Saturday, September 18, 2021

Writing History Books Without History: From the birth and period of the Jeffersonianism republic, 1787 until 1860 no more prosperous country on earth existed on earth.


The numerous declarations among “right-wing” websites, blogs, and print publications usually present a conundrum of any given thoughts among them. It is like a string of firecrackers exploding. They are necessarily lighted in sequence but seem to sound in explosive randomness.

Afghanistan a catastrophe? Of, course. What do you expect? That is if you are a conservative, what do you expect? That is if you are a Jeffersonian republican, which is what a conservative is. It is not Fox News or Prager U. or Mark Levin screaming “You stupid idiot!.” Nor is it any of those pseudo-enlightened anti-Southern beeswax babblers of childish historical elaborations that are publicized as “on the right.”

But being “right-wing” doesn’t necessarily mean being right. It just means being not “left.”

Jefferson advised the United States to seek the friendship of all nations but enter into “entangling alliances” with none.

Even before Jefferson, in his farewell address, George Washington had admonished the republic to beware of “entangling alliances.”

More @ The Abbeville Institute

How the Left Wins Elections by Transforming Nations




Elections are won by demographics. No soup company blindly dumps cans of its newest "Turkey Coconut Bouillon with Nutmeg and Omega 3" in Aisle 6 of the supermarket without testing to see what demographics such a hideous concoction might appeal to. Will the product appeal to lesbian single mothers, divorced Asian firefighters or eccentric Latvian millionaires? Politics is no different.

A political party has its base, definable groups who groove to its message, who eat up the red meat that its candidates toss their way. It has the demographic groups which will always vote for it and those who might swing its way. It knows them by race, gender, age, class, sexuality, home ownership and a thousand other statistical slices of the pie. It has those numbers broken down by states, cities and neighborhoods so that it has a good estimate of its chances in a given place and time based on the demographics of the people who live there.

More @ Sultan Knish

WATCH: 351,000 “Yes” Votes Disappear from Totals in Newsom Recall Election LIVE ON CNN (VIDEO)

Via Alan

The Gateway Pundit

Here we go…

Last night on CNN 351,000 “Yes” votes disappeared in an instant during live coverage of the Newsom Recall Election in California.


California: A legit recall result, yes, but plenty of evidence of fraud

California: A legit recall result, yes, but plenty of ...

Much to many Californians' disappointment, Gavin Newsom won his election recall, and did so by a wide margin.

Blue state, Democrat voter registrations outnumber Republican ones by a wide margin — what's the news in that?

In this case, it's fair to say it may well have been legitimate, given that its 66-34 breakdown wasn't close.  Reputable polls such as Emerson and Trafalgar did show in the days before the vote that the numbers had moved into Newsom's column. 

Larry Elder did bring up that there was evidence of fraud going on but effectively undercut his argument by, earlier in the race, dismissing President Trump's claims of 2020 election fraud.  Fraud in California now but no fraud in 2020?  Give us a break; there's fraud embedded in the system.  It just didn't make a difference this time.

Therefore, this recall election could be useful for Republicans because the evidence of fraud was clearly out there.  And they should act now because there will be elections that will be close.

More @ American Thinker

NYT: 70% of Calls to MS Poison Control Related to Ivermectin Called Out: Real Figure was 2%, not 70%.

 The New York Times Corrects Claim About Ivermectin

After The New York Times published an article about the use of Ivermectin to combat COVID-19, claiming that 70% of recent calls to the Mississippi poison control center were related to Ivermectin, they were corrected by an investigative journalist who pointed out that the real figure was 2%, not 70%.

The journalist, Mary Beth Pfeiffer, tweeted, “I contacted @nytimes & they corrected 8/25 Ivermectin article. ‘This article misstated the percentage of recent calls to the Mississippi poison control center related to Ivermectin. It was 2 percent, not 70 percent,’ says appended note. Sentence removed. Poof. But damage done.

More @ RTM

President Donald J. Trump's letter to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger

Fauci’s Smoking Gun and China’s Campaign to Brainwash Americans

Via Lê Bá Dzũng


Fauci’s Smoking Gun | New documents have been released detailing the United States’ funding research on coronaviruses at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China. The Intercept obtained more than 900 pages of materials in connection with a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit brought by the publication against the National Institutes of Health. Following the release of the documents, Richard Ebright, a molecular biologist at Rutgers University, said on Twitter: “The materials confirm the grants supported the construction—in Wuhan—of novel chimeric SARS-related coronaviruses that combined a spike gene from one coronavirus with genetic information from another coronavirus, and confirmed the resulting viruses could infect human cells. The documents make it clear that assertions by the NIH Director, Francis Collins, and the NIAID Director, Anthony Fauci, that the NIH did not support gain-of-function research or potential pandemic pathogen enhancement at WIV are untruthful.”

More @ America Out Loud