Via MAHA Alliance (X)
One of the most brutal ads you’ve ever seen against a politician. Wow. Just watch.
Dear Kamala Harris,
The vast majority of American men have no issue with electing a female president, our issue lies solely with you. Your reputation precedes you, defined by a relentless pursuit of power, from your tenure as California’s attorney general to the present day.… pic.twitter.com/5ASOnXF2CZ
— MAHA Alliance (@MAHAalliance) October 26, 2024
Via QOSHE / NYTs: Kamala Harris Has an Unexpected Ally
The Conversation
By Gail Collins and Bret Stephens
Bret Stephens: Please don’t tell me you’re going to ask how I’m going to vote.
Gail Collins: Well, Bret, why would you imagine such a thing? Just because I keep getting stopped by people on the street, demanding to know whether you’re going to support Kamala Harris. I am not making this up.
Come on. Give us a hint.
Bret: You really want to know?
Gail: Um, yeah.
Bret: Kicking and screaming, I’ll cast my ballot for Harris.
I really would rather have just sat out Election Day. But Jan. 6 and election denialism are unforgivable. And as my friend Richard North Patterson likes to say, “Donald Trump is literally bleeping crazy.” And what crazy brings in its wake is JD Vance, whom I find worse than Trump, because he’s just as cynical but twice as bright. And what it also brings in its wake is Tucker Carlson and the Hitler defenders he likes to platform.
Gail: OK, gonna take a little time to run up to the roof and toot a horn. Be right back.
Bret: Well …
Gail: Hear that, don’t-like-anyone people? Really, if Bret can bring himself to vote for Kamala, you can.
Bret: It’s a 99.999 percent vote against Trump and a 0.001 percent vote for Harris.
Gail: And to bolster the argument, how about a short list of the things that bother you most about your new choice for president of the United States?
Bret: If the G.O.P. had nominated Nikki Haley, Ron DeSantis or Doug Burgum, I’d be voting Republican. Probably even Tim Scott: That’s how reluctant I was to vote for her.
I fear that Harris is every bit as vacuous behind the scenes as she seems to be on the public stage. I fear she will be tested early by a foreign adversary and stumble badly, whether it’s in stopping Iran from building a nuclear weapon or China from blockading Taiwan or Russia from seizing a portion of a Baltic country. I fear she will capitulate too easily to her party’s left flank, especially when it comes to identity politics, economic policy or polarizing cultural issues. I fear she’ll have no domestic policy ideas that don’t involve mindlessly expanding the role of government. I fear she’ll surround herself with mediocre advisers, like her embarrassingly bad veep pick. I fear she won’t muster the political will to curb mass migration. And I fear that a failed Harris presidency will do more to turbocharge the far-right in this country than to diminish it.
Gail: That does cover a lot …
Bret: But I won’t fear that she’ll refuse to recognize the result of the……..
Prager’s Description: Dennis defines “Trump Derangement Syndrome” and explains why “Never Trumpers” have a narcissistic attitude that could ruin our country.
Before reading the meat of the convo, keep in mind that the only people really talking about violence if Trump is elected and not authorizing the election are Democrats. A couple examples. Long time Clinton and Democrat ally, James Carville, called for armed revolution if Harris loses:
“People say, ‘What’s at stake in this election?’
“I say the Constitution is at stake,” Carville went on.
“We live under a set of laws, it’s literally at risk and he is telling you that.”
Carville then upped the fearmongering ante.
He blasted journalists and commentators who are discussing polling data showing black and Hispanic men’s wavering support for Harris.
He then claimed this is petty compared to Trump’s alleged authoritarian agenda.
“People want to know about [Harris’ polling] weakness among males of color,” Carville said.
“Okay? He’s gonna arrest all of ya,” he claimed.
[….]
He argued that journalists and even a retired Democratic Party strategist like himself would be rounded up during Trump’s possible future presidency.
“When the paddy wagon comes, you and I are going to be in the back of it, bouncing around, and it’s not going to be very much fun, and they will tell you, the judge said, ‘I’m sorry, Mr. Carville, Trump said he was going to get rid of the Constitution, I have no choice but to enforce the democratic norms of this country.’”
[….]
“When the Republic was threatened, people picked up arms and answered the call,” Carville said.
“Or, you know, in 1965 in the middle of the Civil Rights movement, I think people decided they were gonna take matters into their own hands and create a better country and that’s what I hope we do here in the next few weeks,” he finished….
Another call to not qualify Trump comes from Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD), who said that Democrats would not certify Trump because he would be a crises for the consitution — adapted.
(More at LEGAL INSURRECTION)
THE ATLANTIC as well notes the following after talking to multiple Democrats:
Murray and other legal scholars say that, absent clear guidance from the Supreme Court, a Trump win could lead to a constitutional crisis in Congress. Democrats would have to choose between confirming a winner many of them believe is ineligible and defying the will of voters who elected him. Their choice could be decisive: As their victory in a House special election in New York last week demonstrated, Democrats have a serious chance of winning a majority in Congress in November, even if Trump recaptures the presidency on the same day. If that happens, they could have the votes to prevent him from taking office.
In interviews, senior House Democrats would not commit to certifying a Trump win, saying they would do so only if the Supreme Court affirms his eligibility.
Democrats Call For Violence
A long montage (8-minutes), but the key point is the first few minutes of the longer montage. I have another montage of Democrats calling for violence here
“I was a Trump hater until I learned the truth of the media’s ‘very fine people’ lie.”
“I was a Trump hater until I learned the truth of the media’s “very fine people” lie.” pic.twitter.com/hT3txRENJc
— Insurrection Barbie (@DefiyantlyFree) October 21, 2024
See my FINE PEOPLE main post.
Via the WALL STREET JOURNAL:
The ‘Fascist’ Meme Returns:
Why the public isn’t buying this Democratic claim about Trump.
No doubt it was inevitable. As Election Day nears, and the progressive panic over Donald Trump escalates, Democrats are closing their campaign with a favorite theme: Mr. Trump is a threat to the Constitution, to democracy itself, and is even a “fascist.” But is this true, and could he really impose authoritarian rule in the U.S.?
The fascist meme is all over the place, an upgrade from President Biden’s description of the MAGA movement in 2022 as “semi-fascist.” MSNBC interviews earnest academics who draw a straight historical line between mid-20th-century Europe and the 21st-century GOP. A writer for The Atlantic takes the hyperbole prize with a headline that says Mr. Trump is talking like Hitler, Stalin and Mussolini. Why leave out Chairman Mao?
Kamala Harris is also hitting the theme. Mr. Trump “is seeking unchecked power,” she told a crowd this week in Pennsylvania. “Listen to General [Mark] Milley, Donald Trump’s top general. He has called Trump, and I quote, ‘fascist to the core,’ and said, quote, ‘No one has ever been as dangerous to this country.’ ”
Let’s stipulate that there are many reasons to be wary of handing Mr. Trump power again. His rhetoric is often coarse and divisive. His praise for the likes of Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping is offensive, and betrays his view that he can by force of personality cut favorable deals with them. He indulges mediocrities who flatter him, and his attempt to overturn the 2020 election was disgraceful. These columns preferred any other Republican nominee.
Yet despite it all he won the GOP nomination for the third time, was headed toward victory over Mr. Biden, and is essentially tied with Ms. Harris. Are tens of millions of Americans really falling for a fascist takeover?
The answer is that most Americans simply don’t believe the fascist meme, and for good reasons. The first is the evidence of Mr. Trump’s first term. Whatever his intentions, the former President was hemmed in by American checks and balances. Democrats, the press and the federal bureaucracy were relentlessly opposed to all his works, as they would be again.
Mr. Trump’s worst attempt at stretching executive power—reallocating military construction money to build the border wall—was small beer compared with Mr. Biden’s lawless $400 billion student loan forgiveness.
Fascism historically was “national socialism”—government control over much of the economy. By that definition, Democrats today are the national socialists—using regulation, mandates, law enforcement, and trillions of dollars in subsidies to coerce Americans to follow their dictates on climate and culture. Mr. Trump was a deregulator in his first term and promises to be more so in a second.
Ms. Harris is making much of Mr. Trump’s comments on Fox last Sunday that “we have some very bad people. We have some sick people, radical left lunatics. And I think they’re the—and it should be very easily handled by—if necessary, by National Guard or, if really necessary, by the military, because they can’t let that happen.”
It was a typically grandiose and self-defeating statement, but when we asked about it Thursday in an interview, Mr. Trump made clear after some rambling that he was talking about destructive riots. He said he’d “certainly not [use force] against my opponents—it’s against civil unrest.”
Even if Mr. Trump doesn’t mean this, he’d have to face the obstacles built into the American system. His own judicial nominees rejected his claims about a stolen election, and Republicans in and outside his Administration blocked his attempt to overturn the election.
JD Vance is no Mike Pence, but the Electoral Count Act makes a replay of 2020 more difficult. We have confidence that American institutions—the Supreme Court, the military, Congress—would resist any attempt to subvert the Constitution.
This gets to another reason most Americans don’t think Mr. Trump is a unique threat to democracy. They have seen Democrats break all sorts of political norms to defeat him.
Democrats exploited the Russia collusion narrative in 2016 until it was exposed as a lie financed by Hillary Clinton’s campaign. Democrats tried to keep Mr. Trump off the presidential ballot this year. Democrats have used the law in no fewer than five cases to disqualify him—and New York’s Attorney General campaigned explicitly on a promise to find something, anything, to charge him with. This subverts a basic principle of American justice.
Democrats—including Ms. Harris—are also candid in saying they want to compromise the independence of the Supreme Court with new political rules and supervision. If they get even narrow control of the Senate, along with the House and White House, they say they will break the 60-vote filibuster rule to do it. That in our view is a greater threat to the Constitution than anything Mr. Trump might be able to do in a second term.
All of which is to say that the fear of fascism would have more credibility if Democrats didn’t abuse power themselves. If they lose the election against a flawed Mr. Trump, it won’t be because he is a wannabe Mussolini. The reason will be the Biden-Harris record.
For a better context, we are studying the book of Revelation, and the entire sermon this is the end of is HERE.
This is what Churches should do, teach civics at times from the pulpit. Conservative, Evangelical civics. Plus, LBJ was the one who not only devastated the minority families in America, he also hamstringed the church into changing their message:
A book I recommend the book by Dr. Wayne Grudem titled,
If you are a student of American history and do not have them are these:
A two volume collection of sermons written between 1730-1805 by people such as Jonathan Mayhew, John Wesley, Moses Mather, John Witherspoon, Richard Price, Jonathan Edwards, and Noah Webster.
Jim Gaffigan Shows No Mercy To Democrats Or Republicans At 2024 Al Smith Dinner — Comedian Jim Gaffigan roasted the full political world in his remarks to the Al Smith Dinner in New York City.
Former President Donald Trump Full Remarks at Al Smith Dinner — Former President Donald Trump speaks at the Al Smith Dinner in New York City.
Vice President Kamala Harris discusses immigration, the economy, responding to U.S. adversaries and more with Fox News chief political anchor Bret Baier on ‘Special Report.’
BTW, I thought of this when I watched the FOX interview, and I finally had some time to cobble it together:
FOR THE RECORD
Howard Stern said he would never vote for a Democrat again, because they are Commies! Then he proceeds to vote for the most Communist Democrat to run to date:
Fox News host Greg Gutfeld and the panel react to Howard Stern’s interview with Vice President Kamala Harris on ‘Gutfeld!’
BONUS ~ JESSE WATTERS
Jesse Watters discusses how there is possibly some concern among Democrats about Vice President Kamala Harris’ lack of media appearances on ‘Jesse Watters Primetime.’
FIRST ORDER OF BIZNESS BEFORE MINI-DOCUMENTARY:
Here is more from the Western Journal:
It was, according to Biden, “the most significant climate change law ever.”
“We should have named it what it was,” he said.
The problem Democrats faced then, and face now, is that if they name things for what they are, they won’t be able to convince the American public to go along.
During the Trump administration, Democrats tried to sell a “Green New Deal” that didn’t get anywhere — for good reason. The idea of energy created from wind and solar power might sound great on the surface, in a dewy-eyed, dreamy kind of way. But when it comes to spending massive amounts of money for negligible returns, sane, adult people tend to balk.
But when inflation is ravaging household income, coming up with a bill called the “Inflation Reduction Act” makes it much more appealing.
Biden has made a similar admission before. In 2023, during a speech in Park City, Utah, he acknowledged outright that the bill “has less to do with reducing inflation than providing alternatives where we generate economic growth.”
So, an “Inflation Reduction Act” it wasn’t.
“I wish I hadn’t called it that,” he said.
But Thursday’s admission — “we should have named it what it was” — was far more explicit.
And that should be a problem for the Kamala Harris president campaign. It was Harris, remember, who cast the tie-breaking vote in the Senate that passed the monstrosity of a bill in August 2022 and sent it to the then-Democratic controlled House for final approval before Biden got it.
If Biden is admitting its title was a lie, what does that say about Harris? ….
Tie breaking vote of a bill purposefully mislabeled to lie to the American public so it could pass!
Effe Democrats!
Kamala’s carbon pipeline climate scam impacts human health, destroys the environment, and costs taxpayers billions of dollars. Let’s get President Trump back in the White House and me to Washington so we can stop this massive boondoggle.
Damn!
More on the Pipelines created by the “Inflation Reduction Act,” so called (I emphasize a couple things as well – as well as adding a [snippet or two]):
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Biden-Harris Administration, through the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), today issued Notices of Intent to fund two programs that will advance carbon capture demonstration projects and expand regional pipeline networks to transport carbon dioxide (CO2) for permanent geologic storage or for conversion into valued end uses, such as construction materials. The two programs – the Carbon Capture Demonstration Projects Program and the Carbon Dioxide Transport/Front-End Engineering Design (FEED) Program – are funded by a more than $2.6 billion investment from President Biden’s Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. Together, the programs build on the Administration’s recent actions to catalyze investments in clean energy and industrial innovation and advance President Biden’s goal of a net-zero greenhouse gas emissions economy by 2050—creating good paying jobs and economic opportunity. The investments also support the Justice40 Initiative, and DOE continues to prioritize engaging with environmental justice communities to ensure that equity is at the center of reaching our climate goals. [JUMP]
“To meet President Biden’s climate goals, we have to rapidly decarbonize our power generation and heavy industries – such as steel production – that are essential to the clean energy transition,” said U.S. Secretary of Energy Jennifer M. Granholm. “The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law enables DOE to invest in carbon capture, conversion and storage technologies that play essential roles in the development and deployment of clean energy.”
Greenhouse gas emissions, of which CO2 is the primary component, have risen dramatically over the past several decades. Greenhouse gases fuel climate change, increasing the risk of droughts and floods, and putting our agriculture, health, and water supply at risk. These programs will enable the capture, transport, and permanent storage of greenhouse gas emissions to help mitigate the impacts of climate change on communities. They will also benefit communities across the nation by creating good-paying jobs and improving air quality.
[….]
Carbon Dioxide Transport/Front-End Engineering Design Program Notice of Intent
The $100 million Carbon Dioxide Transport/Front-End Engineering Design Program will design regional carbon dioxide pipeline systems to safely transport CO2 from key sources to centralized locations. Projects will expand DOE’s knowledge of carbon transport costs, transport network configurations, and technical and commercial considerations to support the country’s broader efforts to develop and deploy carbon capture and carbon dioxide removal technologies, carbon conversion, and storage at fully-commercial scale.
DOE is also working closely with the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration to incorporate their safety guidance into DOE’s research, development, demonstration, and deployment portfolio for CO2 pipelines. To read DOE’s statement of support for the new CO2 pipeline safety measures recently announced by the U.S. Department of Transportation, click here.
More information on the Carbon Dioxide Transport/Front-End Engineering Design Program Notice of Intent can be found here.
Since FEMA has been in the news for handing out monies meant for Americans in case of natural disasters to housing and feeding illegal immigrants, here is another boondoggle of American transfer of tax money to DEI type projects by FEMA:
[FEMA Press] Release Date: July 15, 2022
WASHINGTON — Today, FEMA released an initial list of programs covered under the Biden-Harris Administration’s Justice40 Initiative, which aims to deliver 40% of the overall benefits of climate, clean energy, affordable and sustainable housing, clean water and other investments to disadvantaged communities that are marginalized, overburdened and underserved. There are four covered programs within FEMA, each of which advance the Biden-Harris Administration’s commitment to environmental justice.
President Biden is committed to securing environmental justice and spurring economic opportunity for disadvantaged communities that are marginalized and overburdened by pollution and underinvestment in housing, transportation, water and wastewater infrastructure, and health care.
Under Administrator Deanne Criswell’s leadership, FEMA has been integral to fulfilling the Biden-Harris Administration’s whole-of-government approach to advancing environmental justice and delivering on the President’s Executive Order on Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad, including the critical Justice40 Initiative.
“The Justice40 Initiative strengthens FEMA’s commitment to ensure quick and equitable distribution of funds and benefits to the communities who need it most,” said Administrator Criswell. “We know that socially vulnerable communities bear the brunt of climate change and are more likely to be impacted by the associated extreme weather events. Thanks to President Biden and the Justice40 Initiative, FEMA will be able to better serve these communities by making them more resilient when disaster strikes.” ….
The CITY JOURNAL responds. Hat-tip to HOT AIR!
… At the start of his term, Biden issued Executive Order 14008, which set aggressive targets for clean energy but also included the demand that 40 percent of the “overall benefits” of environmental programs should flow to disadvantaged communities. The White House says this “Justice40 Initiative” must be a major focus of every government agency. The underlying concept holds that poor and minority communities are exposed to higher levels of pollution and are entitled not just to lower emissions but to various economic benefits to make up for historic underinvestment in those communities. In effect, the Justice40 project redefines the purpose of environmental programs to include not just less pollution but also various social goals such as “empowering communities” and reducing poverty.
What are the key problems with that effort?
Biden’s EJ agenda is a confusing jumble of requirements that burden government agencies with new layers of bureaucracy and contradictory demands. Some of the key requirements of the program, including the meaning of the word “benefit,” are left undefined. At a time when the White House says we are in a “climate emergency,” the EJ requirements will make it harder to get clean energy infrastructure projects approved. It will also raise the costs of those projects by adding demands such as favoring more expensive union labor. In practice, this means it will cost more and take longer to reach the administration’s ambitious climate targets. The EJ rules will also make it easier for activist groups to tie up private industry in litigation, which will undermine economic opportunity in poor communities.
Could you describe the distinction between the “practical” and “extreme” wings of today’s EJ movement?
The EJ movement contains a mix of ideologies and policy goals. On the practical side, advocates seek basic fairness in the application of environmental laws and reasonable goals, such as replacing lead pipes or reducing airborne pollution in cities. On the extreme side, activists see environmental justice as part of a larger progressive movement that pursues radical social change. For example, the influential Climate Justice Alliance describes its mission as working for “regenerative economic solutions and ecological justice—under a framework that challenges capitalism and both white supremacy and hetero-patriarchy.” The White House invited leaders of the Climate Justice Alliance and similar groups to advise it on how to shape its EJ policies.
Do you see parallels between the administration’s EJ agenda, which tries to expand social-welfare programs under the rubric of environmental concerns, and efforts by medical organizations and federal agencies to promote concepts like the “social determinants of health?”
The progressive movement is good at taking goals most Americans agree with—less pollution, or better health outcomes for minorities—and then using them as a kind of smokescreen under which to enact a more radical agenda. In both cases, activists want to take programs aimed at specific, concrete problems and then redirect those programs toward an amorphous set of social goals. For example, the White House’s EJ advisors demand that federal programs prioritize installing solar panels on the roofs of public-housing buildings. That wouldn’t help reduce CO2 emissions; these panels will be less efficient than rural solar farms. But it would mean more inner-city jobs and empowerment for activist groups. These activists imagine a future of “decentralized grid ownership,” in which poor communities control power generation communally. So, while most voters see Biden’s climate policies as being aimed at reducing emissions, EJ extremists see them as a vehicle for building the kind of post-capitalist future they desire. So far, the White House hasn’t followed every extreme EJ policy recommendation, but the activists are planting seeds. They might not fulfill their whole vision, but they can certainly tie up green programs with costs, delays, and contradictory goals.
Ron DeSantis absolutely nukes a reporter who tried to tie yesterday’s tornadoes from Hurricane #Milton to global warming — Via Curtis Houck
WATCH:
First, let us remember how the predictions failed, which is good news:
This post is to be a reference for me when I hear stuff like this:
BILL NYE:
Well, so we claim on our side of it — we claim that we have enough energy to take care of everything right now if we just could apply it, and so the longest journey begins with but a single step. We will phase out fossil fuel use, and they will — we will phase in renewable energy, but just when it comes November 5th, everybody, you’ve got to vote for the Democrats. I’m doing my best here.
For many years, I’ve been head of an organization that we work very hard to be political but not partisan in space exploration. Be that as it may, right now, the choice is clear. So you can, everybody out there, you can hate me, you can hate him, you can hate everything, but when it comes to doing something about climate change, you got to vote for Harris-Walz. And that’s what Too Hot Not to Vote is all about.
MSNBC brought on “hurricane expert” Bill Nye to provide analysis on Hurricane Milton.
His message on how to stop hurricanes: Vote for Kamala. pic.twitter.com/84NaPNc6MH
— johnny maga (@_johnnymaga) October 8, 2024
MICHAEL MANN
See more at NEWSBUSTERS & OUTKICK
What is the truth of the matter? Nothing to see here, move along. This is business as usual, in other words.
DR. ROY SPENCER:
… Florida Major Hurricane Intensity & Number
The following plot shows the intensity of major hurricanes (100 knots or greater maximum sustained wind speed) striking Florida since 1900, updated through recent (2024) Hurricane Helene:
As can be seen from the linear trend line, there has been no significant trend in the intensity of major hurricanes striking Florida since 1900.
The following is via WATTS UP WITH THAT!
“Rather, the damage Milton wreaks in Tampa Bay, or wherever it ultimately makes landfall, will be the only unprecedented thing about it and that is not due to changed climate conditions but rather changed demographics. There is simply more people, property, and infrastructure in and around Tampa Bay than there was when similar hurricanes made a direct strike on the city in 1921 and 1848 – 103 and 176 years of global warming ago respectively.
“In 1921, Tampa Bay’s population was 135,000. Now it sits at more than three million. Hopefully, most people will heed the early warnings afforded by available technology and get out of harm’s way so fatalities, if any, will be low. But you can’t move homes and infrastructure, so the damage will be quite high – not due to the changing nature of hurricane, but to the expanding bulls-eye effect: more people and stuff in harm’s way means more damage.
“While many in the media have been painting Hurricane Milton as ‘unprecedented’ with it being ‘juiced’ by climate change, a review of the factual record and scientific literature say otherwise. Tampa Bay has experienced major hurricanes in 1848 and in 1921, well before climate change was ever conceived.
“Further, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in their most recent report showed clearly, they found no signature of climate change affecting hurricanes in any way. Milton’s 897mb lowest pressure isn’t even unprecedented, being the fifth lowest on record. While Milton remains dangerous, the attempt to paint it as a monster driven by climate change just doesn’t hold up under scrutiny and is unhelpful to those affected.”
“The Tampa Bay area has been hit by mega-hurricanes at least twice before (1848 and 1921), there is no trend in hurricanes hitting Florida, no aspect of hurricanes is outside the range of natural variability, and it’s impossible for emissions to affect hurricanes in the first place since emissions physically can’t warm the oceans. Blaming hurricanes on emissions is an absolutely bankrupt claim.”
I was visibly upset about this information while at work. I had no idea. The extent of this influence over the many years since the beginning of the Great Leap Forward and all the organizations it holds sway over, I was thinking to myself, “how can we stop this? How can I help stop it?” It just seems so daunting.
SIDE-NOTE:
I heard this on radio today via Bob Frantz, so I wanted to get it on my site. Thanks Bob!
A former student, accompanied Gov. Tim Walz (D-MN) on a trip to China in 1995, says the Democratic vice presidential candidate “adores” communist China and is “a Moaist to the core.”
A former student, who accompanied Gov. Tim Walz (D-MN) on a trip to China in 1995, says the Democratic vice presidential candidate “adores” communist China and is “a Moaist to the core.”
“It was almost a daily revelation of how much he adores the communist regime,” the former student, who identified himself only as “Shad,” told Alpha News. Former President Donald Trump called Walz a “radical leftist” soon after Kamala Harris chose the Minnesota governor as her running mate.
Walz was a frequent visitor to China for 10 years of his life as he taught at a high school as part of a Harvard University program. He made his first trip to China in 1989 but was in Hong Kong when the Tiananmen Square protests prompted the Beijing government to brutally suppress and kill the student demonstrators.
Walz later visited the site of the massacre, according to The New York Times, but apparently did not disapprove of the violence. He returned home to sing the praises of China. Five years later, he married Gwen Whipple on the anniversary of the government crackdown as his wife noted that Walz “wanted to have a date he’ll always remember,” according (ARCHIVE.COM) to the Wall Street Journal. The couple honeymooned in China.
Walz visited China by his own estimation “about 30 times” over the next decade as he sponsored summer trips for students. He was even a visiting fellow at a Chinese university. Shad was one of those students who traveled with Walz throughout China. But he says Walz was not just captivated by the geography of the country; he loved the ideology.
“There was no doubt he was a true believer,” Shad said. “I’ve been trying to tell people this for 30 years. Nobody wanted to listen. “At night, we’d go out, we’d walk the street fairs. We’d be buying souvenirs and Tim was always buying the Little Red Book. He said he gave them as gifts … I saw him buy at least a dozen on the trip,” he said, referring to the book of quotations from Chairman Mao Zedong, the Chinese dictator who ruled China and killed tens of millions of people from 1949 till his death in 1976.
“It would be like [being] in Germany and buying copies of Mein Kampf,” Shad told Alpha News. “If there was any doubt about what I’m saying just look at the policies enacted by his administration like the country’s worst abortion law, anti-free speech, the riots,” Shad noted. “He’s a Maoist to the core and should not be underestimated.”
Shad drew attention to the similarities between the messaging of Walz and Kamala Harris—including phrases like “the politics of joy” and “unburdened by what has been”—and the propaganda materials used by Mao. “People need to have their eyes wide open,” Shad said. “The snitch hotline in Minnesota is straight out of CCP. Tim Walz is a very bright guy. None of this by accident.” …..
The below is based in part on my first “sermon” I gave at the Fireside Chat Room on Masters College campus (April 2010):
Mark 11:20-25, “Moving Mountains: Faith in Faith” (My First Sermon)
(I removed the very long intro to get to the point quicker.)
With that PapaG’ism in mind, do not forget that this verse is connected to Christ overturning tables for a second time on the Temple Mount and cursing the fig-tree as representative of Israel’s faithlessness, another seemingly insurmountable task.
As applicable and connective as I think these comments are, there is yet another often overlooked understanding which keeps Christ firmly in context, and not us.
Again, James Brooks mentions that Jesus may have been referencing “the Mount of Olives and the Dead Sea,” the “latter being seen from the summit of the former.”
William Lane expands on this in his commentary on Mark, mentioning likewise that the,
Dead Sea is visible from the Mount of Olives and it is appropriate to take the reference to “this mountain” quite literally. An allusion may be intended to Zech. 14:4. In the eschatological day described there the Mount of Olives is to be split in two, and when the Lord assumes his kingship “the whole land shall be turned into a plain” (Zech. 14:10). The prayer in question is then specifically a Passover prayer for God to establish his reign.
Evangelical scholar Walter Elwell likewise hits on this idea:
Jesus has acted out two parables of terrible impending judgment of unbelief—the withering of the fig tree and the cleansing of the temple; now, in response to Peter’s remark, he turns to the vital component in the eschatological drama that is inexorably coming to pass, namely, faith in God. This Israel does not have, but the disciples can and must have faith if they are to participate as victors in the coming destruction of the enemy-occupied land which will split at the Mount of Olives when the terrible day comes that precedes the kingly reign of the Lord over the whole earth (so Zech. 14:1–11). Jesus urges his disciples to pray with the faith expressed in Isaiah 65:24 and participate with him in the new exodus, and so avoid the coming destruction of Jerusalem and the faithless land. But they must humbly seek forgiveness and harbor no resentment (v. 25), as Israel has not done in the presence of Jesus the Son, if they are to stand in the Father’s righteousness through this cataclysmic time.
[See these and more commentaries in the Appendix]
So like the parable of the faithful and wise servant (Luke 12:35-48), we must watch over this great gift of faith and its awesome responsibility by prayer to the object of our faith… asking for these mountains of faithlessness, self-centeredness, and our unforgiving hearts to be cleared daily by God’s word and our union with Him… always saying like John did, “come Lord Jesus, come!”
Amen?
…Amen.
Bibliography
Post Script
I wanted to point out just a couple of after thoughts. The first part of the verse we read from (v. 20), there is an interesting event that is mentioned.
Something I know the Jewish mind would have surely known considering how well the pharisees knew (at least memorized) Scripture. in verse 20 we read this:
Now let’s read from Hosea 9:16, and then from Job 18:16, respectively.
His roots dry up beneath,
and his branches wither above.
This miracle of Jesus cursing the fig-tree can be seen as one of the many instances Jesus showed Israel He was their Messiah through fulfilling of Old Testament prophecy.
Another quick thing I wish to point out is that many Bibles separate verse 25 from verses 20-24.
I think you can completely drop verse 26 and not include that at all, however, verses 20-25 should be looked at as a cohesive pericope.
Definition of Praxeology
Just so the reader knows how I understand this term: “right” theology into “right” action. The “Word Faith movement/theology,” “Liberation theology,” as well as “Emergent theology” distorts this interpretation. Here is a more in-depth definition:
PRAXIS AND ORTHOPRAXIS. `Praxis’ essentially means ‘action’. Traditionally, the concept refers to the application of theory or socially innovative human behaviour. Its long history begins with Aristotle but the concept achieved contemporary prominence through Marx, who used it in various ways but, most commonly, to mean revolutionary action through which the world Was changed. In theology it has gained currency through liberation theology.” Theology usually emphasizes orthodoxy, i.e., right belief or conceptual reflection on truth. Political theology balances this with an emphasis on action (praxis) and right action (orthopraxis). Gutierrez typically complains that ‘the church has for centuries devoted her attention to formulating truth and meanwhile did almost nothing to better the world’. It not only advocates action but questions whether knowledge can be detached; and it insists that truth can only be known through action. Knowing and doing are dialectically related, and right action becomes the criterion for truth. The danger is, as Miguez Bonino has observed, that theology is reduced to ethics, the vertical dimension equated with the horizontal and the concept built on Marxism. Positively, however, it can claim biblical roots. God communicates with his world, not through a conceptual frame of reference, but in creative activity; in John’s gospel knowing truth is contingent on doing it (Jn. 3:21).
Sinclair B. Ferguson, David F. Wright, J.I. Packer, eds., New Dictionary of Theology (Downers Grove, IL: InterVasity Press, 1988), 527.
APPENDIX
(Commentaries on Mark 11:20-25)
There is good Scriptural connection that makes Mark 11:23-24 an eschatological verse. Of course rabbinical use of “moving mountains” was a phrase referring to seemingly impossible difficulties:
…But it also shows that we cannot pray in faith for anything that we like. In this matter, Jesus was “thinking God’s thoughts after him” and willing his father’s will. That sort of prayer, if asked in faith, will always be answered, for it is praying that God’s will may be done (as Jesus prayed in Gethsemane). We can only move the mountains that God wants removed, not those that we want moved. “Moving mountains” was a phrase used by the rabbis to describe overcoming seemingly impossible difficulties; we must not of course take it in the literal sense. If we pray in this way, we can give thanks for the result before we see it, for the answer is sure in the will and purpose of God.
There is one other condition for effectual prayer: we must freely forgive others, as God forgives us (25). If we do not, how could we pray “in Jesus’ name,” that is, in the way in which he would and did? This verse may indicate that Mark knew the Lord’s Prayer, though he does not record it in his gospel.
D.A. Carson, R.T. France, J.A. Motyer, and G.J. Wenham, New Bible Commentary: 21st Century Edition (Downers Grove, IL: InterVasity Press, 1997), 968.
Matthew Henry speaks to the miracle of faith, which rightfully understood, truly is one of the most miraculous of all:
Now this is to be applied, [1] To that faith of miracles which the apostles and first preachers of the gospel were endued with, which did wonders in things natural, healing the sick, raising the dead, casting out devils; these were, in effect, the removing of mountains. The apostles speak of a faith which would do that, and yet might be found where holy love was not, 1 Co. 13:2. [2] It may be applied to that miracle of faith, which all true Christians are endued with, which doeth wonders in things spiritual. It justifies us (Rom. 5:1), and so removes the mountains of guilt, and casts them into the depths of the sea, never to rise up in judgment against us, Mic. 7:19. It purifies the heart (Acts 15:9), and so removes mountains of corruption, and makes them plains before the grace of God, Zec. 4:7. It is by faith that the world is conquered, Satan’s fiery darts are quenched, a soul is crucified with Christ, and yet lives; by faith we set the Lord always before us, and see him that is invisible, and have him present to our minds; and this is effectual to remove mountains, for at the presence of the Lord, at the presence of the God of Jacob, the mountains were not only moved, but removed, Ps. 114:4-7.
Matthew Henry, Matthew Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible: Complete and Unabridged in One Volume (Peabody: Hendrickson, 1996), Mk 11:12.
Whenever I read Henry I have to say “Amen.” This faith is not only miraculously accomplished, but is imported to us through the work of the Holy Spirit, as Augustine rightly notes this continuous miracle:
Whether they are going to speak before a congregation or any other body, or to dictate something to be spoken before a congregation or read by others who are able and willing to do so, speakers must pray that God will place a good sermon on their lips. If Queen Esther, when about to plead before the king for the temporal salvation of her people, prayed that God would place a suitable speech on her lips [Esther 4:16], how much more important is it for those who work for people’s eternal salvation “by teaching God’s word” [1 Tim. 5:17] to pray to receive such a gift?
Douglas F. Kelley, Systematic Theology, Volume One: The God Who Is: The Holy Trinity (Ross-shire, Scotland: Christian Focus Publications, 2008), 54.
Many of these early thinkers referenced Isaiah 7:9 which basically says this: “If you don’t take your stand in faith, you won’t have a leg to stand on.” So here we are, mentioning some good interpretations of these verses, I believe that in context with the fig tree and some of Jesus’ other teachings, we can almost see that these verses tend to speak to the end-times, one of my favorite commentaries points this out:
The Dead Sea is visible from the Mount of Olives and it is appropriate to take the reference to “this mountain” quite literally. An allusion may be intended to Zech. 14:4. In the eschatological day described there the Mount of Olives is to be split in two, and when the Lord assumes his kingship “the whole land shall be turned into a plain” (Zech. 14:10). The prayer in question is then specifically a Passover prayer for God to establish his reign. What is affirmed is God’s absolute readiness to respond to the resolute faith that prays (cf. Isa. 65:24). What distinguishes the faith for which Jesus calls from that self-intoxication which reduces a man and his work to a fiasco is the discipline of prayer through faith. When prayer is the source of faith’s power and the means of its strength, God’s sovereignty is its only restriction. The assertion in verse 24 reiterates this assurance in more comprehensive and general terms. The man who bows his head before the hidden glory of God in the fulness of faith does so in the certainty that God can deal with every situation and any difficulty and that with him nothing is impossible (10:27).
William L. Lane, The Gospel According to Mark (New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1974), 410.
Evangelical scholar Walter Elwell likewise hits on this idea:
Jesus has acted out two parables of terrible impending judgment of unbelief—the withering of the fig tree and the cleansing of the temple; now, in response to Peter’s remark, he turns to the vital component in the eschatological drama that is inexorably coming to pass, namely, faith in God. This Israel does not have, but the disciples can and must have faith if they are to participate as victors in the coming destruction of the enemy-occupied land which will split at the Mount of Olives when the terrible day comes that precedes the kingly reign of the Lord over the whole earth (so Zech. 14:1–11). Jesus urges his disciples to pray with the faith expressed in Isaiah 65:24 and participate with him in the new exodus, and so avoid the coming destruction of Jerusalem and the faithless land. But they must humbly seek forgiveness and harbor no resentment (v. 25), as Israel has not done in the presence of Jesus the Son, if they are to stand in the Father’s righteousness through this cataclysmic time.
Walter A. Elwell, Evangelical Commentary on the Bible (electronic ed.; Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1996), Mk 11:20.
Another commentator mentions this eschatological allusion:
…Jesus was speaking generally, but there may be some allusion to the Mount of Olives (11:1) and the Dead Sea. On a clear day the latter can be seen from the summit of the former. Alternately, the allusion may be to the temple mount, in which case faith in God makes the temple system obsolete (cf. John 4:19–24).
James A. Brooks, vol. 23, Mark (electronic ed.; Logos Library System; The New American Commentary Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2001), 183.
And this great working through the verses by a favored theologian of mine:
11:21 The Fig Tree Which You Cursed Has Withered
11:23 Whoever Does Not Doubt in His Heart but Believes
11:24 Believe That. You Will Receive It and You Will
11:23 It Will Be Done for Him
Thomas C. Oden and Christopher A. Hall, eds., Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture: New Testament II, Mark (Downers Grove, IL: InterVasity Press,1998), 162-163.
It is a danger to American national security and is a monopoly and can be broken up.
Armstrong and Getty cover the strike. The strike is merely postponed till January 15th… but most likely with the agreement to sweeten their wage offer from about 50% over six years to 62%, rather than the 77% demanded — that is probably the winning number. Maybe. If not, just in time for January 20th.
Did Biden know about his mafia ties?
The Justice Department, which has reportedly lost two cases against Mr Daggett, has accused him of being an “associate” of the Genovese crime family — one of the infamous “Five Families” of the US Mafia.
Charged with racketeering in 2005, Mr Daggett, took the witness stand and portrayed himself as a mob target, despite evidence against him from a turncoat Mafia enforcer saying he was under the mob’s control, the New York Times reported.
During that trial, one of Mr Daggett’s co-defendants, a renowned mobster named Lawrence Ricci, disappeared. His decomposing body was found in the trunk of a car outside a New Jersey diner several weeks later, with the killing still unsolved.
Despite his union serving as a historic symbol of the grip of organised crime on union members, as depicted in the 1954 film “On the Waterfront”, Mr Daggett was acquitted in both cases.
The union leader has previously criticised the Waterfront Commission, set up to combat Mafia control of the port, calling the allegations of mob influence “total bulls—”, and a “dark, ugly attack on Italian Americans”.
“It’s a damn tragedy for the Waterfront Commission to enjoy free rein and target Italian Americans as part of their historic anti-worker campaign. Let’s be real here. The Waterfront Commission has, for decades, claimed good jobs went to only those with so-called ‘mob ties,’” he said in 2022.
As industry goes to automation and technology from fast food the manufacturing… Daggett refuses that at our container ports…“Plus, we want absolute airtight language that there will be no automation or semi-automation, and we are demanding all Container Royalty monies go to the ILA.”
Via FOUNDERS CODE
See also NATIONAL FILE — Daggett’s Mafia-Tied RICO and Racketeering Co-Defendant Disappeared and was found murdered in his car.