We’ve always admired Larry Elder’s ability to shred liberal narratives with data and facts.
John Kerry: Joe Biden’s pick for Climate Envoy. The hypocrisy of being lectured to by a man who is hardly setting the example.
Overnight, WaPo went out of its way to publish a puff piece on identity politics, suggesting interracial couples could breathe easy because a black woman with a white partner were soon to be confirmed at the highest levels of government.
Sorry? I am married to a woman from another race. Not for one fleeting millisecond do Kamala Harris and Doug Emhoff symbolize anything remotely monumental for us. On the contrary. It is utterly irrelevant. As it should be.
Besides, I married my better half because of the content of her character, not the colour of her skin. One imagines Kamala Harris loves Mr Emhoff for his personality. As two-dimensional as Harris often appears, we sincerely doubt Emhoff’s ethnicity was a clincher. Maybe Emhoff loves Harris’ infectious laughter. Who knows? Who cares? It is a matter for them.
The article, penned by Sydney Trent, tried to paint the picture that Kamala Harris is a vital piece in the visual puzzle that will stamp out systemic racism and bigotry for good.
According to Pew Research, c.10% of all marriages today are mixed race/ethnicity up from around 3% in 1967. 17% of all new unions are interracial. So is Trent trying to tell us not to believe our lying eyes that the 5-fold ratio increase in mixed marriages over the last 5-decades is not evidence that contradicts the notion that so many still remain in abject fear of those intolerant few that cast scorn upon them?
Where are Trent’s in-depth statistics that document interracial couples being under constant attack by unhinged lunatics across the USA?
The FBI keeps such a comprehensive database on hate crimes. In its 2019 Hate Crimes report, there is no classification for interracial couple abuse.
The closest to it would be the 4,930 victims of race/ethnicity/ancestry bias in 2019 across 3,963 incidents. By deduction, only 967 groups (perhaps some are couples) have been ‘vilified’ for their racial background. That doesn’t automatically guarantee that they were all interracial couples. Let’s assume that they are for simplicity’s sake.
Among 330 million Americans, interracial couples have at worst a 0.000293% chance of being the victim of a hate crime targeting their race/ethnicity, suggesting that 99.9987% don’t.
Never mind, Trent had to push the identity politics agenda:
“On the last night of the Democratic National Convention, Aisha Cozad watched on television as Joe Biden and his vice-presidential choice Kamala D. Harris held their clasped hands triumphantly aloft. But her eyes were also on Doug Emhoff, Harris’s husband, who was standing off to one side clapping adoringly. It was clear who was in the spotlight and who was the cheerleader…Cozad was moved because Emhoff was a man so publicly supporting his powerful, ambitious wife. And she was moved because Emhoff is White and Harris is Black...”
“Given the current state of race relations, it’s a powerful thing to say that we don’t have to accept these roles as society would have us play them out,” said Cozad, a 46-year-old African American whose husband, Scott, 44, is White. “We don’t have to accept what society says it’s comfortable with. We can, in fact, determine our own path.”
Should we be surprised that Emhoff is proud of his partner given the results? If Emhoff was black, would his applause been any more/less supportive? Hopefully Jill Biden is just as proud of her Joe as Emhoff is of Harris.
Maybe Trent might reflect on the fact that almost 1/5th of current American couples have already “determined their own path” without having to pander to identity politics. Maybe they just dig their other half no matter what race, ethnicity, ancestry, religion, sexual proclivity, orientation or gender they happen to be.
And so the path to globalism marches on.
Former Secretary of State John Kerry will be the new climate envoy in a Biden administration, assuming the high probability he takes office in this still contested election.
Expect more blovating nonsense on climate change to satiate salivating crony capitalists. If COVID doesn’t kill you, climate change will! Got that, peasant?
Kerry is another career politician. He is the man who said peace in the Middle East was impossible. 3 peace deals later under a different administration and how stupid does he look? So should we believe his pontificating around climate change? Of course not.
Seriously, if politicians were surgeons there is no way you would ask them to operate on you given a glance at their win/loss ratio. Yet, Kerry will be afforded all of the media puff pieces on how he’ll be pivotal to saving us all despite reading geopolitics so poorly.
We await the grandiose statements about how close to doom we are. We await more nonsense around the Paris Accords – which grants China the ability to pollute as it pleases til 2030 – while the rest of us tip into the UN jar to misallocate resources for political favours.
You have to hand it to the political class. Await slower growth, higher electricity prices and more inefficiency which will end up in more debt fueled big government.
We’ll leave you with how the scientists believe in the science in a wonderful report compiled by the UN on its own processes. Donna Laframboise noted in her book, “The Delinquent Teenager” the following,
“In early 2010 the InterAcademy Council, an organization comprised of science bodies from around the world, took an historic step. It established a committee whose purpose was to investigate IPCC policies and procedures.
The committee posted a questionnaire on its website and invited interested parties to respond. Answers to those questionnaires were eventually made public after the names of the respondents had been removed. Those provided by IPCC insiders can be separated from the ones submitted by concerned citizens because the questionnaire begins by asking what role the respondent has played in the IPCC.
People with direct experience of this organization were remarkably frank in their feedback. According to them, scientific excellence isn’t the only reason individuals are invited to participate in the IPCC.
Remember, this is a UN body. It therefore cares about the same things other UN bodies care about. Things like diversity. Gender balance. Regional representation. The degree to which developing countries are represented compared to developed countries.
The collected answers to the questionnaire total 678 pages. As early as page 16, someone complains that:
“some of the lead authors…are clearly not qualified to be lead authors.”
Here are other direct quotes:
“There are far too many politically correct appointments, so that developing country scientists are appointed who have insufficient scientific competence to do anything useful. This is reasonable if it is regarded as a learning experience, but in my chapter…we had half of the [lead authors] who were not competent.” (p. 138)
“The whole process…[is] flawed by an excessive concern for geographical balance. All decisions are political before being scientific.” (p. 554)
“half of the authors are there for simply representing different parts of the world.” (p. 296)
Lest anyone think that people from less affluent countries were being unjustly stereotyped, the person whose comments appear on page 330 agrees:
“The team members from the developing countries (including myself) were made to feel welcome and accepted as part of the team. In reality we were out of our intellectual depth as meaningful contributors to the process.”
Remember we are told to believe the IPCC is the final word in climate change science. Look forward to shared misery.
Conspiracy theory? Or is there statistical proof of voter fraud in the coding of the election software?
No matter what side of the politics divide one sits, independently qualifying the software should be a given. If Biden wins after any anomalous discoveries, so be it.
Truth be told, Democrats should relish the chance to absolutely guarantee beyond all reasonable doubt that Biden won the election fairly and squarely. They should push for transparency which shuts up the Republicans for good. Endorsing an investigation makes them look the clean shirt.
Claiming it was fair is one thing. Proving it, another. This is why the election is still far from over.
We find it dubious that Dominion systems stored data in Germany to be processed in Spain. How is it the world’s largest economy doesn’t have the capacity to store and process data at home?
A computer programmer looks through the code and claims to have found the time the software program seems to have kicked in (contained in the link above)
Food for thought, at the very least.
Benny Johnson tabulates in this video why the idea of “unity” espoused by former VP Joe Biden is laughable given the last 4 years of deeds by the left.
While Trump hasn’t conceded, the media have called this election. Never mind that the electoral college decides that and with so much court drama, we may get see a slim chance of Trump winning. What if he did?
The media has wasted no time mocking Trump by publishing articles at just how relieved world leaders are to have a return to the status quo. This idea of division. Really? Trump merely exposed the sheer incompetence of so many leaders and the graft and corruption that goes on in the swamp. He may be no clean shirt himself given he is a NY property tycoon but he has exposed the double standards among the political class who have been completely self serving. What happened to “of the people, by the people and for the people“?
Honestly, in what world does rejoining UN bodies achieve anything other than waste money pushing for globalist nonsense and lining up crony capitalists to feed at the teat of things like climate change and open borders?
Wouldn’t it be ironic to see these world leaders currently publicly distancing themselves from Trump having to do an about face if the courts rule the Biden victory as illegitimate?
Talk about division. World leaders maybe using the media’s call on the election for their own political purposes, but there is some real schadenfreude in the offing if these hacks who have failed to call anything right for four years end up eating their own words as the drown in hubris.
The New Hampshire Union Leader, a conservative newspaper, has endorsed Joe Biden with the following statement:
“Joe Biden may not be the president we want, but in 2020 he is the president we desperately need. He will be a president to bring people together and right the ship of state…
…Our policy disagreements with Joe Biden are significant. Despite our endorsement of his candidacy, we expect to spend a significant portion of the next four years disagreeing with the Biden administration on our editorial pages…”
And don’t forget this caveat emptor:
“* While Joe Biden is the clear choice for president, it would be a disservice to the country to send him to the White House without a backstop. We suggest splitting the ballot and electing a healthy dose of GOP senators and representatives. The best governance often comes through compromise. The civility of the Biden administration will help foster such compromise, but a blue wave would be nearly as disastrous for this country as four more years of Trump. It would result in a quagmire of big government programs that will take decades to overcome.”
With endorsements like this, who needs a slap in the face?
Isn’t it funny that the media celebrates being less awful as a virtue.
It reminds us of this Punch cartoon.
Benny Johnson cruises Scranton, where Joe Biden, the scrapper from Scranton, claims he grew up and asks the locals what they think.
Rasmussen Reports has provided the following data pre and post debate on how blacks see Trump’s economic performance.
Perhaps Joe Biden’s record on race spoke volumes in the debate. Trump’s record HBCU funding, all time low unemployment for the black community and crime bill reform are things that have delivered in the lived experience stakes.
A pretty dramatic switch none-the-less.