Decoding the recent California reparations proposal

 

Rajan Laad   "Recently, Fox News reported the following:

The California Reparations Task Force's five-member economic consultant team reported that under the initiative, qualifying Black residents in the state could qualify for $223,200 per person.

"The Reparations Task Force was formed by legislation signed by California governor Gavin Newsom in 2020.

"The panel, comprising primarily African-American members, voted 5-4 to limit reparations to descendants of enslaved African Americans or of a "free Black person living in the United States prior to the end of the 19th century."

"It would be up to the California Legislature to act upon the recommendations.

"California was a state that fought with the Union during the Civil War and never engaged in widespread slavery, but that's irrelevant to Newsom.  It also isn't the only state attempting the exercise.

"Back in 2021, officials in Evanston, Ill., a Chicago suburb, approved $10 million in reparations in the form of housing grants.

"Also in 2021, officials in Asheville, N.C. committed $2.1 million to reparations.

So let's dig deeper.

"The panel says that only Black residents will qualify to receive reparations.

"Since slavery ended around 157 years ago, these Black residents are likely to have a percentage of slave heritage.

"The first question is who decides the cutoff percentage of qualification.". . .

Will those convicted of smash-and-grab robberies be forced to deduct the value of what they stole from the reparations? Those convicted of the near-fatal assault on Reginald Denny during the LA riots may be asked to pay his medical expenses?

The only way to deduce slave ancestry is for all California residents to submit to a DNA test. This will be a massive undertaking and will probably cost the state millions of dollars, but that is the only accurate way to do it.

When Does a Right Become Bullying – That May Be the Supreme Court’s Biggest Question to Answer in Religion and LGBTQ Case -

 The Conservative Era   "One of the purposes of the Supreme Court in the US Constitution is to provide clarity to contentious situations. Over the last several years, the high court has dealt with several issues related to religious rights. It seems the issue of faith has become a more legal issue than in the past, especially when it comes to the intersection of discrimination.

"On Monday, justices heard a case involving religious freedom and free speech discrimination. Lorie Smith owns a custom website design firm in Colorado. She is an evangelical Christian who says it violates her conscience and faith to design wedding websites for gay couples. She proactively challenged a Colorado law prohibiting businesses from discriminating against LGBTQ customers.

"So, the question is, does the First Amendment protect the rights of religious and LGBTQ persons when there is a contradiction? 

"The challenge is that everyone has a right to be respected. Yet, when is a line crossed? For either side, does the issue become discriminatory or bullying at a certain point?  Here is the answer, in my view.

"The Bill of Rights has three provisions pertinent to this case:". . .

. . ."The very definition of bullying is trying to coerce or intimidate someone into doing something they don’t want to do or find objectionable. Is that what Colorado is doing? Smith has a guaranteed right to choose who she wants to do business with on religious grounds. Perhaps she’s not making a good business decision, or maybe she is — either way, it’s her choice and that of those who choose to do business with her or not because of her beliefs. Colorado also had a choice. They could have respected both sides and worked as a fair mediator to balance Smith’s rights. The hypothetical couple could also find another person to make the website. In America today, many people would gladfully serve them.

Our glorious free press

In sum, there is no media. It has ceased to exist, and the public plods on by assuming as true whatever the Pravda-like news outlets suppress and as false whatever they cover. Victor Davis Hanson(below)

Media Tailspin Continues As Trust Hits Record Lows: I&I/TIPP Poll

It’s hard to build trust when there are abundant signs that you are no longer trustworthy. Some big media, social media, and news sites are at least acknowledging criticism. But will that be enough?

. . .“Elon Musk, Twitter’s new owner and CEO, just dropped a bombshell that has no known parallel in American history: The Biden administration and the Democratic National Committee colluded with Twitter to swing the 2020 election to Joe Biden and his Democrats,” wrote William Sullivan on the American Thinker site.

"Musk himself ripped liberal news media for “deceiving the American public” and for “not being truthful” in ignoring the Hunter Biden laptop scandal, while journalist Matt Taibbi posted an epic thread on Twitter showing the evidence for Twitter’s electoral shenanigans.

"Not only did liberal journalists not congratulate Taibbi, they vilified him for speaking out.

"Here’s some of the other self-inflicted media misery:

• New CNN CEO Chris Licht laid off hundreds of people, and all but admitted his network’s political bias had gotten out of hand and vowed his network will pursue “truth” in the future.
• Disney, owner of several media properties along with its iconic theme parks, brought back former CEO Bob Iger following a series of movie flops and ongoing “woke” disputes that have dampened traffic at the company’s parks.
• Apple has been accused of helping the Chinese regime quell anti-government demonstrations by shutting down a key app used by many of the demonstrators.
• TikTok, the Chinese-owned social media site favored by younger users, has come under fire for its ties to China’s government and concerns that Xi Jinping’s regime could use the app to influence future elections.
• Facebook, likewise, has been harshly criticized for biasing social media mentions on its popular site and for letting government and law enforcement officials request censorship of posts via a special “portal.”. . .

Glenn Greenwald torches CNN’s ‘Twitter Files’ spin: ‘Like the rantings of any #Resistance maniac’   "Ever since “The Twitter Files” dropped on Friday, media firefighters have been working overtime to explain why there’s nothing to see there.

• Ben Collins’ pissiness over Matt Taibbi and Elon Musk’s ‘Twitter Files’ speaks volumes about modern MSM

How Corrupt is a Corrupt Media?  Victor Davis Hanson

The media has ceased to exist, and the public plods on by assuming as true whatever the media suppresses and as false whatever the media covers.

"The current “media”—loosely defined as the old major newspapers like the New York Times and Washington Post, the network news channels, MSNBC and CNN, PBS and NPR, the online news aggregators like Google, Apple, and Yahoo, and the social media giants like the old Twitter and Facebook—are corrupt. 

They have adopted in their news coverage a utilitarian view that noble progressive ends justify almost any unethical means to obtain them. The media is unapologetically fused with the Democratic Party, the bicoastal liberal elite, and the progressive agenda. 

"The result is that the public cannot trust that the news it hears or reads is either accurate or true. The news as presented by these outlets has been carefully filtered to suppress narratives deemed inconvenient or antithetical to the political objectives of these entities, while inflating themes deemed useful.". . .

The Morning Briefing: America's Lunatic Grandma Hillary Is Off Her Meds Again

You have sat too long here for any good you have been doing. Depart, I say, and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go!  

PJ Media

. . ."It would appear that the United States of America has angered whatever luck or karma gods are pulling the strings in the universe. How else does one explain the fact that Hillary Clinton will not go away?

"After the 2016 election, there was a reasonable expectation that Hillary would slink off in defeat and spend her days in Chappaqua exploring the bottoms of various box wines. She did that for a while, but then got out of the house to blame her loss on everything and everyone but herself. Because we’re unlucky, hacks in the mainstream media are always giving Mrs. Bill a camera to get in front of and grouse.

"For the last six years, each time Hillary resurfaces she reminds the American people that she is mentally unwell. When last we were subjected to the ravings of Granny Maojackets, she was insisting that the Republicans already have plans to steal the 2024 election.

"Hillary Clinton always seems to be in a constant state of one-person “hold my beer” where she’s trying to outdo herself. Her follow-up to her unhinged theory about the 2024 election is a real doozy.

"Catherine has the story:". . .

Catholic bishop calls Hillary Clinton an ‘evil woman’ over startling analogy of pro-lifers and war criminals  "Hillary Clinton goes on PBS and compares pro-lifers to the Iranian regime, the Taliban, and Russian soldiers raping Ukrainian women. Of course, Christiane Amanpour agrees, "This pushback on American women's rights at the same time as you're trying to figure a way forward." Alex Christy

What Does Free Speech Mean?

 

What Does Free Speech Mean? | United States Courts (uscourts.gov)

The First Amendment states, in relevant part, that: “Congress shall make no law...abridging freedom of speech.”

"Among other cherished values, the First Amendment protects freedom of speech. The U.S. Supreme Court often has struggled to determine what exactly constitutes protected speech. The following are examples of speech, both direct (words) and symbolic (actions), that the Court has decided are either entitled to First Amendment protections, or not.". . .

Freedom of speech includes the right:

• Not to speak (specifically, the right not to salute the flag).
  West Virginia Board of Education v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624 (1943).
• Of students to wear black armbands to school to protest a war (“Students do not shed their constitutional rights at the schoolhouse gate.”).
  Tinker v. Des Moines, 393 U.S. 503 (1969).
• To use certain offensive words and phrases to convey political messages.
  Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15 (1971).
• To contribute money (under certain circumstances) to political campaigns.
  Buckley v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976).
• To advertise commercial products and professional services (with some restrictions).
  Virginia Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Consumer Council, 425 U.S. 748 (1976); Bates v. State Bar of Arizona, 433 U.S. 350 (1977).
• To engage in symbolic speech, (e.g., burning the flag in protest).
  Texas v. Johnson, 491 U.S. 397 (1989); United States v. Eichman, 496 U.S. 310 (1990).

Freedom of speech does not include the right:

• To incite imminent lawless action.
  Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969).
• To make or distribute obscene materials.
  Roth v. United States, 354 U.S. 476 (1957).
• To burn draft cards as an anti-war protest.
  United States v. O’Brien, 391 U.S. 367 (1968).
• To permit students to print articles in a school newspaper over the objections of the school administration. 
  Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260 (1988).
• Of students to make an obscene speech at a school-sponsored event.
  Bethel School District #43 v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 675 (1986).
• Of students to advocate illegal drug use at a school-sponsored event.
  Morse v. Frederick, __ U.S. __ (2007). . . 

No ‘Tipping Point’ Yet. Will It Ever Come?

 Issues & Insights

First, the issue of the former president.  While Donald Trump’s endorsement in Republican primaries proved very helpful for getting into November, it was far less helpful for getting out of November. Did the red hat dry up the red wave?

"The “red wave” that many believed was going to ka-whoosh from Rhode Island to Seattle did not occur, with the evening turning out to be more of a red trickle – except, of course, in Florida which saw a red hurricane.

"But, at a national level, even the trickle was possibly just enough for the Republicans, who did manage to make Nancy Pelosi the ex-speaker of the House (again) and (maybe, pending Nevada and the runoff, of course, in Georgia) drive Kamala Harris even further into frustrated obscurity by taking away her tie-breaking ability.

"Closely watched “Republican pick-up” races like the second congressional district in Rhode Island, the third in Michigan, and the first in Indiana all stayed blue. True, the results were far far closer (New York was and Oregon is actually competitive, unheard of in years) than they had been in the past, but they were still a few points shy of victory.

"So the question is – with 75 % of voters saying the nation is on the wrong track, a floundering economy, and significant increases in crime – why did the wave fail to materialize?

"That answer will take days to answer in full, but some ideas may need closer inspection than others.". . .

. . ."Ron DeSantis, Mike DeWine, Brian Kemp, and Greg Abbott all won reelection easily. What they all have in common is actual governing ability, crossover appeal people skills, real human personalities, decent staffs, well-earned airs of trustworthiness, and first-rate political antennae. It is not impossible to learn what they are doing so right that they got re-elected so easily and build on that public image nationally."

Fox News Parts Ways With Lara Trump, Cites Donald’s Presidential Campaign

 Resist the Mainstream

. . ."A long-standing network policy prohibits individuals campaigning for public office from being paid contributors, the report noted. The rule extends to Ms. Trump because her father-in-law is an announced candidate for the 2024 presidential nomination.

"She was a vocal supporter of Donald Trump and his policies during his 2020 presidential reelection campaign and presumably will pick up where she left off, then.

 . . ."The relationship between Donald Trump and the Murdochs has diminished since the Capitol riot.

"The former president and his staff used to be greeted warmly and almost slavishly parroted by on-air personalities. Since he turned the keys of the Oval Office over to Joe Biden, attitudes at Murdoch properties have hardened.

"Fox News may have gotten a jump start on other Murdoch news organizations when it called Arizona a Biden win during election coverage of the 2020 race.". . .

A nation gets the leaders it deserves

Sky News

"The free world is run by a person who 'probably couldn't find his way home after dark' "

What happens when the federal government no longer protects the states against invasion?

 D. Parker

So we return to one of our original uncomfortable questions: what happens when the federal government no longer protects the states against invasion?

"The past few weeks have given rise to several uncomfortable questions.

"In the past, the party in power has always been held accountable for what it's done in the previous two years.  History teaches us that if that party has a horrible record, its members are thrown out of office in a massive wave election in a rejection of their policies. 

"That didn't happen, and even worse, they have us on the same trajectory that was present before the election.  This effectively means that their repulsive policies have been reinforced rather than rejected.

"Hence, those uncomfortable questions keep cropping up.

"What is the point of voting and elections in general if the voice of the people isn't heard?

"What is the point of paying for a government indoctrination system (schools) that turns out people who vote for their own enslavement?

"What do we do when state governments buy votes with other people's money, cruelly taken by force?

"What happens when the federal government no longer protects the states against invasion?

"That last one is particularly troubling, because the states entered into a contractual agreement, and it is being flouted, in our faces, daily.  Anti-liberty authoritarians of the fascist far left regularly lie about this fact, telling us that "the border is secure."  But how is there an illegal invader crisis in New York City and around the nation if "the border is secure"?". . . 

 Air marshals plan to refuse Biden admin order to deploy to the southern border: report

"Morale is so destroyed from this... I’ve never seen anything like this."

U.S. air marshals are planning to defy an order from the Biden administration that they deploy to the southern border to aid in handling the migration crisis, a plan that would mean that 99% of commercial flights would be without the protection of an air marshal.

" 'The rank and file air marshals are going to refuse to deploy and risk termination," Air Marshal National Council President David Londo told the Washington Examiner. "You're almost going to have a mutiny of a federal agency, which is unheard of."

"The Federal Air Marshal Service last year asked for volunteers to help out at the southern border, but the government in November 2020 made it mandatory. The Department of Homeland Security wants 150 more air marshals at the border on Dec. 7. Dozens are reportedly planning to refuse and likely lose their positions.". . .

Biden can't be capable of all this; someone else must be making these decisions. TD

Joe Biden’s Senior Moment of the Week Vol. 21

Washington Free Beacon

Trigger warning: The following video contains graphic footage of President Joe Biden that some viewers may find repulsive. Please proceed with caution. 

"Welcome back to Joe Biden's senior moments of the week. Our freshly minted octogenarian president picked up right where he left off before the Thanksgiving holiday.

"Biden mispronounced the name of a national park, celebrated America's special relationship with "Frank" [France], and busted out his patented old man wander at the ceremonial lighting of the White House Christmas tree.

" 'You think I'm joking. I'm telling you, I hear more about the Navajo than I hear about me," Biden said at the Tribal Nations Summit at the White House. As is often the case, it wasn't entirely clear what the hell he was talking about.. . ."

BIDEN SENIOR MOMENT ARCHIVES:

Celebrate: Correct pronouns used for Colorado Springs shooting victims

"But who cares? Victims may be piling up, but at least we are using their "correct" pronouns."  Only PC can turn murder into a comedy skit. 

 Eric Utter  "Five people were recently shot to death (and 18 others injured) inside Club Q, an LGBT nightclub in Colorado Springs.  This prompted authorities to verify the names and the pronouns of the victims by working with their families, instead of merely relying on what the coroner's office provided them, a Colorado Springs city spokeswoman told the USA TODAY. 

"During a November 21 news conference, Colorado Springs police chief Adrian Vasquez identified those fatally shot by stating their names — and their pronouns.

"Vasquez said, "We respect all of our community members, including our LGBTQ community.  Therefore, we will be identifying the victims by how they identified themselves and how their families have loved and identified them."

"He continued: "Kelly Loving; pronouns are 'she/her;' Daniel Aston; pronouns are 'he/him;' Derrick Rump; pronouns are 'he/him;' Ashley Paugh; pronouns are 'she/her;' Raymond Green Vance; pronouns are 'he/him.'"

"It is ironic that all five identified as "cisgender," "Loving" and "Rump" included, while the shooter claimed to be non-binary.

"But the important thing — the key takeaway from this heinous act of violence and terror — is that, though all five may be dead, by God, the correct pronouns were used when referring to them!  Right?  I bet somewhere, even now, they are so proud!  So proud!". . .

Good Riddance, Madame Speaker; Making sense of Nancy Pelosi's Leadership

Andrew Ferguson

And yet, along with President Joe Biden, she has become an emblem—neither is articulate enough to be called a "spokesman"—for Catholic politicians willing, sometimes eager, to abandon the faith of their fathers and to cut their consciences to fit the fashions of an ever-evolving liberalism.

"Quite apart from the sympathy and horror every decent person feels over the attack on her husband, I for one am going to miss the old gal, as Nancy Pelosi slowly passes from power, with the announcement on Thursday that she will step down from House leadership. She’s had a good run, growing from a back-bencher to be a giant in the politics of her time. And as any comparable figure should, she leaves behind a trail of tokens—remarks and phrases and images—that future generations, if they’re moved to do so, can trace to find what there is to find of the real Nancy Pelosi.

Among these many tokens, let’s think of three. The most famous is the deathless remark she made not long before the House of Representatives passed the Affordable Care Act (ACA) in March 2010.

"We have to pass the bill," she said, "so you can find out what’s in it."

"The sentence belongs on her monument, if she gets one. It was her answer to complaints that the ACA, as it quivered its way by peristalsis through the lower intestines of congressional subcommittees and closed-door mark-ups, had grown too cumbersome, too complicated for ordinary people to comprehend its effects or even its intentions.

"She chose to answer the complaint by agreeing with it—and adding an implicit shrug: "What d’ya expect?"

"The remark was so honest and transparent and true—"saying the quiet part out loud," we’d call it today—that her publicists in the press quickly tried to explain it away. Pelosi, they said, was merely making a point about the tide of public opinion, which ran against the ACA: Only when the bill had become law could the mass of little people be dazzled by the glories revealed within, and then change their opinion of it, from skepticism to gratitude.

"But that explanation never stuck. With a single stroke, a mere 14 words, Pelosi summarized and exposed decades of congressional decrepitude, and moreover identified herself as a satisfied creature of it. The reflexive secrecy, the grandiosity, the servility to parochial interests, the endless longueurs that lulled the public to sleep, followed by blind, frenetic fits of legislative activity before the public’s attention could be roused—she was at once the master of this broken system and its servant, utterly complacent, utterly uninterested in its reform. Her party was rewarded in the next election with a group defenestration, losing their majority and 63 seats.". . .