DO THE NATION ANY GOOD.  sAME AS HAVING A nATIONAL cATHEDRAL WHERE ANYTHING BUT TRUE cHRISTIAN DOCTRINE IN S PREACHESD.    

aNYWAY, hETHER cOX rICHARDSON HAS GONE ON TO TALK ABOUT usaid, THE AGENCY OR ORGANIZATION OR WHATEVER IT IS THAT eLONE mUSK AND HIS TEAM HAVE RECENTLY BEEN EXPOSING AS JAM PACKED WITH FRAUD, WASTE AND CORRUPTION.  hcr IS GIVING A VERY SWEET SORT OF PICTURE OF THE AGENCY AS A PURVERYOR OF AID TO FOREIGN NATIONS THAT IS GOOD FOR   THAT IS GOOD FOR US AS WELL AS FOR THEM, SUCH AS FOOD FOR HUNGRY CHILDREN AND WATER AND OTHER NECESSITIES WHERE THEY ARE LACKING.    nO MENTION WHATEVER OF ALL THE FRAUD THE mUSK TEAM HAS UNCOVERED, TONS OF IT, AND APPARENTLY A LOT MORE TO COME.  wHICH DOESN'T MEAN THAT THERE AREN'T SOME GOOD THINGS THE ORGANIZATION DOES, AS THE doge TEAM ITSELF KEEPS POINTING OUT, OR tRUMP DOES ANYWAY.  THERE IS NO ACTION TO GET RIDE OF THE GOOD ONES AT ALL.   aLL THAT IS SAID IS THAT SINCE THERE ARE SO MANY MORE CORRUPT ONES THAN GOOD ONES THE GOOD ONES WILL PROBABLY BE MOVED TO THE sTATE dEBPARTMENT EVENTUALLY WHERE THEY CAN DCONTINUE TO DO WHATEVER THEY NOW DO.    THE doge TEAM WANTS ONLY TO DEAL WITH THE ABUSEE OF TAXPAYER MONEY AND DO AWAY WITH THE PROGRAMS THAT FUNCTION ONLY FOR THAT PURPOSE.  

yOU'D THINK THE dEMOCRATS WOULD BE JUST AS PHAPPY AS THE rEPUBLICANS TO ELIMINATE FRAUSD, WASTE AND ABUSE OF TAXPAYER MONEY, SO THEIR OUTRAGE IS HARD TO EXPLAIN AS ANYTHING OTHER THAN BENEFITTING FROM THE FRAUD, WSTE AND CORRUPTION.   iF NOT, WHAT IS IT?   

sHE ALSO KEEPS TALKING ABOUT eISENHOWER IN RELTAION TO usaid, BUT HE HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH IT.  iT WAS jOYHN f. kENNEDY THAT ESTABLISHJED IT BY AN EXECUTIVE ORDER AS i'VE HEARD FROM MORE THAN ONE SOURCE.   iT'S PART OF THE eXECIUTIVE BRANCH OF THE GOVERNMENT BY THE WAY, WHICH DOEN'ST GET INTO THIS CONVERSTAION MUCH, BUT THAT GIVENES IT , OR THAT MAKES IT A LEGITIMATE TARGET FOR tRUMP AS TODAY'S eXECUTIVE bRANCH.  iT DOESN'[T HAVE TO GO THROUGH cONGRESS TO BE MADE A LEGITIMATE TARGET OF SUCH AN INVETIGATION AS SOME KEEP SAYING BECAUSE IT WASN'T CREATED BY cONGRESS.tHE EXECUTIVE GRANCH IS WELL WITHIN ITS RIGHTS TO CLEAN UP ITS OWN ACT IN OTHER WORDS WITHOUT INTERFERENCE FROM THE OTHER BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT.

hcr'S THINKING IS SO WEIRDLY WRONG i KEEP NOT WANTING TO HAVE TO DEAL WITH IT AT ALL, BUT THEN i GET ANGRY ABOUT HER HAVING SO MUCH INFLUENCE WITH SO MUCH WEIRDLY FALSE INFORMATION.     sHE SAYS THT WHAT doge IS DOING IS JUST .   WELL SHE IMPLIES THEY HAVE NO GROUNDS FOR SAYING , HOW DOES SHE PUT IT, THAT usaid IS JUST FOR PEOPLE ON THE TAKE OR WHATEVER.  oN THE TAKE.  iS THAT HOW SHE PUT IT.  wELL i'LL CORRECT IT IF i FIND OUT i'M WRONG BUT i THINK THAT'S WHAT SHE SAID.  iT SEEMS TO BE HER WAY OF REDUING THE DISCOVERY OF ENORMOUS DEPTHS OF WASTE, FRAUD AND ABUSE OF TAXPAYER MONEY TO A CATCHPHRASE OF HER OEWN FOR OSME REASON THAT DOESN'T EXPRESS WHAT THEY'VE ACTUALLY BEEN SAYING.  THEY'VE ACTUALLY found THIS FRAUD, THEY HAVE ACTUAL EVIDENCE OF THIS FRAUD, THEY ARE DOCUMENTING IT, THEY CAN TRACK IT.  tHIS TEAM IS GOOD AT WHAT THEY ARE DOING.  THIS IS NOT SOME MADE UP WILD ACCUSATION AS SHE KPEEPS IMPLYING, THIS IS REAL CORRUPTION THEY ARE FINDING.   bUT SHE SAYS IT'[S ALL JUST AN EXPRESSION OF THIS STORY SHE SAYS IS HELD BY SOME THAT TH GOVERNMENT IS BAD.  hOW'S THAT FOR A NICE LITTLE PIECE OF TRIVILIAZLIZATION.  THE GOVERNME,TN IS BAD.    jUST A STORY THAT REALLY MEANS NOTHING ACCORDING TO HER.  GOLLY GOSH.    tHE WHOLE CONSERVATIVE FOCUS ON THE DANGERS OF bbIG gOVERNMENT WHICH IS A PRINCIPLE TRACEABLE TO THE cONSSITUTION  IS REDUCED BY HER TO THIS ODD LITTLE PHRASE tHE GOVERNMENT IS BAD.    nOT EVEN gOVERNMENT ITSELF IS BAD, JUST THAT THIS GOVERNMENT IS BAD IS WHAT IT SOUNDS LIKE.  THERE'S SOMETHING SO WACKO ABOUT WHAT ISHE IS SAYING IT'S HARD TO FOLOWOW.    i WISH MY TYPING WEREN'T SO BAD.  

i'VE ALREAYDCOMENTED ON SOME OF THE THINGS SHE SAYS NEXT AND THIS POST IS GETTING AWFULLY LONG SO i'LL STO P FOR NOW, BUT ALTHOUGH SHE SEEMS TO BE SAYING SOME REAOSNABLE THINGS ABOUT THE cONSTITUTION IN WHAT FOLOWS SHE ALWAYS SAYS ENOUGH WACKO STUFF TO MAKE ME WANT TO SAY MORE EVENTUALLY.  i DON'T KNOW BUT i'M GOING TO STOP HERE FOR NOW.

Politics Chat: February 7, 2025 - YouTube

\\jUST LISTENED TO THE END AGAIN.  iS SHE REALLY SAYING THERE ARE A LOT OF aMERICAN CITIZENS WHO ARE IN FAVOR OF SENDING MILLIONS, EVEN BILLIONS OF us TAXPAYER'S MONEY TO FOREIGN COUNTRIES TO PROMOTE TRANSGENDER PROPAGANDA OR SUPPORT TRANSGENDER MUTILATION SURGERY WHEN WE'VE GOT PEOPLE HERE WHO STILL CAN'T ET fema TO TAKE CARE OF RHTIE LOSSES FROM hURRICAN E hELEN AND OTHER DOMESTIC SUFFERINGS THAT ARE GOING BEGGING?

wHILE fema SPENDS MILLIONS TO HOUSE ILLEGAL IMIGRANTS IN POSH HOTELS AND FEED THEM POSH FOOD ALTHOUGH SOME OF THEM HAVE COMMITTED CRIMES AGAINST aMERICANS, WHILE THE PEOPLE fema WAS CREATED TO HELTP ARE GOING BEGGING??

yES SHE HASN'T MENTIONED fema, IT JUST SEEMS TO ME TO BE ALL OF A PIECE WITH SPENDING MONEY ON GTRANSGENDER PROPAGANDA IN WHO KNOWS WHERE  AND SHE SAYS WE ARE CALLING FRAUD WHAT SHE THINGS ARE LEGITIMATE EXPENSES FO RTHE GOOD OF THE NATION AND THIS IS THE SORT OF THINGSGG THAT IS BEING TREATED AS FRAUD SO SHE MUST THINKI IT'S ALL JUST FINE AND DANDY AND SHOULDN'T BE CUT.

DOGE the current target of the weird Left

My previous post was about a video by Heather Cox RFichardson, titled Political Chat for February fourth.    tHEN i STARTED LISTENING TO ANOTHER WONE THAT CAME UP BUT i DON'T KNOW THE DATE OF THIS ONE.  iT APPEARS TO FOLLOW THAT OTHER ONE THOUGH, THAT'S ABOUT ALL i THINK i CAN SAY FOR SURE.    aS WITH THE FIRST ONE i'M HAVING A STRUGGLE MAKING SENSE OF WHAT SHE'S SAYING.  sHE SAYS SO MANY ABSURDITIES i CAN'T DECIDE IF SHE'S GOT SOME SOMR TO FOMENTAL PROBLEM OR IS INTENTIONALLY TRYING TO CONFUSE HER LISTENERS, sAUL aLINSKY STYLE PERHAPS.   TWIST THE MEANING OF WORDS AND MAKING IT HARD TO RESPOND TO HER.  

i PROBABLY WOULDN'T PAY SO MKUCH ATTENTION TO IT ISF A FRIEND HAND'T SUGGESTED i LISTEN TO HER, A LIBERAL FRIEND WHO i ASSUME LIKES WHAT SHE HAS TO SAY AND IN FACT MAY BE ENRAGED AGAINST doge IN PARTI ULAR BECAUSE OF WHAT SHE HADS TO SAY ALTHOUGH THAT HASN'T BEEN SEXPLAINED TO MKE YET.  tHRE FRIEND IS TOO ANGRY TO TALK RIGHT NOW SO WE'RE TAKING A BRIREAK FROM CONVERSATION FOR A WHILE.    

wHAT tRUMP AND eLON mUSK ARE DOING WITH doge IS PERFECTLY STANDARD BGOVERNMENT BUSINESS AS USUAL BUT TO HEAR ALL THE RAGE FROM THE lEFT YOU'D THINK IT WAS THE OUTRAGE OF THE CENTURY.   aND rICHARDSON IS ONE OF THOSE WHO PROMOTE THE KIND OF THINKING THAT THE RAGE IS BASED ON.   jUST ANOTHER OF RHTE ENDLESS STREAM OF LIES AGAINST tRUMP THAT STARTED THE MINUTE HE DECLARED HIMSELF AS A PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE WAY BACK WHEN.   THE MAN MUST BE SOME KIND OF THREAT TO THE FRADUDSTERS ON THE lEFT THAT THEY JUST CAN'T ALLOW TO GO UNOPPOSED OR UNRESISTED FOR HALF A SECOND.  nOVODY HAS EVE HAD TO ENDURE THE KIND OF ATTACKS TRUMP HAS HAD TO ENDURE, AND NOW IT'S ALL SPLILLING OVER ONTO mUSK.  iN FACT AT THE MOMENTY IT'S MORE AGAINST mUSK THAN AGAINST tRUMP.  mUST BE TOUCHING SOME KIND OF SENSITIVE STUFF IN HIS doge ROLE i WOULD IMAGINE.  hE'S ALREADY UNEARTHERD A LOT OF FRAUD, ABUSE AND CORRUPTION AND APPARENTLY THERE'S A LOT MORE TO COME, BUT THE lEFT SCREAMS THAT HE'S INTERFERING WITH NORMAL aMERICANS AND NORMAL GOVERNMENT BUSINESS.  sOME COURTS SEEM TO BE JOINING THEM, THE USUAL lEFTIST COURTS OF COURSE, BUTG EVEN THEY MAY HAVE TO BACK OFF, THIS IS JUST TOO ABSURD.

bEING LEGALLYH BLIND i HAVE TROUBLE TYPING SINCE i CAN'T GO BACK AND CORRECT ANYTHING i MISTYPE, AND hEATHER HAS A LONG NAME SO i HOPE i CAN GET AWAY WITH REDUING IT TO HER INITIALS, JUST ACALLING HER hcR.  

tHERE ARE LITTLE THINGS SHE DOES THAT i'VE COME TO SUSPECT AS INTENDED TO BE DISARMING OR DISTRACTING OR SOME SUCH BUT i'LL SKIP PAST THOSE FOR THE MOMENT.  oNE OF THE FIRST SUBSTANTIVE THINGS SHE SAYS IS THAT THIS GOVERNMETN, THIS ADMINISTRATION i MEAN, IS OPAQUE AND HARD TO FIGURE OUT.  sHE SAID THAT IN THE OTHER VIDEO TOO AND BOTH TIMES IT STRIKES ME AS SO UNTRUE IT MUST BE AN INTENTIONAL BUG  SHE WANTS TO PLANT IN OUR HEADS.  i DON'T KNOW, AS i SAID SHE'S HARD TO FIGURE OUT.  bUT THIS ADMINISTRATION, tRUMP THAT IS, IS SO FAR FROM OPAQUE THE CLAIM IS LUDICROUS.  hE'S MAYBE THE FIRST PRESIDENT WE'VE EVER HAD WHO SIMPLE AND PLAINLEY SAID FROM THE START OF HIS CAMPAIGN WHAT HE PLANNED TO DO WHEN HE BECAME pRESIDENT, AND IS NOW VERY CLEARLY DOING EXACTLY WHAT HE SAID HE'D DO.  THAT'S PRETTY TRANSPARENT, NOT OPAQUE AT ALL, AND SINCE SHE ISN'T AT ALL CLEAR WHAT SHE MEANS BY THE TERM i SUSPECT SHE DOESN'T MEAN ANYTHING BY IT AT ALL, SHE JUST WANTS HER LISTENERS TO BELIEVE IT WITHOUT HAVING TO UNDERSTAND IT.

THEN SHE GOES ON TO MENTION WHAT SHE REFERS TO AS A "PUBLIC cCONVERSATION" WHICH IS THE SUPPOSED AGREEMENT BETWEEN MANY ON BOTH LEFT AND RIGHT THAT THEY DON'T WANT mUSK HAVING ACCESS TO THEIR PERSONAL INFORMATION.   hOW MANY SHE DOESN'T SAY BUT ALL THOSE LOUD SCREAMERS OUT IN THE STREETS AT LEAST i'M SURE.   bUT THE FEELING, AND IT'S ALWAYS A FEELING ON THE LEFT ISN'T IT, HARDLY AEVER A SUBSTANTIVE THOUGHT ABOUT ANYTHIHJGG, ANYWAY THE FEELING IS MISPLACED.D  cOMPLETELY.  mUSK HAS ALL THE AUTHORITY TO DO THIS THAT ANYONE WHO HAS ACCESS TO SUCH INFORMATION HAS.  THE ESECOND url i POST BELOW IS vICTOR dAVIS hANSON IN A VERY  BRIEF STATEMENT EXPLAINING EXACTLY WHAT mUSK'S AUTHORIZATION FOR THIS ACTION AT THE TREASURE IS.  THE FIRST url IS TO THE TALK BY hcr i'M RESPONDING TO HERE AND THE SECOND ITS TO hANSSON'S COMMENT ABOUT MUSK'S AUTORIZATION.

wHAT PEOPLE feel ABOUT HIS IS JUST PLAIN IRRELEVANT, ESEPCIALLY SINCE THEY'VE ALL BEEN WHIPPED INTO THEIR FRENZY BY FALSE INFORMATION SUCH AS hcr'S.

tHEN HERE COMES A REAL DOOZY OF A CONVOLUTED MINDBNENDER ABOUT HOW THERE HAS BEEN THIS "CONVERSATION" THAT WORD AGAIN FOR SOME REASON SHE LIKES THAT WORD THOUGH IT'S NOT EXACTLY APPROPRIATE, ANYWAY THIS CONVERATION ABOUT HOW PEOPLE LIKE HER WHO ARE UNHAPPY WITH WHAT mUSK IS DOING ARE cOMMIES OR mARXISTS OF lEFTIES AND SO ON.   aND THIS CONVERSATION ACCORDING TO HER IS ALL ABOUT HOW WE ON THE RIGHT THINK THE GOVERNMENT IS MANIPULATED BY PEOPLE WE DON'T LIKE, SUCH AS WOMEN OR BLACKS OR TRANSGENDERS OR WHATNOWT.  I'LL HAVE TO GO BACK TO GET HER EXACT WORDS.  bUT YIKES WHAT A PIECE OF BIZARRE SLANDER THAT IS.  

No,k  we don't think any of those groups are manipulating anything.  We thijk most of the mare probably victims of the manipulators who are the Marxist ideologuues who have been imposing their ideology on us for decades now and more intensively than ever in reacent years.   they've made up this DEI sutuff that has been twisting the meaning of freedom by pushing just another form of racism on us.   They promote the favoring of some groups over others and that is essentially racism and for sure is a violation of equal rights for wall.   Affirmative Action was already a violation of equal rights by favoring a group, but that was only supposed to be temporary.  Instead it proliferated and morphed into these new more pernicious forms of violating the freedoms of American Citizensx.   they 've mae up this narrative about how whites are opporessors, are racists from birth and are the victimizers of people of color.  People of color didn't make that up, but Marxist ideology is behind it and it's the work of university people  above all.   MCR says she and those on her side are not Marxists or Communists but they are most certainly Marxists.  Maybe she doesn't know it or maybe she jdoes and is just following the propaganda as leftists to.   It is Marixism that is behind theis stuff.  The term Critical Theory is out of Culturqal Marxism.  Yes there is a Cultural Marx

I've been skipping around in some of her other Political Chat videos and shes just a particularly aggressive Leftie, nothing really new in anythighn she says although she says it in a way that is tempting to spend hours unraveling it because it is so perniciously false.    I may come back to it but I think I'll stop here for how.  

The third URL below is another Victor Davis Hanson breif talk, and the others that follow are longer talks by various people covering mostly this DOGE uproroar on the LEft but other facets of the ongoing leftist onslaught.  Yes they are the ones attacking democracy, but of course they make it a huge supposed failure of the right, typical Soul Alinsky lie that just turns things on their head.  If they are doing it they saccuse the right of doing it.  If the right is championing it they will preented that's what they are doing.   And always we are supposedly fascists and hitelr and so on.   No, that is all Marxist strategy to destroy the country.  they've been making inroads for decadeds.  trump is finally putting a rimp intheir plans but how long can it allast with so much powerful evil against us  I don't kinow.  I just have to pray and pareayh and pray and hope the Lord is getting mjuillions more to pray and pray and pray for righteousness to prevail against this onslaught of darkness that wasnt to destroy what used to be the only true bastion of freedom in the world, America.

Politics Chat: February 7, 2025 - YouTube

Victor Davis Hanson: Sorry Liberals. DOGE is 100% Legal. Here’s Why

Victor Davis Hanson: Not Enough People Were ‘Marginalized,’ So Obama Created DEI

Can America Handle The TRUTH? Trump USAID Cuts With Eric Weinstein

Can America Handle The TRUTH? Trump USAID Cuts With Eric Weinstein

Joe Rogan Experience #2237 - Mike Benz

Joe Rogan Experience #2272 - Mike Benz

Heather Cox Richardson for the Left, new to me but apparently has a big following

 I hope I will get back to the previous post and just fill in a desription of what the two links are about, but for now I'm all cuahgt up in a talk I've been listening to  by a leftist historian, Heather Cox Richardson, about the supposed problems and illegalisties of Elon Musk's investigations into government overspending that she is trying to make out to be something else.

I've listened to the first half of her talk twice now and will problably listen a third time, and I still have to hear it all to the end.  And I've had to pray a lot for understanding of what she is doing because it's pretty confusing at first.    the usual leftist falsehoods but something worse than that even that's hard to pin down.  Prayer is the only way to begin to get a handle on this sort of thing and God has been giving me the ability to see some things I'd otehrwise miss.l  It's subtle, it's sophisticated, but it's deception at a high level.

\First  claims that Trump is not being transparent, while according to her Bidcen was, which is allreadye enough get your eyes rolling out onto the floor.  then she says what is going on with Elon Musk's investigations is a coup.  We're living through a coup she says.   She insinuates that Musk is actually the power behind Trump rather than the other way around.  trump was elected partly on the money Musk donated to the campaign.  Huh?   No, trump was elected on his policies.  And Musk joined the team because he likes trump's policies.  And yes Musk does have authorization to do what he's doing, which Richardson shays he does not hae.  He has the authority of an appointment by tgrump to investigated how the government's money is psent, and he has top securtyy clearance too.   Later ehshe intones the refrain we keep heraing from the left that we did not elect Musk.  Well, no, nor died we elect any of the cabinet heads trump has put in place, they are all appointees by tgrump.  In fact I believe secretary of defense is supposed to be a citizen and ot affiliated with the military, according to some protocol someone read on the radio recently.    The President can appoint whomever he likes to these positions, though he needs Congress to give their avdvice and consent. 

So eshe pretencds that it's Musk who is running the new governmetn, and even pretends that Trump is cognitively compromised in the way Biden was understood to be while of course Biden was really not deficient at all.  Hard to believe anyone would still be trying to get away with that one, but she is.   So it's really Musk who is in charge acording to her and he's now embedded in the bowels of the government as she puts it later in the talk, apparently doing something unconstititutional although since nothing she says is backed up by facts how it's unconstitituional is juist another vague insinuation we're supposed to believe without needing evidence.

Then she tries to make it all aout racism and bigotry on the part of MAGA Republicans.  The fact is that it's always been the Democrats who have been the racists and the bigots while it was the Republicans who initiated the Civil ights laws.   of course she is now muddling it all together with LGBTQ stuff, wokeism gender identity and women's rights as if the Republicans oppose all thse things as one lump just because they're bigots an don't like their power being shared with others or some such evil idea.  But the fact is that it was the Republicans who championed civil ritghts for blacks,and the Decmocrats who fought it.  All the rest was more or less invented by the Democrats following Marxism, even feminism, which has its legitimate side but also a Marxist twisting.  Wokeism and gentder identity exdcept fo rhte basic idea that all individuals should share in basic human freedoms, is all a form of oppression against traidtional Americans.  She even throws religious rights into this as if Republicans are against religious rights.  Where she could be getting that I hve no idea ubut ofr sure thatone is the target of the Left and the Right is always the defender of Religious rights.

It's hard to believe but she even continues the lies about trump saying himself that he plans to be a dictator.  Yikes this is a legitimate historian who can't tell a joke from a real statement, and can't understand that even if he did intend to be a dictator he wouldn't say so?  What is the matter with these people?   And even the lie about how he mocked a disabled man, which was shown to be false in  a series of video sthat show trump mocking many people in exactly the same way who wern't disablesd, showing that this mocking gesture he makes is about things the people say, and has nothing whatever to do with this one man's disability.  but this supposed historian goes right ahwad and pushes the same old lie.  

She blurs things together in a very confusing way, like treating FDR and EWisenhower as sharing the same vision.   All this needs more study and more unpacking but I think I'll stop here for now. 

She objects to the plan to eliminate the Department of Education, mentioning thar  it funds Special Needs programs and gives money to poor schools.  Musk and company haven't even got around to that department yet but I have no reason to think they won't deal with it program by program as they are doing with the USAID department or whatever it should be called.  If itgs doing some good work theyn there are way s to preservwe that good work while doing away with the department itself.  It can be moved to another department at least, or so I woulde guess.  Special Needs I'm thinking of tin this case.  Or maybe it can be handled by the states as education always used to be anyway before the Department of education ws created.  It was crdated, by the way in nineteen eighty one.  Some seem to think we've always had it but now it is a late creatuion and things have been going downhill ever since.  We used to have a very high randiking in education and now we're at some very low point.  that's because the department is promoting indoctrination rather than education and other extraneous things.  our high rnding came when we were under state management for educfation.  Bringing it back could only be a good thing.    as for funding poor schools, what eh poor people have needed for years has been fought by the Left and the teacher's union under the department of education, which is school choice vouchers.    they couldn't care less about deducating our children.  It's all about power.

then she goes on to mention grants for nursing homes.  She first says that we don't know if this has been targedted for elimnination or not but she goes on to acts as it if has been.  it probably is not targeted or if it is in the wrong department it can be moved, but she'sd apparently rather insinuate tht rump wasnt ot get rigd of it though there isn't the lsightest reason to think so at this point an no move has been made in that direction.  She just likes to insinuate the most evil thing she can think of.

Throughout this talk it's a lot of insinuation and just about no substance at all, which is standard for the Left.  She doesnt' illoustrate or edefine anything she labels, she just labels and lets it stand withou clarification.  transparency, what does that mean?  Coup?  well finally she says it's a coup because Musk is in charge, not trump.  But his is a lie.   As for what Musk and his team are trying to do she never once mentions the spending fraud they have already uneartherd.  No subjstance whatever.  Just all aboutg wherther they ahve a right to be there or nortt. 'm sure they do but they hmay have to face a weaponized court first.   

to get some idea of the substance of what she's leaving out by way of substance go listen to the first part of the interview of Joe Rogan, no of Bret Weinstein by Joe Rogan at the link in the previous post.   Rogan spells out the wasteful spening  Musk's team has uncovered, which of course richardson doesn't mention at all.

Actaully I suppose she means to be identifying it when she talks about all those categories she says republicans hate because they benefit groups republicans don't like.  Oh right, that's what she's doing.   it's because theyse probtgrams benefit  "those people" that are idsliked by Republicans that they are being targeted.  Oh right.   Oh this is evil.

that's what she does with DEI.  It's not that it's racist and unconstitutional, it's just that Republicans are bigotd against certain classes of people these DEI programs are designed to benefit.  I't s not that DEI puts incompetent people where we need the highest quality of worker, which puts the whole nation in jeaopardy, no, it's just bigotry.  

It's not that hiring people for a job such as air traffic comntroller requires a high lefvel of skill which means that hiring a person for any other quality than that skill is likely to produce shoddy work, no, it's just bigoty.    So we are having all these plan crashes, and whle it MAY not be for this reason,k it's something we shoulde expect could very well happen as a result of DEI.

cluding Airline mechanics.  Which is why things are falling off airplanes too.

And the fire that destroyed so much of the best parts of Los Angeles could vey well be the result of decisions made on a similar basic, for reasons extraneous to the need for the best possible management of the threat of fire to the city.   this includes personnel schosen for jobs they are not qualified enough for, but also decisions made to protect engdangedered species without regard to the imapact on the human population.

this is fantasy thinking where praftical thinking is needed,k and it's fantasy thinking the Left does best.  they think ideologically and it is dangerous.

Monday.  The only thing she's said that I also wonder about is how they can do anything about money that has been appropriated by Congress.  but I don't know that they are doing anything about it anyway.  As I've understood it they are tasked with identifying what is condsidered to be wasteful and bringing that to Trump's attention, at which point he and his consultants will decide what to do about it.  That's how I've understood it.  So her freakout about how they are cutting off money may not have anything to support it.  but again I don't know.  She is using a lot of speculative language howere, like even saying she doesn't know if grants for nursing homes will be affected, althoygh she goes right on to act as if they are being taken away.  

I think I forgot to mention above that among her long list of lies or errors or whtever they are she also said the reagan tax cuts caused a deficit in the economy, when in fact they caused the tax reveneue to double, and this is something you can find at IRS, it's no made up like most of her stuff is.

Her attack on elon Musk is hard to stomach.  the man doesn't need any money so the idea that he has any interet in lining his own pockets through this work is craxy.  In fact I would lithink it could be libel worthy.  the one thing I've learned abourt musk in the last year or so since I startedllistening to interviews with him is that he is genuinely concerned about humanity, about Western civilization and about America.  He wants to help and he uses his money to help.  tesla is to help with the global warming problem.  The space X program is to provide an escape from an uninhabitable earth at some time in the futture.  Musk is a humanitarian in everything he does, and I hate to see him slandered the way this woman is doing.    trump too is President MONSTLY for the same kind of reasons.  He doesn't need the abuse he's been getting, same as Musk doesnt need it.  Neither of them has to do any of this.  they are very rich men who could spend the remainder of their lives in luxurious comfort, but they ahve chosen to be public servancts.  tgrump enjoys the limelight and the contact with people too, but I do think his main reason for being President or wanting to be is patriotism, humanitarianism, and the knowledge that he knows how to do it in a way others just don't.

It's sad, as I say over and over again, that it's just about impossible to get anyone on the left to consider any of this.  I've even discovered that I can provide actual evidence and it doesn't make a dent.  Prove that Trump did not say that Neo Nazis are fine people just by pointing a person to listen to the entire speech he made wherein he clearly denounced the Neo Nazis.  You'd think that would be convincing proof that the media are lying to us, but no, somehow some on the left are able to brush that off, although there are others who have seen what it means and left the party so it's certainly not everyone.   

Continuing on with this woman's talk.  Smearing trump again.  More people voted for someone else than voted for trump, she says?  Really?  golly gosh I thought it was pretty cler hat he ot the popular vote this time.  Why is she lyin about this?   And she suggests, insinuates, that he decided not to hold the inauguration outside because he wasn't going to get the numbers he wanted in the crowd.  This is so sleazy it is hard for me to avoid using some prettry hard language.   It wasn't trump's idea to move inside, lady, oh, woman, and it was very clear that it ws first bvecause the weather was so bad.  One President, I forget who, way back there in the ineteenth centuiry aI believe, died of pneumonia a week aftger he'd stood in the cold to deliver his inaugularation speecyh.   The weather was a real factor.  b ut there was a seconary fact tor that wasn't ever made official but that many suspected, buwhich ws tha security would be a lot easier to maintain in side the building, and security with a President who has been targeted twice for assassination is a real issue.   

I'm certinly in favor of her final advice to make sure we contact our representatives about wshat is going on and do it a lot, and that means us trump supproters.    

this idea that "Musk is in control of the US Governmetn" is just plain instance.  Insance.  She wousounds like a  a paranoid schizophrenic when she says that.  this is absolutely raving bonkers insane.  

Yes, sure people who have a lot of power, which apparently Musk an his team have been given, could do a lot of damage if they were dso inclined.  What is the point of saying that.  Only to suggest to the gullible that they have such motives.  But they were aponjted by trumpf ro a particular task for which they are well qualified and morally worthy.  they also have top security clearance.  What is your problem.

I'm down to the end of her talk and wow is she a pro government loon.  She says the Deep State otherwise known to us on the righrt as the Swamp is really just good people drying to the best for all us Americans, but that Maga has the wrong idea that they are only supporting some group of people we don't identify with.  good grief this is nuts.   the swamp is ufrthering Marxism.  Marxism is antiAmerican and anti humane for that matter.  She is obviously Marxist whether ehse knows it or not and maybe she does know it.  I ahaven't decided if I think she's a clever deceiver or just a lunatic or deceived her self.   But everything she'[s said in this talk is false.  Or ninety nine and half percent of it is.  And I can't think of what part might be true at this point.  It's all false and if she isn'[t just lying she should do a lot more to muster her evidence because she has none and if she tried she'[d soo nfind that out.   Evidedence is not the strong suit of the left.    

She said ot one thing that's true.  That's the bottom line.

Oh now she'[s wrapping up and guess what, although she said jothing has as yet been done to change the status of the grants for nursing homes she's now saying we are now realizing tht THEY ARE CUTTING all these things we depend on and nursing homes is among them.  Remember, I don't ieven think  anything has been cut yet at all, they are jyust in the information gathering phase and nothing has been cut.  that's up to Trump, not up to Elon Musk and his team.     this woman is dangerous.

She has put out a piece of pure misinformation.  I don't think people who do this should be cancelled.  What I think is that they should be sued for defamation.

Oh sorry, I just keep finding more insanity to mention.   she thinks that it's accumulating tax dollars that '"creates welath for all of us?"  What on earth?  What planet does she live on?  Wealth is created by work, by buiklding businesses,k by establishing new businesses.  tax moneyu is one of the fruits of it but the wealth is in the money earned and the ability to buy more, not in taxes.l  Taxes create nothing for anyohnje.  Taxes go to provide , legitimately provide, for the necessary infrastructure and communal needs of the nation, NOT FOR WELFARE PROGRAMS although she keeps trying to say it does.     All this needs to be rethought but it will be a long time before it is done.  Oh she also thinks Soc ial Security is going to be cut?  No, the problem with Social Security is that it's running out of money.  It's going to end up cutting itself if something isn't done about it.   Cutting taxes to free up busineses to exapand and increase employees and so on, along with cutting regulations that strangle such enterprises, is how welath is created in the short run.   She thinks like a Marxist, everything is upside downan dand backwards in the Marxist mind.  

The President is dotty, she says, just doing the usual Alinsky rule of tgaking what is true about the Left and projecting it upon the Right, standard playbook there and she does it a lot in this talk, anyway he's dotty and ther's theis Rogue foreigner in chartge of the government.  again this sounds like a paranoid schizophrenic talking.  Where on earth is she getting such a wacko idea.  He's an appointee of trump's.  the young students working under him and working for him.  They are investigating how money is spent by the government.  They are not cutting anything.  They are not in charge of anything.  they are doing a job as tasked by the President who is far from dotty.  good grief.

With people like this woman against us it is clear we can't let up on our constant vigilance and especially constant prayer.  Prayer prayer and more prayer.  Only god can deal with the mess we're in still despite all the good things that have happened with trump's win.   It's hard to believe people could be so misled but obviously they are.  Half the country still it seems, although some have come over to our side on at least some of the issues.   this is scary stuff.   

Yes they say the same sort of thing.  Burt the evidence is not on their side.  If they ever bothered to look at the evidence.  Which they don't.

No .  No, Trump has not been "talking to El Salvador" about taking Emrican prisoners.  No he has not.  He knows that is not constitutionally possible.  El Salvador offerdered but trump isn't accepting.  but this woman acts as if hes considering it.  She needs to be ansswered, corrected, over and over and over again.  

taxes create wealth?  I'm flabbergasted.  

I couldn't get the URL to this talk and then I just now lost the video and havn'et found it again yet, but another one came up in which she is talking about the same general stuff, how Elon Musk is supposedly in charge ofthings now and he's accessing our personal information, which isn't ihis aim at all and the whole idea is ridiculsou.  yes I'm sure it's available to him but that isn't what he's after and he has no interest in getting our personal stuff.  Anyone who has access to these things has that access and we trust them not to make bad use of it so why is it different with Musk for some reason.  He has this task legitimately, appointed him ty trump, there is no reason to treat him as this woman does as somewhow not trustworthy the way we'd assume anyone given this sort of power is presumed to be trustworthy.      Again she says money is being withheld or some su ch.  Is it really?  I thought they were to investigate, not change anything.    Well, I hope I'll hear from some other source soon what is true about that aspect of things.

Then she says this other absurd thing again.  Supposedoly we MAGA people hate governmetn because it's being manipulated by women and colored people and black people.  this is screamingly insane, just so crazy it's hard to sit still.  and kep typing.   Conservative thinking has always opposed Big govwernemtn.  It is understood to be contrary to the vision of the American Founders.  Governm,ent was to be limited to some very clearly defined areas of national need, like roads and power and thtsat sort of thing.  there's a ta  no, it's an interview with the economist Milton Friedman from back int eh Nineties where he is asked what departments of government he'd like to see eliminated and which he'd like to keep.  He identifies quit a long list he things ks should go that include th Deparment of Education, but of course wants to keep defense and trtansfportation and all those things.  I'll trye to get hold of that URL.   Anyway Richardson is pushing a false line here, as she is with everything else she says.  Smearing us as bigots as usual.  I would LOVE to see these people sued, the way Nicholas Sandman sued his  smearers and won.  

Later still.   Well I need to bring this to an end but now I'm into this other video of Heather C Richardson and tempted to take that one apart line by line too, which would drive me to insanity and mean I'd never get anything lse done so for now I guess I'll put it off at least.   

However, I should note here that I did find out that the Musk team is in fact cutting expenses in some areas, not clear which at this point but they aren't just auditing the records as I'd thought, they are actively following some guideleines for cucting some of the excesses, frauds abuses corruptions, that they are finding.  And USAID in particular is chock full of those.  Of course Heather doesn't think so, she thinkis it's all hunky dory good stuff to provide aid to disadvantaed countries and benefit americans by improved relations with them and so on and so forth.   tgoo much to try to sort out here.

She keeps saying such tempting absurdities though.  Just now I heard her say that there's no essential difference between a republic and a Democracy, just like a golden retriever versus a something else, spaniel maybe I don't remember.    Oh brother.  

Most of what she says is just plain false, some weird misdefinition of conservative categories in particular, but also just plain lies like her continuation of the idea that trump mocked a disabled man for his disability or that he really did say he really did intend to become a dictator.  How cfan you talk to someone who hangs on to such misinformation?      but it it does need to be said that there are legitimate differences between left and right that could always be talked about sensibly I would assume if al lt this extraneous craziness were done asway with.   

Anyway.

Stop stop stop.

 

Trump Dismantles DEI | Glenn Loury & John McWhorter | The Glenn Show

Joe Rogan Experience #2269 - Bret Weinstein

A Fatal Flaw in the MAGA Project I Fear

 Only Chrisitians would agree with me about this, and not all of them I suppose although they  should.  America was great because America was Christian.  Ameria was prosperous and peaceful and a force for good in the world because America was Chrsitian.  Over the decades some have worked hard to prove that this isn't the case, tht our heritage is not from the bible as much as from Greece and Rome, but it isn't so.  It's a popular idea, probably the j dominant idea, but it isn't so.

The episode of Uncommon Knowledge which I've mentioned more than oncde here, with Steven Meyer, Douglass Murray and tom Holland, gets this across very well.  Tom Holland is not a Christian but wrote a book on his researches into the philosophical and cultural origins of America and concluded that America is definitely dominated by Christianity.  He said he discovered that although he had thought the main influence was Greece and Rome, when he compared their morality to what most American live by, insluding himslef, our morality is definitly Christian and not Greek or Roman.  We are all cultural Christians ven now after decades of efforts to destroy that influence.

Aann Hirsi Ali is a woman from Somalia who started out as a member of the New Atheists, with Christopher Hitchens and richard Dawkins and Sam Harris, but recently she converte to Christianity, and has recognized that this culture can't be transplanted anywhere else because it's a creation of the Christian mindset and if other cultures are gased on any other moral foundation the culture just won't fit and there is no way to simply teach them our democratic ways, or as Ayaan says, even our gadgets which came out of our Christian mindset.  America is Christian through and through, and although we weould very much like to transmit it to other nations so that they could be prosposperour too, it just never works .  Their mindset is just not compatible with it.

So if we lose our Christian foundations we are not going to remain CAmerica for long.  And unfortunately that foundation is not accepted these days except by those who are active Christians, who are a dwindling number.  We have foces now that work actively against the original greatness of America.  Trump has a solid sense for the most part of what needs to be done operationally to return the country to our former greatness, but I fear he's leaving out the essence of it.  this in spite of the fact that it is now more acceptable to affirm a Christian midset than it has been for many years, and he too supports it.

But what I'm thinking of is that outrageous speech by the Bishop of the National Cathedral that siaimed to humiliate GTrump.   I'm also thinkin g of the many ecumenical prayers that are held in Washington D. DcC. in spipusupport of the gvovernment.  Ecumenical prayers, meaning prayers shared with representabtive of all sorts of religions that are at aodds with the God of the Biblbele  .  God regards these as idolatry and they work to destroy the nation rather than to support it .  I've said this in many posts in the past.  The prayer meeting after nine eleven was horrific as it included a Muslims Imama of all things to pray for the country.  Unbleievers think nothing of this, and too many supposed Christians sondon't seem to know what's wrong with it either.  Really three is only one true Christianity and it is made up of those who believe that Christiane died for our sins and rose from the dead to save us.   By that standard Judaism doesn'[t qualify either .  Native Indian reliegion doesn't qualify.  Wicca doesn't qualify.  even Catholicism doesn't qualify because they don't rest in that faith for salvation but alddd all kins of pagan superstittions into tht emix and even say we can't be certain about how to be saved.  There is only one true Christianity that God would recognize and honor and bless the ntion for following.  The original thirteen colonies all shared it.  Except Maryland.   We've lost it.  

We even have Native Americans and Wiccans praying to open Congress.  this is an abomination to God.  As long as this keepxs up there is no way we will vbe able to hol

Still Having a Hard Time with the Great American Political Divide

 Sure, I'd like to be able to have effective discussion s with liberals, give and take in which we don't say insulting things, or try very hard not to, but earnestly try to muster the evidence to defend what we think is the truth.   We average peopole don't do much to hold on to evidence unfortunately.  I don't.  I wish I had it when I need it, I know it's out there somewhere because I heard it, but I didn't do anything to keep track of where I heard it or where to find it.  My impression is that in gerneral liberals are far worse about evidence, trusting in narrative alone.  Since I can prove that many of their narratives are founded on lies I know this is obviously a bad policity but they aren't going to give up the habit easily.

Yes I wish it were possible to have such discussions but for the most part it just isn't.  I know some take the attidue that there's no point in even bothering to tell a liberal what we think because it doesna't todo any bgood.  I think sometimes this mayb e sjustified that somethingmes it's just a cop out.  that is, I defend it as the right attitude when you are talking abotu family members and very close long time friends where the relationship is more important than the argument.  Or a spoiuse in particular.  Yes.   But when yoyu are talking about mere acquaintances you don't have to deal with every day I think it is porobably a cop out to avoid saying what needs to be said in the face of some liberal assertion said in a publig c place in particular and certinly if it's on social media.  It begs to be answered.  Even if it would do no good with that particular person, there are other people listening and they need to hear it.

Then smetimes, after years of trying or years of avoiding discussing such things with a friend, to the point that there's very little of the friendhip left to be shared anyway becauase both of you are heavily involved in the political world and care most about that and not that much about the ordinarly things of life that are all that's left to talk about when you are avoiding the big issues...  THEN , I'm beginning to think anyway,  it's worth making it clear that you find the friend's opinion so odious and evil, even if you do ascribe it to deception and not to malice, I mean the friend's being deceieved of course, that it is likely a good think to say you so abhor and condemp the opinion that you are willuing to give up the friendship until the friend at least shows an interest in hearing something of the other point of view.    

That's hat I'm thinking at the moment.

Every day I'm assaulted by the liberal point of view on the internet or on the radio where I listen to conservative tgalk shows but the station is owned by an alphabet news compoany that inserts something into every news report that insinuates wrongdoing by trump or conservatives.  It's wearing and depressing and all the more so knowing that librals listening to the same stuff don't notice it at all and have no idea at all how conservatives are being persecuted every day by the liberal powers that be.  

\\They don't notice that this is not news reporting but opinionating, something supposedly assiduously avoided by true journalists.  On the left it isn't avoidied.  they seem to go out of their way to insert a denigraintng or insinuating word into a report.   If talkinga bout trump's objection to how a \n election was conducted, they ave to insert the word "unfounded" or "false" to describe his point of view.  this is an egreegious violating on of the tenets of journalism as I always understood to be the case.      

Otherwise they just uauote the nastiest assessment by a leftist they can find to air in the report.   Oinion or not it's treated as valid commentary, even as evidence, and listening liberals just take it tstraight, see no problem at all, and have their own opinions shaped without their being aware of it.

this is going to ocontinue throughout trump's presidency I'm sure.   Sincw prayer helped a lot during the election phase it's clear we need to keep praying our hearts out that people on the left will continuie to to walk e up and see the light and embrace the real truth instead of their delusional truth.