NEW YEARS' EVE WITH COVID, RED CHINA, AND CORPORATE FINKS

      So we begin the New Year under the shadows here in the now-moribund United States of America. A photo of the New Years' celebration tells volumes about how the future is starting out:

  

       This shouldn't surprise anybody: China's been back open for business and back to normal since Summer. That was when the Ameroboobs were setting up CHAZ zones, burning out commercial districts, and beheading statues of Jesus. Mask mandates were coming into vogue here, too: although the Chinese were then repealing mask orders. As early as late February, China's top influenza specialist, Dr. Zhong Nanshan, correctly predicted that the outbreak would peak by March. He also pointed out that COVID-19 was of such a nature that it not likely survive the Summer; that Western propaganda about vaccines was a chimera; and that new outbreaks of the virus were progressively weaker. 

      The Corporate Media and the Color Revolutionists here in this country pay no attention to the authorities in China. Instead, they've been disseminating considerable anti-Chinese propaganda---mostly coming out of Soros-funded NGOs---accusing the Chinese of committing numerous atrocities to contain the virus. These are basically the same myths generated against any government that the Elites wish to vilify: their purpose in this case being to make our own repressive measures seem less extreme. 

      One thing that the Chinese did do however was to fan COVID hysteria in the West as much as possible. No Communist can ever resist the opportunity to foment disruption and panic in free societies. Sadly, in the United States these days creating mass hysteria requires very little effort. 

       I didn't go to China for New Years', even though it looked like they were having a lot of fun. Instead, I journeyed to a secret location in a redoubt deep in the Cascade Mountains where we wined and dined in complete privacy. At one point, some of us gentlemen withdrew to the smoking lounge and there was an episode of the 1960s espionage series The Man from U.N.C.L.E on the television. Interesting to see how far we've evolved in just one generation. It used to be that wealthy megalomaniacs who hired teams of mad scientists with plans of world domination were considered villains. Now, of course, they're considered world benefactors. These kinds of Oligarchs have learned the same lesson over time that the Red Chinese have: conquering the West isn't as easy as simply buying it out. 

     Joseph Biden, the Insurgency's figurehead, announced just before Christmas that Brian Deese---an operative at Blackrock Holdings---would be inserted into the administration as his top economic policy strategist. Deese will chair the National Economic Council (in name) and engineer policies favorable to High Finance (in reality). Deese's job at Blackrock was "focusing on identifying drivers of long-term return associated with environmental, social and governance issues." During Obama's term, Deese fleeced American taxpayers and enriched his corporate cronies with the 2009 auto-makers' bailout. Obama was so impressed by this that he gave Deese a position as Senior Advisor. Deese went on to help set up the Paris Climate Accord in 2015. 

   Blackrock Holdings is the largest financial cartel on Wall Street, and was the conglomerate that paid for both of the recent Stimulus bailouts. It's CEO---and Deese's and Biden's actual boss---is the appropriately-named Larry Fink. 

      Fink and Blackrock control a low estimate of $7 trillion in assets, with $12 trillion as a high estimate. Either figure is higher than the annual GDP of every nation in the world except for the U.S. and China. In fact, the high estimate is more than the GDP of Germany, Britain, France, and Italy combined. And he's just one of the new ruling financial junta in the United States. So, Snowfalkes: do you still want to tell us that the New Order is about unity and equality? 

     There is plenty of unity in Crony Capitalism, however. Mitch McConnell's corporate overlord, Vanguard Holdings, holds about 8% of Blackrock stock. The Top 10 holdings Blackrock itself has are:

     1. Apple Inc. (Tim Cook)

     2. Microsoft (Bill Gates)

     3. Amazon Inc. (Jeff Bezos)

     4. Facebook (Mark Zuckerberg)

     5. Alphabet Inc. (Eric Schmidt)

     6. Johnson & Johnson (Big Pharma)

     7. Alibaba (The Chinese Communist Party)

     8. Visa Corporation (High Finance)

     9. Berkshire Hathaway (Warren Buffet)

    10. Vanguard Group (High Finance)

      Larry Fink is not only a proponent of the Great Reset, he sits on the WEF's Board of Trustees and the WEF is packed with Blackrock operatives. 

      “Climate change has become a defining factor in companies’ long-term prospects … But awareness is rapidly changing, and I believe we are on the edge of a fundamental reshaping of finance.” Fink ominously prophesied at Davos last January. His views on the Climate Change scam are about fanatical as Bill Gates' views on the Scam-demic are. It is quite noteworthy that---for all of his rhetoric about 'free markets'---Fink comes across as a bit heavy-handed when it comes to imposing his kooky climatology upon others who may not agree. In a manifesto published on Blackrock's own website, he wrote: 

    "We believe that when a company is not effectively addressing a material issue, its directors should be held accountable. Last year BlackRock voted against or withheld votes from 4,800 directors at 2,700 different companies. Where we feel companies and boards are not producing effective sustainability disclosures or implementing frameworks for managing these issues, we will hold board members accountable." That's right: not toeing the PC party line on Climate Change could cost an executive a promotion or maybe even a job. BTW, how come we never heard a single objection from a Conservative political figure over this policy? I suspect that there are at least 7 trillion reasons why not. 

    "This year, we are asking the companies that we invest in on behalf of our clients to: (1) publish a disclosure in line with industry-specific SASB {the Sustainabilty Accounting Standards Board} guidelines by year-end, if you have not already done so, or disclose a similar set of data in a way that is relevant to your particular business; and (2) disclose climate-related risks in line with the TCFD’s {the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures} recommendations, if you have not already done so. This should include your plan for operating under a scenario where the Paris Agreement’s goal of limiting global warming to less than two degrees is fully realized, as expressed by the TCFD guidelines. We will use these disclosures and our engagements to ascertain whether companies are properly managing and overseeing these risks within their business and adequately planning for the future. In the absence of robust disclosures, investors, including BlackRock, will increasingly conclude that companies are not adequately managing risk."

     What an arrogant b-----d. Neither Blackrock, nor the Paris Accord, nor the two NGOs he cites have the slightest legal force in the United States. Not one American business is under any legal obligation to do any of this. But because of his financial power, Fink can impose his arbitrary will upon any firm without the resources to resist. Now that he and his confederates have taken over the U.S. Government, just imagine what he'll be doing. Remember that Fink & Co. hold trillions in government debt. He's got Biden by the throat and can order him around like he does his shareholders. 

    "Each year we refresh our engagement priorities and voting guidelines. This year, we will be mapping our engagement priorities to specific UN Sustainable Development Goals, such as Gender Equality and Affordable and Clean Energy. We will also be incorporating key performance indicators in our engagement policies, providing clarity on our expectations for companies."

    At this point, life under the Communist Chinese is starting to sound like a better option. They occasionally actually execute Oligarchs who start getting ideas about being more powerful than Xi and his Merry Men. 

    Under our (former) system of government we don't need to send guys like Fink to the firing squad---however emotionally satisfying and socially hygienic that would be. All it would have taken would have been to reinstate the securities and exchange laws that the Clintons repealed; prohibiting the Government from borrowing money from Corporate looters; and defending things like Right of Conscience in the workplace; enforcing anti-trust laws, etc. But none of that happened, and now we have these pigs pulling the wires on public policy. When the Insurgency finally falls, our successors will have to give some serious thought about how to build a legitimate Free Enterprise system back in place.

     

    

     

THE ROY MOORE DISTRACTION

       The 2018 Electoral Cycle is just getting underway and we have our first Media-fabricated scandal over Alabama US Senatorial candidate, Roy Moore. Essentially a woman who worked for the Clinton Campaign is accusing Moore of acting like a heterosexual male back when the 'accuser' was a young nubile. 

        Are these allegations true? Answer: who cares?

       First of all, consider that the US Mainstream Media---a collection of neurotics, drug-addicts, perverts, and cultists---are the ones who are pushing the story. These is the same group who attacked Moore when he was a judge for refusing to take down a monument displaying the Ten Commandments. They are the same group who think nothing at all is wrong with interjecting homosexual scenes in children's Disney cartoons or depicting lurid sex and violence on prime-time television. It's no accident that cities with the highest per capita number of homosexuals and drug-addicts are also major media centers. 

       This whole obsession with older men and younger women as being somehow morally wrong is a completely recent innovation: inspired by Radical Feminists and other anti-heterosexual groups. Though hardly a senior citizen, I well recall married women and mothers in my high-school graduating class. Just looking back at the Night Wind Family Tree, male ancestors were taking brides of 15-19 for six generations going back to the year of immigration.

         But some will say---have we ever leaders in the US who've had relationships with teenagers or much younger women? Well, yes there were. Let's start with the only man who won two non-consecutive terms as President:

      Grover Cleveland was engaged to his ward, Frances Folsom, when she was 14. She wanted to finish school before marriage, and the two were wed when she was 19 and the President was 49. Theirs is still the only marriage ceremony that has taken place in the White House.

       The President who escaped an assassination attempt and held the country together in the wake of the Civil War; sacrificing his own political career for the good of the country:

      President Andrew Johnson married 17 year-old Eliza McCardle in 1827. She was an educated woman, incidentally, and Johnson was an autodidact. So much for a man 'taking advantage'of a younger female. 

     Former Governor of California, general, and the first Republican candidate for the Presidency:

        John C. Fremont was engaged to Jessie Benton---daughter of a US Senator---when she was 15. They married shortly after her 16th birthday. 

         Civil War Cavalry hero, Commander-in-Chief of the US Army; founder of Yellowstone National Park and former president of the NRA:

        
          Phil Sheridan married at 44 to Irene Rucker, 18, daughter of another general. 

       America's greatest inventor, a leading businessman, and the man who made electricity and mass communication possible:

          Thomas Alva Edison married Mary Stilwell when she was 16. The couple had three children. Mary later died of an illness, and Edison's second wife was 20 years his junior.

           On the subject of great inventors and great American patriots:

          Benjamin Franklin proposed to Deborah Read when she was 15. She lived as Franklin's common-law wife from her mid-teens despite being later forced into an arranged marriage with another man. She continued to live with Franklin as a wife until her death. They had three children. 

          The point of this being that a man's tastes in women is absolutely no reflection on either his abilities or his character. As President Cleveland used to say of critics during one election: "If my choice of a wife costs me an election, so be it. I wouldn't want to be the leader of any people who choose their leaders on that kind of basis."

           Our modern political system could stand a few more like Cleveland. 

THE FAKE GOOGLE MANIFESTO DEBATE

     There's been some considerable arm-flapping this week in the Prozac Nation over the fate of a Harvard and MIT-educated software engineer named James Damore. Damore was fired from Google today after being exposed as the author of a 10-page Manifesto that was circulated first through Google as an unauthorized and anonymous corporate memo; then later leaked to the Internet at large. Most of the manifesto, which bore the title Google's Ideological Echo Chamber has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with say, designing software.

      Instead, this memo was really an exercise in trolling. Not surprisingly, the whackos on the fake Right---with Vox Day and Jack Posobiec at their head---are screaming about censorship. And of course they agree with Damore's premise: that women are unsuited for tech fields. Carly Fiorina and other Conservatives might disagree, however.

      Before taking sides in this non-debate, let us examine only a few simple, basic facts:

      1. Google is a huge corporation with thousands of employees; and their success as a company rests upon getting these thousands of people to work as a team.

       2. An employee circulates an unauthorized memo that causes a disruption in the corporate environment---wholly unrelated to Google's purpose as a Technology company.

       3. Someone---probably the same employee---leaks the text of this memo to the press, causing damage to Google's image. It should be noted that Google is currently also involved in a controversy with the US Labor Department over alleged wage disparities between genders.

         4. The same memo openly accuses Google management and executives of sabotaging the corporate good and arrogantly makes demands upon them to change.

       So what does one suppose that any corporation would do with an employee like that? Give him a medal for speaking out? No, they would fire him, as they did Damore. The bottom line here is that Google is a business. Software engineers don't dictate company policy to CEOs; and they especially don't disrupt the entire organization from within and without. They design software: that's what they're paid to do. As an employee, Damore's actions were completely unacceptable.

        And that is really the issue here. This not a censorship or free-speech issue because Damore was fired for his actions, not his words. Vox Day, in his usual dishonest way, ran a poll on Twitter asking whether or not respondents thought there was an problem with Google's diversity policy. That's not even a relevant question to what Damore did.

        It's time to get a grip on reality. Damore is no martyr; he did something stupid and got fired for it. Think of this: did Damore face losing his job before he published this manifesto? Of course not. Google didn't care about his opinions as long as he produced software---nor should they have cared. But Damore used his opinions to harm the company and that's another matter.

      Anarchists and Communists believe in Labor overthrowing company leadership from within: Conservatives do not.

      

      

ROSIE O'DONNELL HAS PUBLIC BREAKDOWN FEARING TRUMP

     With the Inauguration of the 45th President now only a week away, we in the Prozac Nation can no doubt expect an upsurge of neurotic episodes from frustrated anti-Democracy extremists. We've seen notable breakdowns and public tantrums already from Stephan Colbert, Hilary Clinton, Keith Olbermann, Meryl Streep, various Academics, and today from Rosie O' Donnell.

     Rosie is an obese, gutter-level, trash-culture 'entertainer' who's been mentally teetering on the brink of complete psychological collapse for some time. Her chronic obesity and constant state of emotional rage actually triggered an apoplectic stroke in 2012. She's finally completely lost it now; going on a Twitter rampage calling for the US Military to overthrow Trump.

      Next to O'Donnell's Twitter avatar---which tellingly depicts her wearing what looks like a Burger King crown---she writes: "I fully support imposing martial law---delaying the Inauguration---until Trump is cleared of all charges!"

     What charges does she mean? She answers somewhat ramblingly: "Show us your taxes! Show us your taxes! Show us your taxes! Show us your taxes! We the people want to see them! Show us your taxes, Trump!"

     There's obviously nothing in American law that prohibits holding public office during a tax audit. Trump has so far not released tax records due to the audit results not being tabulated. There have been no tax 'charges' filed; as Rosie apparently claims. Those who've been involved with IRS audits know that criminal charges are very rarely ever filed. Contrary to popular belief, the IRS is usually more willing to settle out-of-court. They usually only pursue criminal charges if income was obtained and assets hidden in conjunction with some other illegal activities. A tax audit is hardly an excuse for martial law.

      Given the state of our military today, it would be a questionable issue as to whether they could actually defeat the Secret Service, FBI, and DC Police to take control of the Capitol anyway.

      The US has rarely ever seen martial law. Even when it's occurred, it's been under the control of the President; who is the only legal authority who can impose it. The Continental Congress imposed it occasionally during the War of Independence. The Lincoln Administration imposed it often during the US Civil War. During WW2, FDR put the Pacific Coast under military law. It's also been used occasionally locally such as President Grant employing it against a KKK insurrection in 1871 and Bush Senior during the Los Angeles riots in 1992. Essentially then, it has never happened except when civilian authorities have lost control over public order---which is roughly how it is legally defined in the Constitution.

     What Rosie O'Donnell is actually describing is a military coup d'état which is an entirely different matter. The United States is so diverse, and so well-armed that this is a completely impossible scenario---and that the Military would attempt it because Rosie O'Donnell demands it--- is even more ludicrous.

      Rosie O'Donnell is clearly a mentally sick person; probably suffering from delusions of grandeur and paranoia among many other complexes. She should probably be more pitied than ridiculed; but still a lot of Liberals agree with her on Twitter---and they should know better. This is why we need to expose these fake Cultural Elites in any event because they can influence low-information and uneducated people who don't recognize the insanity that's transparent to the rest of us.