When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I foolishly looked to the internet to try and find a graph that would give a clear representation between the ideologies. It doesn't exist. What does is misinformation and half-truths, like the first Replublican-**** "comparison" at the top.
Well, this is the difference between ideology and practice. Or, perhaps between perception and reality.
Take the blue / red infographic first. It uses the terms "Left" and "Right" rather than "Democrat" and "Republican," however I'd argue that those terms are effectively synonymous for most people.
It's true that, from a purely ideological perspective, a Liberal should espouse personal freedom and "look to the future." In reality, modern "liberals" in the US support only some types of freedom for some people (think abortion access) but vehemently oppose other personal freedoms, such as freedom of speech. Likewise, modern liberals in the US spend an awful lot of time looking toward the past, trying to find examples of of someone telling a racist joke 30 years ago, or talking about colonialism or slavery or reparations.
By the same token, a true conservative ought to espouse economic freedom, free trade, and be of a "don't tax & spend" mentality. But Republican legislators love regulating trade (especially international trade) and spending money on pork projects just as much as the dems.
In reality, though, claiming affiliation with the Republican or Democrat party is more about virtue-signaling for the average politician than it is a reflection of their actual beliefs and actions.
That being said, consider the "Republican = ****" argument. This is a matter of the way that lefties perceive certain things as compared to normal people. If, for example, you believe that:
Hate speech = violence
Women can have penises
Not wanting to pay for your housing is the same as wanting you to be homeless
Protecting a national border is racism / xenophobia, and
Putting illegal border-jumpers into cages is the same as tossing all of the Jews into Treblinka
Then it's perfectly understandable how you could look at the platforms espoused by the Republican party and be unable to differentiate between it and Nazism, while being blind to the fact that it was the *****, not the republicans, who
Banned private gun ownership
Censored objectionable speech
Revised history to suit their liking
Codified discrimination and segregation based on ethnicity into law
Taught that it was proper to blame people of a certain race for your own problems, and
Completely disregarded the existing constitution and rules of law when they disagreed with them.
... All of which are defining characteristics of 21st century "liberals" in the US.
... All of which are defining characteristics of 21st century "liberals" in the US.
This is the defining characteristic of the Left these days. Every thought should not emanate from your brain, but from Big Brother, whether what he says directly contradicts what was said yesterday or not.
Should be in prison for pushing the fake Russia narrative and trying to facilitate a soft-coup against a sitting president. We should be getting news of a verdict of treason from a jury, not him promoting his book.
WASHINGTON, June 8 (Reuters) - China has reached a secret deal with Cuba to establish an electronic eavesdropping facility on the island roughly 100 miles from Florida, the Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday, citing U.S. officials familiar with classified intelligence.
Such a spy installation would allow Beijing to gather electronic communications from the southeastern United States, which houses many U.S. military bases, as well as monitor ship traffic, the newspaper reported.
The U.S. Central Command headquarters is based in Tampa. Fort Liberty, formerly Fort Bragg, the largest U.S. military base, is based in North Carolina.
The countries have reached an agreement in principle, the officials said, with China to pay Cuba "several billion dollars" to allow the eavesdropping station, according to the Journal.
“I cannot speak to this specific report, but we are well aware of – and have spoken many times to – the People’s Republic of China’s efforts to invest in infrastructure around the world that may have military purposes, including in this hemisphere," John Kirby, spokesperson for the White House National Security Council, said in a statement.
"We monitor it closely, take steps to counter it, and remain confident that we are able to meet all our security commitments at home, in the region, and around the world," he said.
A spokesperson for the Chinese Embassy in Washington said: "We are not aware of the case and as a result we can't give a comment right now." The Cuban embassy did not respond to a request for comment.
The agreement between the two U.S. rivals, both ruled by communist governments, has caused alarm in the Biden administration, the newspaper said, posing a new threat close to America's shores.
The reported deal comes as Washington and Beijing are taking tentative steps to soothe tensions that spiked after a suspected Chinese high-altitude spy balloon crossed the United States before the U.S. military shot it down off the East Coast in February.
It could also raise questions about a trip to China that U.S. officials say Secretary of State Antony Blinken is planning in coming weeks. Washington's top diplomat had earlier scrapped the visit over the spy balloon incident.
The Biden administration has pushed to boost engagement with China even as ties have deteriorated over disputes ranging from military activity in the South China Sea and near Taiwan, Beijing's human rights record, and technology competition.
U.S. Senator Bob Menendez, Democratic chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and a Cuba hawk, said that if the report is true, it would be “a direct assault upon the United States.”
“So I hope the administration will think about how they'll react, if it’s true," he told reporters on Capitol Hill.
A former U.S. intelligence official with knowledge of signals intelligence collection told Reuters that a Chinese listening post in Cuba would be a “big deal.”
However, the U.S. has a long history of spying on China in its neighborhood. It is widely reported to have used Taiwan as a listening post for the mainland and regularly flies spy planes in the South China Sea.
The head of Taiwan’s National Security Bureau told the island’s parliament in April that Taiwan was conducting real-time encrypted intelligence sharing with Five Eyes partners, which includes the U.S.
A cash infusion would likely be welcomed in Cuba, where the economy is sputtering with inflation, fuel shortages, plunging farm production and a cash crunch drag on output and continue to fan discontent in the communist-run island nation.
Relations between Washington and Havana remain tense. The Biden administration last year partially rolled back some Trump-era restrictions on remittances and travel to the island, but Cuban officials called the steps insufficient.
The intelligence on the plans for a Cuba station was gathered in recent weeks and was convincing, the Journal reported. The officials said it would allow China to conduct signals intelligence, including emails, phone calls and satellite transmission.
Cuba, an old Cold War foe of the United States, has long been a hotbed of espionage and spy games.
The Cuban missile crisis in 1962 began after Moscow began placing Soviet nuclear weapons on the island. It backed down and removed the missiles, but it is widely regarded as the moment when the United States and the Soviet Union came closest to a nuclear confrontation.
The Soviets installed a spy base on the island at Lourdes, just south of Havana, in the mid-1960s, with parabolic antennas aimed at Cuba´s northern neighbor. Russian President Vladimir Putin closed the facility in the early 2000s.
EXCLUSIVE: Bill Barr Confirms Rep. Jamie Raskin Lied About Biden Family Corruption Investigation
Bill Barr Confirms Rep. Jamie Raskin Lied About Biden Family Corruption Investigation“It’s not true. It wasn’t closed down,” William Barr told The Federalist on Tuesday in response to Democrat Rep. Jamie Raskin’s claim that the former attorney general and his “handpicked prosecutor” had ended an investigation into a confidential human source’s allegation that Joe Biden had agreed to a $5 million bribe. “On the contrary,” Barr stressed, “it was sent to Delaware for further investigation.”
Former Attorney General Barr went on the record with The Federalist following statements Raskin made to the press Monday afternoon. Soon after attending a closed-door meeting with House Oversight Committee Chair James Comer and the FBI — at which lawmakers reviewed the FD-1023 form summarizing a CHS’s detailed allegations that then-Vice President Joe Biden agreed to accept money from a foreign national to affect policy decisions — Raskin spoke to the media.
“What I learned,” Raskin claimed, “was that Attorney General Barr named Scott Brady, who was the U.S. attorney for Western Pennsylvania, to head up a group of prosecutors who would look into all the allegations related to Ukraine.”
Seems like the Dems need to find a solid Presidential candidate before throwing Uncle baby-sniffer under the bus.
Seems like the Dems need to find a solid Presidential candidate before throwing Uncle baby-sniffer under the bus.
Why?
All they need to do is wait for absolutely nothing to come of this information, and then continue on making false claims and launching new investigations against Trump. Business as usual.
All they need to do is wait for absolutely nothing to come of this information, and then continue on making false claims and launching new investigations against Trump. Business as usual.
You could be right...
edit--it was a nice little country while we had it.
I wonder if he's going to address today's news when he gets back, or just skip over it and keep accusing people of pederasty?
It is interesting how two of Trump's top lawyers, Jim Trusty and John Rowley, both suddenly resigned just after the revelation that Trump is on tape as having said "As a president, I could have declassified them, but now I can't."
Trump himself, meanwhile, is no longer denying it, he's now just whining about how Jack Smith didn't investigate former VP Biden for basically the same crimes.
Revising my prediction on this one, which had previously been 50/50. I now feel it's more probable than not that Trump will be convicted, and if it happens prior to Nov 2024, that will likely strengthen his position in the Presidential election.
Well, it's official. The state of California is making it a criminal offense to say that boys are not girls and visa-versa.
I lived in California for nine years. It's honestly not as insane a place as you would think if you only ever pay attention to Sacramento and the Bay Area.
California Bill Would Charge Parents Who Don’t ‘Affirm’ Transgenderism With ‘Child Abuse’
An updated bill in California has introduced the inclusion of “affirming” a child’s sexual transition as a requirement for parental responsibility and child welfare. This means that failing to affirm transgenderism for a child would be considered abusive according to the proposed California State Family Code.
AB 957 successfully passed California’s State Assembly on May 3, and subsequently underwent amendments by a co-sponsor in California’s State Senate on June 6. The proposed amendment to Section 3011 of the Family Code outlines several factors that the court must consider when determining the best interests of the child in custody proceedings.
This addition suggests that a parent’s support and affirmation of their child’s self-identified gender would become a crucial factor in evaluating the child’s well-being in custody cases.
This bill proposes two changes to existing law. First, it states that if one parent objects to a name or gender marker change to affirm a minor’s gender identity, the court should strongly consider that affirming the minor’s gender identity is in the child’s best interest. This does not require the court to side with the objecting parent but adds it as a factor to consider.
Second, in child custody proceedings, the court would be required to consider a parent’s affirmation of their child’s gender identity when determining the best interest of the child. This bill does not uniquely impact parental rights and is in line with the court’s responsibility to make decisions based on the child’s best interest.
“When you say that gender affirmation is in the child’s best interest for health, safety, and welfare, it takes nothing to say [non-affirmation] is now abuse—because you’re not taking care of the health, safety, and welfare if you’re not affirming them,” said Erin Friday, a San Francisco attorney.
The proposed California bill that would charge parents who do not affirm transgenderism with child abuse has ignited a contentious debate. As the bill makes its way through the legislative process, it is likely to face further scrutiny and potential modifications.
The California Capitol Connection has opposed the bill as they believe it undermines the existing law that allows parents to object to their child’s request for a change of gender and/or name on official documents. They argue that the bill would force family courts to disregard parental objections and rule in favor of the minor’s request, arguing that parents should have the final say in major decisions affecting their children. They also referenced religious beliefs and natural gender distinctions as additional reasons for their opposition.
The California Parent’s Union also emphasized the importance of judges making objective and unbiased decisions based on the law and the facts before them, particularly when it involves a significant and potentially life-altering issue. The CPU highlighted the controversial nature of changing a minor’s gender and expresses concerns about the potential consequences of such decisions within the proposal.
06-02-2023, 07:15 PM
3
