Saturday, July 13, 2024

Wednesday, July 10, 2024

Biden's Are Holding Out For An Approximate $200 Million Donor Severance Package

realestate  |  He is the Commander in Chief of Cash.

President Joe Biden and First Lady Jill Biden have treated their various Delaware real estate holdings like a personal ATM for years, taking out several mortgages and refinancing a whopping 35 times, according to the New York Post.

The couple, said to boast a net worth of $US10 million ($A15.01), allegedly borrowed $US6 million on the properties over the decades.

The wheeling and dealing dates back to the late 1970s — shortly after Joe and Jill were married. The pair have negotiated new mortgage or credit deals approximately every 17 months, the Daily Mail reported. The frequent refinancing has raised eyebrows.

“It doesn’t make a lot of sense unless they were desperate for cash,” a finance expert commented to the outlet.

The revelations add a layer of intrigue as the President faces scrutiny over his family’s financial past.

The Bidens’ current residence, a mansion purchased in 1996, still has an outstanding $541,000 mortgage nearly three decades later, records show.

The president’s previous Wilmington home, bought in 1975 for $US185,000 and offloaded in 1996 for $US1.2 million, had 15 mortgages and lines of credit attached to it before being sold to the vice chairman of credit card company MBNA, Delaware’s largest employer, which reportedly hired Hunter Biden that same year.

“Why would anyone view their home as an ATM?” LA realtor Tony Mariotti, founder of, asked the Daily Mail.


Tuesday, July 09, 2024

Lil'Buckwheat Got Pounded And Grilled Like A Cheap Steak On Beat Bobby Flay....,

MissouriIndependent  |  President Joe Biden pledged Monday to stay in his race for reelection, even after a weekend in which a growing number of Democrats asked for him to withdraw and a key U.S. House Republican called for an investigation into the president’s doctor.

In a letter to congressional Democrats, Biden argued that the calls for him to drop out of the presidential race — with just 119 days until Election Day — ignored the results of Democratic primaries and caucuses that he handily won and said he remained the best candidate to defeat former President Donald Trump.

The two-page letter ended with a call for party unity and an end to the public back-and-forth among Democrats over whether Biden should leave the race, after a June 27 debate performance that shook some high-ranking Democrats’ confidence in his ability to overcome his polling deficit against Trump.

“The question of how to move forward has been well-aired for over a week now,” Biden wrote. “And it’s time for it to end. We have one job. And that is to beat Donald Trump.”

Comer seeks interview with Biden doctor

Congress returns Monday from a weeklong July Fourth recess after several days in which members of both parties continued to press the issue of Biden’s fitness for office.

Republicans also began pressing for more details. House Oversight and Accountability Chair James Comer on Sunday called for Biden’s physician, Dr. Kevin O’Connor, to submit to a transcribed interview about his assessments of Biden and O’Connor’s business dealings with James Biden, the president’s brother.

The Kentucky Republican said Biden and the White House had sent mixed messages about recent medical examinations of the president.

White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters last week that Biden had not been examined by a doctor since his regular checkup in February.

But Biden told a group of Democratic governors the same day that he was “checked out by a doctor” following the debate, Comer wrote.

Following the debate, Biden, attempting to explain a low, raspy voice, said he’d had a cold.

Comer also questioned if O’Connor could accurately report Biden’s health, or if he was compromised by a conflict of interest because of his involvement with James Biden’s rural health care company, Americore. James Biden has testified to the committee that he sought O’Connor’s counsel for the business.

The White House did not respond to a message seeking comment about Comer’s request.

More Democrats call for withdrawal

The holiday weekend also saw more U.S. House Democrats join a list of those asking Biden to step aside rather than seek reelection.

In a written statement on Saturday, Minnesota’s Angie Craig became the first member from a competitive district to call on the president to quit the race. Craig is the fifth member to publicly call for the president’s withdrawal.

Additional members are making private calls, according to media reports.

Four Democrats who lead House committees — Jerry Nadler of New York on the Judiciary Committee, Adam Smith of Washington on the Armed Services Committee, Mark Takano of California on the Veterans’ Affairs Committee and Joe Morelle of New York on the House Administration Committee — said during a caucus leadership call on Sunday that Biden should withdraw, according to reports.

Other accounts reported more members on the call, including Susan Wild of Pennsylvania and Jim Himes of Connecticut, also opposed Biden’s continued candidacy. Wild later told the Pennsylvania Capital-Star she expressed concerns about Biden’s electability.

In an impromptu call in to the MSNBC show “Morning Joe” on Monday, Biden insisted again he was staying in the race and called for any opponents he had to “challenge” him at the party’s convention in Chicago next month.

Biden, who has secured enough pledged delegates through primary and caucus wins to clinch the nomination, would be heavily favored in a contested convention. Democratic Party rules mandate pledged delegates “shall in all good conscience reflect the sentiments of those who elected them,” but are not legally required to cast their convention vote for their pledged candidate.

Monday, July 08, 2024

Negroes Getting In Trouble F'ing Around With Brandon...,

WaPo  | The head of a Philadelphia radio station said Sunday it has parted ways with a host who acknowledged that she interviewed President Biden with questions submitted by his campaign, going against the station’s practice and those of most news outlets.

“On July 3, the first post-debate interview with President Joe Biden was arranged and negotiated independently by WURD radio host Andrea Lawful-Sanders without knowledge, consultation or collaboration with WURD management,” Sara M. Lomax, president and CEO of WURD Radio said in a statement.

“The interview featured pre-determined questions provided by the White House, which violates our practice of remaining an independent media outlet accountable to our listeners. As a result, Ms. Lawful-Sanders and WURD Radio mutually agreed to part ways, effective immediately.”

Lomax described the station as Philadelphia’s only independently owned Black talk radio station. She said such a move violated the trust the station has developed with its audience over the last two decades, and “is not a practice that WURD Radio engages in or endorses as a matter of practice or official policy.”

She added: “WURD Radio is not a mouthpiece for the Biden or any other Administration,” and that “we will commit to reviewing our policies, procedures, and practices to reinforce WURD’s independence and trust with our listeners. But mainstream media should do its own introspection to explore how they have lost the trust of so many Americans, Black Americans chief among them.”

In a one-minute video posted on Facebook on Sunday, Lawful-Sanders said, “effective immediately I am no longer an on-air host at WURD. I tendered my resignation yesterday. It was accepted.”

She then thanked “all of you who played a part in this journey, including WURD Radio.” She went on to say that she is “grateful,” and that “Life is moving. Things are shifting and changing. And, in a day or so you’ll hear more.”

Lawful-Sanders’s interview was one of two Biden recorded last week after his June 27 debate against the 78-year-old presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump. In it, Biden, 81 appeared at times tired, confused and incoherent, touching off calls from a growing number of Democrats to question whether he should continue running.

After the debate, the White House press secretary announced that Biden had recorded two radio interviews, one with Lawful-Sanders on WURD and the other with Earl Ingram, whose show is broadcast across Wisconsin.

On Saturday, Lawful-Sanders and Ingram appeared on CNN, where a host said both interviews with Biden featured very similar questions. “Were those questions given to you by the White House, or the campaign, or did you have to submit questions ahead of this interview?” CNN host Victor Blackwell asked Lawful-Sanders.

“The questions were sent to me for approval. I approved of them,” she said. Ingram was not asked about his questions during an appearance on CNN, but later told ABC News: “Yes, I was given some questions for Biden.” Ingram said he was given five questions and asked Biden four of them, according to the outlet. “I didn’t get a chance to ask him all the things I wanted to ask,” he said.

Later on Saturday, Lawful-Sanders sent a statement defending her interview and how questions were negotiated in advance.

Saturday, July 06, 2024

I did the goodest job as I know I can do...,

vox  | Unwilling to reconsider his candidacy, Biden also proved averse to proving his mental fitness empirically, refusing to commit to submitting to cognitive and neurological tests and then sharing the results with the public.

Finally, the president ended the interview with a Trumpian bout of self-flattery, one that also served as an implicit rebuke of his vice president’s readiness to manage foreign affairs. “Who's gonna be able to hold NATO together like me?” he asked rhetorically. “Who's gonna be able to be in a position where I'm able to keep the Pacific Basin in a position where we're — we're at least checkmating China now? Who's gonna — who's gonna do that? Who has that reach?”

The Biden who spoke with ABC News Friday night was enfeebled, ineloquent, egotistical, and intransigent. He was a man who appeared both ready and willing to lead his party into the wilderness. Asked how he would feel if he stayed in the race and Trump were elected, Biden replied, “I'll feel as long as I gave it my all and I did the goodest job as I know I can do, that's what this is about.”

This is not the president’s best self.

What this moment asks of Biden is no small thing: to forfeit immense personal power so as to give his party its best possible shot of keeping an authoritarian reactionary out of office. Many statesmen would not be capable of summoning the humility and selflessness necessary for doing so. I still hold out hope that the president’s commitments to liberal democracy and the Democratic Party are in earnest and that he can find his way to such heroic self-knowledge and sacrifice.

Friday, July 05, 2024

So, Now It's Take Your Crackhead Convicted Felon Son To Work Day At The White House?!?!?!

dailycaller  |  Hunter Biden is reportedly making one of the hardest pitches for his father to continue serving as president, people close to the situation told The New York Times (NYT). This first son has been regularly attending meetings with senior White House aides following Biden’s concerning debate performance on June 27, NBC News reported. Kelly was appalled by Hunter Biden’s reported proximity to presidential matters, stating that his presence in the room is “a big deal.”

“Hunter is now going to the White House meetings,” Kelly said. “Hunter Biden’s there now. Hunter Biden – convicted felon … Drug-addled Hunter Biden — though he’s said to be clean at the moment — is going with the President to all of his meetings right now, apparently as like a backup Biden. And this is begging defended by people like Mika Brzezinski as like, no big deal. But it is a big deal, and there’s a real question about whether this is appropriate and why he’s there. They’re saying, the White House is saying, ‘Oh, it’s just because it’s a holiday week.’ Well, what does that mean? Is it like being your kid, is it bring your son to work day because it’s almost July Fourth?”

In June, a Delaware jury convicted Hunter Biden on three gun felony charges related to his purchase of a revolver and false statements about his drug addiction. 

A stunned Kelly called the situation “remarkable” before mentioning that the White House reportedly said polling data will likely cause Biden “to see the truth.” The radio host cited internal polling obtained by Puck News.

Democratic strongholds like New Hampshire, Virginia and New Mexico are reportedly “in play” for presumptive 2024 Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump, according to the post-debate poll. Additionally, Kelly said the poll showed Biden’s support in free fall in battleground states like Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia and Nevada.

“The electoral map, based on Open Labs reporting, would land as follows: Biden with 205 electoral votes, Trump 333,” Kelly said. “Three hundred and thirty-three. That would be a landslide.”



Thursday, July 04, 2024

You'll Have To Pry The White House From Jill Biden's Cold Dead Fingers....,

dailybeast  |  Usually, a first lady looking radiant on the cover of Vogue is a PR coup for any presidential administration and a carefully-cultivated statement for a magazine that primarily covers fashion but also insists on its seriousness and depth.

respected first lady + tasteful Vogue treatment = mutually beneficial. And it would have been for first lady Jill Biden, who looks equal parts chic, powerful, and beatific in a Suffragette-white tuxedo dress in front of a cream-plaster backdrop, her name in font so large it is dwarfed only slightly by the Vogue logo, and augmented by a quote that was meant to be a feminist rallying cry: “We will decide our future.”

Except the cover dropped just days after her husband gave a debate performance so disastrous that there is widespread talk of replacing him on the ticket, and as Jill, Joe, and the Biden family gathered at Camp David to hash out next steps. “We will decide our future” suddenly takes on a different implication—not that voters generally and women specifically will decide the nation’s future, but that a small, tight-knit family will decide for the rest of us.

Jill Biden has largely been a well-liked and uncontroversial first lady, but in the aftermath of the debate and her family’s wagon-circling, she’s been under more scrutiny. And that scrutiny has expanded now to Vogue’s editor-in-chief Anna Wintour, who is a Biden friend and political donor.

Some conservatives have whined that Melania Trump was never given a Vogue cover while her husband was in office, while Jill Biden, Michelle Obama, and Laura Bush were all featured in the magazine (Melania did grace the cover when she married, but she was identified not by name, but as “Donald Trump’s New Bride”). Generally, the accusation seems to be that Wintour is playing favorites with Democrats because of her own political persuasions.

This is, of course, extremely silly from a variety of angles. Vogue is an aspirational magazine aimed at sophisticated, city-dwelling women who care about high-end fashion and lifestyle but also choose to read longer-form articles about politics and culture–not exactly Trump’s voter base, and not exactly a cohort that admires or aspires to be like Melania.

College-educated city women are more likely to vote Democratic than Republican. And these same women have vested personal interests in many of the matters the Democratic Party promotes and the anti-feminist Republican Party attacks, including access to abortion, contraception, and IVF, not to mention paid family leave, affordable childcare, and a general vision of women as free and independent.

Women’s magazines have a duty to inform their readers and to be fair to their subjects. But they also have a duty to be honest with their audiences about how elections and the winning party might impact their lives, and not just stick to shoes and handbags as some demand.


Wednesday, July 03, 2024

Is The Chicago Democrat Machine (Pritzkers) The Shot Caller In Election 2024?

CTH  |  James Clyburn and Barack Obama are the two democrats who could unilaterally remove Joe Biden by withdrawing their support.  It must frustrate Jill Biden to know The Lightbringer and the Ballot Master have that kind of leverage over her appointments at Tiffanys.

As a result of this dynamic, we remind everyone to pay close attention to how Clyburn and Obama are indicating their position.

Additionally, it is worth remembering how Obama and Clyburn agreed on Kamala Harris as the VP selection in 2020, and informed Joe Biden who would be on his ticket.  The Jussie Smollet operation was still active when Kamala was installed with Biden.

During an MSNBC interview today, James Clyburn expressed support for Kamala Harris to ascend the top of the ticket if Biden makes the decision to remove himself.

Keep in mind, Biden will not quit. The decision to exit will be made for Biden, and within the departure process all deference will be given to the Biden group to shape their exit.

The Obama/Clyburn professionally Democratic power brokers within the DNC collective will make the decision; Biden will just be given the opportunity to make it look like it’s his choice.  That’s the way Democrats roll.


Tuesday, July 02, 2024

You Can't Make A Competent Silk Purse Out Of A Senile Sow's Ear

CTH  |  The wheels on the bus go thump, thump, thump…. just ask the three debate officials who are now being blamed for the disastrous performance by Joe Biden in Atlanta last week.

According to several sources who have talked to Politico, the Biden family are naming top Biden advisor Anita Dunn, her CIA husband Bob Bauer and top advisor Ron Klain for horrible debate preparation.  The three senior staff advisors have been a part of the Biden/Obama orbit for many years.  Jill Biden and the rest of the family are pointing the finger directly at them.

WASHINGTON DC – Members of Joe Biden’s family privately trashed his top campaign advisers at Camp David this weekend, blaming them for the president’s flop in Thursday’s debate and urging Biden to fire or demote people in his political high command.

There is no immediate expectation that Biden will follow through on that advice, according to three people briefed on the family conversations but not directly involved. The three people were granted anonymity to discuss the matter.

The blame was cast widely on staffers, including: Anita Dunn, the senior adviser who frequently has the president’s ear; her husband, Bob Bauer, the president’s attorney who played Trump in rehearsals at Camp David; and Ron Klain, the former chief of staff who ran point on the debate prep and previous cycles’ sessions.

“The aides who prepped the President have been with him for years, often decades, seeing him through victories and challenges. He maintains strong confidence in them,” Biden campaign spokesperson Kevin Munoz said in a statement.


Monday, July 01, 2024

Little Buckwheat Is Gonna Outlast Anita Dunn

NYPost  |  Top aides to President Biden secretly hatched a plan this past fall to replace White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre by recruiting outside allies to nudge her out the door, The Post has learned.

Jean-Pierre, who made history in May 2022 by becoming the first black and first openly gay person to hold the position, had developed the exasperating habit of reading canned answers directly from a binder to reporters at her regular briefings — offering what her superiors viewed as a less-than-compelling pitch for the 81-year-old Biden as he readied his re-election campaign.

De facto White House communications chief Anita Dunn, 66, the wife of Biden personal attorney Bob Bauer, told colleagues she had decided to call in prominent Democrats to explain to Jean-Pierre, 49, that the time was ripe to move on, sources told The Post.

“There were a number of people she asked to engage Karine,” said one source who heard of the strategy directly from Dunn, whose role as senior adviser has been filled during the past three presidencies by Jared Kushner (Donald Trump), Valerie Jarrett (Barack Obama) and Karl Rove (George W. Bush).

While Jean-Pierre isn’t going anywhere, the issues that brought about Dunn’s failed machinations remain — with both sources saying the press secretary is too reliant on notes to provide the pushback and quick-thinking repartee needed to effectively champion Biden’s cause.

“Karine doesn’t have an understanding of the issues and she reads the book [binder] word-for-word,” said the second source, adding that the situation is made worse by the fact that “she thinks she’s doing an amazing job.”

“She doesn’t have a grasp of the issues and doesn’t spend the time to learn,” this person said.

“These issues are not second nature to people. Israel and Gaza is a perfect example. It’s very nuanced. Jen would have calls with people to feel well-versed enough to go to the briefing.”

“There’s an enormous amount of work that goes into getting ready,” the first source said, “and consistently she does not put in that level of work.”

In response, White House deputy press secretary Andrew Bates told The Post: “Not only are these claims wildly false, but the reality is the polar opposite. Karine was never approached by anyone with such a message. She spends four hours preparing every day. And neither Jeff nor Anita did any such thing; both have been unflinchingly supportive of her.”

Bates added Friday morning: “Every press secretary uses the binder. Why is she being singled out?”


Sunday, June 30, 2024

2021 Obama and Biden in a Secret Room in the White House...,

Obama: Now what i'm going to teach you is the Dap. 

This will gain you the trust and respect of the black male community. 

 Biden nods, wide-eyed. “Am I ready?” Obama looks at him for a long moment. 

“We can only hope.”

Thursday, June 27, 2024

I'll Believe It When I See Firings And Jailings For The mRNA Mandate  |  The House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Administrative State, Regulatory Reform, and Antitrust will hold a hearing on Wednesday, June 26, 2024, at 10:00 a.m. ET. The hearing, "Follow the Science?: Oversight of the Biden Covid-19 Administrative State Response," will discuss the Subcommittee's oversight that found how the Biden Administration pressured the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to "cut corners" and lower agency standards to approve the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine and authorize boosters. This approval enabled the Biden administration to mandate the vaccine, despite concerns that the vaccine was causing injury among otherwise healthy young Americans. Congress needs to address reforms to the administrative state to bring accountability to its agencies, particularly when it comes to the process of approving vaccines.

  • Dr. Philip Krause, MD, former Deputy Director, FDA Office of Vaccines Research & Review - testimony 
  • Aaron Siri, Vaccine litigation expert - testimony 
  • Jordan Vaughn, MD, Birmingham, Founder and President of Microvascular Research Foundation- testimony 
  • Andrew Tobias Pavia MD, FAAP, FACP, FIDSA, FSHEA, Chief, Division of Pediatric Infectious Diseases and Geographic Medicine George and Esther Gross Presidential Professor, Department of Pediatrics University of Utah School of Medicine - testimony 

Wednesday, June 26, 2024

Nobody Is Safe Until Everybody Is Safe  |  Today, the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Administrative State, Regulatory Reform, and Antitrust, led by Chairman Thomas Massie (R-KY), released an interim staff report titled, "Politics, Private Interests, and the Biden Administration's Deviation from Agency Regulations in the COVID-19 Pandemic" The report details how the Biden Administration pressured the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to go beyond its regulatory authority to change its procedures, cut corners, and lower agency standards to approve the Pfizer COVID-19 vaccine and authorize boosters. This approval enabled the Biden Administration to mandate the COVID-19 vaccine, despite concerns that the same vaccine was causing injury among otherwise healthy young Americans. 

"In August 2021, when the Pfizer shots received FDA licensure, and just before the booster received EUA, the top two FDA vaccine reviewers with decades of experience announced they were leaving the agency," said Chairman Thomas Massie (R-KY). "During the pandemic, politics overruled science at the government institutions entrusted with protecting public health. The FDA abandoned its congressional directive to protect citizens from false claims and undisclosed side effects, and instead ignored its own rules to pursue a policy of promoting the vaccine while downplaying potential harms. Exposing and acknowledging mistakes that were made is a necessary step toward restoring integrity and trust in our regulatory agencies."

The Subcommittee's investigation also revealed that the administrative state mishandled reports of vaccine injury, despite requirements to actively obtain, synthesize, and report feedback on the safety and efficacy of the Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) vaccine. Two former FDA scientists, Dr. Marion Gruber and Dr. Philip Krause, testified to the Subcommittee that they felt pressure to cut corners on the vaccine review, which was due to outside pressure to provide immediate approval so that the government could mandate vaccines. Despite evidence of harms from the EUA vaccine, the Biden Administration sought to fully approve the Pfizer vaccine through the Biologics Licensing Application (BLA) process.

Under the leadership of then-Acting FDA Commissioner Dr. Janet Woodcock, a long-time FDA staffer who the Biden Administration promoted to Acting Commissioner, and Dr. Peter Marks, head of the FDA's Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER), the agency cut corners in its usually rigorous BLA process to brand the Pfizer EUA vaccine as the only fully licensed "safe and effective" COVID-19 vaccine on the market at the time.  Today, former Acting FDA Commissioner Woodcock says that, as it relates to vaccine-related injury, she is "disappointed in [her]self" and that the FDA did not do enough to address vaccine-related injury.

The FDA succumbed to the Biden Administration's pressure to act beyond its authority, which may have long-term impacts on the agency's ability to confidently serve the American public. This poor policy by the Biden Administration reveals many significant problems related to accountability and good decision making in the administrative state that warrant legislative reform. 

Read the full interim staff report and appendix here.

Sunday, June 23, 2024

American Elites Begin Acknowledging America's Decline...,

This month has seen a bevy of new thinkpieces from top American deepstate figures or old-guard publications urging the changing of course, lest the country be swept away by the remorseless tide of history.

The first and most prominent of these making the rounds is that of former speech writer and White House staffer to Obama, Ben Rhodes, entitled:

Rhodes remains among the political haute monde, having founded a thinktank alongside Jake Sullivan, which had many interlinkings with Soros’ Open Society organizations. That’s to say, Rhodes has his finger on the pulse of the ‘inner circles’ of the patriciate, which is underscored by the CFR’s journal offering tribune to his latest. And so it’s even more telling that he’s moved to sound the alarm against a country he feels is—as the cover art above obliges—stumbling headfirst into historic headwinds.

The article is actually quite long and detailed, so we have Arnaud Bertrand to summarize its finest points. The first bolded portion below gets to the heart of Rhodes’ startling argument—but read the rest of the bolded:

This is an interesting piece by brhodes, Obama's Former Deputy National Security Advisor

In an immense departure from US policy to date, he advocates that the US "abandons the mindset of American primacy" and "pivots away from the political considerations, maximalism, and Western-centric view that have caused [the Biden] administration to make some of the same mistakes as its predecessors".

He writes, and I find this a very powerful sentence, that "meeting the moment requires building a bridge to the future—not the past." As in not seek to regain a lost hegemony, but adapt to the "world as it is" which he calls "the world of post-American primacy".

To be sure, the piece still has strong relents of the liberal instincts to remake the world in America's image - a leopard cannot change its spots - but at least he acknowledges the reality that the world has changed and that the US should view itself as a power coexisting with others, not THE power that needs to dominate the rest of the world. Which is a first step...

Also, significantly, he points out the insanity of "framing the battle between democracy and autocracy as a confrontation with a handful of geopolitical adversaries" when the West's own democracies are in such sorry states today that they can hardly be called "democracies" anymore... He writes that instead of trying to constantly interfere in changing other countries' systems, "ultimately, the most important thing that America can do in the world is detoxify its own democracy".

The below encapsulates the core thesis, which is that America’s global primacy is over, and the only way for the country to stay afloat is to adapt to the new realities:

Yet even though a return to competent normalcy was in order, the Biden administration’s mindset of restoration has occasionally struggled against the currents of our disordered times. An updated conception of U.S. leadership—one tailored to a world that has moved on from American primacy and the eccentricities of American politics—is necessary to minimize enormous risks and pursue new opportunities.

This is the theme which recurs again and again throughout the new zeitgeist taking over political discourse in the stricken Beltway—panicking neocons are exhorting each other: we’re in a fight for our lives, if we don’t accept the new realities, we’ll drown!

Publications like Foreign Affairs are where the elite address not us, but each other, in the long-standing tradition of euphemism as secret-coded language of their ‘interior world’ of the deepstate and outlying political class. Here Mr. Rhodes adeptly navigates the nuances of this privileged cant when he declares that the Rules Based Order has fallen:

Saturday, June 22, 2024

Honestly Not Sure How A Turd Like This Calls Itself A Scholar.....,

chronicle  |  It is not surprising for a boss to think that employees should avoid saying things in public that might damage the organization for which they both work. It is not even surprising for the boss to understand “damage” to include making the boss’s own life more difficult.

But college faculty members have fought very hard, for a very long time, to be protected from such attitudes. They have established that, unlike employees at most organizations, they have the right to publicly criticize their employer and their administration. So it is notable when an especially prominent administrator publicly announces that faculty speech rights should be rolled back a century or so. That is what Lawrence D. Bobo, dean of social science and a professor of social sciences at Harvard University, did last week in an opinion essay published in The Harvard Crimson with the ominous title, “Faculty Speech Must Have Limits.”
Members of the faculty, Bobo argued, have the right to debate “key policy matters” in “internal discussion,” but they should be careful that their dissent not reach outside ears:
A faculty member’s right to free speech does not amount to a blank check to engage in behaviors that plainly incite external actors — be it the media, alumni, donors, federal agencies, or the government — to intervene in Harvard’s affairs. Along with freedom of expression and the protection of tenure comes a responsibility to exercise good professional judgment and to refrain from conscious action that would seriously harm the university and its independence.
Such public criticisms, Bobo says, “cross a line into sanctionable violations of professional conduct.” If a group of faculty members, for example, decides that a dean’s policies are inimical to their institution’s core mission, and if they take their criticism to the press, then — according to Bobo — they should be properly disciplined.
Bobo’s views were conventional wisdom among university officials and trustees in 1900. They are shocking in 2024. Shocking, but unfortunately no longer surprising. The Harvard dean’s arguments resonate with a growing movement of those who wish to muzzle the faculty. Professors are to be free to speak, so long as they do not say anything that might disturb the powers that be. Those in power may not want the faculty to march to the same tune, but they do all like giving the faculty their marching orders and expecting them not to step out of line.
The 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure, issued jointly by the American Association of University Professors and what was then called the Association of American Colleges, established the now widely adopted rules regarding faculty speech. It specifies that when professors “speak or write as citizens, they should be free from institutional censorship or discipline.” The statement does suggest that professors have some “special obligations” when speaking in public, though the AAUP has long urged that those be treated as suggestive rather than obligatory. Even so, the statement merely urged professors to “be accurate” and “exercise appropriate restraint.” They “should remember that the public may judge their profession and their institution by their utterances,” and thus they should avoid embarrassing themselves in public by being rude or ignorant. But there was no suggestion that they should avoid airing the university’s dirty laundry.
Harvard’s own free-expression policy, first adopted in the Vietnam era, is if anything even more emphatic about the need for officials to tolerate dissent and critique. It notes that “reasoned dissent plays a particularly vital part” in the university’s existence and that all members of the university community have the right to “advocate and publicize opinion by print, sign, and voice.” Dissenters are not to obstruct “the essential processes of the university” or interfere “with the ability of members of the university to perform their normal activities,” but they are free to “press for action” and “constructive change” by organizing, advocating, and persuading. Bobo’s ideas about where the limits of faculty speech are to be found are plainly at odds with both AAUP principles and common university policies, not to mention First Amendment principles that would bind officials at state universities.
The AAUP’s 1915 Declaration of Principles provided the rationale for such protections of faculty dissent. “With respect to certain external conditions of his vocation,” a professor “accepts a responsibility to the authorities of the institution in which he serves,” but “in the essentials of his professional activity his duty is to the wider public to which the institution itself is morally amenable.” The “university is a great and indispensable organ of the higher life of a civilized community,” and the members of the faculty “hold an independent place, with quite equal responsibilities” for caring for and preserving those institutions. For those purposes, the “professorial office” was not that of an employee doing the bidding of a boss but that of a scholar answering to a public trust. The faculty’s ultimate duty is not to the college as such but to the larger public that even private universities, as charitable institutions, serve.

Tuesday, June 18, 2024

KC Gets KKFI Community Radio And Kultcha That Y'all Don't Get...,   |  [Cerrone's "Supernature" playing] Woman: The disco sound was just wonderful.

It was exciting, powerful, you know, spank you, and you just had a good time.
Barry Walters: Disco brought together Black Pride, women's liberation, and LGBT culture.
It was the coming together of that that made it so powerful.
Allen Roskoff: Listening to the music and letting yourself go, you become a different person.
Singers: ♪ Supernature ♪ ♪ Supernature ♪ ♪ Supernature ♪ ♪ Supernature ♪ There was this powder keg chain reaction that happened that made it suddenly totally take over the airwaves.
Singers: ♪ Supernature ♪ Jake Shears: It was, of course "Saturday Night Fever" that really, like, tipped everything over, that, like, tipped the scales.
It just set the world on fire.
Disco was on everybody's lips.
Clubs were packed every night.
♪ Woman: Studio 54, I created it as a playground.
Sex, drugs, disco, whatever you need.
Singer: ♪ Angry with the man ♪ ♪ 'Cause he changed their way of life ♪ Bill Bernstein: In the late seventies, the outsider became the insider.
Singer: ♪ Take their sweet revenge ♪ Woman: The Black disco diva was a breakthrough persona.
Someone like Donna Summer, she was a disco queen.
Don't forget Gloria in all her gloria.
Singers: ♪ Supernature ♪ I think that era music allowed the disco diva to have this stage to be adored and celebrated.
♪ Candi Staton: Disco freed me.
It saved me.
[Cheering] ♪ Singers: ♪ Supernature ♪ [Protestors shouting] ♪ Richard Nixon: In all the decisions I have made in my public life, I have always tried to do what was best for the nation.
Throughout the long and difficult period of Watergate, I have felt it was my duty to persevere, to make every possible effort to complete the term of office to which you elected me.
Woman: In the mid-1970s, the United States was not a happy place.
There was the Watergate scandal, and any faith that Americans had in government was shaken to its core.
What percentage of the American people do you think still have confidence in President Nixon?
Well, among young people, very few, I'd say less than 25%.
Nixon: Therefore, I shall resign the presidency effective at noon tomorrow.
announcer: Nixon has announced he will resign as president of the United States at noon tomorrow.
Roskoff: In my life and everybody I knew, Nixon was detested, but it was an intense period of time.
You knew you were living history.
You knew that this is monumental.
♪ [Machineguns firing] George McCrae: Was a hard time because of the Vietnam War.
Also a nuclear bomb threat And Russia, you know.
that they might drop a bomb any day.
"Oh, my God.
What we gonna do?"
♪ Farrington: The flip side of this dark moment is that when life gets hard, you party harder.
[Gloria Gaynor's "Never Can Say Goodbye" playing] ♪ I was living in New York in the 1970s.
All we wanted to do was dance to disco music.
Gaynor: ♪ I never can say goodbye ♪ David Depino: There was a freedom.
It was like express yourself was so welcome and wanted, and music was the common denominator.
Gaynor: ♪ Heading for the door ♪ ♪ There's a very strange... ♪ Nicky Siano: I mean, it was just igniting people's dance souls.
Gaynor: ♪ It says, "Turn around, you fool" ♪ ♪ "You know love him" ♪ Man: Why is everybody rushing and flooding the doors of discotheque?
Oh, I think it's because with all of the hardships that are going on in the world today, people need a place to go and relieve tension and release their anxieties, and discotheques are a great place to do just that.
Gaynor: ♪ Say goodbye, boy ♪ ♪ Ooh, ooh, baby ♪ ♪ I never can say goodbye ♪ ♪ No, no, no, hey ♪ ♪ I never can say goodbye ♪ ♪ Say goodbye ♪ ♪ Oh, no, I ♪ Reporter: Gloria Gaynor is a rock 'n' roll singer whose records have really never made it before until she decided to specialize in a brand-new rock 'n' roll musical style called disco music.
Gaynor: ♪ All gonna work out ♪ ♪ But there's that same unhappy feeling ♪ ♪ And that anguish and that doubt ♪ Depino: She made you raise your hands up and want to touch the ceiling while you were dancing and screaming.
When Gloria was doing her thing, I think she was the First Lady of Disco.
♪ Say goodbye ♪ ♪ It is so ♪ ♪ I don't want to let you go ♪ Vince Aletti: She was one of the earliest people to have a major presence in the clubs, was, you know, Queen of Disco before there was such a title.
Gaynor: ♪ No, no, no, no, no, ooh ♪ Gloria, did you ever think this would happen?
No, I really didn't.
Not like this, anyway.
I always thought I would sing eventually, but I never thought all this would happen.
♪ I never can say goodbye ♪ ♪ No, no, no, no, no, no, no ♪ Woman: I think disco means to most people, probably it means a lot of fun.
To me, it meant a change.
♪ Farrington: In the early seventies, Black women were caught between a rock and a hard place.
Statistically, they were at the bottom of the heap.
They earned less than most any other group, male or female.
They were victimized by a notorious government-sponsored report called the Moynihan Report.
It was a report that discussed what were the particular problems of Blacks and Jews and Puerto Ricans.
Black women were literally blamed for the problems of Black men.
Black women were heads of their families, too matriarchal, too strong, and unfortunately, when scholars produce a document that is government-approved, people tend to believe it, and so rather than fight against this, which was virtually impossible for a group that oppressed to do, they tried not to be like that.
Nona Hendryx: You had to work hard to fit in, and to fit in, you're gonna be quiet.
You're not gonna bring all your loud culture with you or whatever it is and make demands.
You're gonna try and fit in.
[Church choir singing] Ward: When I was growing up, the only time that people heard my voice, I was singing.
My father had been a minister, so we just had to kind of stick to what we were told to do.
I just wanted to sing.
Woman: ♪ I can hear Jesus calling me ♪ Choir: ♪ Calling me ♪ Staton: The pastor called me up on the stage, and I started singing, and the church people started shouting and screaming and standing up and waving.
"Sing, baby!
Sing that song."
That was the beginning.
♪ Ohh ♪ Woman: The gospel diva or the soul diva, that's a really powerful, full-bodied sound that moved into the mainstream in the sixties.
Man: Sarah Dash, Nona Hendryx, Patricia Holt, known as Patti LaBelle and the Bluebelles.
♪ Somewhere over ♪ ♪ The rainbow ♪ Hendryx: In the sixties, se were a traditional girl group, and we dressed alike.
We did the kind of, you know, lead singer with backing singers waving their arms and looking very nice.
Farrington: Patti LaBelle and the Bluebelles were fulfilling a vision of Black womanhood that was on the tail end of the early sixties Motown era.
They embodied that non-threatening persona that America wanted to place Black women in.
♪ Hey, hey, oh, oh, oh ♪ Hendryx: We were expected to carry ourselves a certain way in the public, you know, well-dressed, well-behaved.
That's how it was.
♪ Really do come true ♪ Staton: In the music industry, we were fighting, trying to get out of that box that we were put in in the sixties, so disco was wonderful.
Royster: Disco did offer Black women new opportunities.
Disco did give space for Black women to kind of add soul and funk and depth to a lot of different kinds of music to kind of take center stage like Patti LaBelle and the Bluebelles.
[Labelle's "Lady Marmalade" playing] ♪ Woman: My next guest stars are the hottest girl group in America.
Man, they are truly hot, and they've got the hottest single, too, "Lady Marmalade," and here they are-- Nona Hendryx, Sarah Dash, and Patti LaBelle known throughout the music industry as Labelle.
♪ Go, sister, soul sister ♪ ♪ Flow, sister ♪ ♪ Go now ♪ ♪ Go, sister, soul sister ♪ ♪ Flow, sister ♪ ♪ He met Marmalade ♪ ♪ Down in old New Orleans ♪ ♪ Struttin' her stuff on the street ♪ Farrington: When Patti LaBelle and the Bluebelles changed their name, they changed their look, and they changed it dramatically.
♪ Da da ♪ ♪ Gitchi gitchi ya ya here ♪ ♪ Mocha ♪ ♪ Mocha chocolata, ya ya ♪ Hendryx: Patti LaBelle And the Bluebelles were a girl group, right?
Labelle were a girl band.
♪ Voulez-vous coucher avec moi ce soir?
♪ ♪ Voulez-vous coucher avec moi?
♪ Ana Matronic: Labelle looking like they just, like, beamed in from some crazy, funky galaxy.
It was just so over the top and so amazing and so out there.
That to me meant a certain kind of freedom.
♪ Oh, gitchi gitchi ya ya here ♪ The architect of the look of Labelle was Legaspi.
He also designed the look for KISS.
Patti LaBelle: ♪ Ahh ahh ♪ Farrington: He also designed the look for Funkadelic.
Labelle: ♪ Coucher avec moi ce soir?
♪ Larry was already sort of making things that looked like a futuristic look, and then with us being open to even going further, he began to design more.
♪ More, more, more ♪ Farrington: I was mesmerized and delighted to see my people in a way that was unlike any way anyone had ever imagined them.
Labelle: ♪ More, more, more ♪ ♪ Gitchi gitchi ya ya da da ♪ ♪ Gitchi gitchi ya ya here ♪ Hendryx: Just singing songs that felt right to us or mattered to us, and the audience were responding to it.
♪ Touching her skin, feeling silky smooth ♪ ♪ Ahh ♪ ♪ Ahh ♪ Royster: Lady Marmalade is talking about, I mean, basically sex tourism and sex work.
♪ Roar until it cried ♪ All: ♪ "More, more, more!"
♪ Royster: Women don't often get center stage, or if there is a story that's being told, it's also a story that's about titillation or about fetishization.
Hendryx: It's like a playwright, you know, someone describing something as opposed to judging it and in a way that-- not celebratory, but in a way that was not downtrodden and horrible and that this is just yet another aspect of life.
[Indistinct chatter] Royster: I really think that music is really important in terms of creating social change, and in this moment, you know, music was reflecting Black women's lives in a way that it hadn't ever been.
Staton: I was so glad disco came in.
You know, good music, good lyrics, songs that had a meaning to them.
In the sixties, we were known as R&B singers.
♪ I'd rather be lonely ♪ ♪ Than to lose you ♪ My songs were, like... ♪ I'm just a prison ♪ and begging men not to leave me and "Oh, God, if you leave me, I'm just gonna die," you know, I mean, this was the kind of songs they would play on us.
Men could sing anything they wanted to sing.
So to make a long story short, disco freed me.
It saved me.
♪ You know, I been married a few times, and I don't mind telling it because, you know, I was in one of those type of marriages, but it was dangerous.
It was a really a dangerous marriage.
So I was doing Las Vegas with Ray Charles.
I was opening for Ray Charles.
The last night, I decided I was gonna just sit in the audience and watch Ray do his show, and my ex-husband, he was looking for me, and he couldn't find me, and I was in the audience, and he kept walking up and down the aisle.
I saw him.
And that's the night when he went completely nuts.
My suite was on the--way up on the 20th-something floor, and he pushed me.
You know, he was pushing me all the way through the lobby to the elevator, and then we get to the floor.
He said, "I'm--I'm gonna kill you tonight.
"I tell you what I'm gonna do.
I'm gonna throw you off the balcony."
20-something floors.
He picked me up, and had me--holding me over the banister like this, and I'm like, "This man is gonna kill me tonight.
"How in the world?
Well, how am I gonna get out of this one?"
I said, um, "You know you're in this hotel, "and it's owned by Mafia.
This is Las Vegas.
We're in Las Vegas now."
I said, "You got to get out of here.
"You got to walk out of here.
"How are you gonna feel with my body splattered at the bottom and my name is on the marquee?"
And I said, "You won't make it out of Vegas."
He thought, and he brought me back in, and he said, "I'll tell you what I'm gonna do.
I'm just gonna shoot you."
So I laid--I just, you know, I was so tired.
I just laid down on the bed.
I said, "OK.
Shoot me."
I went to sleep.
He had the gun like this.
I said, "Just shoot me.
I won't know it.
I just--forget it."
That's how "Young Hearts Run Free" came about.