Racism is racism. It doesn’t matter if it’s White against Black, Black against White, Hispanic against Asian… it’s bad no matter which direction it’s pointed. There was a time when America understood this. Unfortunately, the pendulum has swung so far that racism against Caucasian people isn’t allowed to be considered racism.
Former Republican congressional candidate Robby Starbuck pointed out how this is the case on Twitter and asked Elon Musk to address it, highlighting Tweets by “Bishop” Talbert Swan that are so unambiguously racist, it’s unfathomable that anyone can delude themselves into thinking otherwise.
Hey @elonmusk, Longtime Twitter issue has been different rules for different racism where racist tweets like these can refer to white people in all kinds of bigoted ways but never face consequences like they would if they used slurs against other races. Will this change?
If you replaced the word white with any other race and tweeted these things, you’d be banned online, you’d lose your job and your life would be ruined. For some reason it’s acceptable to say about white people though. That’s not okay and must change. Slurs are slurs. @elonmusk
If you replaced the word white with any other race and tweeted these things, you’d be banned online, you’d lose your job and your life would be ruined. For some reason it’s acceptable to say about white people though. That’s not okay and must change. Slurs are slurs. @elonmusk pic.twitter.com/A0yjo4GShh
— Robby Starbuck (@robbystarbuck) May 20, 2023
I’ll never forget the moment during the Democrat presidential debate in 2016 when the candidates were asked, “Black Lives Matter or All Lives Matter?” It was a no-brainer to me that some if not all the candidates would be lucid enough to realize that of course all lives matter. Call me a moron, but I was shocked when all of the candidates declared that Black Lives Matter.
That was the moment when I realized the left was no longer interested in equality. It’s also around the time period when I understood their push for equity over equality was a purely political move designed to play to the base emotions of superiority with some misguided sense of retribution to drive minority voters to embrace them.
What Twitter and other social networks have experienced in recent years is a cognitive dissonance at its purest. To them, condemning racist statements against Caucasians is racist itself. That must change. Will Elon Musk have the guts to stand for what’s right?
What Would You Do If Pharmacies Couldn’t Provide You With Crucial Medications or Antibiotics?
The medication supply chain from China and India is more fragile than ever since Covid. The US is not equipped to handle our pharmaceutical needs. We’ve already seen shortages with antibiotics and other medications in recent months and pharmaceutical challenges are becoming more frequent today.
Our partners at Jase Medical offer a simple solution for Americans to be prepared in case things go south. Their “Jase Case” gives Americans emergency antibiotics they can store away while their “Jase Daily” offers a wide array of prescription drugs to treat the ailments most common to Americans.
They do this through a process that embraces medical freedom. Their secure online form allows board-certified physicians to prescribe the needed drugs. They are then delivered directly to the customer from their pharmacy network. The physicians are available to answer treatment related questions.
Anti-racist is necessarily racist. It is intentionally unbalanced, unfair, and partial. Racism is expected.
But as with all racists, he mostly only harms himself and those he leads.
Of course, the greatest irony of all, as usual, is that he is a multi-millionaire.
He mostly does it because it pays.
And of course he’s living proof critical theory destroys the mind.
His tweet on abortion is an embarrassing abuse of statistics. You cant use normal distribution in such an instance.
For that matter, any use of normal distribution is inherently erroneous to some degree. Often barely short of a wild guess.
Lies, d*** lies, and statistics
It’s been a long time since I took statistics, but if I remember correctly it’s basically an attempt to generate a probability or projection out of unknowns. But of course, all is not unknown. There are factors intentionally ignored. It’s far more likely that women who are against the murder of unborn children are far less likely to murder an unborn child, which is basic common sense to anyone who’s mind isn’t completely fried. It doesn’t take a degree to understand that.
Intersectionality is little different. Ultimately it’s bearing false witness. (Apparently his Bible doesn’t contain a 9th Commandment.) But you can’t tell him anything. Only the Lord can fix a reprobate mind.
The actual data is messy and difficult to track down. Every year, about 1% of women murder their unborn child. Using his own numbers, about 0.55% would account for white women. Year over year, among women of birthing age, some have multiple abortions, and so on, which can only reduce the number of white women overall who have had at least one abortion. But even if there were none who had multiple, across and estimated 25 years of birthing age, the sum total within such a time frame would be 13.75% of white women, low enough such that the 15% of non-Christian white women could account for every single abortion. And again, due to many women having multiple abortions, the actual number would be less than 13.75%
In other words, the numbers are so far apart that there is realistically no mathematically necessary overlap at all whatsoever, much less any justifiable reason to apply standard distribution.
These are things most of us just know. It’s common sense. He couldn’t have the slightest clue how many Christian white women murdered their child, if any at all.
And of course, if any call themselves Christians and do murder their child, they’re most likely democrats on his side of the aisle. They’re about as much a Christian as Nancy We-Can’t-Afford-Them Pelosi.
Those numbers aren’t 100% correct. 0.55% would be relative to all women, so it would need to be adjusted upward in order to represent the percentage of just white women, which make up roughly 60% of the population of all women. The numbers would then be about 0.9%, over 25 years 22.5%, which depending on the percentage who have multiple abortions could possibly require a small overlap of a few percentage points, which would then have to be adjusted further down by 85% to roughly determine the minimum possible percentage of white (professing) Christian women who murdered their child.
My math is not exact, and I don’t know the exact numbers. But the main point is that it’s so far apart there is no justifiable reason to apply normal distribution. You don’t need the exact numbers and perfect math because the numbers are that far apart. There is a very tiny amount of overlap, if any at all.