It's About Power, not Truth, Science is Dead.

By Tom Rhodes, 7/10/2020

You'll note the left keeps talking about power, and empowering, etc. They never talk about, nor promote liberty and freedom. They are openly attacking freedom of speech, they want the left to be able to censor those who dare speak something the left doesn't approve, and completely cancel any who dare speak against the left.

The hate free speech, as they realize the if they have the power to control speech, they have power over the masses. They don't want liberty, equality, and freedom for everybody equally, they simply want power.

They have finally succeeded in ending valid scientific research. Getting scientists whose findings don't support their narative fired. So scientists now know that if they do research, it doesn't matter what the actual data says, or with the objective truth exposes, their results must support the mob or the scientist will be canceled.

After the Wall Street Journal that cited the study the mob attacked at UM were “complications” on campus and outraged wokesters demanded that the profs be flogged, or something else terrible.

Professor Hsu told the WSJ: “The MSU professor who conducted that work, psychologist Joe Cesario, tells me that ‘we had no idea what the data was going to be, what the outcome was going to be, before we did this study.’ Mr. Cesario has collected evidence from a simulator and from real-world interactions between police and citizens. He concluded that ‘the nature of the interaction really matters the most, and officers were not more likely to be ready to shoot upon encountering a black versus white citizen.’ Pofessor Hsu has been Canceled.

Michigan State University leaders have successfully pressured Stephen Hsu to resign from his position as vice president of research and innovation after the Graduate Employees Union launched a campaign to oust him from his role.

Once the professor was forced out, the other scientists who worked on the paper are trying to get the paper withdrawn to save their carriers.

The left wants a war against objective truth, and freedom of speech, because both get in the way of them being in power.

Remember all it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to say and do nothing. This shows that just doing your job and telling the truth will get you attacked by the mob.

If you tolerate SJW's at work, and don't speak up, and keep your head down, just hope and pray, you don't have to tell the truth that the mob doesn't like, or worse yet, you were merely on a "team" that produced results the mob didn't want, or didn't want others to know about. You too will be canceled.

Sometimes I Hate Being Right

By Tom Rhodes, 6/25/2020

News yesterday is "Hundreds ‘ambush’ Tampa police responding to report of shots fired, 2 officers injured, chief says" This is an example of the people of Tampa seeking justice by other means because because they have no legal remedy to the police abusing their rights.

I predicted this would happen back in 2014 and talked about why, noting the Ferguson Riots were the Early Signs of Revoluion.

I noted a couple years later in 2016 that Civil War II has started, it's a slow burn but it is ramping up and will unfortunately become a shooting war before another generation is born. I rightly stated, "As long as the minions of the elite maintain their quasi-military attitude, their us vs them mentality, and their legal unaccountably, they will increasingly find themselves at war against the American people. It is a war they cannot win."

That same article concluded "No sane person would celebrate the current situation, it has been predicted, but the repeated calls to hold the police and our government accountable have gone unheeded. When the FBI boldly proclaims that yes the elite did break the law, but we won’t prosecute, and cops routinely (hundreds of times a year) shoot the unarmed public without accountability, it clearly demonstrates to the people that the rule of law is dead, and the people cannot expect justice from the government. The people can, and will, seek justice through other means when the government refuses to enforce the rule of law."

I hope I'm wrong, but I predict that Civil War II will be bloodier and more deadly than the War Between the States.

Government Admits it was lying to us

Government Admits it was lying to us

All we can know for sure, whatever the govt tells you is not meant to be honest, it is meant to manipulate you

VIDEO - Fauci Admits Feds Initially Misled About Face Masks: ‘Wanted to Make Sure Health Care Workers’ Had Enough https://t.co/qO5G0G3arX

— Grabien (@GrabienMedia) June 17, 2020

Big Cities are Doomed

Prediction: The Ruins Detroit will be the model for all large Democrat run cities.  The most productive people in those cities have and are witnessing the inability of Democrat leaders to enforce the rule of law and protect them and their property.  The most productive will move out of places where they don't have protection from looters, or criminals, and the elected leaders are unwilling to enforce the laws protecting normal people.  This will hurt the poor in cities most.

No rational person will remain where they know real criminals can and do get away with looting, arson, etc. while they are overly taxed, and fined for even the most minor code violations, when they can live under the rule of law, with protection from criminals in other parts of the country.  You will also see the 'burbs and flyover country unwilling to support urban hell holes and fight back against taxes being sent to sustain them. 

Kung Flu Sicken has taught us the large office complex in the city is not needed, good people can be dispersed and don't need to be congregated to be productive. Cheaper to pay for an employees internet connection than provide them with an office. Big cities with Democrat leadership that are pandering to criminals are doomed.  Civil War II will be between urbanites and the rest of the country.  Who thought the dystopian fantasy Escape from New York would be a model of how to deal with urban hell holes.

Science says there multiple human "races" and culture is genetic too.

By Tom Rhodes 6/6/2020

From the article in the Huffington Post titled, "What Scientists Mean When They Say ‘Race’ Is Not Genetic", we read:

Genetic methods do not support the classification of humans into discrete races, [and] racial assumptions are not good biological guideposts. Races are not genetically homogeneous and lack clear-cut genetic boundaries. And because of this, using race as a proxy to make clinical predictions is about probability.

This is bullshit and not scientific. Let's use dogs as an example, and reword it that assertion using terms people associate with dogs.

Genetic methods do not support the classification of dogs into discrete breeds, [and] breed assumptions are not good biological guideposts. Breeds are not genetically homogeneous and lack clear-cut genetic boundaries. And because there are more mutts than purebreds, using breed as a proxy to make clinical predictions is about probability.

Absolutely absurd, when talking about different breeds of dogs, we can make good predictions not only on such clinical predictions as average age, size, speed, strength, susceptibility to certain disease, and so on, we can also make good predictions on temperament, intelligence, and behavior. Implying that race isn't a good indicator to make decisions because it is not a perfect predictor of those qualities, is like saying it's dumb to select a breed of dog because nobody can predict that dog's temperament etc.

All dogs are from the species called Canis lupus, a subspecies of wolf. The wolf, Canis lupus, has about 40 subspecies. Canis lupus familiaris. is the subspecies of wolf we call dogs. 

The races of man are simplistically referred to by color, white, black, yellow, some add brown and red.  The scientific fact is they are all subspecies of homo sapiens

Analysis of genomes from around the world establishes that there is a biological basis for race, despite the official statements to the contrary of leading social science organizations. An illustration of the point is the fact that with mixed race populations, such as African Americans, geneticists can now track along an individual’s genome, and assign each segment to an African or European ancestor, an exercise that would be impossible if race did not have some basis in biological reality.

Although it is not politically correct, the science is clear, although lots of people are mutts, that does not change the fact that the races of man genetically distinct, and we can observe and see measurable differences in not only color, but races are predictive  estimating average; size, speed, strength, IQ, temperament, behavior, immune systems, and even culture.

How evolution is active and observable in the human population even in recent history.  One could rationally conclude that the industrial revolution, was caused by evolution and a drive in accelerated evolution, and the reasons some races had it and others never did, are evolutionary driven by natural selection and environmental pressures.

The fact that Time Magazine published what is about as politically incorrect an article as you can read is amazing. About as non-PC as you can get, but rational, measurable and scientific. "New analyses of the human genome have established that human evolution has been recent, copious, and regional."

Read it and rationally not emotionally look at the evidence, and history is pretty clear. Not only are the races genetically distinct, but so are cultures.

Prudence Dictates... But...

By Silence Dogood

The Constitution does not grant us rights, it acknowledges rights with which we are born. We can choose not to exercise them, but they cannot be taken away.

There is no provision of the Constitution allowing for the waiving of rights under any condition, but most legislatures are content to sit back and watch this all proceed without their fingerprints anywhere near it.

Our rights cannot simply be waived in the face of anything. From the beginning of the country, government has been trying to do just that. But government is a necessary evil, and that evil has a predictable nature.

It’s the nature of government and those in power to attempt to amass as much of that power as possible.  The only way to have more power, is to have more control of the people, and that is done by force. Our Founding Fathers knew this and wrote the Constitution to guard against it as best it could be done. Yet those same forefathers were guilty of trying to take away the rights of the people and limits on government before the ink was dry on the Bill of Rights, can you say "Alien and Sedition Acts."

If you add a belief in the superiority of the elite to dictate to the masses how they should live, you end up under standing today's Democrats’ basic nature: they know better than you do what you need, they are better than you are, smarter than you. Coronavirus just allowed a peek into their minds. Individuals are irrelevant to the left, as are your rights. The Constitution is an obstacle to be overcome, by any means available, not the restraint on their power it was written to be. Remember that come November…or you soon won’t be allowed to say it.

Govenor rulings mandating stay at home orders are clearly unconstitutional, the fact that the people are tolerating them as well as we have with as few protests, and defiance of those unconstitutional orders, confirms Jefferson's words in the Declaraion of independence. "Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.:"

Let's not forget the BUT at the end of that sentence. "But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

What is the goal?

Tom Rhodes 1/8/2019

To control their herds of animals farmers control the quantity and temperament of the sex of the animals they raise.

Chicken farmers sex chicks and keep only a few roosters for hundreds of hens, they don't want to waste time and energy controlling unruly roosters that don't lay eggs. Roosters fight all the time, having only a few (or 1) is more controllable.

How many ungelded boars does a pig farmer keep compared to fertile sows?

How many bulls compared to gelded steers, and fertile cows does a cattle rancher keep? Why do farmers disarm (cut the horns off) their herd? On a dairy farm what's the male/female cow ratio?  On a meat ranch what's the bull to cow and steer ratio?

Basic animal husbandry and observation is that the male of the species are unruly and harder to control than the female or gelded males. If you are raising sheep or cattle, you want to be the one who is in charge of the herd – so you castrate most of the males.

The rise is single mother lead households seems more like design than unintended consequence. By incentivizing the destruction of the nuclear family, it promotes women's natural urge to seek security for herself and her kids, and thus promotes for government to provide for them, because there isn't a male there to do so, nor a model of a strong man to do so to be observed.

Look at how the ruling elite choose to live, the vast overwhelming majority of the successful who are and become the elite, are a traditional man and woman married couple with kids, and their lives follow traditional family values. Yet they call for the masses to accept the gelding of men through shame, drugs, financial incentives, etc.

Men in media are generally treated like either brutes, or idiots, again to discourage the idea that a man heading the home is good. Current welfare rules, reward single mothers, and punish them if there is both a man and woman in the house.

The whole idea that there are more than 2 genders, is just part of a larger plan to geld the men of the west. The rise in "T" of LBGT politics, and the labeling of masculinity as toxic, and the labeling and drugging of boys who are "A D D" etc. is all part of the ruling elite wanting to control the masses. If you emasculate men, shame them for acting like men, in essence eliminate or geld them, the masses are easier to control.

If your goal is to have a compliant society of dependent serfs, you need to geld ("detoxify") the males or make them irrelevant. A father in each family protects his own and works hard so his offspring can thrive. A society made of strong families, led by armed men, can thwart the designs of would-be rulers.

Thanksgiving - Celebrating Private Property's Triumph Over Collectivism

By Tom Rhodes, 11/22/2018
I doubt anybody will notice but this as a repeat of my 2010 Thanksgiving article

As you know the original colony to Plymouth celebrated thanksgiving with the Indians in November of 1623. The Pilgrims arrived in December of 1621, and began their colony as a commune, and organized their farm economy along communal lines. The goal was to share the work and produce equally. This experiment again proved what the ancient Greeks observed eons before. As Aristotle wrote, "That which is common to the greatest number has the least care bestowed upon it."



The Pilgrims faked illness rather than working the common property. Some even stole, despite their Puritan convictions. The result was as winter of 1622 set in, they did not have enough food and provisions set for the winter and famine and privation ran rampant by the spring of 1623 only 5 women had survived. Gov. William Bradford wrote in his diary, "So as it well appeared that famine must still ensue the next year also, if not some way prevented.

The problem is that when people can get the same return with less effort, most people make less effort. This was an early harsh and historically repeated lesson that socialism and communism result in less production even to the point of starvation. Thus again proving that the rules set to us by God are best to live by. 2 Thessalonians 3:6-15

Later of the colonists, Bradford said, they "began to think how they might raise as much corn as they could, and obtain a better crop than they had done, that they might not still thus languish in misery. At length after much debate of things, (I with the advice of the chiefest among them) gave way that they should set corn every man for his own particular, and in that regard trust to themselves. And so assigned to every family a parcel of land. . . This had very good success, for it made all hands very industrious, so as much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been. By this time harvest was come, and instead of famine, now God gave them plenty, and the face of things was changed, to the rejoicing of the hearts of many."

Because of the change, the first Thanksgiving could be held in November 1623. Because of the abundance the Pilgrims not only were able to feed themselves, but to take care of those among them who try as they might failed to do so. It was private charity that took care of those less fortunate.

Thanksgiving is clear proof and evidence of the triumph of private property, connecting effort to reward, demonstrating that when everything is “shared equally” it incentivizes each person to contribute as little as possible to get their “equal” share. Whereas with every pilgrim given private property produced abundance which they could then trade with others for things they lacked. The free mutual exchange for mutual benefit makes the entire community richer.

We should all be thankful that we do not have to learn the lessons of protecting private property in the same deadly way that the pilgrims. Thanksgiving is the quintessential American holiday, copied by many other countries; it is a polar opposite of May Day. On Thanksgiving, we celebrate the fall of communism and are thankful for the abundance God provides through the free market.

July 4, 1776

IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.


He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.


The 56 signatures on the Declaration appear in the positions indicated:

Column 1
Georgia:
Button Gwinnett
Lyman Hall
George Walton

Column 2
North Carolina:
William Hooper
Joseph Hewes
John Penn
South Carolina:
Edward Rutledge
Thomas Heyward, Jr.
Thomas Lynch, Jr.
Arthur Middleton

Column 3
Massachusetts:
John Hancock
Maryland:
Samuel Chase
William Paca
Thomas Stone
Charles Carroll of Carrollton
Virginia:
George Wythe
Richard Henry Lee
Thomas Jefferson
Benjamin Harrison
Thomas Nelson, Jr.
Francis Lightfoot Lee
Carter Braxton

Column 4
Pennsylvania:
Robert Morris
Benjamin Rush
Benjamin Franklin
John Morton
George Clymer
James Smith
George Taylor
James Wilson
George Ross
Delaware:
Caesar Rodney
George Read
Thomas McKean

Column 5
New York:
William Floyd
Philip Livingston
Francis Lewis
Lewis Morris
New Jersey:
Richard Stockton
John Witherspoon
Francis Hopkinson
John Hart
Abraham Clark

Column 6
New Hampshire:
Josiah Bartlett
William Whipple
Massachusetts:
Samuel Adams
John Adams
Robert Treat Paine
Elbridge Gerry
Rhode Island:
Stephen Hopkins
William Ellery
Connecticut:
Roger Sherman
Samuel Huntington
William Williams
Oliver Wolcott
New Hampshire:
Matthew Thornton

Is Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez a Fringe Whackjob

by Tom Rhodes, 2/15/2019

Is Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez a fringe Whackjob, or is she just bringing the Democrat party out of the closet?

Clearly the Democrat party has abandoned liberalism for authoritarian principles. They clearly recognize that they cannot reach their Utopian dreams if they continue to embrace liberal principles. The Democrats are now an authoritarian socialist party. There is no way that the Democrat party can claim to be liberal.

Liberals used to be defined as people who believed in Liberalism, which is a political philosophy or worldview founded on ideas of liberty and equality.

Classical liberalism, a political or social philosophy advocating the freedom of the individual, where the governments purpose is to insure and protect individual rights and civil liberties of all equally, guaranteeing the rule of law, and equality under the law.

Economic liberalism, the ideological belief in organizing the economy on individualist lines, such that the greatest possible number of economic decisions are made by private individuals and not by collective institutions.

The Democrats have and are rejecting the will of the people, they commonly refer to the masses as “flyover country,” deplorables, etc. The current Democrat positions:

Reject Religious Liberty

Legalize Infanticide

End the Second Amendment and Your Right to Self Defense

End Free Speech through “hate speech” laws

Anti-Semitism

End Due Process

Different rules for Elite than Masses

Green New Deal(GND)

Force Home Reconstruction

Outlaw 99% of Private Vehicles

Eliminate Nuclear Energy

Ban Affordable Energy

End most Air Travel

Forced Government Healthcare

Nationalize Banks

End right to spend money on speech

Replace Republic of USA with Democracy

Abolish Electoral College

Establish Federal Control of heat, electricity, phone, internet, and public transportation

Ban Meat

Provide Income to those Unwilling to Work
The GND is supposedly about Climate Change, but most of the proposed ideas in the GND have nothing to to do with Climate Change, the proposal is instead an authoritarian wish list to end the Constitution.

None of the current policies and objectives of the Democrat party are liberal. They are even openly racist calling for segregation on our college campuses. I cannot find anywhere Democrats want to protect or increase individual liberty, economic freedom, or civil rights. Clearly today’s Democrats want to eliminate the Bill of Rights. Other than the Third Amendment all of the Bill of Rights is getting in the way of how the Democrats want the power to control all aspects of how all Americans life. They are openly calling to end our Constitutional Republic and replace it with some oligarchy not bound by any of the restrictions that, We The People, placed on them. Democrats clearly chafe at the idea that the mere masses, don’t accept their superiority, and that the will of the people should be ignored because the ruling elites know best how everybody should live. The Democrats are clearly Authoritarian.

Ocasio-Cortez Occasional-Cortex is not a fringe fruitcake of the Democrat party, she and all those who support the GND, are the reality of what the Democrats believe. It is not liberal, or conservative, but leftist authoritarianism. Occasional-Cortex in a recent interview came out and said that to enact the GND there would necessarily be some totalitarian actions by government.

Psychology Today lists What You Can Expect From an Authoritarian. Clearly the actions and attitude of today’s Democrat party reject liberalism and embrace all the top 10 traits of Authoritarians:

Hatred.

Punishment and Cruelty.

Violence, Aggression, and Assaultive Behavior.

Threats and Scare Tactics.

Quixotic, Unclear Rules.

Paranoia and Enemies’ Lists.

Truth Held as Enemy.

Shaming Efforts, Derision, and Ridicule.

Rigidity and Obsession with Control.

Intrusiveness.