RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2022/03/ketanji-brown-jacksons-favorite-critical-race-daniel-greenfield/

The existence of a speech by Biden’s Supreme Court nominee, Ketanji Brown Jackson, praising Derrick Bell, the godfather of critical race theory, and citing his book, “Faces At the Bottom of a Well”, as an influence has been widely reported. Conservatives have covered Bell’s racist views, his praise for Farrakhan, his antisemitism, and attacks on America. Much of this was already hashed out during the exposure of the relationship between Barack Obama and Derrick Bell.

But it’s important to specifically focus on Jackson’s interest in “Faces At the Bottom of the Well.”

In her speech, Jackson mentions that Bell, whom along with his wife she praises throughout her speech, “wrote a book in the early 1990s about the persistence of racism in American life”.

The subtitle of the book, which few people have mentioned, is, “The Permanence Of Racism”.

Persistence and permanence are not the same thing. But this is another example of Jackson subtly distorting Bell and his book in order to make their extremism seem more moderate.

Jackson goes on to say that, “My parents had this book on their coffee table for many years, and I remember staring at the image on the cover when I was growing up; I found it difficult to reconcile the image of the person,who seemed to be smiling, with the depressing message that the title and subtitle conveyed. I thought about this book cover again for the first time in forty years when I started preparing for this speech.” That would have made her ten years old.

As others have pointed out, “Faces At the Bottom of the Well” was published when Jackson was in her early twenties during Bell’s tantrum against Harvard University. It’s unlikely that Biden’s Supreme Court nominee grew up with the hateful text, but it’s entirely plausible that she was influenced by the book which came out when she was at Harvard and then Harvard Law.

Since Bell began his racial strike against Harvard Law before she had completed her undergraduate degree, it’s unlikely that she had taken any of his classes, but the former member of the faculty was clearly an influence on her. Perhaps Jackson’s memory is faulty or she’s deliberately backdating the book’s influence to her childhood to make it seem more innocent. Surely no one could blame a ten year old for being attracted to a racialist text.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2022/03/the_terrifying_moment_someone_switched_bidens_brain_off_in_poland.html

Like many people in failing health (physical or mental), Biden has his good days and his bad days. Somehow, a lot of those bad days are on foreign soil perhaps because—and this is often a problem for people with dementia—he’s away from a familiar environment. Maybe that’s why, in Poland, Biden told members of the 82nd Airborne that they’d soon be on the ground in Ukraine and see the war there for themselves. Did Biden just leak that he’s about to start WWIII or did we hear the ramblings of a damaged, fading brain? Either way, wise people are worried.

Here’s a video of Biden’s statement. However, don’t pay attention only to his words. Instead, note his affect: Slurred speech, vague wandering in a little circle, zero energy. This is a man who seems either to be on way too many drugs or, alternatively, to have been cut off from the drugs that normally keep him functioning:

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2022/03/the_pentagon_strikes_a_blow_against_transgender_madness.html

Ketanji Brown Jackson’s stupid and essentially disrespectful response to the question “What is a woman?” tells us what the official line is from the Biden administration: a woman is whatever the transgender lobby says it is.  And we know that the Biden Pentagon has been going out of its way to accommodate so-called “transgender” troops.  That’s why it’s so delicious that the Pentagon announced today that it is lowering the physical standards for women and older people.

Here’s the story from The Hill (emphasis mine):

Following a three-year review, the Army has scrapped plans to use the same physical fitness test for all soldiers, choosing instead to have some reduced standards to allow women and older soldiers to pass, the service announced Wednesday. 

The decision follows a RAND-led study that found men were more easily passing the new, more difficult Army Combat Fitness Test (ACFT) compared to women and older soldiers, who were “failing at noticeably higher rates.” That six-event test developed in 2019 was an expansion from the three events — pushups, situps and a run — soldiers had done prior.

The Army first changed its fitness test to include dead lifts, power throws, pushups, planks, a run and a sprint-drag-carry event, as well as a leg tuck that was eventually eliminated. 

Service leaders hoped the newer test — the first such change in more than 40 years — would better replicate tasks needed for combat while reducing the risk of injuries.

But the new fitness curriculum was quickly criticized after it became clear women, older male soldiers and National Guard and Reserve troops had difficulty passing it.  

About 44 percent of women failed the test from October 2020 to April 2021, compared to about 7 percent of men, Military.com found at the time.

Sorry, Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, but after reading that, I don’t think you need to be a biologist to figure out that there’s something different going on physically when it comes to women and men.  If you have young people in their prime, the women will perform physically like old men and men who spend their days not doing P.T., but doing desk jobs.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2022/03/no-on-ketanji-brown-jackson/

Barring an unexpected plot twist, the Senate Judiciary Committee has concluded its hearings on the nomination of Ketanji Brown Jackson to the Supreme Court. Democratic senators appear primed to confirm her, but Republicans should vote “No.”

The hearings were testy at times, but they were a model of civility compared with the Brett Kavanaugh or Clarence Thomas hearings. Unlike Kavanaugh, Judge Jackson did not have senators reciting the preposterous claims of a since-imprisoned grifter that she was a gang rapist, and did not see the Capitol and the hearing room overrun by angry mobs. Unlike Amy Coney Barrett, she did not face a barrage of media attacks on her faith and her family. Unlike Samuel Alito, she was not slimed by tenuous association with racist or sexist groups, even though Jackson herself currently sits on the board of overseers of a college that is being sued for its open and notorious practice of anti-Asian race discrimination in admissions.

Indeed, Democratic paeans to the historic nature of her nomination to be the first African-American woman on the Court ring hollow due to their prior mistreatment of appellate nominees such as Miguel Estrada and Janice Rogers Brown, both of whom were targeted because Joe Biden, Dick Durbin, Chuck Schumer, and other Senate Democrats feared letting a Republican president appoint a “first.”

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-president-should-avoid-public-speaking-11648247289?mod=opinion_lead_pos11

Some issues are just too important to be left to an unscripted Joe Biden. This is not CNN and your humble correspondent is not a doctor so this column will not be offering a long-distance diagnosis of the president’s mental health or an assessment of how his cognition compares to that of other world leaders. But these are dangerous times and we would all be much safer if Mr. Biden would make greater use of prepared statements on subjects such as, for example, weapons of mass destruction.

Two months after a bumbling press conference in which Mr. Biden implied that a “minor incursion” by Russia into Ukraine might be tolerable to the U.S. and its allies, the President flew to Europe this week and somehow ended up taking questions from reporters at NATO headquarters in Brussels.

Yes, it’s important for all of us to be able to hear from our elected officials and to assess the content of their remarks as well as the skill and conviction with which they advocate for their policies. But this particular elected official does not appear to be up to the task. While we consider the implications, Mr. Biden should try to say as little as possible in public during an international crisis.

This presents a unique challenge since he happens to be the sitting president of the United States. But there is no constitutional requirement for the president to make off-the-cuff remarks, or to deliver speeches of any kind. If necessary he can email messages to Congress rather than speaking to legislators.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-ginni-thomas-texts-washington-post-jan-6-committee-mark-meadows-clarence-thomas-11648243651?mod=opinion_lead_pos1

What story do you think would deserve to push the biggest war in Europe in nearly 80 years down from the lead news of the day? If you said the private text messages of the wife of a Supreme Court Justice, you are apparently qualified to run a major American newsroom.

That’s the leak-on-a-silver-platter news the Washington Post blared at the top of its homepage on Thursday evening. Someone handed reporter Bob Woodward and protege Robert Costa the content of 29 text messages in 2020 and 2021 between Mark Meadows, then White House chief of staff, and Ginni Thomas, wife of Justice Clarence Thomas.

Mrs. Thomas sent 21 of the messages and Mr. Meadows sent eight. All but one are from November 2020, in the early days after Joe Biden was declared the winner in the presidential election. The House select committee on Jan. 6 obtained the messages from Mr. Meadows as part of its investigation.

While in Europe for an emergency meeting of NATO and a trip to Poland, Joe Biden announces that the U.S. will accept 100,000 Ukrainian refugees. He also promises more U.S. natural gas for our European allies, but will his policies match his rhetoric? Plus, the panel answers a listener’s question about whether the United Nations has a role to play in ending Russia’s invasion.

The Post hypes the messages as showing “how Ginni Thomas used her access to Trump’s inner circle to promote and seek to guide the president’s strategy to overturn the election results.” Sounds nefarious, until you understand that the back and forth added up to nothing meaningful.