Sunday, February 24, 2019

Time to get over the fear of being called "racist" -- here's why

"... human beings are to a greater or lesser degree racist, a trait that evolution has hardwired into the genes of our species for good reason — survival of the homogenous group to which each belongs and the retention of its resources and achievements..."

"...it has little to do with the melanin content of the either tribe’s skin, although that can often be an indicator of historic intent and practice… The propagation of the concept that racism is solely the product of different skin colours is a very red herring indeed."

"... at last we Whites appear to be looking to our disparate tribal origins and beginning to understand that to unilaterally forgo the survival benefits of racism is but a subtle form of suicide, and once we are no longer prepared to accept this fate we will have surmounted the deleterious effects of the decades-long campaign designed to neutralize our will to survive. Those who seek to destroy us know that first they must undermine our ancient social cohesion with lashings of historic guilt… and they have almost succeeded." (Emphasis added.)

From: Race Wars or Situation Normal? — That is the Question
by Seneca III at Gates of Vienna

https://gatesofvienna.net/2019/02/race-wars-or-situation-normal-that-is-the-question/

Tuesday, February 5, 2019

Late Term Baby-part Hustling

     The purpose of late term abortion is more lucrative baby-part harvesting. More politicians want their state to cash in.
      What state will have the "distinction" of becoming the first to legalize post-birth abortion for baby-part harvesting?
     And there are dopes who are still talking about "a woman's right to choose...."

      This country is evil. Hideous. Grotesque.

Sunday, February 3, 2019

Me and Michael Jackson ... and Vitiligo

This post on the Other Forum has inspired this long, boring, meander through my life experience: "So he didn't pose in the yearbook photo, but admits to donning blackface to imitate Michael Jackson. (Ironic, since Jackson had his skin surgically whitened) Wearing blackface is either wrong or it isn't."

Michael Jackson had vitiligo. He said so in interviews and it was confirmed at his autopsy.  As far as I know, there is no surgical procedure for whitening skin.

I have had vitiligo since early adolescence, and I used to research it for developments in curing or minimizing it. I read that melanocytes, the skin cells that produce melanin, each make enough for themselves and 36 other cells that do not produce melanin. So when one melanocyte's melanin producting ability is stopped, 37 skin cells lose their pigment.

The cause of vitiligo is unknown but it is hereditary (my maternal grandfather also had it). It is thought to be an auto-immune disorder where the body's immune system considers melanocytes to be foreign bodies and attacks them (whether it destroys them, or just their ability to produce melanin, I don't know.)

I was one of those little "brown as a berry" girls -- dark skinned, dark haired, dark eyed -- who would get even darker playing in the summer sun. Then, when I was twelve or so, after summer camp, we noticed a small white patch with irregular edges under my chin. Then my inner wrists and outer elbows developed white patches, followed by knees and ankles. They distressed me, but they really distressed my mother.

Sunless tanning products were just coming on the market, and my mom bought some Coppertone "Quick Tan" and applied it to my white patches with a Q-tip. Next morning my white patches were a deep, dark rust color, with the Q-tip tracks showing. (It did not wash off ... it took days to wear off.) So much for that remedy.

The doc gave me some pills called psoralens. One pill followed by four hours exposure to the sun -- daily. It was hard, almost torment.* Hot, sweaty, blinding white sun...  This was in east central Alabama. I had only my new little periwinkle, black and silver transistor radio for a companion (nobody else was fool enough to stay outside for more than a few minutes.) After many, many days, the follicles in the white patches developed a brown freckle. As summer progressed, the freckles would enlarge and run together.

I kept this insane routine up for two or three summers. Several of my white patches almost completely filled with that routine. But in the fall, when school started and the daily four hours in the sun ended, the freckles disappeared and the white patches reappeared ... and grew. Forget this!

I eventually quit trying to get rid of them and settled for covering them. In high school, I minimized the ones on my face with makeup -- Panstick was my friend. Creamy Ivory in winter, Creamy Beige in summer. As the years passed, I grew more white than brown (Creamy Ivory all the time), and by the time I reached my forties, I had few pigmented areas left. We had moved to Florida by then, and I wore long pants and long sleeves when I went anywhere. I can tell you, even with light-weight, open-weave fabrics, summer is hot in Florida.

Vitiligo is not like albinism, although each condition increases risk of skin cancer from sunlight. Albinism results in no color at all, in irises and hair, not just skin. My hair remained very dark blackish brown until the age-related gray strands started coming in, although my dark brown eyes gradually turned to a dark olive green in my late teens. I don't know if that had anything to do with vitiligo. Irises have their own melanocytes, so in theory, whatever attacks and destroys skin melanocytes could attack the ones in the irises, I guess....

In any case, at one point during this life-saga, I noticed that tattoos were no longer monochrome dark blue. There were colored tattoos, and it occurred to me to wonder if I could get myself tattooed head to toe with flesh-colored ink, ha. It seemed unlikely, and the cost would probably be prohibitive, and since I'd heard that the procedure was painful, this idea never got beyond the "wondering" stage.

I did try a few other remedies -- the most successful was to "paint" a very thin coat of NoAd sunless tanning gel on the white patches, blot them with a tissues to even out the gel (no more rust-colored Q-Tip patches for me!), let it dry and then "paint" my entire arms, legs, face/neck, etc, with the NoAd. I used a big, wide brush like you use to paint walls. It evened out the applied gel better than anything, and kept it off my palms. The NoAd also resulted in light brown coloring, not orange like some sunless tanning products. Problem was, I had to do this every third day or so and  had to exfoliate my skin like crazy... and it was pretty time consuming. I would have continued it, though -- except NoAd quit making their sunless tanning gel...

Apparently Michael Jackson's remedy was to lighten the remaining dark skin he had using products made to lighten age spots. I had never thought of that but then, I didn't want to be paler, anyway. I wanted my "brown as a berry" skin back. But, alas, it was not to be. I am now truly "lily white." What slight coloring I have comes from blood in the capillaries in my skin. I still wear long pants and long sleeves outside, as I don't know if any sun-block products offer the same level of protection. I have never worried about getting skin cancer because of this routine.

In any case, I am always amused when I see these theories about Michael Jackson's skin. I am no fan of the late celebrity -- pedophilia utterly destroys any positive feelings I might have about anybody -- but I found the "surgically whitened" comment guffaw-worthy.

========
* It was nothing compared to the horrific medical conditions some kids, and adults, experience. I have no cause for complaining about it and I have never often done it.

Now they're discussing Northam on the OF

I'm still kicked off the Other Forum, despite my repeated petitions to the owner and/or moderator, stating my case that the people still allowed on the forum post things far worse than anything I ever posted.  That means I can't respond when I see things (I can still read, if not post, on the forum) that really, really need a reply. I can't even respond to posts about me. Yes, they're still commenting about me. I guess I'm something of a legend over there now.)

Those people lie. They lied a lot about my posts, but they just lie routinely about most anything -- especially Trump. I've been enjoying the thread, now up to two pages of it, about Ralph "Coonman" Northam, he of the Virginia governor's office, post-birth abortion proponent and current blackface/KKK hood brouhaha.

One guy says he believes Northam's apology...I wonder what he thinks now that Northam has changed his story and says it wasn't him in the photo.

Another poster mentioned Northam's "appalling comments on abortion," which generated this response, "..his appalling comments about abortion...You mean the comments like old men should not govern how women manage their bodies? Or any woman who wants an abortion should have one? Those apalling comments?"

Ah, no, GL...the one where he said the baby would be delivered at term and made "comfortable" while the "mother" and her "doctor" discussed the situation -- presumably to decide whether the comfortable, living baby would be allowed to continue living or to be murdered. Or maybe they'd be deciding on prices for the baby's body parts?

When are these nutzoids going to realize that abortion is NOT about a woman's body? Her body is not shredded, her head not crushed, in an abortion -- it is the baby's body that is shredded....  The baby is INSIDE her body but it is NOT her body. I guess some of the wombless cannot understand that.

SVA, who has a track record of posting untruths and bizarre comments, adds, "However, the GOP is screaming for his resignation as are many democrats. Where was the screams from the Republicans when they helped confirm Kavenaugh. They seem to have had no problem with his behavior and it continued into his college years. Said BEFORE you start defending him because he was in high school SB."

Well, (1) Kavanaugh was falsely accused by a cabal of leftist idologues so Republicans didn't believe them, (2) his yearbook showed nothing to confirm the sexual misconduct he was accused of, (3) college kids drinking (or adults drinking) was not, and is not, a political issue (see Nancy Pelosi's in-flight hard liquor  "adult beverage" bills before you say another syllable about Brett Kavanaugh's beers) and (4) Republicans don't hold themselves up to be examples of sobriety the way Democrats claim to be saintly examples of anti-racism, which they obviously are not. Does that explain it, SVA?

RJ adds, "Democrats are very quick to condemn their own," and gives one example, ONE EXAMPLE, of Al Franken being thrown under the bus for one photo. He completely forgets Bill Clinton's vile behavior IN OFFICE that Democrats winked at, and the leftist, Democrat-supporting sex harassers in Hollywood and the news media.

A couple of comments come close to the crux of the matter (but then veer off): "The Dems have claimed the moral high ground, so must defend it; the Rips embrace the low ground, and advance anarchy..." and "Repugs don’t actually believe this is a serious problem- tRump is exhibit A- but know how sensitive Dems are, and so use this as a cudgel. Totally amoral- any weapon in a brawl. Dems still seem to think it’s a gentlemans game."

What these come close to, but end up completely missing, is that the Democrats are TOTAL HYPOCRITES because they claim the "moral high ground" and have falsely accused people of racism for literally GENERATIONS when they are as guilty as sin of the same sins. They've just always been protected from disclosure by the press. The Internet is changing that. No wonder they want to regulate it.... Republicans don't "embrace the low ground." Nobody champions what Trump said. Try to find where they have, fellas.

The forum's Great Wise One responds to this, "Just because he was promoting 9th month and at birth abortions . . ." with this: "This is a blatant falsehood. You are either deceived or deliberately lying." You're wrong GWO -- he defended and promoted post-birth abortion as something a woman and her doctor should DISCUSS after the baby is born.

SB remarks, "Imagine the furor if instead of blackface or a Klan sheet he'd been photographed wearing a red cap. Or a smirk." Indeed. SB is one of maybe four of five conservatives I found in the forum. What Northam is experiencing, he brought on himself. The MAGA hat kids were innocent and the press crucified them for no reason except for the media's deep, visceral hatred of Trump.

SVA falls back on his oft-repeated fantasy that Kavanaugh is an alcoholic, despite the fact that he doesn't exhibit any of the symptoms or tale-tell signs of alcoholism. This is a huge fantasy of the left.

One member I never encountered when I was a member posted this, "So he didn't pose in the yearbook photo, but admits to donning blackface to imitate Michael Jackson. ( Ironic, since Jackson had his skin surgically whitened) Wearing blackface is either wrong or it isn't."

Agree. He admitted to appearing in black face, period. But this person's comment, "Ironic, since Jackson had his skin surgically whitened," is not true. (More on this in my next post.)

A Virginian who hates the Flaggers posts, "My other half is Roman Catholic and has been giddy over this affair. He is a single issue voter and Northam's abortion position has pushed K-- over the top. I suggested he may need to go to confession this afternoon due to his schadenfreude."

But not due to his defiance of Scripture's prohibition of the sin of homosexuality... (shaking my head).

Someone mentioned wearing his MAGA hat proudly, with a smirk, and SVA -- again -- posts, "Firstly, I'm surprised that you can find one small enough to fit on your head.  Secondly, you realize those hats are made in China. How does it represent making America Great if Trump has a Chinese Factory making them and not an American Company? Ever think about that? I doubt it granted."

This insult to a fellow forum member is a far worse transgression that mine, and it breaks a clearly stated rule of the forum. Second, this fellow just lies like so many of them do -- over and over and over. Trump hats you buy at Walmart are probably made in China, but Trump hats you order from Trump's official website are made in America. Even the left-protecting "fact checker" website, Snopes, acknowledges Trump's official hats are made in the USA.

Flagrant lies about Trump are par for the course at the OF.

CK sez, "Weird how republicans are shocked by racism only when it serves their purposes."  It's not the racism, CK, it's the leftist, Democrat hypocrisy.

That condition -- rank, flagrant hypocrisy -- is the defining characteristic of the left.

Thursday, January 31, 2019

Hard Hearts at the Other Forum

Governor Northam in Virginia and a couple of cold-hearted legislators came up with an abortion bill that makes post-birth abortion legal. It allows for abortion when the "mother" is in labor, and if the baby is born alive, it will be made "comfortable" while the mother and the doctor decide whether they will let it live, or will kill it. Thank goodness, the bill has failed. But you know they will try again, until they get what they want. That's how the left works.

The fellows at the Other Forum have had a discussion about the New York bill, which they seem fine with, since late-term abortions are rare, they say, and are usually only performed to save the life or health of the mother, or if the baby is not viable. They are missing a huge part of the point.

People scorn "slippery slope" arguments but in this case, we have been sliding down the slope since 1973.  We've gone from "safe, legal and rare" to celebrities "celebrating" their abortions ("It was marvelous!"), to women having multiple abortions, to relying on abortion as birth control, to a mother and her doctor deciding whether her just-born infant will live or die.

What the Other Forum fellows (and many others) are missing is, regardless of how rare, abortions that kill a full term baby will be legally sanctioned. Or maybe they're not missing it, but just don't care that it will become part of our national life, our national soul, if you will, when it is canonized into law. It will create a view that if babies can be killed at the time of birth -- or after, as in Virginia  -- it will be codified into our laws that we don't value the life of infants. Infants being persons, that means we don't value the life of persons. People.

A woman's right to choose does not outweigh a baby's right to life. "Reproductive freedom" for a woman does not outweigh a baby's right to life. Abortion is not a woman deciding what to do with her own body; it is a woman deciding to end the life of another person.

One fellow over there posted, "If you don’t approve of abortion, don’t have one." Utterly disingenuous. How about, if you don't approve of guns, don't buy one. If you don't approve of bank robbery, don't rob a bank. If you don't approve of global warming, don't pollute.

They do not understand that the killing off of future generations has an impact on our whole culture and civilization, which means it is far from being "between a woman and her doctor".

Why do women have abortions in this day and age when birth control is so cheap and easy? "But birth control isn't always reliable," they say. Well it's reliable enough to prevent hundreds of thousands of abortions every year. But not, of course, if it isn't used.

The reason the feminist movement is so adamant in support of abortion is because it lets them be like men. At its core, feminism is hatred of men, but on the surface, for many individuals, it is hatred of men, as well. At least, on some level. And it is jealousy and envy ... it is about getting even with men. For thousands of years, men could screw around and there would be no consequences for them, no responsibilities. If women did that, and they were "punished" with pregnancy and children.

Now, several generations of women have been able to screw around with no consequences, due to birth control, but that still isn't enough. When the pill malfunctions, when they forget to take it, or when they just don't want to go to the trouble, abortion is their ace in the hole. It has the added bonus of mutilating and removing from her body a problem that exists because of something a man deposited there.

One guy at the OF posts, "Bravo New York. Yes, the christian righties have put their spin on it to make it look like a woman can decide up to prior to giving birth to have an abortion without any criteria, and lots of dummies are eating it up on social media."

Lots of hatred for Christians and conservatives over there, although they reserve their deadliest venom for President Trump. In any case, abortion without any criteria is basically what we're talking about because the "health of the mother" criteria is not legally defined. Moreover, a doctor is not always required to perform an abortion.

Another guy sez, "Well, imagine an anencephalic fetus and for whatever reason the woman didn’t find out until 30 wks. You want to force her to carry to term? But like those poor Covington Catholic boys sent to protest Roe V Wade, you won’t ever have to be burdened by the options."

So now we're what-iffing and dreaming up scenarios for hundreds of thousands of abortions, when anencephalic fetuses only occur in 1 in 5,000 pregnancies, most of which end in miscarriages or the babies are born dead. But let's focus on that so we don't have to acknowledge that hundreds of thousands of abortions are performed every year without medical reason.

As for the Covington Catholic boys, they weren't sent to protest Roe v. Wade. They went to support respect for life in the womb. Apparently leftist proaborts can't conceptualize respect for life in the womb.

They fantasize a lot over there -- about people they don't like. One old fellow writes,

"To be fair to the anti-reproductive rights crowd: The consequences of pregnancy must be allowed to happen without human intervention regardless of whether the fetus was the product of rape, the mother will die or be maimed by carrying the pregnancy to term, or whatever comes out will live a short and horrible life of illness, deformity, and/or killing poverty.

These are people of very stern moral character able to stand for truly horrific events.

That's the good ones. Many in the anti-reproductive rights crowd are simply about misogamy and patriarchal power."


First, the "anti-reproductive rights" crowd doesn't give a fig about a man's reproductive rights. It doesn't matter to them if his child is the one getting shredded by the woman incubating it. Second, a number of women who became pregnant by rape carried the babies to term and either gave them up for adoption, or so bonded with them during the pregnancy they kept them to love and raise, so pregnancy by rape isn't an automatic reason to deprive a baby of its life. If the mother's life is truly in danger, aborting the pregnancy might be justified, but again, there is anecdotal evidence by women who lived it that a dangerous pregnancy can be gotten through successfully.

Who defines "short, horrible life"? Many such children have gone on to live happy and successful lives? Shred a baby because of a deformity? Or because of "killing poverty"? What is killing poverty? There is no such thing! Government and private programs abound for helping those in poverty. How insulting that this man, who probably lives a life of plenty and ease, would have a child killed because of poverty!

Dr. Ben Carson, a brilliant man and former neurosurgeon, grew up in a life of poverty. How fortunate for those whose lives he saved that he was not aborted.

But the most telling of all -- and this is probably very widespread in the pro-abortion crowd -- is this guy's fantasy about pro-life people being about misogamy and patriarchal power.  Man, the feminist movement has brainwashed so many people in this country -- men, even, who should be able to think more clearly rather than wallow in emotion.

In any case, because of the Virginia bill (defeated, thank God -- but for how long?) our country has crossed the threshhold into territory where officials with the power of government are introducing infanticide to our land.

People like the fellows at the Other Forum probably freak out at the comparison Christians make between abortion and the sacrifice of children to Moloch in ancient Israel. But they are more alike that different -- the chief similarity being dead offspring that need not have died.

And that slippery slope? Some folks suspect that the next step will be euthanasia for the frail and sick elderly ... or even healthy seniors -- like so many members of the Other Forum. Will they become willing lambs for the slaughter, just to be consistent with their abortion stance? Or will they suddenly become aware of the sanctity of life? 

Tuesday, January 22, 2019

Protesting my unfair and arbitrary removal ...

... from the Other Forum.

It is true. The moderator allows egregious things to be posted by others... namecalling, falsehoods, personal attacks on other members (although that's supposed to be against the rules). One member told another his DNA didn't go any higher than his neck. How is that not a personal attack?

Unfair treatment of conservatives is, of course, ubiquitous on the Internet. But I expected grown men to have more objectivity. It appears, however, that if  you're a leftist, fairness is not your thing, no matter how "grown" you are.

Monday, January 21, 2019

Getting it wrong because of ideology

The overly leftist Other Forum (OF) which summarily kicked me off for saying/doing no worse than its leftist members do every flippin' day, can get pretty pathetic. Not all, but many are so blindly leftist they can't see reality.

For example, one guy posts about Nick Sandmann, the young man showcased in so many Lincoln Memorial videos "... he has the white-power-OK hand signal in his signature. So heart-achingly sad."

Patch up yer old heart, F---. The hand-signal you're talking about is a HOAX. It does not mean White Power. It means what it has always meant -- "OK". The White Power nonsense was thunk up by kids on 4-chan, totally fabricated, to show how biased and gullible the leftist media is, and boy, did it work. The media fell for it, bigtime, and reported it just like it was true. It was so embarrassing for them, they are trying to claim it was "adopted" by white nationalists after it was proven and known to be a hoax, simply because they couldn't stand to admit they'd been had -- especially about something so important to them as white supremacy. Utterly ludicrous and disgusting.

Another fellow has twisted himself into a giant pretzel -- trying to "be fair" to everyone, I guess. And he gets sooo much wrong.

T--, the initial videos weren't edited, except perhaps for length. They were likely cell phone videos uploaded as soon as they were shot.

How do you know that their history led the blacks to the Mall to protest? It appears to not be that at all. They are Black Hebrew Israelites. Their doctrine says African Americans are God's true chosen people because they, not the people known to the world today as Jews, are the real descendants of the Hebrews of the Bible. Most are harmless, but there is a growing extremist element within the group who are antisemitic. Presumably the ones at the Mall were from the extremist element. However, I have found nothing online that would indicate they are Trump haters and would thus be offended by a MAGA hat -- but who knows? I mean, they think they're God's Chosen...

At the time of the mis-reported confrontation, the Catholic teens' protest -- the March for Life -- was over. They had been given some time to walk around and sight-see and were to meet at the Lincoln Memorial where the buses would come to take them home.  This is according to Nick Sandmann's statement.

 The First Nations elder did not move between the blacks and the kids to "defuse" things. He said he did it to "intervene" which doesn't necessarily  mean to defuse. There can be all sorts of motives for intervening. Besides, it wasn't his place to intervene. Phillips is an experienced leftist activist. He has been in situations like this before and behaved the same way for the same reason. His description of the event at the Lincoln Memorial has inaccuracies (purposeful ones?) in it. USA Today reported:
Phillips, 64, an elder of the Omaha Nation, was participating in an Indigenous Peoples March that was concluding when he noticed the verbal clash in front of the Lincoln Memorial steps and decided to intervene.

“There was that moment when I realized I've put myself between beast and prey,’’ Phillips told the Detroit Free Press, part of the USA TODAY Network. “These young men were beastly and these old black individuals was their prey, and I stood in between them and so they needed their pounds of flesh and they were looking at me for that.’’

Phillips said he became frightened as the throng of teenagers grew around him, adding that they yelled at him to “Go back to the reservation’’ and broke into chants of “Build that wall.’’ He also questioned why chaperones did not get involved.

Part of his fear, Phillips said, arose from what he perceived as a “mob mentality’’ in the boys.

“It was ugly, what these kids were involved in,’’ he said. “It was racism. It was hatred. It was scary.’’
And he is either outright lying, or he is senile. The boys were "involved" in a show of respect for human life. That is not racism, hatred or frightening. Numerous reports indicate that "Build the wall" is not heard on any of the videos. Did any of them say "Go back to the reservation"? We do know some of the "First Nations" people with him told the Covington boys to "go back to Europe."

Nick Sandmann's statement said the Covington boys asked their chaperone if they could do some of their school's spirit chants, to drown out the ugly talk from the Black Hebrew Israelites, and the chaperone said okay. THAT's what they were chanting -- not "Build the wall."

Phillips' statement to the press is tailored to make the boys look like a "mob" and  himself like a victim, or near victim. What hooey. As I said, he's a professional at this.

But I imagine it's hard for a leftist to give up on such a beloved concept as white Catholic MAGA boys turning into a threatening mob.

These boys were trashed in the media, whose aim apparently was to drum up hatred for them in anyone who read their deceitful reports. Why? Because they are (1) white (2) male (3) prolife (4) Christian (5) MAGA hat-wearers. Any one of those would be enough to cause visceral hatred on the left -- but together, there was no other response possible.

If the BNL claim above is true, Mr. Phillips is simply not credible, and you cannot help but wonder how credible are his other statements? The ones in the press about the incident depicted are pretty wild. I, for one, am extremely skeptical.

Let's Get Something Straight

The Covington/MAGA hat "controversy" is not fake news.

It is Christian persecution.

IT IS ALSO DELIBERATE CHARACTER ASSASSINATION by the leftist media. They don't care that they ran with the story on incomplete information. They don't care that what they said WAS NOT TRUE. They don't care WHO THEY HURT with their lies.

The media saw white, Christian, Catholic, racist, pro-life males in MAGA hats harrassing a poor, innocent Native American elder. THAT made these boys deserving of being ripped to shreds in the media.

The problem is, "racist" and "harrassing a poor, innocent Native American elder" are flat-out lies.

Video has confirmed lies in the press before, and it was ignored. This can't be. It there were too many videos proving the lying media wrong.

Unfortunate that the school and diocese caved so quickly. One can only hope they will publicly apologize when the truth comes out in court.

I hope these boys get big bite$ of the "news" organizations that libeled and lied about them, but even more than that, I hope the court makes these hate-filled leftist propaganda machines tell the truth about their lies, their motives, their methods -- and to apologize to these boys, their families, and to the people of the country, no matter how insincere an apology from baldfaced liars will be.

Sunday, January 20, 2019

"Tolerant" Democrat Congressman attacks free speech


Rep. Yarmuth, you shoulda waited before attacking the free speech rights of American teens. It didn't take long for even CNN to backtrack and tell the WHOLE story. Highlights --
Students from all-male Catholic (read: pro-life) school visit D.C. to participate in the March for Life. Afterwards, they wait for their bus at the Lincoln Memorial. Wearing their MAGA hats.

Black Muslims harass them, flinging homosexual slurs, because their school is all-male.

The students backtalk but make no move to physically start anything. They ask their chaperone if it is okay for them to sing their school song, and permission is granted.
Along comes Native American drum-beating chanter, who marches into the group of students and gets right into the face of one of them, barely missing hitting him with his drum and drum-banger, whatever it's called.

Student confronted by the "elder" stands where he is smiling, says nothing, does nothing.
There are several videos online. You need to see more than one to grasp everything that happened.

The students did NOTHING racist, nothing scary, nothing hateful, nothing poisonous.

See, this it just another leftist politician trying to get some attention and mileage by making something out of nothing.

Thanks, Congressman, for adding -- for no good reason -- to the existing division in the country for your own political benefit.

These kids were called "nasty little white boys" at the other forum. Deep hatred over there; couldn't wait to find out the whole story. Just drum up hatred, because Trump.

I agree with Starnes; "Let’s hope the families sue every news agency that falsely reported the story."

Sort of too bad they can't sue private citizens trying to stir up hatred for their sons on the Internet.

https://www.toddstarnes.com/politics/dem-congressman-wants-to-ban-teens-from-wearing-maga-hats/?fbclid=IwAR01ljPBnEKw6vu5EvDcS17TbYx0wuD1muOEXP7MQjV_lCmxJs7vpDsR2go