Notes and Quotes from Dr. Karlyn Borysenko/ June 16, 2021 video:
THE DEFINITION OF CRITICAL RACE THEORY:
1/ Critical Race Theory is an ideology started in academia in the 70’s that says racism exists everywhere – in every person and system – and the job of the critical race theorist is to assess HOW (not if) racism occured in any circumstance.
2/ Another way to think of critical race theory is this: It’s the opposite of what Martin Luther King preached. It is the idea that we should judge people on the basis of their race, that someone’s race is the only thing that matters about them, not the content of their character.
CRT PROBLEM: CONFIRMATION BIAS
1/ When you start with the conclusion that racism has occured and work your way back from that conclusion that is confirmation bias. You will only look for information that supports your conclusion.
2/ If you are looking for racism in everything then you will inevitably find racism in everything. You will misconstrue the most innocent thing as being a symbol of racism. You will also ignore data that contradicts your point so your are not showing the full spectrum of information.
3/ All that leads to the conclusion being confirmed and anyone who disagrees with you or points out all of the information you ignored is fragile. When you start with the conclusion you leave no room for the theory to develop.
Russ Vought, the former Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for the Trump Administration, is a long time acquaintance since his days at Heritage Action. Russ ran the OMB with the utmost integrity. He is an amazing individual and he is the reason for my post today.
Now aligned with the work Russ is doing at The Center for American Restoration and the activity arm, American Restoration Action (ARA), you are invited to learn more about ARA. Especially, I invite you to join in on the Thursday Calls to be enlightened on important issues that should drive the Constitutional agenda to Restore America.
Apparently Josh Hawley started a conversation. Then Marco Rubio had a spin with #CommonGoodCapitalism, and then there have been several back and forth discussions from numerous others defending this, that, and the other from a variety of perspectives as they pull out a note or two from each others commentaries.(Note additional reading/viewing suggestions at the end of the posts in the links above.)
Having read numerous articles and tending to side with the concerns of the Libertarian critics of Rubio and Hawley it sounds like the under-50 crowd Republicans are ready to make their move to clean out the over 50-squatters in the GOP and set the tone for a Republican platform that will appeal to the most voters in the coming years, post-Trump.
As someone who has had to endure the lies of the 60’s generation, I feel like I am about to get run over by potentially Misplace Loyalty Millennials now. So go ahead and call me a Boomer, tell me to move over, but do not think for a moment that I won’t fight against all of the up and coming know-it-alls any less than I have been fighting against progressive know-it-alls in both parties with their same old rehashed tales of woe, struggle, and government solutions.
I have spoken with a few politicians who claim they are Fiscally Conservative but…. (yeah, wait for it…)….. they are Socially Moderate.
I wrote in an earlier post about not calling the Capitalist System anything but what it is: Capitalism. It is an amoral system wholly dependent upon those who use it to be filled with integrity. (Sort of like guns don’t kill people. People kill people.)
Cronyism is cronyism and cronyism abuses the Capitalist System. It happens in business and by government intervention.
Miscreants who lie, cheat, steal, and abuse the Capitalist System are not Capitalists. They are what they are, liars, cheaters, thieves and system abusers or basically, anti-capitalists.
So that leads me to Rachel Bovard’s piece, and full disclosure, I am a big fan of hers because she is always willing to #FrameTheDebate and #HaveTheDiscussion.
“But, either intentionally, or through a severe lack of capacity for nuance, [George Will] misses Hawley’s point, which also happens to be a political as well as an economic reality: that even despite broad indicators of wealth, huge swathsof this country still feel economically insecure and displaced, and that a majority of Americans believe a strong economy primarily benefits the rich.”
Huge swaths feel and a majority of Americans believe a strong economy primarily benefits the rich. Well that sounds like they have been raised on the socialist rhetoric of the last 40 years because that is the language of class warfare.
She continues:
“And so visceral is the economic cynicism among millennials (who, by the way, will be the first generation to createless wealththan their parents) that they are turning, in droves, to socialism.”
Are these the same visceral millennial cynics who have been indoctrinated with socialist information for the last 40 years? Are they really turning to socialism or is it merely a core belief system they have embraced under the guise of having been tutored to become Fiscally Conservative but Socially Moderate/Liberals?
And seriously, they are 30 year olds who still have another 20-30 years to create wealth. They are not done yet. How many people have had to work at two or three jobs and go to school to pay their bills into their 40’s in my lifetime? (Boom-boomers.)
Sheesh, I was in my mid-40’s when I could afford my first home, 1245 sq feet and it was a 35 year old home we pretty much gutted and repaired to resell while we lived in it for four years. And we lived on one middle-class income.
Rachel defends Hawley, and I somewhat agree, as:
“doing his best to remind the GOP of what they once prioritized: community bonds, strong families, and an economy that encourages true individual autonomy—not one that just means a bevy of market choices—to flourish.”
But that does not mean I want government to step in and fix things before undoing all they have done to manipulate, regulate, and subjugate people and businesses through various degrees of government control. I do not believe the U.S. Government should establish itself as the new Civil Religion, the top down dispensers of nannyism for life.
So lets flashback to 1998 and see what the problems were then compared to now:
“These three simple questions asked in that order–do you care? are you responsible? and shouldn’t the rich pay their fair share?–have determined political careers for 62 years. These three politically loaded questions have been turning the liberal vision into liberal results for six decades.”
And there you have it. The same questions, now for eight decades. We still have a mess with Medicare/Medicaid, Social Security, and significantly increased tax burdens and those same questions have led us into a socialist/communist movement to control the American People as we have never before seen in my lifetime.
So as the upcoming GOP Millennials hammer out leadership for the coming years, and then within the #CommonGood debates to define issues, I hope discussions will be focused on principles and values that restore family as the fundamental unit of society and end the social programs that keep individuals and businesses from becoming independent while sustaining Government Bureaucrats as middle managers to control the people.
Like Matt Kibbe says:
“When you get past all the acrimony and all the name-calling, the question we are all debating is really quite simple: Do you believe in the freedom of individuals to determine their own futures and solve problems cooperatively working together, or do you believe that a powerful but benevolent government can and should rearrange outcomes and make things better?”― Don’t Hurt People and Don’t Take Their Stuff: A Libertarian Manifesto
Some supporters of Rubio claim his speech as “remarkable.” Well, I guess they can claim that depending upon what their definition of is is in “remarkable.” And yet I find it highly irritating to hear claims of praise for it being remarkable when No. No. No. It was not remarkable.
It was meh. It sounded like someone reaching out to people who need emotional support through words of flowery feel goods, shared feelings of the pain, the suffering, all in the voice of a whiner so as to prove feelings matter and how Marco, a potential leader for the universe, is with us all in seeking governmental solutions for Common Good Capitalism.
Blah-bity-blah-bity-blah.
Marco’s quote from Robert F. Kennedy was interesting:
Senator Robert F. Kennedy noted that “if… we, as Americans, are bound together by a common concern for each other, then an urgent national priority is upon us.”
Because, he said, “even if we act to erase material poverty, there is another greater task; it is to confront the poverty of satisfaction – purpose and dignity – that afflicts us all.”
My goal for this speech, but also in what I have tried to do in the Senate, is above all else about doing whatever it takes to keep our country from coming apart – whatever it takes so that this exceptional nation continues and endures instead of ending with us.
Then Marco and his crew need toseriously engage in a discussion to address valid criticisms of Marco’s seemingly self-serving speech. Otherwise, all of the remarkable Rubio talking points are merely an outreach to moderate leaning socialists while alienating his conservative base.
Rubio delivered a well-received 30-minute speech, hitting key campaign issues including jobs, the “crushing national debt,” national security and immigration, even taking a dig at Republicans now serving in Washington. He said temporary tax cuts should become permanent, but spending cuts, including a ban on earmarks, also would be necessary to achieve a balanced budget.The economy continues to suffer, in part, because business owners who could add employees and expand are “afraid to because of uncertainty about the future,” Rubio said. “Small businesses are taking the brunt of it and we’re all paying the price.”
For the last two years I have seen attacks on Mike Lee continue to grow. Why is that? Who is behind those attacks? Why are alleged Conservatives fueling those attacks or perhaps the better question: Who are the trusted voices whispering in their ears?
What I know about Mike Lee is: ASK Mike Lee. Go to the ORIGINAL SOURCE, Mike Lee, just like Glenn Beck did:
If you have followed Mike Lee, you know he is more measured in thought than most. He is not one to speak without careful considerations. You know he is a Constitutionalist. You know his father, the late Rex Lee, taught him well. You know Mike has always been able to discuss his rational thoughts on that which he believes, promotes, and stands for.
If you do not know that then pull your head out of the sand, out of the sky, or out from wherever you are hiding it and go to the original source, Mike Lee and then seriously consider the trash talk about him. Ask yourself these questions when sophists bash Mike Lee:
Am I being approached as a thinking citizen or as a frightened animal?
How did the basher find out what they know?
Is this a contrived story or twisted representation of what Mike actually said or believes?
Do I really trust the hearsay or do I trust Mike’s Constitutional voting history more?
Is the yapper giving an accurate account of something or it is an attack on Mike Lee?
Can I verify the information by going to Mike Lee as my original source?
(Hat Tip to Gary C. Lawrence, Political Campaigns and You, New Era, Sept. 1972)
So please. If you feel triggered by some report of what Mike Lee said or is trying to do, do your own research. Do not trust anyone who is trying to discredit an honorable man, doing the very best he can to be honest, true, and trustworthy of your good opinion.
A brilliant friend of mine, Joe Walker, took a 365 challenge to post a graphic every day. His work is fabulous and he is a fantastic man to boot. Following his 365 example I tried to write every day for a year on this blog. I did it, making a mess of my daily count (#mathimpaired) but I did indeed complete the challenge.
One piece I wrote included homage to Daniel Greenfield. I LOVEDaniel Greenfield. Truly. I love him for his brilliantly reasoned writing. The flow and tone in his articles move through my soul and very often settle my frenetic thoughts on a subject. In fact, I wish I had seen this before posting my thoughts on #RedFlagLaws for I certainly would have added it to the reading list:
When criminals and psychos aren’t locked up, then everyone ends up in jail.
Gun controllers insist that the Founding Fathers never anticipated the problem of mass shooters. That’s probably true. But they would have also never tolerated the conditions that brought them into being, a permissive criminal justice system, a failure to institutionalize the mentally ill, and a media that promotes these acts of violence under the guise of condemning them and clamoring for gun control.
This piece by Michelle Malkin is an excellent read in the demonizing of the Military whistleblowers. False allegations and labeling, or red-flagging those who oppose government bureaucrats who have a little authority as the bureaucrats suppose, is nothing new. Just ask anyone falsely accused of anything by a bureaucrat. This article is proof of how Red Flag Laws will work if instituted across America.
Understanding abuse of power by bureaucrats makes it easy to fully appreciate this segment with Eric Brakey on the rationale of the Second Amendment.
Erick is right! “If the people are not allowed the means to self-defense then we are not citizens, we’re subjects.”
Taking guns away from law abiding gun owners is NOT the solution if it does not include due process. Under today’s Red Flag Laws Thomas Massie and John R. Lott, Jr. point out:
“During the first nine months after Florida passed its red-flag law last year, judges granted more than 1,000 confiscation orders. In the three months after Maryland’s law went into effect on October 1, more than 300 people had their guns confiscated. In one case in Arundel County, a 61-year-old man died when the police stormed his home at 5 a.m. to take away his guns. Connecticut and Indiana, which have had these laws in effect for the longest time, have seen increasingly large numbers of confiscation orders.”
If you do not know who Jonathan Dunne is, then please check out his website and podcasts. As Freedom’s Disciple, he truly understands how to #FrameTheDebate as he discusses the:
One of the greatest mass killings took place on 9/11 2001, and as Jonathan points out (around 20:22 minutes) it had nothing to do with guns. Neither did the Oklahoma Bombings. Dunne attributes these heinous acts to a “health, heart and head problem” that needs be solved.
The Social Elitists and their minions have been pushing for gun control for more than thirty years. Red Flag Laws are the most disturbing push for the subjective nature of accusations that can or might be leveled to usurp the unalienable right to keep and bear arms.
Criminals and Crazy people will always circumvent the law, the rules, the norms or a moral society. And almost always, it is the liars, deceivers, and power seekers demanding and influencing the crazies to take #Control by hurting people and taking their stuff.
So yeah. We definitely need Criminal and Crazy control.
I have been a fan of Matt Kibbe since he headed up FreedomWorks. In fact I was pleased to attend a fantastic FreedomWorks event in Florida where I got to shake his hand, get a photo, and signed copy of Hostile Takeover. (And I must mention the wonderful Deneen Borrelli from whom I got a signed copy of Blacklash and a photo.)
When FreedomWorks edged out Kibbe I was pretty irritated. He was able to work with Conservative-Libertarians and shake up the alleged conservative establishment to create a movement of the masses that helped reign in government power, only to have the proverbial rug yanked out from under his feet.
So now on to the great news portion of the story. Matt Kibbe moved forward by writing Don’t Hurt People and Don’t Take Their Stuff, another fab book. He has developed his video/podcast program on the BlazeTV titled Kibbe On Liberty. He is a fantastic interviewer of very interesting people sharing ideas.
For the last four days I have been checking Senator Mike Lee’s Senate page, Twitter feed, and Facebook page in anxious anticipation for his take, his decision on the Cruz amendment. Tonight he has put out his thoughts on the subject. Finally! Finally his statement is out and I can sleep in peace, come what may.
It is high time for Progressive Republican Leader (PRL) Mitch McCONnell to be voted out of his way-way-upness. He deserves to be stripped from his leadership position, just like Boehner. Basta!
Now on to promote Mike Lee for Senate Majority Leader.
All you have to do is go to Mike’s YouTube channel and listen to him to begin to understand why he is a far better leader than the current PRL.
Sentinel2Sentinel 