That’s my take on it. Trump gave the order to attack Iran and some piece of equipment necessary for the mission failed or was not ready for the job.
The US armed forces have a bad track record when it comes to military action against Iran. You can go back to the aborted hostage rescue attempt under the Carter Administration. This cluster f**** of an operation killed a bunch of good men in a mission that was doomed to failure. Carter and company wanted every branch of the military to have a part in the mission which was flown at night. People that had not trained together were thrust into a dangerous operation in an environment hostile to both men and equipment.
Operation Eagle Claw … was a United States Armed Forces operation ordered by U.S. President Jimmy Carter to attempt to end the Iran hostage crisis by rescuing 52 embassy staff held captive at the Embassy of the United States, Tehran on 24 April 1980. Its failure, and the humiliating public debacle that ensued, damaged U.S. prestige worldwide. Carter blamed his loss in the 1980 U.S. presidential election mainly on his failure to secure the release of the hostages
Fast forward to today. President Trump has inherited a sketchy military that is highly reliant on untested systems. My use of the word “untested” is a charitable term.
As documented previously on this blog, Navy’s 13 Billion Dollar Cruise Ship, we have aircraft carriers that can’t arm planes, launch them or land them because their systems don’t work. The Navy also has weapon systems that they can’t test fire because it costs too much money to test them ($1 million per shot).
The Navy is scrapping production of rounds for its newest warship, citing costs of nearly $1 million per unit.
The move comes just two weeks after the Navy commissioned the U.S.S. Zumwalt, the next generation of the Navy’s guided missile destroyer program. The scrapped Long Range Land-Attack Projectile (LRLAP) fired from the Zumwalt would be capable of hitting targets up to 80 miles away. Lockheed Martin claims the rounds are so accurate they can “defeat targets in the urban canyons of coastal cities with minimal collateral damage.”
The Zumwalt is equipped with two large guns which are only capable of firing LRLAP rounds. The guns are still slated to be mounted on two upcoming Zumwalt class ships, and are the largest weapons to be designed for a warship since World War 2.
Every branch of the military has similar stories of equipment issues.
The U.S. military, government agencies and other purchasers bought more than $20 million worth of Chinese-made counterfeit goods designed to look like domestically produced gear from a company that defrauded the government and helped to orchestrate the counterfeiting process between January 2013 and October 2018, Justice Department officials said last week.
The counterfeit gear included 200 specialized parkas designed to counter night vision goggles that would have been used by U.S. Air Force personnel stationed in Afghanistan.
But the Multicam APECS Parkas sold to an unnamed U.S. Air Force base supply center didn’t actually do that, which could have put troops’ lives at risk.
Those types of parkas use a near-infrared technology woven into the fabric that is designed to make the wearer more difficult for enemy forces to detect with equipment such as night-vision goggles, justice officials said. The counterfeit versions, however, lacked the near-infrared technology, unbeknownst to the wearer.
The sales were in violation of the Berry Amendment and the Trade Agreements Act, which require goods sold to the military and certain government buyers to be manufactured in either the United States or select countries.
In the case of Trump aborting the attack on Iran, I think the likely culprit is the F-35.
The F-35 program began in 1992. The idea was that all branches of the military would use the same aircraft thus saving that taxpayers money. The program was known as the Joint Strike Fighter. However, like the proverbial horse created by a committee, every part of the military had their own ideas about what this aircraft should do and what type of weapon systems it should have. By 2017, the commonality of function between the services was measured at 20 percent.
The F-35 in my opinion is a failure as a replacement for the F-16. It is incapable of winning a dogfight with an F-16, it cannot maintain supersonic speed without compromising its structure, and requires pristine flight conditions to operate.
I think the carrier aircraft were not up to the task of doing the mission due to an equipment readiness issue and Trump remembering the Carter fiasco, aborted the mission. It was not a last minute breakthrough of diplomacy.
That’s my read on it but we will learn soon enough because nothing stays secret in Washington for very long.
Tesla stock has been slightly up these past two weeks but not because of earning reports or Elon Musk ginning up support on Twitter. Instead Tesla has benefitted from the algorithms that fund managers use to insure they have a sufficiently diversified portfolio. Generally, if the Dow is up, Tesla has been up and vice versa.
However, Tesla has hit another bump in the rode.
Tesla and Uber both had requests for tariff relief rejected by U.S. trade officials, a decision that will force the companies to pay a 25% tariff or seek new suppliers.
Reuters was the first to report the decision by the office of the U.S. Trade Representatives. TechCrunch previously reported on the Trump administration’s refusal to exempt the “brain” of Tesla’s Autopilot technology from punitive import tariffs.
Last year, the Trump administration imposed 25% tariffs on a range of imports, including electronics, to try to reduce the U.S. trade deficit with China. Tesla and Uber are among the U.S. companies that have requested relief on those tariffs.
Tesla warned that higher tariffs on the “brain of the vehicle” could cause economic harm to the company.
As stated here before, Musk’s fortunes have been bleak since Trump was elected. Trump has shutoff many of the taxpayer subsidies that Musk needed because he can’t compete in an open and free market. Republicans don’t tend to tamper with the market by subsidizing unproven alternatives to things that work while Democrats have the hubris to pick winners and losers (Solyndra and Tesla) claiming for political and economic reasons that “Green” is good despite any evidence that it is factual.
But there’s even more bad news for Elon and his posse.
One such stock that you may want to consider dropping is Tesla, Inc.
A key reason for this move has been the negative trend in earnings estimate revisions. For the full year, we have seen two estimates moving down in the past 30 days, compared with no upward revisions. This trend has caused the consensus estimate to trend lower, going from a loss of $1.14 a share a month ago to its current level of a loss of $1.32.
Also, for the current quarter, Tesla has seen two downward estimate revisions versus no revisions in the opposite direction, dragging the consensus estimate down to a loss of 70 cents a share from a loss of 64 cents over the past 30 days.
I’m not ready to declare Tesla dead yet but the disconnect between their perceived value and actual value is still way out of line. Barring anything else, look for a significant drop when the 90-day monster makes its appearance in July. The “tell” is when Musk goes on Twitter in mid-July to divert your attention from the impending bad news. So far we have had the flamethrower, leaf blower, underwater submarine car, and pickup truck.
Elon Musk with Tesla Flamethrower
Elon has plans for submarine better than the one driven by James Bond Disclaimer: Playboy model extra, some assembly required
Can the Tesla motorcycle be far behind?
Last year’s Tesla Model M motorcycle
Oh, wait, Elon had that last year. What will this guy think of next? He wants you to look at the new shiny thing in his hand not dollars and common sense.
I keep telling the editorial staff here at ReallyRight that the 2020 election will be American Values (i.e. Donald Trump) versus California Values (everyone else).
This is true not only culturally, socially, and politically but also because in their attempt to be relevant, California Democrats have moved our jungle primary to Super Tuesday, the earliest allowed date in March 2020. Thus giving a hyper-Liberal an early advantage in the delegate count towards their nomination.
Per an article at World Net Daily, yesterday Rush Limbaugh also seized upon this idea.
But talk-radio host Rush Limbaugh believes Donald Trump, a Republican, needs to make a bid for those votes.
“I’m talking actually making a play for people out there. Go to California and make your case. Go to California and explain your philosophy, your policies, your heart. Go to California. People out there are not hearing it. California may as well have boundaries around it where outside news doesn’t get in there, other than things like this show,” he said Wednesday.
“And not to win California. This is an unreasonable expectation. It would be great icing on the cake if Trump could actually win California for the Republicans. There just aren’t the Republican votes to do that right now. At the same time, it makes no sense to write off the state. Somebody like Trump could go there and make the case that the people of the state of California never hear made anymore, because it’s a one-party state and a different way of life as an option is really never presented,” he said.
It would be fun to see Trump campaign here, even just a little; plus it would bleed the Dems of a bunch of money just to shore-up their base. Democrats just don’t understand how toxic any ideas labeled as “California” are in the rest of the country.
If Trump defines the race as America versus California, he will sweep states in ‘flyover country” and give Democrats a much deserved black eye in the process.
Georgia has decided to break with conventional wisdom and dare to support the weakest among us and all hell has broken loose on the other side. Many media companies that find it too difficult (bureaucratic and expensive) to work in Liberal meccas like California and New York are spending big money in the Peach State to create content. Now these folks are threatening to pull-out of Georgia and other states that take a stand for life. First out of the gate was Netflix; followed by Disney et al.
Nearly half a dozen major media companies have joined Netflix in reconsidering their hundreds of millions of dollars in investments in states where so-called heartbeat bills have either been passed or are already in effect.
Netflix was the first Hollywood studio to publicly take a stand on the polarizing issue, when chief content officer Ted Sarandos said Tuesday that the company would consider pulling movie and television productions from Georgia if the state implements a controversial abortion ban, Variety reported.
Walt Disney Co. followed Wednesday night and by Thursday, NBCUniversal, WarnerMedia, Sony Pictures, CBS and its Showtime division had each issued statements saying states’ anti-abortion laws would affect the studios’ decision-making when it comes to selecting locations for production.
Other states are in the crosshairs of these liberal leaning corporations for daring to support life but please note that one player is conspicuous in their absence. Where is CNN? You know, the Liberal news network headquartered in Atlanta Georgia.
CNN has made no public statements on the topic of moving but their supporters have noticed and purport to speak for them. The following quote is from a California Democrat and Presidential hopeful telling CNN what they should do.
Rep. Eric Swalwell on Sunday said he supports the kind of economic boycott that private businesses are threatening in Georgia if a new abortion law goes into effect and suggested at a CNN town hall on Sunday that the television network might have to leave the state as well.
Meanwhile, the big studios that huffed and puffed in the article above are moderating their stance.
To be clear, each company’s statement includes the same set of caveats. None of the corporations has actually committed to boycotting Georgia, but only to reconsider their work there. Plus, they’ve only said they will potentially take action if the law survives what are expected to be significant court challenges.
It’s a far cry from the full-on boycott some activists have demanded. Yet, the various statements represent a notable shift, or at least a breaking of the silence.
Folks, I think the movie studios should take a page from Laura Ingraham’s Shut Up & Sing. Quit worrying about social issues or you risk the wrath of the other half of the country that disagrees with you.
I’m not going to cancel Netflix and Hulu yet but if they go forward with their threat then I’m pulling my money from their companies. Getting rid of Comcast as my ISP is more problematic but once 5G is deployed, I may not need them anymore. I may not be signing a bunch of online petitions about this but I will surely vote with my wallet if this posturing is turned into action.
While the CRA and Koch Brothers may be glad to hear this prediction, it’s sad for the rest of us. Why? Because Republicans have failed in their duty to defend and uphold the Constitution while the Democrats never believed in the Constitution to start with. Democrats view the Constitution as an obstacle to overcome (or thwart) to get what they want. No news with that claim.
Koch Brothers promise to support Democrats in 2020 elections
Basically, my prediction is just simple math. Democrats allow illegal aliens to vote and ditto for felons (see Florida, Virginia, California). Anyone they can create into a group dependent on them gets the franchise. Also they have no problem with letting people vote more than once and even beyond the grave. In short, any and all means they can use to game the system to get the outcome they want are allowed.
Only a national voter I.D. program that is part of a comprehensive voter reform and integrity program could change this from happening but the Republicans failed to do this when they controlled Congress so I think that ship sailed. There is an outside chance to do this in 2020 if they retake the House but I wouldn’t bet the farm on it.
We live in a country where there are millions more voters than people and the ruling party in these states likes it that way. And if by some miracle we should prevail at the ballot box they then go to their buddies in the courts to get an injunction to stop what they don’t like.
Also, the indoctrination of our youth via government schools is creating dependency on government programs and solutions, a trend which is unfavorable for freedom as well.
Folks the Republic is over and nothing but divine intervention can fix that fact. You can call it oligarchy or rule by elites, but the idea of rags-to-riches as described years ago by Horatio Alger and more recently by Rush Limbaugh is a world of opportunity that is going the way of the T-Rex and coal powered trains.
The old saying that “as California goes, so goes the nation” is proving more true that we’d like to believe. The question is not “if” but “when”. The only alternative left for “flyover country” is exit the republic. Me? I’d rather cling to my guns and religion than be led by these “leaders.”
Like him or hate him, Donald Trump is the last Republican President we will ever have. I hope I’m proven wrong but sadly I see no evidence to contradict this assertion.
Here are a few supporting links for my prediction:
Former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr., who has shunned today’s Democratic Party orthodoxy on issues from crime to compromising with Republicans, again broke with his party’s base and many of his campaign rivals on Wednesday when his campaign confirmed that he still backs the Hyde Amendment, a measure that prohibits the use of federal funds for abortion with exceptions for cases involving rape, incest and when the life of the mother is in danger.
Former Vice President Joe Biden reversed his position on the Hyde Amendment Thursday after facing intense backlash from within his own party.
NBC News correspondent Mike Memoli noted the reversal, tweeting, “NEWS: Biden says that in an environment where women’s health is under assault especially in GOP-led states, he ‘can no longer support an amendment’ that cuts off funding, as in Hyde.”
The last paragraph on Biden’s recanting of the Hyde Amendment is a classic study in Orwellian doublespeak.
A number of Democrats had criticized Biden for his support of the amendment, claiming that recent bans and added restrictions in a number of states had turned the Hyde Amendment into a de facto attack on the rights of poor and minority women.
Hey Joe, who is poorer, weaker, more vulnerable, and a real minority?
Folks another white Democrat just came out for killing poor and minority children thru all nine months of pregnancy.It’s sad but it’s what Joe has to do if he want the votes of poor and minority Democrats living on the plantation.The mystery is why the sheep keep voting in lockstep for the wolves. I guess the wolves keep the sheep better fed.
A bust of Winston Churchill was given to President Lyndon Johnson in 1965. It was placed in the Oval Office of the White House until Barry Obama had it removed. When President Trump was elected, Churchill was welcomed back into the President’s office.
Churchill bust on display in Trump White House
The Washington Post has a sympathetic explanation of the details which you can read here.
Trump likes Churchill (which in my opinion is a good deal). On his visit “across the pond” this week, Trump was gifted with a Churchill styled hat.
Winston Churchill ~1940
Donald Trump tried on a personalized version of Winston Churchill’s signature hat when he was given it as a gift during a talk show appearance on his UK state visit.
Piers Morgan, host of the ITV network’s “Good Morning Britain” show, interviewed the US president in the Churchill War Rooms, where the late British prime minister famously directed World War II.
“This is where Britain’s greatest leader fought the war, and he used to wear these famous hats from the hat maker Lock. We’ve had one made for you,” Morgan said as he handed Trump the hat which was monogrammed with his initials, DJT.
Trump, while wearing the hat said:
“I think Winston looked much better with it,” he said.
Oh, Morgan is a friend of Trump. That Trump regards anybody in the media as a friend is the biggest surprise to in this whole incident.
Morgan, a past winner of Trump’s show “The Celebrity Apprentice,” has a close relationship with the president. He was the only journalist to be granted a TV interview with Trump on his state visit to the UK.
Donald Trump with Piers Morgan (June 2019)
My conclusion is that people don’t like it because Trump did it, not because it’s bad to have a Churchill hat.
Those of you aspiring to get rich in California real estate better buckle-up and get ready for a tumultuous ride. Those owning commercial property, your day is coming; but today; let’s look at those of you that rent housing to others.
First, congratulations! You are about to win the lottery. At least according to people that I know that rent property. No, really. Thanks to the California Assembly, under the guise of affordable housing, you are about to score bigtime. AB 1482, has passed the Assembly and is waiting on the Senate for action. This bill is a ‘guaranteed income for life dream’…at least until you get hosed by whatever happens when Prop 13 is dismantled.
This bill allows you to increase tenant rent by five percent a year plus inflation.
“… prohibit an owner of residential real property from increasing the rental rate for that property in an amount that is greater than 5% plus the percentage change in the cost of living …”
It’s possible that the actual rent increase could go up to seven percent if our benevolent lawmakers decide to more closely mirror the Oregon version of the law but who knows. Anyway, the only thing standing between you and this utopian dream is two guys, the senate leader and Governor. I’m not sure I’d bet against the house (pun intended) on this movement.
So what is the downside of such blessed compassion on the masses?
Ironically, more than 10,000 apartment units in San Francisco reportedly sit vacant. That’s another result of the city’s rent control and tenant ordinances: Landlords are afraid to rent their apartments to strangers. Because tenants are granted special “rights,” it’s difficult to evict them. Landlords let the properties sit idle.
That’s a reality. If the cities where I own rental houses pass rent control, I won’t be the only one who is done with that type of investment. Who has enough blood-pressure medication to handle the stress of it? In rent-controlled cities, landlords exit the business and turn their apartments into luxury condos. If they can’t make a profit, they’re not about to install new counters or put on a pricey new roof. We end up with third-world conditions: the wealthy living in beautiful places and everyone else in squalor.
Oh, should this legislation go down in flames, never fear. Regardless of legislative action, statewide rent control will be on the ballot in 2020 and it’s considered a slam-dunk by its opponents.
Californians need to ponder this unpleasant reality given that community activists appear to have gathered enough signatures to place a statewide initiative on the November ballot that would overturn state limits on local rent-control ordinances. The 1995 Costa-Hawkins Act forbids California localities from placing rental-price caps on single-family homes, condos and newer construction. It also bans vacancy controls, meaning that landlords in rent-controlled cities are free to raise the rent to market rates once tenants vacant the property.
If California voters approve the repeal of that measure, the state’s housing crisis will get worse—especially in the liberal, high-priced coastal cities that almost certainly will embrace tougher rent control laws. It’s going to be difficult to stop the initiative, for obvious reasons. The pro side will hit the “easy button” (the rent is too damn high; we’ll magically make it lower!). Unfortunately, it’s hard to make a complex economic argument to voters who are suffering from unaffordable rent and housing prices, but it’s worth rehashing the long-proven results of such ordinances.
When I saw that Tesla stock was up today (which is a rare occurrence), I thought Elon was back on Twitter but alas, I found a different reason. Tesla is getting free money.
As mentioned in a previous installment, Tesla is being subsidized by European automakers so they can make their emission goals thanks to the nonsensical fake environmental “science” of carbon taxes and emission credits. Now Bloomberg has published an article that Tesla is also being subsidized by American automakers GM (Government Motors) and Fiat-Chrysler.
For years, Tesla Inc. has hauled in revenue by selling credits to other carmakers that needed to offset sales of polluting vehicles to U.S. consumers. These sorts of transactions have largely been shrouded in secrecy — until now.
General Motors Co. and Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV disclosed to the state of Delaware earlier this year that they reached agreements to buy federal greenhouse gas credits from Tesla. While the filings are light on detail, they haven’t been reported on previously. They also represent the first acknowledgments from carmakers that they’re turning to Tesla for help to comply with intensifying U.S. environmental regulations.
The deal with GM will come as a surprise to those who thought years of sales of plug-in hybrid Chevrolet Volts and all-electric Chevy Bolts would leave the largest U.S. automaker in the clear with regard to regulatory compliance.
Oh, also buried in this article is a nugget about the 2020 election.
And the company wants to bank the credits for future years when emissions rules get tougher — especially if a Democrat beats President Donald Trump in 2020.
“This might not be a bad hedge,” said Mike Taylor, the founder and president of Emission Advisors, a Houston-based environmental credit consultant and broker. “If a Democrat gets elected in 2020, GM may need the credits and prices may go up.”
If you read further into the article …
Tesla has generated almost $2 billion in revenue from selling regulatory credits since 2010.
So between US and European manufacturers, we now know that Tesla has banked at least $4.3 billion dollars just for existing—and producing nothing.
Once again, it is proof positive that in a truly free-market economy, Tesla would not cut it as a viable business. Only because of government interference–direct and indirect–does this company still draw breath.
I don’t get it. Black people are not only agreeing with the KKK and Nazis on their views of race but defending them publicly. It’s been almost 150 years since Lincoln freed the slaves and they still don’t want to leave the plantation. In fact, they are defending the proposition that some men have the right to decide who should live or not live. The strong unilaterally deciding the fate of the weak. Oh, and to them, I’m the racist for pointing it out. Whiskey Tango Foxtrot?
I could start this blog in many ways, but I know that I won’t move the needle in this arena for most people. Sadly, folks would rather deal with feelings than facts. I’ve known the deck was stacked against truth and reason, but that belief was reinforced on my recent trip to Washington D.C.
I paid a visit to the recently opened museum on African American History. Black folks have had many accomplishments in this country, but I think the narrative is muddled and missing direction. Christianity was missing in places it should have been front and center, but then that’s the trick isn’t it? If black folks were following Christ, then they wouldn’t be agreeing with the KKK and defending the Klan’s philosophy as right.
I also visited the Martin Luther King Memorial and that too was missing something; namely, the endpoint of the racial struggle was missing. The “I Have a Dream” speech was not there. It should have been the cornerstone for all races to strive for the ideal King annunciated when he said, “I have a dream that my four little chi1dren will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.” The goal of the civil rights movement as defined by King was a colorblind society where everyone was looked at as a child of God and we were all evaluated by who we are on the inside not the outside.
King, as a good Republican, knew that the group needed opportunity, but it was the individual that would then be able to stand or fall on his merits. However, those claiming to be successors of King, flipped this idea on its head and embraced a system of never-ending dependency where they just happened to be the leaders. Many of these “leaders” claim to be clergymen but their gospel is not based on biblical truths but Marxism, propaganda from the Klan, Liberation Theology, and other assorted nonsense that tickles the ears of listeners.
Blacks want the Right to Kill Each Other
This false teaching is currently on display all over the Internet and your evening news. Black people are demanding the right to kill other black people without repercussions. Why because black people are stupid and poor and need to be controlled. Not my words, but theirs.
Here are just a few examples.
Ohio Rep. Janine Boyd – D
A female Democrat state representative from Ohio, Rep. Janine Boyd, drafted an amendment last week seeking to have black babies exempted from pro-life legislation dubbed the “heartbeat bill,” which bars babies with detectable heartbeats (around six weeks gestation) from being killed via abortion.
As reported by LifeNews, Boyd’s bill “would have given an exemption to African American women to abort their unborn babies for any reason up to the state’s current abortion limit, 20 weeks.” . . .
“Black slaves were once treated like cattle and put out to stud in order to create generations of more slaves,” argued the Democrat. “Our country is not far enough beyond our history to legislate as if it is.” . . .
Former Planned Parenthood executive turned pro-life advocate Abby Johnson ripped Boyd’s targeted amendment, snarking that “apparently a 38% national abortion rate in the African-American community isn’t enough.”
She then continued. “You can’t control women because, I don’t know if y’all heard, but women are the same as humans. And I’m Leslie Dracarys Jones. “Why do all of these weird ass men care what women choose to do with their bodies? I don’t care what you do with your 65-year-old droopy a— b—s.”
“When women have a choice, women have freedom,” Jones exclaimed to huge applause.
“The fact that nine states are doing this means this really is a war on women,” Jones said in conclusion. “You can’t tell me what to do with my body.”
Rapper Offset of the group Migos has slammed Alabama’s controversial abortion law, comparing it to slavery.
The rapper unloaded on Twitter on Saturday evening, criticizing Alabama’s law, which outlaws abortion at any stage and does not allow an exemption for victims of rape or incest. Abortion will only be permitted in the state should the pregnancy pose a life-threatening health risk to the mother, should it become enforced in 2020.
There’s more examples and we’ll get to another shortly. But first a look at how this situation came to be.
Vocabulary: Malthusian
In his magnum opus, An Essay on the Principle of Population, published in six editions from 1798 to 1826, Malthus wrote:
“All children born, beyond what would be required to keep up the population to a desired level, must necessarily perish, unless room be made for them by the deaths of grown persons. . . . Therefore … we should facilitate, instead of foolishly and vainly endeavoring to impede, the operations of nature in producing this mortality; and if we dread the too frequent visitation of the horrid form of famine, we· should sedulously encourage the other forms of destruction, which we compel nature to use. Instead of recommending cleanliness to the poor, we should encourage contrary habits. In our towns we should make the streets narrower, crowd more people into the houses, and court the return of the plague. In the country, we should build our villages near stagnant pools, and particularly encourage settlements in all marshy and unwholesome situations. But above all, we should reprobate specific remedies for ravaging diseases; and restrain those benevolent, but much mistaken men, who have thought they were doing a service to mankind by projecting schemes for the total extirpation of particular disorders.
Grand Illusions: The Legacy of Planned Parenthood p 55-56
Thomas Malthus 1766 – 1834
Vocabulary: Eugenics
Eugenics the study and control of procreation as a means of improving hereditary characteristics of future generations. The concept has sometimes been used in a pseudoscientific way as an excuse for unethical, racist, or even genocidal practices such as involuntary sterilization or certain other practices in Nazi Germany and elsewhere.
Malthusian beliefs coupled with Darwin’s “survival of the fittest” allowed racists the world over to claim a scientific basis for the superiority of one group over another. This fueled calls for eugenics programs; euthanasia, abortion, infanticide, forced sterilization, genocide, and other atrocities. Margaret Sanger–who you are about to meet–was a leading voice in Europe and the United States for these ideals. Her beliefs overthrew the morality of her day and replaced it with one of convenience and death. A belief system which is thriving to this day.
Margaret Sanger racist architect of Planned Parenthood
Margaret Sanger: Architect of American Eugenics
OK, so where did black folks get the idea to kill other black folks? Why, from a white lady named Margaret Sanger and her merry band from the Birth Control League. Sanger has a long history of such rhetorical gems as these:
“More children from the fit, less from the unfit that is the chief issue of birth control.”
“the most merciful thing a large family can do to one of its infant members is to kill it.”
“We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population. And the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”
For those of you that went to public school or are lifelong members of the Democrat Party, here’s some info you may not have heard.
Margaret Sanger had learned of eugenics from Havelock Ellis. She first acknowledged the place of birth control in the eugenicists’ program when she announced in 1919: “More children from the fit, less from the unfit that is the chief issue of birth control.” Mrs. Sanger usually used the word “unfit” to refer to the mentally retarded and physically deformed. “Birth control,” she said in 1920, “is nothing more or less than the facilitation of the process of weeding out the unfit, or preventing the birth of defectives or of those who will become defectives.” Increasingly, she saw feeblemindedness, the bogey of all the hereditarians, as antecedent to poverty or social organization in the genesis of social problems. “The philosophy of birth control,” she said in 1922, “points out that as long as civilized communities encourage unrestrained fecundity in the “normal” members of the population—always of course under the guise of decency and morality—and penalize every attempt to introduce the principle of discrimination and responsibility in parenthood, they will be faced with the ever-increasing problem of feeblemindedness, that fertile parent of degeneracy, crime, and pauperism.”
Margaret Sanger and others considered the most menacing aspect of proliferating unfitness to be the growth of the custodial welfare state. “Protective and paternalistic laws,” said a speaker at the Sixth International Neo-Malthusian and Birth Control Conference in 1925, benefited “the least desirable elements of society.” Such laws, he said, “are usually put forward upon moral or humane or altruistic grounds and in nearly all cases by professional agitators and stupid busybodies… What they actually accomplish is the preservation of the misfit, the degenerate, the low, the unworthy and the more or less defective elements at the expense of the strong and exceptional.” If practiced by the right people, he suggested, birth control could wipe out those evils for which welfare legislation gave at best merely symptomatic relief.
That Spencerian attitude, embracing the familiar tenets of individualism, elitism, and antistatism, provided one base for the eugenics program. In 1922 Mrs. Sanger registered her acceptance of such ideas when she said that if society applied to reproduction the techniques of efficiency employed by “modern stockbreeders,” there would be no need for measures that were “fostering the good-for-nothing at the expense of the good.”
Birth Control in America by David M. Kennedy p 115-117
By 1920 eugenicists were specifically advocating the adoption of birth control by the slumdwellers and impoverished, who had always been Margaret Sanger’s chief concern.
Kennedy p 118
Because of her Malthusian and Eugenic connections, she had become closely associated with the scientists and theorists who put together Nazi Germany’s “race purification” program. She had openly endorsed the euthanasia, sterilization, abortion, and infanticide programs of the early Reich. She published a number of articles in the Birth Control Review that mirrored Hitler’s Aryan-White Supremacist rhetoric. She even commissioned Dr. Ernst Rudin, the director of the Nazi Medical Experimentation program, to write for The Review himself.
Grand Illusions: The Legacy of Planned Parenthood p 61
Early on, Planned Parenthood adopted a similar strategy against the church. Margaret Sanger recognized that the church was “the enemy” of her crusade. But she also recognized that· an all-out frontal assault on God’s People was suicidal. And so she put together a “Balak strategy.” She relied on wolves in sheep’s clothing (2 Timothy 3:6).
Margaret began by wooing young and ambitious ministers with the trinkets and baubles of power, prestige, privilege, and position. She doted on them, feeding their sense of self-importance. She enticed them with honors. She invited them to sit on her boards. She patronized their pet projects. She wined them and dined them. She rewarded them with trips, junkets, and tours. She knew just how to tantalize them with attention and appreciation. Her winsomeness was irresistible and her thoroughness was incomparable.
But even without all that alluring charm, Margaret’s campaign to seduce Christians would probably have won support in three broad sectors of the church.
Racists. Especially during the Great Depression when tensions were high and jobs were scarce, racists saw Margaret’s Eugenic plans and programs as an open opportunity to eliminate whole “undesired” races and “dysgenic” classes. Tragically many of them carried out their vendetta in the name of Christ.
Lettie Perkins grew up in a small sharecropper’s cabin deep in the heart of rural South Carolina. When she was just a youngster she remembers a countywide tent revival meeting cosponsored by several large all-White Baptist churches and several social service agencies, including Planned Parenthood. “We were all excited,” she said. “The revival was always the social event of the year. And that year was to be the first time Blacks were allowed to attend. We could hardly contain ourselves. Most of the women bought or made new dresses. We got hats and gloves. We really were going to do things right. It was like a debutante’s coming-out for us.”
The pastor of one of the sponsoring churches spent a good deal of his time for nearly a month before the revival making sure that black pastors in the area turned their people out. “I don’t know why we were so naive at the time,” Lettie told me. “It was so obvious that he was setting us up for something.”
Indeed, he was. On the day that the revival was to begin, Planned Parenthood set up several tents. Blacks were herded into them and “counseled” on the “benefits” of sterilization and birth limitation. “We weren’t even allowed to go into the revival meeting itself until we’d listened to their whole spiel,” Lettie said. “And even then, they segregated us off to one side. Like usual.”
Most of the Black families were outraged. The blatantly racist collusion between Planned Parenthood and the all-White churches was shocking to them, even in that day of raw and festering prejudice. “I can still remember my Mamma just shaking with anger and humiliation,” Lettie said. “Our family never went to church again. Not any church, Black or White. Mamma didn’t want to have anything to do with a faith that could sanction things like that.”
Liberals. But it wasn’t just racists that were attracted to Margaret Sanger’s cause. During the first three decades of this century, the great Modernist-Fundamentalist controversy erupted onto the American church scene. More disruptive than even the eleventh-century Schism or the sixteenth-century Reformation, the controversy forever changed the face of Christianity in this country. In reaction to the Modernists’ emphasis on the “Social Gospel,” most Fundamentalists withdrew from all cultural involvement to focus on “spiritual things.” Meanwhile the Modernists pursued cultural involvement with a vengeance, uncritically embracing every fringe Liberal cause, issue, and organization including Planned Parenthood. Since the conservative Fundamentalists no longer actively opposed them, the Liberals were able to capture the seats of power and influence.
Men who no longer believed the Bible and who were committed to a radical social agenda were easy prey for Margaret. She exploited the Liberal coup brilliantly.
Richard L. Ford was the young idealistic pastor of a large Methodist church on the West Coast during World War II. Already thoroughly infected with Liberalism even then, his congregation sponsored several cooperative programs with Planned Parenthood. ”At the time we were giddy with excitement,” he told me recently. “We felt that we’d been sequestered in a religious ghetto. That we’d been irrelevant for years. Now at last we were doing things that made a difference in the world. Unshackled of every encumbrance-tradition, the Bible, everything-we loyally followed every new fad and fashion.”
A funny thing happened on the way to relevance, however. “I found that I didn’t have answers anymore,” Richard said.
“When people are facing a crisis in their lives they don’t need their pastor to experiment on their souls and minds with whatever the latest pop therapy is. They need answers. When teens are facing a barrage of temptation you just can’t turn them over to Planned Parenthood. That’s like throwing gas on a fire. They need standards. Solid and sure.”
No longer able to provide his congregation with decisive guidance, Richard was left helpless in the face of a rapidly deteriorating moral climate. “There wasn’t any such thing as sin any more for us,” he said. “So, not surprisingly, we began to indulge ourselves. Illegitimate pregnancies skyrocketed. Divorce rates soared. And the worse things got, the more we turned to the very organizations that prompted our demise in the first place. Imagine! Going to Planned Parenthood to solve the teen pregnancy epidemic! That makes about as much sense as going to a pusher to stop drug abuse or to a pimp to stop prostitution. But, that’s exactly what we did.”
Compromisers. Margaret Sanger was able to successfully recruit large numbers of Fundamentalist, Evangelical, Catholic, and Orthodox Christians into her fold as well. Unlike the racists and liberals who were converts of conscience, these men and women were converts of convenience. They were fine, upstanding Christians who opposed Planned Parenthood’s promiscuous sex education programs. They stood firmly against abortion. Until . . .
Charles Boothe is a respected and admired Christian leader. A former pastor and now the chairman of his church’s deacon board, he runs a community-wide youth ministry. From the expression on his face I could tell that he was deeply disturbed when he walked into my office. “Jeanie, my youngest daughter, is pregnant,” he told me. “She’s just seventeen, a senior in high school. What am I going to do? She has her whole life ahead of her. Why this? Why now?”
We briefly talked through the Biblical options: maternity homes, adoption agencies, alternative centers, and marriage to the father. We consoled one another. We wept together. We prayed together. And we talked long into the afternoon. We embraced warmly when he left.
He then promptly took Jeanie to Planned Parenthood and had his grandchild killed.
I was shocked.
Why? Why would he do such a thing? Why would he resort \ to that which he knew was wrong?
“I’ve always been against abortion,” he told me later. “Always. And I still believe that it’s wrong. It’s murder. But … I tell ya. When it’s your own daughter. . . . Well, I just couldn’t see ruining her life by making her go through the humiliation of an illegitimate pregnancy. And besides, our reputation. . my reputation…. Well, I uh … I just…. Well, you know.”
Margaret Sanger’s “Balak Strategy” proved to be a phenomenal success. Enticing Christians to “play the harlot,” she was able to do what no activist or ideologue possibly could: trap and defeat the church (Numbers 25:18).
It would be several decades before Planned Parenthood would be able to consummate its victory and actually sack the citadel of Christian consensus. But that future conquest in the Supreme Court was ensured by the moral defeat wrought by Margaret’s minions in the church.
Grand Illusions: The Legacy of Planned Parenthood 219-223
Facts and Truth
So now you know how it came about that black people have embraced the belief that the way to improve the country is to kill as many black people as possible. Meanwhile, their self-appointed leaders spout meaningless phrases like Black Lives Matter…but not really meaning it. As long as some lives have more value than others, none really have any worth.
Oh, that chick from Saturday Night Live quoted above might want to consider the graphic below showing that those old white guys are trying to save poor black babies from being murdered by their own mothers.
Yet another Celebrity Chimes In
Left-wing activist Emily Ratajkowski is making an anti-science argument to justify the murder of unborn black children as a means to lower the prison population.
And I use the term “anti-science” because Ratajkowski’s racist appeal to decrease the black prison population as some kind of public service is purely driven by a sense of supremacism and has nothing to do with facts or statistics.
Emily Ratajkowski wants to abort black babies to reduce prison population
“This week, 25 old white men voted to ban abortion in Alabama even in cases of incest and rape. These men in power are imposing their wills onto the bodies of women in order to uphold the patriarchy and perpetuate the industrial prison complex by presenting women of low income opportunity the right to chose not to reproduce. The states trying to ban abortions have the highest proportions of black women living there. This is about class and race and is a direct attack on the fundamental human rights women in the US deserve and are protected by under Roe v Wade. Our bodies, out choice.”
Without even attempting to conceal or shade or nuance it, Ratajkowski comes right out and says we need to kill unborn black children before they grow up to become black criminals.
What you have here is a white racist making a eugenics argument cloaked in social justice niceties.
We’ll get to the facts and statistics in a moment, but this must first be made clear: Emily Ratajkowski’s argument, her rationale is no different from what we have heard throughout the darkest parts of human history from the KKK, Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger’s hideous sentiments about black Americans, or from the Nazis about any non-Aryan race.
Before we get to the math that exposes Ratajkowski as the godless supremacist she is, for just a moment let’s assume her thinking is correct– that, in the coldest and most clinical terms, her beliefs make sense. Even so, in order to agree with her, you still have to strip every bit of humanity from a monstrous idea comfortable with the murder of children — based solely on their skin color — for crimes they have not yet committed.
And even Ratajkowski knows that not every black child murdered in the womb is destined to grow up to be criminal, but she is still willing to exterminate, to sacrifice innocent black life as a means to stop the others.
But it’s the math that exposes Ratajkowski… The math is damning.
According to the most recent statistics I could find — and I am using Alabama as my example because it just passed the most progressive pro-life laws and just happens to have the highest proportional number of its citizens in prisons — there are some 45,000 Alabama citizens in federal, state, and local prisons.
A majority of those prisoners, 54 percent are black.
That means that roughly 25,000 black Alabamans are in prison.
Last year, roughly 4,200 black babies were aborted in Alabama, and if you look at the numbers going back to 2006, it seems safe to calculate that over the last ten years, some 50,000 black babies have been aborted in Alabama.
The question, then, is this…
Did the legal murder of 50,000 black unborn children decrease the prison population?
According to the U.S. Census, for every 100,000 black citizens in Alabama, 1,788 end up in prison, which means that of those 50,000 murdered black children, about 2,500 would end up in prison.
What this means is that in order to spare Alabama an additional 2,500 prisoners over ten years (or only 250 a year), Emily Ratajkowski thinks it’s a good idea to literally exterminate the other 47,500 innocent black children.
Emily Ratajkowski believes it is noble and woke to murder 100 percent of unborn black children because five percent might end up in prison.
Emily Ratajkowski is defending the murder of roughly 5,000 black babies per year because 250 might end up in prison.
If you read the rest of the article, it gets even worse for poor Emily.
Some Words of Sanity by Rev Jesse Lee Peterson
Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson
The moral state of America has plunged over my lifetime – with the black community leading the way. Men have become increasingly weak, and women angry and out of control. Children grow up without any good examples. I’ve talked to Millennials and younger people who never saw a man of strong character while growing up. Instead, pathetic beta males kiss up to women, thinking they’re showing love and “equality” while bringing out the worst in the women. Today the female-dominated Democrat Party is the party of death.
In New York, the Democrat-majority government passed a new pro-abortion law allowing mothers to kill their unborn children up to the due date. Democrats dubbed it the “Reproductive Health Act,” declaring abortion a “fundamental right.” According to New York Right to Life, the Democrats’ idea of a mother’s “health” involves vague considerations of “age, economic, social and emotional factors.” In reality Democrats put personal convenience above a child’s life, ignoring the rights of the father, spoiling and lying to the mother, who later suffers. Democrats pretend that a human being inside the womb is not a “person” and should die if the mother “chooses.”
Have you ever wondered about the callousness of young black males killing people in America’s inner cities? In a rare honest moment, Hillary Clinton was actually right in the 1990s when she called these killers “super predators” with “no conscience, no empathy.” But consider that these communities are filled with mothers who commit abortions at a higher rate than anywhere in the country – discarding lives like trash. In New York City in recent years, more black babies were aborted than born! In 2009, 57 percent, and in 2012, 56 percent of black pregnancies in the city ended in abortion.
Genocide of the black race is not ok. Glenn Kaiser said, “The way you treat the person you love the least is the way you love God the most.”
Glenn Kaiser
God gives life and takes it way, when someone put themselves in place of God, their actions repeat the lie from the Garden, “ye shall be as gods…”
“There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.”
Proverbs 14:12
Folks a day of reckoning is coming, if its not here already, and I don’t want to stand before Almighty God being judged because I said nothing when they came for the unborn, the elderly, the weak, and feeble. Jewish folks keep saying we should never forget the Holocaust, but they ignore the one in their midst. We kill 50 million babies worldwide each year and over 60 million in our country since 1973—38 percent of which are black—but most people don’t care.
The bottom line is we have reaped the whirlwind. The church is supposed to be salt and light to a culture, an ethical firewall, but those before us were ill prepared for the tsunami of challenges to their beliefs. They failed to have an answer to the hope that was in them. The wolves have scattered the flock, but pockets of resistance are fighting back. Sadly, too few voices are crying in the wilderness.
If we are holding out for a political solution, we are putting our faith in the wrong basket. Only the transforming power of God can make any move to uphold life permanent. If Roe is overturned, much more work needs to be done. Our side wants to be left alone while the other guys are all in on serving the State because government power is their god and for many, abortion is their sacrament. Their defeat is certain, but it would be nice to see it in our lifetime.
While you’re downloading Grand Illusions, look for Political Polytheism and read that too, then we’ll talk.
