No matter how crazy you think Leftists are...

 

"Why is there a push to ‘cancel’ one of the wealthiest Bay Area cities?"

The piece below (after needed background) is from the San Francisco Chronicle, Aug 10, 2026

Some things about the future are easy to predict: You find out who's running any entity--a city, state, company, country, "association"--and if they're liberal Democrats you can be absolutely certain the liberal shitheads will penalize whites for the sole purpose of giving free shit to minorities. "Cuz dat only FAIR, citizen!!"

Oh, y'say you think that's hyperbole?  Not possible in the U.S.?  Ahh, I see you just arrived on this planet.  Enjoy your stay.

Some background on the story below: It's from the left-liberal (pro-socialist) San Francisco Chronicle.  The leftist propagandist is writing about a tiny city across the bay--a tiny, beautiful, 1.7 square mile enclave named Piedmont, totally surrounded by the city of Oakland.
 
San Fran and Oakland have always been rivals.  Then slowly, Oakland turned into a crime-ridden shithole.  I won't bore you by explaining how that happened, cuz you already know.

After the 1906 earthquake that destroyed much of San Francisco, some of that city’s wealthiest families flocked to an unincorporated portion of the wooded foothills overlooking Oakland.  Months later, as Oakland tried to force their tiny community to become part of faaabulous Oakland, citizens voted to incorporate their own city.  By doing that, Piedmonters preserved their large lots and ensured control over their town's decisions about parks, schools, police and so on. 

So why would the Chron be concerned about this tiny city inside its cross-bay rival, eh?

Because the Chron is run by leftists.  The Chron piece is absolutely dripping with leftist/lib propaganda--all of which has one goal: if you're white, the Left demands that you not be allowed to have a tiny town with better housing, better parks, better city services than the mega-shithole that surrounds you--even though you pay for those things.

Instead you must be forced to build "low-income housing" inside your tiny, 1.7-square-mile jewel.  You're forced to do that by a state law, rammed through by the Democrat-ruled legislature.  What could possibly go wrong, eh?

Over a century after this wealthy suburban enclave rejected being "annexed" by Oakland, Piedmont remains one of the Bay Area’s most controversial cities.  To its 11,000 residents, their 1.7-square-mile swath of oak trees, ivy-covered mansions *and top-ranked schools* represents the zenith of the American dream. 

But to its critics, Piedmont is a prime symbol of the economic and racial divides that continue to plague the Bay Area. 

“It really is ridiculous that a place like Piedmont even exists,” says [leftist "transit planner," Oakland resident and protagonist for this propaganda piece] John Rosemoore, who has a punk-rock aesthetic. “What’s going on there says a lot about our society as a whole.”

Yes, and the Left hates everything about the place--because it represents freedom, which communists absolutely hate.

It’s not just that Piedmont’s median home price is more than 3½ times that of Oakland’s.  Despite being completely surrounded by one of the nation’s most diverse major cities, Piedmont is roughly 70% white and just 1% Black—a striking figure compared to Oakland, where 20% of residents are Black.

You may have noticed that the Chron doesn't capitalize "white," but does capitalize "black."  No kneeling, fawning, slobbering suck-ups at the Chron, eh?

The boundary between Piedmont and Oakland means one household might have access to a better-performing school district and police department than the home right beside it.

Yep, and that's intentional: it's not a plot, or "oppression," just the difference between a well-run, honest city government, chosen by residents who have high standards, versus Oakland.
  So now Chron propagandist inserts a pithy quote by the assistant director of UC Berkeley’s "Othering and Belonging Institute," and with a name like that you already know it's run by leftists: 

“Back in the day segregation was having white and Black neighborhoods in the same city, but now most segregation is felt between cities, rather than within them.”

In case you didn't get that, read it again: it's the thrust of the article:  'It beez a crime dat whites wanna run dere own cities, wif' good skoolz and cops an' parks an' stuff!  Yew only gots dat 1.7 square miles cuz yew stole it!  We not shure how, but gotta be true!  Or yew exploited us!  However yew did it, it not right, so we gon' use state law to force yew to build "low-income housing" so we kin have duh benefits of yo' skoolz an' parks an' shee-it.'

Enter “Cancel Piedmont.”  Transit planner Rosemoore has been handing out stickers and selling T-shirts with that slogan.  The professional transit planner now sees the campaign as a vehicle for challenging the Bay Area’s intertwined systems of race, wealth, housing and local governance.

That's some world-class wordsmithing there: the screech from Leftists like the Chron propagandist and Rosemoore is that "We will not ALLOW you to somehow have better schools, better cops, lower crime and bigger lots.  We demand that you build "low-income housing" so you'll become as magnificently DIE-verse as Oakland!
  The article then describes an admittedly awful incident from a hundred years ago:

By the mid-1920s, Piedmont touted the most millionaires per square mile of any U.S. city. [cuz it was only 1.7 square miles, eh?]  One of them was Sidney Dearing, who’d made a fortune running a popular jazz club in Oakland. Since he was Black Seminole, at a time when Black people weren’t allowed to buy homes in Piedmont, he gave his white mother-in-law $10,000 to purchase a four-bedroom house.

Some residents were outraged, and there were many aggressions against the Dearings.  The city eventually bought the property by claiming it needed it to build a road--which was never built.  Outrageous?  Clearly.  Problem is, liberal white guilt wants to turn Piedmont into Oakland to atone for the century-old outrage.  Sound familiar?  The "reparations movement" is well underway in California.

By the time the leftist transit planner began his "Cancel Piedmont" movement in June 2025, Piedmont was well into confronting complex questions: how to build more housing, reckon with its history of racial exclusion, diversify its schools and respond to growing scrutiny over whether a city so different from Oakland should remain that way.

 "So different from Oakland," eh?  Different HOW?  Ooohh, can't say!  And there ya have it:  If you live in a jewel and have a lick of sense you do NOT wanna "build more housing" or "diversify your schools."  Living in Piedmont beats the hell out of living in Oakland, and everyone knows it.  Which (and here comes the entire point) is the entire reason the Left wants to see Piedmont brought down to Oakland's level.
  Is dat clear enough for ya?

If not, consider this:  Back when the Berlin wall divided communist East Berlin from free West Berlin, why did thousands of residents of the East risk their lives to get to West Berlin--with hundreds shot to death on the barbed wire--and yet NO ONE ever went the other way, eh?
   Same climate, same natural resources, and yet all the daring escapes only went in one direction.

Or consider North Korea vs. South Korea:  Same deal: identical climate and resources, yet hundreds of residents of the North fled to South Korea, with scores shot to death as they tried to cross the DMZ--and yet not one person tried to go the other direction!

Why do ya think that was, eh?

I don't need to tell ya, cuz you already know.  Sadly, your kids don't know.  The communist-ruled public skoolz nevah told 'em, cuz "Dat not important, comrade.  Prolly FAKE NEWZ by duh capitalists!"

See, when two competing ideologies are operating right next to each other--as in Berlin, Korea or Piedmont/Oakland, the difference in the results becomes to obvious to ignore.  So leftists wanna make people ignore the better competing system, whether by putting up a wall or merely barbed wire and shooting anyone who tries to go to the better side.  Or in the case of Piedmont, forcing that tiny enclave to bulldoze parks to build low-income housing.

So back to Piedmont.  Leftists: "We don' wanna do hurt doze wipipo in Piedmont!  We jus wanna force 'em to build low-income housing!  An' to "diversify" their skoolz and police force.  Cuz die-versity iz ouah strength, citizen!  Dat beez obvious to ebrywun!"

Wait...if "die-versity" is so fucking great, why is die-verse Oakland--in exactly the same location as Piedmont, with the same great climate, views and access to...everything...such a crime-infested shithole compared to Piedmont, eh?
   When you have an answer for that, let me know.  Take all the time you like.

 But the more Piedmont has tried to atone for its divisive past through diversity initiatives and public apologies, the louder some of its detractors have become.

Wow, what a shock!  Give socialists/leftists an inch...

The city’s diversity efforts have included hiring a consulting firm to help it address implicit bias and organizing community discussions to promote racial equity, which critics  claim are little more than performative gestures. 

The state of California says only 200 of Piedmont’s 3,947 housing units are in multifamily buildings like duplexes or apartment complexes.

Heaven forbid!  So we--your betters--will force you to fix that!

Complicating matters [nice wording], the vast majority of the city’s zoning is for single-family homes, and there isn’t much room for more construction.

Why is this a problem?  If you don't have room for more, why on Earth would you try to build more, eh?  You've got a jewel there--but if you do as the Left demands, you get Oakland.  "But dat jus' FAIR, comrade!"

Faced with these constraints, the city has long struggled to translate its stated support for affordable housing into completed projects that enable more teachers, firefighters and other middle-income workers to call it home.

Again the communist goal is revealed: 'Effrywun shall liff in identical 1,200 square foot apartments!  If dat requires building apartments where there are now parks and tennis courts, tough shit.'  To communists "equity" is far more important.
    Of course dat don't apply to duh rulers, like duh faaabulous Gavin Newsom, cuz dey deserve 7,000 square foot mansions in gated communities!  But yew are ordered not to object to dat, cuz...Gavin iz special.

Even modest housing proposals [i.e. building low-income apartments on what are now parks--this is considered a "modest proposal"] can spark public debates about altering a cherished neighborhood character defined by large lot sizes, abundant greenery and quiet street-scapes. 

Caption in the Chron: "The city remains controversial because of its high-priced homes and lack of diversity."

The city’s latest housing project proposes turning a stretch of open space, sports fields and public facilities into at least 132 homes, including 60 units of low-income housing.

Victory for liberal Democrats.  They force the city to allow the sharp end of the wedge in.  But hey, what could possibly go wrong, eh?

Professional transit planner Rosemoore has nothing personally against Piedmonters.  For him, Piedmont’s ugly racial history >>The city’s most consequential housing project proposes to turn a city-owned stretch of open space, sports fields and public facilities into at least 132 homes, including 60 units of low-income housing.

As decades passed, Piedmont’s exclusionary housing practices became far less blatant. But local real estate agents’ penchant for “off-market” deals with friends and acquaintances still made it difficult for Black and working-class families to gain entry.

You need to be a realtor to decipher that line: that means not listing a property, but facilitating a sale between friendly realtors.  The left wants this to be illegal.

Now every year Piedmont High School holds an assembly to educate students about the horror the Dearings endured. The city even commissioned an Oakland artist to design a memorial near the Dearings’ old home. The project, which could be unveiled by the end of the year, cost around $400,000.

So there ya go, citizen.  We order that every city mus' be "die-verse."  Yew may not like that, but we leftists rule the state and the courts, so we don't care what yew want or think.

Yet another murder you'll never hear about from the Lying Mainstream Media

Another day, another black-on-white murder that you won't ever hear about from the Mainstream Media:

 

White husband and father Fredrick Lytton was working alongside black monster 23-year-old Devin Rice in Nashville.  And with only that much info you already know how this ends, eh?

The two were reportedly arguing about a soda when the older white father turned and walked away.  Moments later the black demon walked up behind the older man and emptied a handgun into the white father's back, killing him. 

It's been a week since this black-on-white murder, and unless you lived within TV range of Nashville, you never heard about it.  Not one national network mentioned it.

Of course local media had to cover it to avoid looking corrupt, and numerous local media published or broadcast the story--but not ONE showed you a pic of the white victim, nor mentioned that race of his murderer.

Leftist Media owners: "Wuh...why would we do dat?  Dat wud jus' make whites angry and suspicious of young black men, eh?  We woud NEVAH wanna do dat, eh?  Cuz dey ain't nuffin' to be alarmed about, deplorable!"  

The white dad walked away from the argument.  So duh black demon feel disrespekted, right?  So he totally wif'in his rights to murder duh white guy from behind, eh?

Now obviously, only a fraction of blacks are like this.  The problem is that that fraction still translates into a huge number of blacks who are pleased when blacks murder whites.  They don't worry about consequences because they expect white judges and DAs to tolerate their murdering whites cuz that's how today's leftist-ruled "justice system" works.  

Leftist judges and DAs go easy on black killers cuz "dey haz been so oppressed," eh?  It's how all leftists think, and how the Dem party works.

Whites aren't "out to get" blacks, we're just totally sick of the endless violence and social pathologies, the endless complaints, the bottomless well of grievances.  The endless excuses for murders, rapes and other violence.  The endless anger. 

Devin Rice's public defender will plea-bargain the ambush murder of the unarmed white father down to "assault."  The demon may be sentenced to a long term but will be out in two years.  "Cuz it wudn't hiz fault, see?  He felt disrespekted!  So yew cain't blame him, right?"  Put Devin Rice's name in Google Alerts and you'll see. 

Some...thought-provoking quotes from the Koran

With the Muslim communist Mamdani ruling NYC and the ghastly Abdul El-Sayed looking like a shoo-in to be the first Muslim U.S. senator, perhaps it's time to look at the commandments in Islam's holy book:

Democrat: "Dat FAKE NEWZ!  None of dat iz in duh Koran, cuz Islam is 'the religion of peace!"

DSA Democrat: "Actually we support all those orders.  Like our leader, the faaabulous, brilliant communist Hasan Piker has said, "We must make the streets run red with the blood of capitalists!"

Democrat: "Um...uh...umm...she doesn't really mean dat.  She jus' venting!  Yeh, dat's it!  After all, who wouldn't be screaming after Trump has been so mean to trannies and women and minorities and 'undocumented Americans,' eh?"

Birds of a feather: both are fakes.

One claims "I'm Doctor Science," the other claims to be a woman. 

 

For young Americans and Democrats: as should be obvious, the creature in purple isn't female, so obviously wouldn't need a gynecologist.  Instead it's a tranny named Richard Levine, hand-picked by bribem to be America's director of health at HHS.

It's an inside joke by the Democrats on conservatives: the director of "health" (including mental health) being a tranny.  Too funny, eh?  

Amusingly, by LAW the director of health is made a four-star admiral in the "U.S. Public Health Service," which was another Democrat joke on conservatives: "Four-star tranny admiral."  Are you laughing yet?  Russia and China had to be shaking their heads with amazement--or laughing their asses off. 

 

Dems used Sesame Street to push duh fake "vaccine"

What do ya know about propaganda, citizen?  Answer: virtually nothing.  So naturally the following piece broadcast by Democrat-fellating CNN--using the adorable, totally trustworthy puppets of the totally leftist-ruled Sesame Street--doesn't make you the least bit uneasy, right?

Couldn't possibly be propaganda, cuz it's so sweet and cute, right?

 

Do ya think the Democrat-fellating leftists at Sesame Street said even ONE cautionary word about getting your kids "vaccinated" (well, jabbed) to save ouah chirren? 

Of course not.  Not a single word about duh jab harming or killing pipo.  Or that it would NOT prevent pipo from getting Covid--though the moronic Biden promised it would?

If this doesn't strike you as propaganda, don't worry: You're reacting just as the creators of this horseshit predicted:  Like most Americans you believe this iz too cute to be propaganda.  

Definition: "We gon' lie to ya to get ya to do whut we want, an' yew gon' believe we iz tellin' you duh Gospel truth!"  

Average American: "I'm way too smart to fall for that!" 

Horseshit parroted by moronic leftists in state govts

This is the kind of horseshit parroted by moronic leftists--in this case the "Oregon Health Authority."  Parroting Fauci's bullshit that it was totally safe for pregnant women to be injected with the "leaky" (i.e. didn't keep you from getting covid) "vaccine."  

 

Oregon has been ruled for decades by left-wing Democrats and lesbians.  They wouldn't know a "confidence interval" or a "codon" or the genetic code of the spike protein if it bit 'em.  But what the could do was parrot anything Fauci bleated--without bothering to do a scintilla of actual research.  "Cuz Fauci is 'Doctor Science,' so everything he utters mus' be true, right?  Cuz why wud he lie?"

"Wait...whut dis?  Y'say we have emails from his subordinates saying duh virus was clearly modified in a lab?  And that literally two DAYS later he emailed 'em back saying he wanted 'em to write a paper saying the exact opposite--that the virus "evolved naturally"?  Wuh...wuh...wuh...dat mus' be a LIE!  SURELY his lackeys nevah wrote such a paper, right?  Right???"

"Wait...y'say they DID, and that Fauci got it published in 3 weeks?  Titled "The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2," published in the journal Nature Medicine on March 17, 2020?Authors Kristian G. Andersen, Andrew Rambaut, W. Ian Lipkin, Edward C. Holmes, and Robert F. Garry?"

(For young Americans or Dems who never paid attention: the first case of the Chyna virus in the U.S. was only confirmed on Jan 29, 2020.  Fauci's lackeys already had the genetic code of the spike protein--as I did--and instantly recognized the four inserted genes that made the harmless bat virus lethal to one-tenth of one percent of humans who got it.  They told Fauci their conclusion the first week in Feb, via email.  We have the email.)  

(Two days later Fauci emailed Kristian Andersen, "asking" him and his colleagues to write a paper saying exactly the opposite--that the virus had "evolved naturally."  We have the email.  And Andersen et al did exactly as directed--because he and his "institute" were dependent on multi-million-dollar grants from Fauci.)

The person congress should subpoena and question under oath is Andersen.   Ask him if he every emailed Fauci that the gene sequence of Covid-19 appeared to have been modified.  If he denies, remind him he's under oath, and show him the email and ask if he sent it. 

Then ask him if Fauci emailed back "about" two days later asking him to write a paper saying the virus "evolved naturally"--i.e. the exact opposite of what Andersen and his colleagues had actually concluded.  If he denies, again remind him he's under oath, and show him the email he wrote.

Now that Fauci is no longer head of NIAID, Andersen won't risk a perjury conviction to save the monster's worthless ass.

Question for the GOP:  Why hasn't this already been done?  Y'all have the emails.  Do your damn jobs!  

Nah, citizen, dat FAKE NEWZ!" 

If these rays can really get this far out of the water, I'm impressed

Is this real, or AI?

 

x 

The WaPo just noticed the massive ($40 TRILLION) national debt

Apparently Hell has frozen over.

I deduced that because today at 7:30 a.m. the leftists who run the Washington Post published a story that finally recognized what I've been warning about for a decade: massive deficit spending, adding to the massive national debt, is about to kill the U.S.

Of course you didn't believe me, cuz I'm just some anonymous blogger.  But when the faaabulous WaPo says there's a problem, Democrats pay attention, eh?  Some quotes from the Post:

The budget of the federal government is the largest of any organization in human history. It’s larger than the entire economy of every foreign country except China.

Yep.

In the past, huge surges in our nation's debt were largely caused by wars or recessions.  So they were temporary.    That’s not how it works anymore. The debt increases due to demographic trends as the bulk of spending goes to programs that serve an aging population.

Yep.  When the Democrats rammed through "Social Security," Medicare, and later Medicaid, the future disaster was set in concrete.  A few math-proficient people warned about it at the time, but the Democrats controlled congress, so they always got whatever they wanted.

One of the problems is that most people don't understand "maff."  Most don't even understand "compound interest."  People who understand both knew the Democrat programs would eventually bankrupt the government, but the Dems refused to listen, cuz promising voters free shit was a sure way to be re-elected for life.

This is how you get members of congress (and presidents) who are 85 years old and have never held a job outside of government in their entire lives.  They're dumb as rocks, but Dem voters love 'em cuz they support giving duh pipo "free shit."

It'll come as a big surprise to most Dem voters to learn that (obviously) nothing is free, eh?  Someone always has to pay.

Democrat politicians: "But not you, citizen!  Because we have absolute power, we'll make duh rich pay for the stuff we're gon' gibs ya!  We can set the income tax rate on high earners as high as we want, an' dey haz t' pay it!  How about...94 percent?  So duh rich will pay for everything!  Just like under faaabulous socialism!"

Democrat voters: "Perfect!  Those fat-cats have too much money!"

Oh, young Americans say dat fake newz?  Dat duh max tax rate wasn't even close to 94%?  Okay, try asking AI "Was there a time when the top federal income-tax rate was 94%?"
   
So the pitch to voters was "We'll offer you a monthly check from age 65, and we'll fund it by taking a tiny bit of  your check, and the rest from taxing The Rich."  And of course 95% of voters--being offered free money each month--agreed that this was a great idea.

And at that point, the future was set in concrete.  Inevitable.

Of course you don't wanna believe that.  "Dat jus' a 'right-wing conspiracy theory!' eh?"

I love it when people who don't understand a lick of maff or finance or compound interest or exponential growth try to tell me how the world works. 

So back to the Post story:

In 1945, 84 percent of federal spending was on WW2, a tsunami of spending that would end once the war ended.  By contrast, in 2025, 73 percent of federal outlays were on mandatory spending or interest payments, which are legally obligated to continue.

Read that last sentence again: first that these payments are "legally obligated to continue."  Half of that is true: interest payments are mandatory.  But the other half is a brilliant piece of Democrat propaganda: congress could reduce SS, medicare and medicaid drastically.  Of course they won't do any of that, cuz...Democrats.  I get it.

So let's look at "interest payments."  If the U.S. were to default on paying interest on the debt, no sane entity would loan any more money to us.  So you might think that would force the gummint to cut spending back to only what it takes in in revenue, eh?

Hahahahahaha!  No way.  The sons of bitches will never cut spending, and instead will simply print all the money they "need," while trying to find a way to blame Trump. 

Democrat voter: "WOW, printing money!  Why didn't we think of that earlier?!"

Answer: cuz printing "fiat money" always causes ruinous inflation--as has happened to every third-world shithole when they've done it.  Dozens of examples.

Democrat: "Dat fake newz!  Dat nevah happened!" 

Really, sparky?  Latest example is Maduro's Venezuela, where inflation reached 10,000 percent a year.  Going out to dinner you had to carry a dufflebag full of currency.  Savings became worthless overnight.

What do ya think that does to a country, eh?

You have no idea, and don't wanna know.  The evidence is out there, quite clear.  You just don't want to know.  And the Lying, Democrat-fellating Mainstream Media refuses to tell ya.

Oh wait...maybe this "breakthrough" article by the Post explains how we can avoid disaster, eh?  Let's see:

The only source of population growth after 2030 will be immigration.  The entitlement programs making up much of the budget were designed under 20th-century demographic assumptions that no longer hold true.

Ahhh, the brain-trusts at the Post assure readers "immigration will save us!"  And because you read it in the Post, you believe it.  But is it true?

Certainly massive immigration adds people to the country.  Question is, how many of the "immigrants" are working in jobs that pay into the Social Security fund?  If you're a self-employed American citizen, the LAW forces you to pay not just the 6.5% SS tax that's taken out of every check corporate employees receive, but ALSO another 6.5% that your employer is forced to ALSO pay.  And since you're the employer...get it?

You have to pay it because the IRS knows who you are, knows every bank account you have.  But if you hire, say, lawn care or a housecleaning crew, paying cash, who pays into SS, eh?  And "migrants" aren't known to the IRS.  All cash, only minimal bank accounts that could be confiscated. 

But these same "migrants" are collecting welfare and medical care, and what used to be called "food stamps" (now "EBT"), free housing.  Where does all that come from, eh?

Government.  Meaning taxpayers.  And since the federal government always spends more than it takes in, it must borrow the difference, every week.  So are "migrants" a net gain to the SS system, or a net loss?  

No one knows.  What we do know is that most Dem-ruled states refuse to open their books to show how much they're paying to "migrants," which should be a clue.  And we're just starting to find the hundreds of billions lost to fraud in both Medicare and Medicaid--much of which is stolen by foreigners.  But we're not likely to ever know the real numbers.  And that's intentional.
  
The Post admits that SS "has run annual deficits since 2010" and "is projected to go insolvent in 2032."  And that

"Medicare’s budget-busting makes Social Security’s look modest by comparison.  It spells fiscal Armageddon. The Medicare hospital insurance trust fund goes insolvent in 2033."

Wait, it gets worse:

"The fiscal *challenges* [note the far less alarming wording] scheduled to arrive in the 2030s are actually based on optimistic assumptions.  The CBO estimates assume no recessions, low and stable inflation and no new government programs."

Ahh.  "Optimistic" is being generous.  The Post piece ends with this:

"Budget hawks have been talking for years about many of these problems, [to no avail].  The federal budget has been able to withstand more than many expected. But the 2030s is when the bill comes due."

I'm writing this on August 10, 2026.  For duh maff-phobic, 2030 is just 3.4 years away.

If that didn't get your attention, read it again.

If we'd started taking corrective action 20 years ago, the catastrophe would be less serious.  But of course, politicians refused--cuz dey luuved giving voters "free stuff," eh?

But now Democrats (including the Post's writers and editors) say we kin be rescued IF we'll just open the borders again, like the Partei's brilliant thinkers Obozo and bribem did, eh?

No, but this bullshit claim will enable the Dems to blame conservatives for the disaster, saying "We tried to fix dis by opening the border, but yew deplorables insisted on not only closing it, but also deporting ouah saviors!"

So it goes, eh?

Source: Washington Post, 10 August 2026

https://archive.ph/LaP2e#selection-2589.0-2589.232


    

White population is dropping as white women decide to have 1 or none

I've posted many times about the fact that white women in modern nations are having so few children that white populations are actually shrinking.

Of course you didn't believe me, since the Mainstream Media never says a word about dat, eh?

Well finally ONE Mainstream source confirms it--but the focus of the story is NOT the U.S. but...Spain.  The first mention of the U.S. is in the 8th paragraph, and most Americans won't read that far in an article seemingly about a small Spanish village.

The website is Politico, which is a Democrat-fellating leftist rag masquerading as neutral.  And to avoid angering the "die-versity is ouah strength" Dem party, and the "We need a female president like Kamala" wing, Politico can't approach this problem from the perspective of "white populations are dropping," but making the focus "the Social Security system."

That's *really* clever.  The problem is that LOTS of white women are deciding not to have kids--or to have just one.  

You may well wonder why that is, eh?  Of course you already know, cuz every TV show and movie has been blasting the message to women and girls for decades: "Having and raising children is hard work, expensive, and compared to the excitement and power of the business world, BORING!  Women should be running companies and countries!  They should be police chiefs, CEOs, generals, all those exciting jobs!" 

"See, if women were police chiefs or the head of Homeland Security we could take care of all doze poor refugee kids from all over duh world!  Now *that* would be exciting!  We give the orders and someone else does the work!"

And once a 15-year-old bites on *that* hook, the prospect of being a Hilliary or Cackles or a governor or senator is SO seductive compared with a boring, useless husband and whiny kids, right?  Kids always need something, whereas in the corporate world rich, sophisticated, well-dressed *powerful* men are always wanting you to join the team to negotiate deals in exciting foreign countries!

Girls see Hilliary Clinton and Cackles and governors like Hochul and Mikie Sherill and Abigail Spanberger and think "I want to boss people around!  Including men!  Cuz dat whut corporate execs DO, right?  That's what I see on TV and the movies, so it must be true.  No changing diapers or washing dishes for THIS stronk, powerful woman!  Nope nope nope!"

Also: the Globull Warmers have convinced young American women that having children is bad for duh climate, cuz children require heating and electricity, and drive cars and take plane trips across the Atlantic to receive fawning awards in Cannes for "saving duh Erf."  So this is yet another reason why American women are having no more than one child, and sometimes none.

So with the "why" established, let's look at the numbers.  I'll be using a number called "TFR"--the total fertility rate.  In the past that's been hard to find, probably because it's an easy concept to understand, and the last thing western pols want is for you to understand this.  [Don't confuse TFR with "fertility rate," which is almost useless: it's the number of births per 1,000 women in a year.  Doesn't tell you anything about whether the number shown is above or below replacement rate, so is much less informative.]

TFR is the *average* number of children a woman has in her lifetime.  It doesn't take a PhD to realze that if each female has 2 children, that would keep the population level (steady).  The actual number needs to be about 2.1, because a small percentage of children die before reaching child-bearing age.  So less than 2.1 and the population of that group steadily drops.

The farther below 2.1, the faster the drop.

In 2024 the average TFR for Europe was 1.34--way below the "replacement rate."  Spain's TFR is just 1.1--the lowest of the large nations.

The CDC reports that in Q3 of 2025 the TFR for the U.S. was 1.594--again, far below replacement.  But that number conceals a far more disturbing truth, because that's the number for *all women in the U.S. regardless of race or citizenship.*

The CDC also claims the TFR for whites is 1.54, for blacks is 1.465, and for Hispanic, 1.893.  But I'm really skeptical, because everywhere I go it seems that black women have lots more kids than whites.  Have you noticed?

https://x.com/BirthGauge/status/2014824763516977591?lang=en

Also, all three TFRs are below replacement, yet the population of the U.S. keeps increasing every year.  How can that be happening?  Of course: millions of "migrants" every year.  

So for the TFR for all women in the U.S. to be 1.626, the rate for whites is *highly likely* to be less than the 1.544 number claimed by the CDC. 

And sure enough, even though there are more white women in the U.S. than non-white, in 2024, for the first time in U.S. history there were more non-white births in the U.S. than white births.

You already have at least an idea of what that means, but what you don't know is how fast it's coming.  So to give you an idea let's use a simplified example: Suppose we assume the vast majority of all births are to women between the ages of 16 and 46.  Now assume we replace that 30-year cohort of women having 2.1 TFR with the same number of women with a TFR of 1.05.  In 30 years it means *half as many births* to this group.

Certainly a simplified example, since white U.S. women are likely at 1.3 instead of 1.05, so over the 30 years needed to completely substitute the new cohort, white births wouldn't be cut in half, but would be down perhaps 40% compared to today.

Liberals and Democrats: "We don't see a problem with that.  Sounds great to us!"
 
Imagine every big city mayor is a Mamdani or a Brandon Johnson or Karen Bass.  Imagine a congress composed of Maxine Waters, Ilhan Omar, AOC.  Imagine every state legislature is majority-minority and majority-Democrat.

It's coming, sooner than you can imagine.  

Top Democrat: 'Requiring proof of citizenship to vote is RAAaaacist!'

 

Senate leaves for a month without passing voter-ID bill

 

Fauci wanted the EUA, and to get that he had to claim no existing treatments worked

Most Americans are sick of hearing about Fauci, since a) "You can't change the past"; and b) "It's clear that as long as the Democrat party insists on protecting him, he'll never be punished for his crimes against humanity, so why waste time trying?" 

I get it.  Really.  And I *really* wanna change that.  I want you to be as furious as his many crimes deserve, so that maybe our useless congress will send this monster to prison. 

SO...you probably think you have an idea about what a ghastly monster, liar, murderer Fauci is.  But you've barely scratched the surface.  It takes a bit of background to understand how carefully plotted the entire covid thing was.

The so-called "vaccine" was approved under a section of U.S. LAW (yeah, I know, law ain't shit to Democrats) called "Emergency Use Authorization" (EUA).  As the name implies, if a new epidemic were to hit, this emergency provision allows developers to cut corners to rush a *possible* treatment to the public--but ONLY if there's no existing treatment for the disease.

Since Fauci got the EUA approved, by LAW that must mean no known, approved treatment was effective against covid.  But was that true?

In 2005 Asia was struggling with a coronavirus closely related to Covid-19, called "SARS-CoV."  It used the same type of spike protein to bind to the same target cells in the human airway ("ACE-2 receptors").  

The NIH has a publication called "Virology Journal," described as "an official publication of the National Institutes of Health.  In August of 2005 that journal published an article titled "Chloroquine is a potent inhibitor of SARS coronavirus infection and spread."  

Chloroquine was field-tested by the U.S. Army around 1943 and has been used for decades.  It's safe when used at recommended dosages, and astonishingly inexpensive.  It was tested "in-vitro" against SARS-CoV at various concentrations, and found to kill the virus's ability to infect the ACE-2 receptor cells.  At micro-molar levels it killed all the virus.  Nice!  

And if that wasn't impressive enough (and this is a really big deal), it was treat not only effective in treating cells after infection, when given before infection it was found to *prevent* infection entirely! 

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1232869/

[If you click on the link to read the 2005 paper, don't be misled by the first sentence, which says "No effective prophylactic or post-exposure therapy is currently available."  The authors mean that chloroquine had not been approved for use against SARS-CoV *at that time.*
  This is confirmed in the conclusion: "Chloroquine is effective in preventing the spread of SARS CoV in cell culture. Favorable inhibition of virus spread was observed when the cells were either treated with chloroquine prior to or after SARS CoV infection."]

Hydroxychloroquine ("HCQ") is a less-toxic derivative of chloroquine.  It was first used in 1955.  It's widely used to treat lupus and rheumatoid arthritis, and the VA dispenses roughly *a million pills of it a month for those conditions.*

On March 28, 2020, the FDA gave "Emergency Use Authorization" to both chloroquine and HCQ for use in treating Covid-19.  Interestingly, AI says "No, the FDA did NOT *formally approve* HCQ."  But if you keep reading, the FDA did grant EUA.  That's sure as hell an approval ("Authorization"), even if with restrictions.

During February, March and April of 2020 the VA purchased more than 6.3 million tablets of HCQ.  But if the "normal" use for lupus and arthritis was a million tabs a month, why did the VA buy more than twice the normal use during that three-month period?

And IF the VA gave HCQ to patients with Covid-19, are there any records of the outcome?

On June 15 of 2020 the FDA rescinded the EUA "after clinical data showed the drugs were unlikely to be effective."  I've read a couple of papers reporting the results, and they're FULL of crap.  It's as if they wrote the "no help" conclusion first and plugged in numbers to support it. 

In any case, as the head of one of the five divisions of NIH for decades, Fauci had to know that BOTH CQ and HCQ were known to be effective "in vitro," BOTH in preventing infection AND in treating existing infection.  And yet he repeatedly claimed--during daily news conferences--that both were dangerous and didn't help.  And of course no Dem-fellating "journalist" ever asked him what papers supported his claim.

That would have exposed Fauci as a liar.  Ooohh, can't have dat, eh?  Even though his diary shows he lied *constantly,* about *everything.*

Fauci was determined to get the "vaccine" approved--though carefully AFTER the election that saddled us with the vegetable bribem.  To get it done without taking another year to do all the long, costly, normal trials meant an EUA.  And to get the EUA required showing that no other effective treatment existed.

That obviously meant discrediting the two drugs above, plus ivermectin.  So the question to ask Fauci is "What studies do you cite as support for your claim that none of those three totally safe, already approved, low-cost drugs were NOT effective?"

Having been given federal immunity, Fauci should be forced to testify.  And since the DOJ will have time to review the "studies" Fauci is likely to cite, their flaws can be easily shown. 

Who dis? An' why should you care?

The woman below is Jackie Stepp.  She beez duh po-leece chief of a beautiful tourist attraction called Asheville, North Carolina.  Her role will be explained below. 

 

If you're a typical American you don't pay attention to anything outside your immediate arm's reach.  Fair enough: it takes all your time and energy to keep food on your kids' table, a roof over their heads and trying to keep 'em off drugs.  

You've got your hands full.  I get it.  Really.

With that said: If you refuse to "step up your game" and fight, you're gonna lose more and more of the country you grew up with.

It's been happening for decades, but slowly.  But in the last decade the pace of conquests by the forces of evil has tripled.

Of course unless you live in one of the shithole cities (formerly beautiful and quaint), you never see it.  And in truth, most Americans wouldn't care, since if residents of a city losing to the demons--the orcs--don't care enough to do what needs to be done, why should you care, eh?

Latest example: Asheville, North Carolina.  Tourist town.  Lovely.  Surrounded by what pass for mountains for easterners.  (Just kidding--it's lovely.)

Well: Asheville is a university town, and like every other university town it's been ruled by liberals, Democrats, socialists and communists for decades.

And for decades that was only a tiny problem.  But then something happened.

Black gangs discovered that Asheville was run by Democrats.

Democrat voter: "Why would that be a problem?"

Because Democrat DAs refuse to punish black thugs *in any meaningful way.*  As in, any way that makes 'em stop robbing and murdering. 

If you don't already know that, you're a brain-dead liberal and deserve what you're getting.

Let me explain: when a thug murders someone, and the DA offers a "plea bargain" in which the killer pleads guilty to "felon in possession of a firearm" and is sentenced to 3 months in jail (usually DAs in Dem-ruled shitholes don't demand prison time for "felon in possession"), does anyone with a functioning brain think that deters the thug from doing it again?  And then again? 

With that, let's return to Ashville:  Three weeks ago [Dems: "Dat old newz!  Why you care bout old newz, boomer?"] at 2:30 a.m. a group of "pipo" (never further described) fired 80 shots, hitting seven, killing two.

Typical Democrat: "Dat nuffin'!  In Chicago or NY or LA that wouldn't even make the news!  So go away, whiny deplorable!  Hater!"

Except Asheville has a population of 94,000.  If you widen the borders to the entire metro area, 422,000.  For a population this size, this fatal shooting should have been a big deal.

But if you listen to the female police chief, Jackie Stepp, it's a nothing: NOT gang-related at ALL, citizen!  Wait, Jackie, you liberal tool: How the fuck do you KNOW that, since you haven't arrested anyone and don't know anything a about who did the shooting, eh?

Oh, got it: Asheville is a popular tourist attraction, so Jackie can't admit her city has murderous gangs, eh?  Cuz dat would cut the number of tourists, eh?

She admitted to the local TV station that the city "has gang activity," since she knew the networks would never pick that up--but quickly said the murders were NOT "traditional gang activity."

Ahh.  Jackie, would ya tell us what you mean by "traditional," and how that reassures your city's residents?

Wow, that's a huge relief, eh?  Of course she doesn't know who did it or why, but will parrot  that it's "not gang-related" regardless, cuz... well, we cannot let potential visitors thinking ouah city beez gang-infested.

And so it goes.  NYC gang members and LA gang members found easy pickins in Asheville: ruled by liberal Democrats, soft on crime, liberal female police chief.  So...Asheville it is, eh?

This is the future, folks.  Enjoy.  And the comments are a hoot!  Over 2,400 right now:

You can't solve problems that you refuse to recognize.

The chief is hoping the problem will go away if she just keeps denying it exists.  News flash, it won’t, but it will get worse. Once again, the problem isn't "guns," but failure to imprison killers.

Asheville is run by Democrats.  Quaint town but absolutely Democrat in every respect. While the rest of NC is Republican, Asheville is just another high-rent, socialist-leaning blot on the Appalachian mountains. They've pushed for reparations, green tyranny and freezing rents.  Classic.

San Francisco of the East.  Pro-Hamas signs everywhere.

First the city's Dem rulers let the homeless take over the downtown, now they let the gangs take over.  And then rush to the cameras to deny it's happening.

Lived there.  Bunch of "progressives" running and ruining the place. 

How many of these shootings involve people with criminal records?  I notice they're never put in prison.  Why not?  Oh, got it.

[Then we have the inevitable Democrat shill, posting...] "Sounds like maga." 

Democrats absolutely assured us that removing Uncle Ben and Aunt Jemima from rice and syrup bottles would end black violence.

Asheville native here: Liberals have taken over city and county leadership and ruined what was once a unique, charming southern town.  Higher taxes, non-existant policing, no prosecution...you know the agenda. Don't take your family to downtown "Little Chicago" after dark. Sad.

No city can reduce crime unless it's led by pols willing to do what's needed.  Instead, voters keep electing Dems who are unwilling to lock up thugs for long terms.  You get the same result when parents never require anything of their children and provide no discipline...Asheville will regret the way the city ends up.

Downtown Asheville is full of people openly casually smoking crack, because they know the cops won't arrest 'em.  Every thug sees, and knows exactly what that means: city rulers won't prosecute.

Sounds like downtown Denver.  Dem-ruled cities always turn into shitholes.

What used to be a sleepy little mountain town has become a southern California transplant haven.

Grew up in Asheville [born 1953] with church bells ringing on Sunday morning and able to safely walk downtown at any hour.  Somehow it's turned into a shithole.  How did that happen?  Next up: Muslims blaring their call to prayer five times a day thru loudspeakers, then DEMANDING that churches be prohibited from ringing *their* bells on Sunday morning.  And the Dem rulers will scurry to comply!

Wokie Democrats scream that enforcing laws is RAAaacist!  SO much nicer when anyone can smoke crack on the sidewalk.

Our beautiful town began turning into a liberal Mecca 15 years ago when Obozo was running the U.S. into the ground.  Liberals took over hundreds of formerly safe towns all over the U.S.

How can you fix a problem if city "leaders" refuse to recognize there IS one?

Same thing happened years ago in Minneapolis: everyone saw the beginnings of gang violence but mayor and governor refused to acknowledge it or address it.  By the time it got out of control--so they could no longer deny it--by then it was too late.  Democrat pols were afraid of losing the black vote, and of being accused of racism by white libs.

Work forces me to go to downtown Asheville every day.  I call it “Little Portland."  Open drug use everywhere--syringes thrown into gutters, broken crack pipes, the smell of weed everywhere.

Nine people are shot and two died.  In the Dem-ruled city is anyone surprised that Dem city rulers deny gangs were involved?

Dems bleat that it's a "gun problem," and that the obvious solution is to confiscate all guns from civilians.  But of course it's NOT a "gun problem."  Not one of my guns has driven downtown at midnight and shot anyone.  No, the problem is wokie pols who refuse to prosecute and jail murderers and mere thugs.

Asheville needs to apply for a federal grant to erect a hundred signs downtown saying "It's against the LAW to shoot people."  Cuz the average thug jus' din' know.  Signs will solve this, cuz thugs always obey signs and laws, right?

Democrat plan for reducing crime: "Don't call murders and robberies 'crimes.'  Instead call 'em 'incidents' by 'justice-involved individuals,' or 'disenfranchised youth groups.'"

Source. 

Movable goalposts

The utterly corrupt, thieving government of New York City is paying $43 Billion of taxpayer dollars to "educate" K-12 students this year.

That's $44,000 per student per year.

And "educate" is a *very* amorphous word--like Cackles Harris, it means anything the speaker wants it to mean.

Dems believe what the teachers' unions have always said: if you want better results, ya gotta pay top dollar, right?  The average state spends way less than half that (poor Oklahoma City spends $13,200 per student per year), but duh gummint of NYC believes that spending mo' cash gives top results, right?

C'mon, moronic Democrats!  Let's hear it:  "Spending more gives top results, RIGHT?"

Democrats: "Yeah.  Reeeally."

Me: "Thanks.  So how did NYC students do on, say, reading proficiency exams this year, eh?"

Dems:  "Uh...sorry, can't chat.  Got a plane to catch!  Later, MAGAt!"

So typical: turns out less than half of 3rd, 4th and 5th-graders passed the basic "English Language Arts" test.

Democrats: "Tests beez RAAAAaaacist!  Ebrywun know dat!  Aks 'em sumpin *useful,* like 'Who Cardi B?  Or "Who Lizzo?"  Or 'Which political party gibs yo' mom mo' free stuff?"  Or "Say you got a chance to score 500 ballots fo' duh November elections.  How much kin yew get fo' sellin' em?' See, *useful shit* like dat!"

This is the future:  The black "chancellor" of NYC schools is Kamar Samuels.  I haven't even bothered to look up his salary yet, but I'll predict it's $400K per year, before "benefits."  That's Fauci-level grift.  But he has all the qualfications needed, right? 

A VP of the United Federation of Teachers union (yet another teachers' union to have to placate, after NEA and AFT) blamed terrible test scores on "changes in curriculum and teaching strategies," one of which allows students to graduate *without passing a single standardized test!*  "Dis beez SO cool, comrade!  We don' like standardized tests, so we simply invented a workaround that will let ouah students granulate [sic] wifout passin' no dumb test!"

If Dems don't like a goal post, move it. 

Source: New York Post

https://nypost.com/2026/05/12/us-news/nyc-dumping-record-43b-into-public-schools-at-whopping-44k-per-pupil-despite-plummeting-enrollment-poor-test-results/ 

Sometimes evil doesn't bother trying to look normal

Most of the time evil is hard to recognize.  But sometimes, when it's just toying with humans, it doesn't bother. 

 

Can you guess who?  Sure ya can, citizen. 

Y'know that thing that nevah happens? Well it happened again

Hey, y'know that thing that the Democrats say never happens?  Well, it happened again:  In a town near Cincinnati three total mental cases brutally tortured a 7-year-old boy--severe beatings, burning, choking, and water torture.  Finally the nutters killed him.  

 

Now here's how four Lying Mainstream Media outlets lied about it:

 

Notice that all four of these Democrat-fellating outlets identified the three killers as "three women."  Nope.  Flat-out lie, uttered to protect Democrats, who have pushed the whole tranny mania on us.  Cuz two of the four are males pretending to be women.

Supreme Court moron Katanji Brown Jackson: "No, dey iz all reel women!  At least, dey say are, an' since I have no idea how to tell what a woman is, I has t' believe em!  Which means you do too, since I'm sometimes the deciding vote on close decisions!" 

Do we really have to put up with this shit? 

Either of these two look familiar? Yeah, didn't think so

The person on the left is a leftist monster.  It's kinda ironic cuz she looks so harmless, eh?

She's Vy Lyles, the first black female mayor of Charlotte, North Carolina.  EVERY local media outlet--all Leftist, of course--positively swooned over Vy, cuz...obvious.

Okay, so why did I just call her a monster, eh?  Because of the girl on the right.

Not one American in 10,000 will recognize her.  That's because of monsters like Vy and her Left/liberal/Democrat friends, who have worked SO hard to try to ensure that no one  would know about the girl on the right.

 

The girl on the right is Iryna Zarutska--a refugee from Ukraine, living in Charlotte.  On August 22 of last year Iryna boarded a streetcar/tram in Charlotte.  Sat down by herself, for what would be the last two minutes of her life. 

One minute later a black career criminal and schizophrenic sitting behind her stood up, pulled a knife and stabbed her three times in the throat.  She had just enough life left to look up at him before collapsing and dying.

So how does the monster mayor come into this?  It's because the tram had high-resolution video, which caught the unprovoked fatal stabbing close-up.  No obstruction, totally sharp and clear.  Transit workers had it right away--and because the fatal stabbing was so totally unprovoked, they released the vid to local TV stations.

Mayor Vy asked the stations NOT to broadcast the video or any parts of it--because she already knew the killer had been repeatedly released by wokie, soft-on-black-crime DAs and cops in her city.  And since all Media is run by woke leftists, ALL the stations agreed not to show the video.  And a few days later mayor Vy actually thanked the stations for doing as she demanded.

Not a single local TV station broadcast a single frame of the video for TWO WEEKS after the murder--and then only because the Internet was already showing it, so the local TV stations didn't wanna look like the corrupt fools they were and are. 

So that's how Vy earned the richly-deserved title of "monster:"  She made the corrupt decision to try to prevent voters from seeing the clear video of the brutal, unprovoked murder because her regime was utterly negligent in allowing the career-criminal schizo to be released again and again, so he was free to murder.   

Making progress in anything requires that those in charge admit what doesn't work.  But just as Tony "Doctor Science" Fauci was determined to do anything to avoid being found responsible for the entire covid disaster, mayor Vy was determined to prevent voters from seeing the horror of the unprovoked ambush-murder...to preserve her career.  Just like Fauci.

Now:  Imagine how the mayor and local TV stations would have reacted if the races had been reversed, eh?  But people have a hard time imagining that because white schizophrenic career criminals are quickly jailed or institutionalized for life.

Hmmmm...it's almost like we have two wildly different sets of laws in this country, eh?

London, then and now

My parents are from Flyover Country, but due to business (international oil) they lived in London's posh West End for 19 years.  A hundred yards from Speaker's Corner, Hyde Park.  Loved visiting 'em.  

But this was back from 1966.  And things have changed a lot since then.  If you're white and Christian, it hasn't changed for the better.  The city has been taken over in the same way New York City has.

In London thru around 1990, streets with lots of elegant stores were called "high streets."  Think Rodeo Drive in Beverly Hills.  No longer.  The brief passage below is from a current London resident:

Walking down what was once one of London's "high streets" now is totally depressing:  Barely any local businesses left, just endless vape shops, tacky nail salons, dodgy phone shops and the obligatory Turkish barbers, most of which never see a single customer and barely even bother to maintain the pretence [author used the Brit spelling] of being legit anymore.
   A palpable atmosphere of quiet despair and resignation amongst the trickle of shoppers wandering aimlessly around.  It's like living in a country that just lost a war without firing a shot.  Never seen anything like it in my lifetime. 

Of course you don't care, any more than you care about what happened to New York City.  Why would you?  You don't live there, and you don't see any connection to anything you can do something about, so..."not my problem."  I get it.

Of course there IS something you can do, but almost no Americans see the connection. 

For the terminally stupid, for the hundredth time: "Import the third world, become the third world."  Leftist/Dem/communist politicians want to import a million Somalis and another million random third-worlders because a) they know eventually they'll be able to make 'em citizens, thus voters, and they'll vote Dem; and b) long before that, illegals are useful as "street muscle" to show alleged support for Dem politicians like Karen Bass, Brandon Johnson, Zohran Mamdani, AOC and the like.  

When Paleswinians block highways, or masses of Muzz block streets to pray, who would try to object when you get attacked--and the cops, at the orders of the pols, don't arrest the attackers?  

This is an everyday occurrence in big Dem-ruled cities, but it's happened slowly enough that few Americans noticed.  And now the three largest cities in America--NYC, L.A. and Chitcongo--all have communist mayors.  "Dat democracy, deplorable.  Duh pipo haz spoke, so yew cain't object."  "Ohh, an' duh nex time duh Dems take control of everything, we're gon' demand dat taxpayers in flyover states gibs us $100 billion or so to bail out the budget deficit in duh cities we rule!"

When Trump was prez, Dems hated the vaccine. A week after the election that totally changed

Many people have noticed that before the 2020 election (so Trump was still president in his first term), Democrats said they'd never take "Trump's "vaccine."  All the late-night talk-show whores said that.

Then as the election approached, Fauci conspired with the FDA to delay that agency's approval of the supposedly awful "vaccine" until just after the election. (The FDA approved "Emergency Use Authorization on or about December 1st, 2020.)

Then something amazing happened: Suddenly all the Democrat cock-sucking sons of whores who had been squealing that they'd NEVAH take "Trump's vaccine" did a total 180: now they not only loved it, they DEMANDED that you and your kids take it.

At the time, very few Americans noticed the sudden reversal.

So did the "vaccine" change, even a tiny bit?  Of course not--not by so much as a molecule.  What changed was that to Leftists, Democrats and communists, everything is political.  So what was bad, terrible, AWFUL yesterday can become good today (or vice-versa) IF duh leaderz of The Partei decide they'd benefit from changing their position.  

Need another example?  Did you notice how fast Teslas went from being totally fawned over by the Left to being vandalized daily?
  Before Elon bought Twatter from the drug-addled leftist Dorsey, every leftist and Democrat absolutely adored Teslas!  Cuz "Doze faaabulous EV's don't use dat AWFUL oil stuff, so dey gon' save duh Erf!"

But the moment Musk started supporting Trump, suddenly every fucking, retarded leftist in the country started keying Teslas, spray-painting 'em, setting 'em on fire.  Throwing rocks thru dealership windows.

Did the car change, even a tiny bit?  Obviously not.  What changed was that the founder and CEO of the company supported the arch-enemy of the Left/Dems/communists.  So virtually overnight a car Dems slobbered over was now a target of vandals.

And the Democrat party didn't bat an eye.  When a Dem Minnesota state employee was caught on camera keying a Tesla in Minneapolis, he wasn't fined or jailed--much less fired.  Oh no.  In fact about six months ago the piece of shit was promoted--because the Dems who totally rule that utterly corrupt state approved of his vandalism--as long as it wasn't their car, eh?

To Dems, communists and leftists, everything is political.