Democrats & Planned Parenthood Push African Child Sacrifice Religion in America

  It seems strange to talk about child sacrifice in 2020,  but it continues  to be part of  “traditional African medicine”.

According to Wikipedia:  “Witch doctors, who also identify as traditional healers, will consult the spirits for anyone who can pay their fee.^[6] The spirits will communicate via them the kind of sacrifice for appeasement that they want. Often  these sacrifices are chickens or goats, but when such sacrifices fail to make the client prosper instantly, ‘the spirits’ will demand human sacrifices.^[8]”

  Witch doctors may   suggest child sacrifice to help with  matters   involving “health or good fortune” or perhaps ” to ward off evil spirits”    Child sacrifice “is the harmful practice  of removing body parts, blood or tissue from a child who is still alive.^{[4] “}

[ note:  Witch doctors played  a role in English culture. “In its original meaning witch doctors were not witches themselves, but rather people who had remedies to protect others against witchcraft. Witchcraft-induced conditions were their area of expertise”]

Evangelist Dr. Alveda King, the niece of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.  said:    ”   Planned Parenthood moved into our community with the abortion killing centers and said, ‘We’re here to help you. Let’s kill your baby, so you can have a better life.’ Well, killing our babies doesn’t give us a better life.”

Dismemberment abortion  fits the definition of child sacrifice  because “abortionists tear off the baby’s limbs and crush the head while the child is alive. “

Americans may not understand that people in less knowledgeable societies may attribute mental issues such as depression  to  “evil spirits.”    Planned Parenthood’s  [witch] doctors may prescribe abortion/child sacrifice to treat depression

Will Chicago Area School District Use Black Children in Dangerous Experiment?

American People Daily reports that the Evanston/Skokie school board District 65 ” has determined that African American kids will have the first option to return to the classroom…..The school board determined that there was a pandemic before COVID-19 ever showed up. They stated that it came in the form of ‘inequity and racism, and classism.’ ”

The school board is lying to black parents by telling them their children might benefit if they started school before the  white kids.  Nobody  knows  what will happen when schools  reopen during a pandemic. .The degree of  risk varies among school  districts .

Evanston/Skokie school board’s  decision to have black students start school ahead of white students implies the district is misusing  black students to determine when  it will be safe for white students to return to the classroom.  Starting students at different times could  lead to  segregation because it wouldn’t be fair to the students  who start first  to  have to  stop and wait for  the others   to  catch  up .

Need New Teen Athletes Classification System

Teen athletes have traditionally been  classified as “boys”  or “girls” so that  girls can participate in sports without having to compete against  boys who are usually stronger  and faster than girls.  This system worked as long as everyone agreed on which athletes were girls and which athletes were boys.  Today some disagree about who qualifies as girls and  who qualifies as boys.

One thing hasn’t changed.   There are   two different genetic types  of  athletes.   One type has two “X” chromosomes.  The other has an “XY” combination of   chromosomes.     Athletes   who   have an “XY” combination of   chromosomes are usually stronger  and faster than  athletes who   have  two “X” chromosomes.

To   insure  everyone  an equal  opportunity to participate in sports  athletes who   have an “XY” combination of   chromosomes should not  compete against  athletes who   have  two “X” chromosomes.

The   “Y” chromosome can be detected using a microscope   because it is shorter than  the  “X” chromosome.     Thus   it would be easy  to divide athletes into “X” and   “Y” groups.

Athletes might  want to give the groups  names like  “Xenas”   and “Yodas”.

Washington Redskins Name Opponents Ashamed of Own Heritage

Washington Celtics could replace  Washington Redskins because the Irish are proud of their heritage and many North  Americans are simply ashamed of their heritage.

The word “redskins” is a physically descriptive term that doesn’t have inherently negative characteristics.   The word is one of the English translations of the Ottawa term “Oklahoma”.   If we consider the characteristics of the people the term “redskins” was first applied to, it’s a positive term.

I’m attempting to understand why some of the descendants of the people Christopher Columbus called “Indians” say they are ashamed to be called “redskins”.

The only explanation I can think of is they are ashamed that they are not white or perhaps they are simply ashamed of their heritage.

In the 1950’s many black Americans were ashamed of their color. They tried to bleach their skin and straighten their hair to look more like white people.   In the early sixties someone discovered a statement abolitionist John Sweat Rock had made a century earlier.  Rock said, “black is beautiful”.   Many black Americans recognized that Rock was correct.

Black is just as beautiful as white and so is red.   Many white Americans think the complexion of  the Navajo, Cherokee etc. is so much better than theirs  that they are willing to bake themselves in the sun for hours to get their complexion the same color the Navajo and Cherokee are born with.  So why would those who are born with such a desirable complexion be ashamed?

Over 200 years ago leaders of the Piankeshaw, Osage, Santee Sioux and Meskwaki nations referred to themselves as “redskins“.   The great Shawnee nation leader Tecumseh  in his speech to the Osage nation in 1811 used the terms “red men” and “red children [of the Great Spirit]”.   If the original redskins found the term acceptable, why don’t today’s redskins?   Do today’s redskins think they are unworthy of the name used by their ancestors?

If people have a negative view of an ethnic group any word used to describe members of the group will be negative.  In 1850, one of the worst things you could call someone was “Irish”.  In northern states they ranked below blacks.  On southern docks they were given jobs too dangerous to risk the lives of slaves on

There were numerous slurs for the Irish.  For example, blacks often called the Irish “white [n-word]s”. Urban whites used the term “green [ n-word]”    However, people didn’t need to use a slur for the Irish because of the negative attitudes people had about the Irish. This attitude was most commonly shown in “Help Wanted” signs that included the phrase “no Irish need apply”.

Incidentally, centuries before Andrew Jackson moved the Cherokee to Oklahoma, the English moved much of the Irish population from Ireland to North America and the West Indies.

The words “redskin” and “Irish” don’t have any inherently negative implications as is the case with the n-word and the word “native”.    Using the word “redskins” provides a unique one word name for the peoples of the various North American nations .

Using color to distinguish one group of Americans from another implies the differences between them are only cosmetic and members of one group are not inherently better than members of the other group.

Using the word “Indian” for redskins requires adding the adjective “American” to distinguish them from the residents of India.

Using the word “native” requires adding the word “American” to distinguish them from all the different groups of peoples around the world called “native”.  In old movies and television shows the term “native” was used for unnamed primitive original residents of the areas white people were visiting or had taken over.   The castaways on the “Gilligan’s Island” television show were occasionally visited by “natives” from other islands.

The Irish didn’t let slurs and mistreatment keep them down.  They persevered and made “Irish”  a respected name.

In 1968, James Brown released his most important song “Say it Loud, I’m Black and I’m Proud“.   It became the theme song for the black power movement.

Redskins nee d to take similar pride in their complexions.   They need to tell everyone they are proud their skin is “red”.

The old leaders who called themselves “redskins” stood up to the white man. Native Americans take orders from whites.

Redskins were free and independent people.   Native Americans often live on reservations overseen by the government.

The leaders who called themselves “redskins” were self reliant and self confident. Native Americans often appear to lack self confidence.

How Demonstrators Can Fight Racism

Demonstrators who want to  stop racism should switch  from  toppling old statues to facing active threats like “black genocide”.

Some governments pay Planned Parenthood to kill black babies with abortions so those governments won’t have to deal with as  many black adults in  the  future.

Dr. Day Gardner points out that  Planned Parenthood is  a worse threat to black lives than the police and the Ku Klux Klan.  “The KKK brutally killed about 3,500 black people since it began in 1865, [Margaret] Sanger’s Planned Parenthood is responsible for 19 million black deaths since 1973.”

Demonstrators should attempt  to shut down Planned Parenthood  abortion clinics.

Americans Are One Race with Members of Many Colors

Media are perpetuating racism by falsely claiming color divides us into different races.

Jesse Washington has reported that many dark skinned Americans recognize that they are not “African” Americans in spite of what some racists say.

The term “African-American”  perpetuates the  principle tenet of Southern racism:  “part black, all black” under the “one drop rule”.

Those who use the term are in effect segregating  Americans with dark complexions from the rest of the population they may be related to.   Those who use the term believe that those with dark complexions should only be able to claim their African ancestors and should forget about ancestors who came from Europe, North America or Asia even if most of a person’s ancestors came from places other than Africa.

The media in particular apply the term indiscriminately to any American with a dark complexion. For example, they call golfer Tiger Woods “African American” even though his ancestry is predominately Asian.  His mother is Asian and his father had Asian as well as African and American Indian ancestors.

Dr. Martin Luther King dreamed of a day in which  color would not be important.  Unfortunately, the media along with many politicians and black leaders are still preoccupied with skin color.

Members of the media still falsely claim that differences in skin color among Americans indicate a racial difference.  Perhaps there is an European “race” that is white and an African “race” that is black, but if there is an American race it is red and yellow, black and white.  We Americans are a mixture of peoples from all parts of the world.

As the Lakota say, Aho Mitakuye Oyasin (We Are All Related)   regardless of the color of our skin.

The fact that a person has dark skin doesn’t mean a majority of ancestors came from Africa. Dark skin only means a person received  one or more of the half dozen skin color related genes that produce “black” skin from an African ancestor.   For example, dark complexioned singer Eartha Kitt  told talk show host Dick Cavett that her father was white and her maternal grand father was Cherokee.

Some of the genes associated with dark complexion are also present in persons from other parts of the world, especially India and Australia.  The versions of the skin color genes that cause dark skin are dominant genes which means if a person has a dark version of the gene, complexion will be dark even if the other gene is associated with light skin.   Incidentally, the African gene pool includes the albino gene  which means some residents of Africa have pale skin.

Calling black Americans African-Americans denies them the opportunity to claim their European (especially Irish) and North American ancestry.  The first Africans  in the English colonies worked with the Irish in  the fields and occasionally became sexually involved with them. In some cases planters deliberately forced Irish women to have children by African men to produce children of a desired complexion. Later, Irish overseers and plantation owners sometimes offered favors for sex or just raped slaves.

Until the 1960’s Southern white men could rape black women without fearing punishment.    Some black women voluntarily had sex with white employers or their sons.  Former Sen. Strom Thurman fathered a daughter by his parent’s 16-year-old housekeeper when he was a young man.   Young southern women were told that if their good night kisses were too passionate, their boyfriends might seek sexual satisfaction in the black community.

Some black Americans can trace their ancestry back to President Thomas Jefferson and his virtual wife Sally Hennings.   DNA tests confirmed the claim that Sally Hennings descendants were also descendants of  Thomas Jefferson.  The tests examined the “Y” chromosome which is passed from father to son.

A test of the “Y” chromosome of Martin Luther King III indicates that he and his civil rights leader father Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., had a north European male ancestor  like about 33% of black American males.

The Spanish who established colonies in South Carolina, Florida and Georgia in the 16th Century using African slaves were less likely than the British to bring wives and instead used their slaves for sexual satisfaction.  The French in Louisiana also had a shortage of white women.  The French, unlike the English, even used terms indicating the proportion of African and European ancestry.

African slaves of the Spanish started a long association with the original inhabitants of North America that continued in the British colonies.  The Africans left behind when Spain withdrew from Florida joined with the Seminoles.  In the English colonies the Cherokees and some other tribes socialized with the Africans, gave refuge to runaway slaves or had African slaves of their own.

Many white  Americans, including former President Warren G. Harding, have African ancestors.  Some believe as many as four other white presidents had African ancestors.  After the “Roots Miniseries” many whites who researched their family histories were  surprised to find ancestors who served in the military who had a “C” after their names for “colored”.

Most whites with African ancestors probably don’t even know it because their African ancestors whose skin was light enough to pass for white covered up their past.  It would only take a few generations of people with mixed parentage to have descendants with skin light enough to pass for white.  If only one gene were involved, the math of inheritance would indicate that if two parents each had one black parent and one white parent approximately 25% of their children would have white skin.  The math is more complicated with the involvement of multiple genes, but  the probability of some light skinned children increases with each generation.

Racists  sometimes suggest that black males  have a greater propensity for violence especially against women and falsely ascribe that characteristic to their African ancestors.   If some  black men actually have a genetic tendency to commit rape and murder it would be far more likely that they inherited the gene from a white male ancestor who raped one of their black female ancestors than that they inherited it from an African male ancestor.

Another popular stereotype is that blacks have “rhythm”  which they are supposed to have inherited from their African ancestors.  Although the slaves’ African heritage would have influenced their music, it seems more likely that the social and biological association with the musically oriented Irish would be more responsible for the black emphasis on music.

The Irish responded to the repressive treatment by the English through musical expression.  They would have passed that tradition along to the Africans whom they initially worked with as “indentured servants” and later supervised after black slavery was established.  The slaves blended their Irish and African traditions with their own situation.  They concentrated on expressing themselves through music because their oppressors didn’t allow other ways to “fight” their situation.    Watch Irish groups like Riverdance and Celtic Woman and then say that black Americans could only have gotten “rhythm” from African ancestors.

The first  African “servants” arrived in Jamestown in 1619 only 14 years after the founding of the settlement.  During the two centuries of the Atlantic slave trade only about 500,000 additional Africans were imported into North America.   Britain led the way to ending the Atlantic slave trade in 1807 and the United States quickly followed to outlaw the importation of slaves without prohibiting the internal slave trade.   Thus, the vast majority of the 4.5 million blacks living in the U.S. in 1860 were born here to parents and grandparents who were born here.   A substantial portion had at least some ancestors who were living in North America at the time of  the American Revolution.

It’s time we recognize that the only African ancestors of the descendants of slaves arrived here centuries ago.  We need to recognize that those dark skinned  Americans whose ancestors were slaves are just as deserving of being called  regular Americans as those of us with light skins without any modifier that segregates them from the rest of us.

Americans with dark skins should be allowed to claim all of their ancestors, not just those who provided the genes responsible for their skin color.  Those of us with light skins need to accept the possibility that many of those with dark skins are our distant cousins.  Those of us whose ancestors arrived here a couple of centuries ago or came from the British Isles, especially Ireland, likely had relatives who had sexual relations with the descendants of Africans. We could also have ancestors who came from Africa. Those whose ancestors have lived in the south for several generations, especially if they have dark naturally curly hair,  could easily have an ancestor who passed for white at some time in the past.

Americans need to recognize that color is only skin deep.  It doesn’t totally define us.

George Floyd Riots Are a Warning to Autocratic Governors

The George Floyd rioters may  identify with Floyd because they feel that state or local government is kneeling on their necks.

The  claim   that  Floyd    died of strangulation  ignores  the fact he was able to say “I can’t breathe!”   The fact Floyd  could speak means he could exhale air through his throat.  Thus the statement “I can’t breathe!”  probably indicates he could  not expand his lungs so  he  could draw in air.    He would have had trouble  expanding his lungs lying face down with a man  on  his back.

If the men involved in Floyd’s  death  are typical of  those who  work for the Minneapolis police department I’m glad I don’t have to rely on the Minneapolis police department for protection.

Vladimir Putin’s 2016 Election Mischief Continues to Disrupt American Politics

Vladimir Putin’s 2016 Election Mischief  Continues to Disrupt American Politics

There is no evidence that Russian President Vladimir Putin is a master at the board game called “chess”, but he is a grand master at a real life version of the game.

In 2016. he began an operation to discredit the American system of elections.   He took advantage of the basic stupidity of many American politicians and journalists to create the delusion that he had colluded with Donald Trump to affect the presidential election.

Putin was a Lieutenant Colonel in the KGB, the highly effective Soviet Secret Police.  If  the Russians had been trying to elect Trump, any Russian contact with the Trump campaign would have been done in secret to avoid detection.  Putin is intelligent enough to know that some Americans would vote against a candidate favored by Russia.

Putin had Russians meet with Trump campaigners to set Trump up for a collusion charge in the event Trump won.  I became suspicious of the real purpose of  one meeting because a tv news story sounded like someone might have coordinated the meeting with the Department of Justice.  The discovery of the meeting seemed too  easy.  I’m not a fan of Putin, but I respect his intelligence.  He would not have used people so unprofessional that they would be caught while engaged in what  should have been a secret operation.

Putting people in apparently compromising situations  is an old KGB tactic that the KGB used to blackmail  people into cooperating with the KGB such as by providing access to information.    The Russian contact with Trump campaigners is a variation on this tactic with the goal simply being to frame people in Trump’s campaign.

I doubt that Putin wanted either Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump to be President  of  the United States.   In 2016 Putin  likely thought the best outcome would be a discredited American election especially if the winner would be forced out of office.  .  Putin had been criticized for his  conduction of presidential    elections.   Creating a scandal about an American presidential election might prevent unfavorable comparison of Russian elections to American elections particularly if Putin could claim the “American Secret Police” rejected the candidate voters wanted.

Putin is certainly aware of how much the Soviet Union had benefited  from the Watergate controversy.  The fall of Richard Nixon  was followed by the fall of U.S. backed governments in Vietnam and Iran.  The  Soviet Union was able to take advantage of the weakened American presidency to invade Afghanistan.

Putin obviously wasn’t trying to help Trump win.   If  Putin had wanted to help Trump win Putin would have had actual or forged Clinton incriminating Libya emails.

If Putin has any derogatory information about Hillary Clinton, he will probably keep it secret unless she is elected president.

This farce has gone on long enough.   Congress and President Trump  need to concentrate on the real problems our nation faces.

Is the Bill of Rights a Bad Joke? pt. 1

The Founding Fathers wisely added the Bill of Rights to the Constitution to explicitly prohibit Government from doing  things it isn’t authorized to do.

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution  is one of the  most important provisions:  “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

The Constitution doesn’t authorize using a pandemic to prohibit the free exercise of religion or to abridge “the right of the people peaceably to assemble.”  Government officials who take either action are breaking the law.

Government officials should treat COVID-19 measures as suggested guidelines rather than  rigid rules which  must be obeyed. We should accept that  there will always be a few who don’t want to go along with the   program.

We Americans aren’t like  the “good Germans” in  Nazi Germany who obeyed orders.

We Americans don’t like to be told what to do.  In 1773 American Patriots destroyed an entire shipment of tea at  the Boston Tea Party  to protest the tea tax.   In the eighties many of us used our CB  radios to avoid tickets when we exceeded the 55 mph speed limit.

Democrats Are Regressive Ultraconservatives Not Progressive Liberals

Conservatives should stop helping ultraconservative  Democrats  lie by agreeing  with the Democrats’ false claim  that  Democrats are liberals   instead of ultraconservatives.  Conservatives should also stop calling outdated Democratic ideas   “progressive”.

Conservatives, like many Americans, falsely believe there are only two political  “attitudes” in the United States.  One attitude is called “liberal”.  The other is called “conservative”.   There is a  third attitude called “ultraconservative” which  has at times adversely affected American society.

Real liberals are open-minded and sometimes overly optimistic about the positive  impact  of change.   Democrats are closed-minded True Believers who tend to believe they are Right about everything and anybody who disagrees is Wrong.   Democrats seem unable to comprehend the possibility of any other proposals than theirs.   A real liberal believes his  ideas will win over your  ideas in  a  fair debate.

A real liberal who believed the global warming / climate change myth might believe warming would  be desirable  because it would  create a longer growing season.  A real liberal might belittle claims of  climate disasters  by suggesting the disaster claims  represent ultraconservatives’   exaggerated  fears of  change.

In 1861 ultraconservative southern Democrats started the Civil War.   A century later ultraconservative southern Democrats were trying to block efforts by Republicans and liberal Democrats to end the south’s rigid system of racial segregation.

Although liberal presidents such as Franklin Roosevelt and John Kennedy led the Democratic Party in the mid 20th Century, by the 21st Century ultraconservative  racists were back in control.   Pastor Clenard Childress, Jr. , Dr. Alveda King   and  Day Gardner   accuse Democratic Party supported Planned Parenthood of “Black Genocide.”

Conservatives who believe “liberal” is a bad name don’t understand that many others [including most political journalists] don’t consider “liberal”  a bad name.  Many journalists seem to think that American politics involves a contest between good guys and bad guys like a 50’s tv western.    Many also believe that “liberals” are the good guys and “conservatives” are the bad guys.

Most journalists have no idea what a “liberal” is but assume that the people  conservatives call “liberals” are the ones they should support.    Conservatives have no idea what a “liberal” is but falsely assume that the people who disagree with them must be “liberals”.  Conservatives don’t consider the possibility one or both of  them  might  have wrong information.  If  both had correct information they might agree.

The conversion of American liberals into ultraconservatives involves a process  Friedrich Nietzsche described. “Liberal institutions straightway cease from being liberal the moment they are soundly established:  once this is attained no more grievous and more thorough enemies of freedom exist than liberal institutions.”

Once liberals create an institution they become protective toward their “baby”.  Liberal created regulatory agencies may become  over zealous, Subsequent liberals may face opposition if they try to reform the institution.

Often one generation’s liberals become the next generation’s conservatives.  Politicians who  support old programs are some type of   conservative:  Thus, politicians who want to expand Medicare are conservatives.

Conservative  Republicans need to recognize that they are in the middle between  liberals and ultraconservatives.   Or, conservative Republicans would be in the middle between  liberals and ultraconservatives if the United States had any real liberals.  Conservative  Republicans aren’t on the “far right” as Democrats falsely claim: : Conservative  Republicans are actually in the American political main stream as were liberal Democrats such as Franklin Roosevelt and John Kennedy.

Republicans will have  a better chance of  winning if they stop  helping  ultraconservative Democrats lie by agreeing  with the Democrats’ false claim  that  Democrats are liberals   instead of ultraconservatives.

Republicans  should  stop using the word “progressive” to describe Democrats or  their old 20th Century proposals.   Democrats use the  term “progressive” because “progressive” is the political equivalent of the consumer  product slogan “new and improved”.    Unfortunately many naive voters, especially young voters,  don’t understand that the  term “progressive” is meaningless.   Some politicians even call the archaic  concept of socialism “progressive”.