The Democratic Party’s obsession with skin color has plagued the republic for nearly two centuries. Democrats spearheaded Indian removal, promoted slavery and then defended racial segregation deep into the 20th century.
Today, that obsession takes a different form, but it remains as toxic as ever.
A bit of old news making the rounds on social media reminds us that many who associate with the Democratic Party still view the world through the lens of race. And that view often disturbs us.
On the social media platform X, formerly Twitter, an image of paintings by artist Kehinde Wiley has garnered 1.2 million views.
The left side of the image features a portrait of former President Barack Obama. The right side of the image shows two portraits of black women holding the severed heads of white women.
End Wokeness, an X account with 1.5 million followers, posted the images Wednesday.
“Obama’s official portrait was painted by Kehinde Wiley, a black artist who loves depicting whites being decapitated. What would happen if the races were reversed and it was Trump?” the accompanying post read.
Obama’s official portrait was painted by Kehinde Wiley, a black artist who loves depicting whites being decapitated
Wiley’s history of controversial paintings does not qualify as news. A story on the artist’s “past works featuring scandalous subjects” appeared in the U.K.’s Daily Mail in 2018.
Talking about the works in an interview with New York magazine in 2012, Wiley said, “It’s sort of a play on the ‘kill whitey’ thing.”
Meanwhile, the Obama portrait hangs in the Smithsonian’s National Portrait Gallery.Still, the side-by-side images of Obama and the two decapitations generated fresh outrage this week.
On the question of what might happen if the portrait depicted former President Donald Trump and the races were reversed in the decapitation paintings, one person offered a guess.
“There would be an outrage and the portrait the artist painted would be removed immediately & there would be endless media reports & editorials about it,” the X user tweeted.
There would be an outrage and the portrait the artist painted would be removed immediately & there would be endless media reports & editorials about it.
As a general principle, one does not begrudge Wiley or any artist an appropriate degree of license. His decapitations would provoke little outrage, for instance, if they represented a historical event or something equally authentic.
The artist, however, did not intend this kind of representation. Nor did Obama understand Wiley’s work in that context.
The former president, of course, bears no direct responsibility for Wiley’s past paintings. Neither, however, can he feign ignorance of those paintings. In fact, at the unveiling of his portrait, Obama praised Wiley’s body of artistic work.
“What I was always struck by whenever I saw [Wiley’s] portraits was the degree to which they challenged our conventional views of power and privilege and the way that he would take extraordinary care and precision and vision in recognizing the beauty and the grace and the dignity of people who are so often invisible in our lives and put them on a grand stage, on a grand scale, and force us to look and see them in ways that so often they were not,” Obama said, according to the National Portrait Gallery’s website.
If this does not amount to a direct endorsement of Wiley’s violent depictions, it nonetheless proves Obama’s familiarity with the artist’s style and message.
Furthermore, readers will recognize the race-mongering phrases in Obama’s statement. The former president cited “conventional views of power and privilege” and “people who are so often invisible.”
Here he reflected modern Democratic thought, where things such as privilege and visibility depend on skin color.For nearly two centuries, Democrats have pursued power by sorting Americans into categories based on complexion. They do not appear poised to stop anytime soon. source
The words I might place here would not please my Lord Jesus, so I will leave it at this.
Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge in the field of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods. ~ Albert Einstein, 1953 My eyes widened when I saw a recent headline, There’s far more scientific fraud than anyone wants to admit. The topic was not unknown to me nor did I doubt the premise; my surprise was due to its appearance in The Guardian, the self-congratulatory flagship of vaccine promotion and bearer of the shield against those who dare to question the deities of science.
Over the course of three years, Guardian editors enthusiastically attacked anyone who doubted the pharmaceutical industry’s insistence that we should just trust them.
This is the very same Guardian newspaper that disseminated false claims about the so-called disinformation dozen, in an attempt to shut down those who raised concerns about how medical science decided to battle a flu virus. The research organization that generated this report is now being sued specifically because of its use of questionable data to make sweeping claims; a challenge Guardian editors must staunchly defend against to protect their own behavior and interests.
The destructive compromises made by news media during the COVID fiasco are well-documented for those who care to look beyond the propaganda. Yet this recent piece on questionable research practices has been published by The Guardian without any reference to their own twisted pharmaceutical pabulum produced over the last three years. How could they read this essay without an iota of self-introspection?
The dramatic title of the piece destroys the foundation of every single Guardianeditorial proclamation during the pandemic. Those who submitted opinion pieces to The Guardian suggesting that the pharmaceutical industry may not be worthy of blind trust were ignored, while new experimental mRNA vaccines continue to be applaudedwith gushing admiration.
As a bellwether of mainstream news media, in its high and mighty fashion, The Guardian continuously repeated the misinformation that COVID vaccines were effective in stopping infection, applauded government mandates, and belittled other treatment methodologies. This was done in lockstep with the dogmatic scientific pronouncements from the very same fraudulently inclined sources described so eloquently in the article they just published.
Guardian editors continue to push repeated vaccination, even though, along with the rest of the press, they had to eat their own words with an admission that vaccines may not prevent infection and transmission. And like their brethren in this charade, Guardianwriters slipped easily into using the standard rhetoric, claiming: they are still protecting most people from severe illness.
It takes more than a blind eye to allow an acute pattern of misleading publishing. This most recent opinion piece on scientific fraud is an indication of chronic self-deception. Consider these words within the article about the motivation and consequences of scientists who lie:
These researchers are required – sometimes in stark terms – to publish papers in order to earn and keep jobs or to be promoted. The governments of some countries have even offered cash bonuses for publishing in certain journals. Any surprise, then, that some scientists cheat?
And these are not merely academic matters. Particularly when it comes to medical research, fakery hurts real people.
Fakery and the damage done are at the heart of the matter; particularly the injury to real people who trust The Guardian. Readers incorrectly assume that medical news coverage and editorial pronouncements have been thoroughly and skeptically checked independently — when we now can read in The Guardian — that some scientists cheat.
And these are not merely academic matters. Particularly when it comes to medical research, fakery hurts real people.
Why does a news source so willingly repeat the fakery? It is essentially due to the same highly infectious disease that has compromised medical and scientific research.
The financial stability and salaries of all Guardian employees are dependent on donations from some of the most well-endowed foundations and individuals in the world, directly connected to the pharmaceutical industry.
Well before the pandemic, the Guardian had set up a non-profit structure to support its journalism. Although haughty claims of self-criticism and independence from financers are made, these words pale in the shadow of editorial policy during the pandemic.
There is no hiding that the Gates Foundation gave The Guardian a major donation to cover health coverage from 2020 through 2022. The Guardian doesn’t see this as a conflict of interest, although they must notice that the Gates Foundation reminds those paying attention, of their generosity on its website, implying the consequences of failure to follow the prescribed narrative:
The Guardian – Global Development
Purpose – Global Policy and Advocacy
Date –SEPTEMBER 2020
Committed amount — $3,499,032
Grant topic — Global Health and Development Public Awareness and Analysis
Duration (months) — 36
Yes, this is nearly three and a half million dollars given to The Guardian during the same 36 months of news coverage that spanned the pandemic.
This benevolent gift is directly tied to a covert but firm, arm-twist of a news-gathering organization. And in the same time frame, the Gates Foundation was supporting Big Pharma’s development of mRNA COVID vaccines to the tune of two billion dollars.
This game, where The Guardian was a mere pawn, was engineered by a consortium of the world’s richest individuals and corporations. These nefarious sources of funds and power are private entities that want to ensure their billions keep growing. At the same time supplying the financial needs of news sources like The Guardian, they strong-arm governments to sway policy and opinion in their favor.
The Guardian’s editorial hypocrisy and conflicting interests are not new to journalism, although the degree is unprecedented.
Private capital tends to become concentrated in few hands, resulting in an oligarchy of private capital the enormous power of which cannot be effectively checked even by a democratically organized political society.
Moreover, under existing conditions, private capitalists inevitably control, directly or indirectly, the main sources of information including the press, radio, and education.
It is thus extremely difficult, and indeed in most cases quite impossible, for the individual citizen to come to objective conclusions and to make intelligent use of his political rights.
~ Albert Einstein, 1949
What we can do is recognize and reveal the compromised and manipulative sources of news that continue to commit fraud at a level that no one wants to admit.
“For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows”
“HE WHO CONTROLS THE WEATHER WILL CONTROL THE WORLD” ~LYNDON B. JOHNSON
Brethren, we know that GOD IS IN CONTROL. But do not forget that HE has a ‘perfect’ will and a ‘permissive’ will.” HE is Omnipotent – HE can do anything HE chooses to do.
There are times when HIS permissive will allows events to happen to further fulfill Bible Prophecy.
I believe that HAARP and WEAPONIZED WEATHER CONTROL falls under HIS permissive will.
An aerial view of a wildfire in Kihei, Maui County, Hawaii, on Aug. 8, 2023 in this screen grab obtained from a social media video. (Clint Hansen of Maui Real Estate Radio/TMX via Reuters)
At least 36 people have been confirmed dead in wildfires on Hawaii’s Maui Island, officials confirmed Thursday.
“As the firefighting efforts continue, 36 total fatalities have been discovered today amid the active Lahaina fire,” said a brief official update. The wildfires were fanned by strong winds from Hurricane Dora passing far south of the state and made worse by dry conditions.
The wildfires took the island residents by surprise with the disaster leaving behind building rubble and burnt cars on what were busy streets.
Let’s be in prayer for these people. Father, please help them!Send Your holy angels!
