Connect with us

Culture and Religion

Supreme irony: The Democrats are no longer Democratic

Published

on

Supreme irony The Democrats are no longer Democratic

The Left’s desperation in the Kavanaugh confirmation circus once again shows they have no use for democratic principles.

If there is one constant in the universe, it’s that the Left will use all manner of deception to hide their true agenda. They’ve exploited the words ‘Liberal’ and ‘progressive’ for years now [Unfortunately with unwitting help from the right]. The Supreme Court confirmation circus illustrates they also have no longer have any use for the will of the people.

What are the Left’s ultimate motives behind their smear tactics in Supreme Court confirmation circus?

The national socialist media is working overtime to dig up whatever they can to smear the present nominee. In a stunning display of activism that makes one wax nostalgic for the halcyon days of mere media bias, the nation’s socialist media have thrown even the appearance of objectivity under the bus. While it takes a tremendous amount of effort to even comprehend the torrent of ‘journalism’ excreta being unleashed on the country, It important to understand why this is taking place.

Simply put, the Left cannot obtain its agenda by democratic means, so they have to use the courts to ‘Rahm’ it down our throats. Parenthetically speaking, if they could get a majority of the people to vote for their wondrous socialist agenda, they would have no need to work the courts to put it in place by the back door of the Judicial branch of the government.

The Leftist sacrament of abortion tops the list – the only Liberty they really care about – despite their exploitation of the moniker of ‘Liberal’. Liberty Control as well as the vestiges of national socialist healthcare follows this on their list of priorities.

Let us consider what the Left has been willing to throw under the bus in their extreme opposition to the democratic process. Granted, most of these would be different with regard to the case of Leftist under accusation. As they say, if the Left didn’t have double standards, it wouldn’t have standards at all. Were this over someone of the national socialist Left, these rights would be sacrosanct, never to be violated for any reason. However, for those on the Pro-Liberty, Conservative Right these rights are non-existent.

Due process.

This limitation on government power in the judiciary has been on the Leftist chopping block for years. Witness the current zeal to confiscate someone’s means of self-defense with so-called ‘Red Flag’ laws being pushed around the country. With varying degrees, these laws will take the word of almost anyone to impose severe restrictions on someone’s Liberty without any form of due process. So it shouldn’t be surprising that the nation’s Left would exploit this concept in this case. What is even more shocking is that they are being quite blatant about the issue.

Presumption of innocence.

Again, this right is sacrosanct for those on the nation’s Left while being non-existent for those on the Pro-Liberty Right. It is also shocking that certain United States Senators are proudly declaring that Judge Kavanaugh is guilty based on ideology rather than fact.

Burden of Proof.

This follows along with the first two items, but if Leftists are anything, they are stickers for being though in going after every civil liberty they can. No stone will be left unturned in their zeal to destroy the constitutional civil rights of those on a certain part of the political spectrum.

Truth

Senator Dianne Feinstein said it herself that “I can’t say that everything is truthful. I don’t know” With regard to the one set of accusations. The second Kavanaugh accuser is refusing to talk to Congress.  The Left almost automatically assumes that every allegation was truthful, no matter how tenuous the evidence – or lack thereof. Their desire to bolster a political cause deciding the veracity of a story.

Journalistic ethics

One only has to look at how some Leftist media sources have prostituted themselves for the cause of bringing down Judge Kavanaugh to see how far these have fallen. It’s to the point where some sources have outed their comrades in the practice.

The Takeaway

This whole sordid affair will not bode well for future events. Now that they have unleashed the Kraken of smear they will not hold back for the next round. It is easily presumed that these tactics will soon be employed in the upcoming electoral contests. Perhaps we can look forward to the circus leaving town with a confirmation vote set for Friday.

In many ways the ‘Me too’ movement was important in exposing predators – especially in the Leftist Utopia of Hollywood, but it’s weaponization by the Left will soon be it’s downfall. Hopefully, there will be some sane Leftists who will realize they have gone too far and will pull back from the brink. If not, this will soon get out of hand to the detriment of all.

 

Liked it? Take a second to support NOQ Report on Patreon!
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Culture and Religion

Harvard students figured out why women are paid less than men

Published

on

Harvard students figured out why women are paid less than men

It genuinely disgusts me that, despite how much we’ve progressed as a society, especially in regards to our treatment of minorities and women, men still earn more than women do. It makes me ashamed of my country. How can we still refer to the United States as the “Land of Opportunity” when women are only paid $0.80 for every $1.00 that men are paid despite working just as hard in the same positions? Hell, even that depressing number doesn’t accurately express how large the gender pay gap is, according to the Institute for Women’s Policy Research.

In the report, titled Still a Man’s Labor Market: The Slowly Narrowing Gender Wage Gap, published in November 2018, the organization revealed that women earn a mere 49% of what men do. What’s worse is that it won’t be until 2059 that men and women have 100% equal pay, assuming the gap continues to narrow as slowly as it currently is. This is absolutely unacceptable, and it’s well past time Congress made it illegal for employers to pay women less than men for the same work.

At least, that’s what I would say if I was a leftist moron who still pays attention to the easily debunked “women earn less than men because of sexism” argument that’s been regurgitated countless times over the years.

The reality is that Congress made it illegal for employers to pay people differently based on their sex decades ago. It was called the “Equal Pay Act” and it was signed into law by President John F. Kennedy all the way back in June 1963. Ever since then, employers have been able to pay employees differently based on their merit, their seniority, their work output, or really whatever factors the employer desires… except sex.

A man and a woman in identical positions with identical output are legally required to be paid the same amount, and employers that fail to do so run the risk of some hefty legal ramifications. But if that’s the case, then why do the numbers presented by the IWPR show that there’s such a massive gender pay gap? Is the Equal Pay Act ineffective? Did the IWPR mess up its numbers? Is there some patriarchal plot to keep women from making money?

No, no, and no. The real answer is incredibly simple, and it’s one I’m sure most of us were able to figure out on our own the first time we heard the “women earn ($0.75, $0.79, $0.80) for every $1.00 that men earn” statistic that’s been getting thrown around for years. Basically, men are paid more than women on average because they seek out more lucrative jobs on average and work longer hours on average. If you take the combined earnings of all the women in the United States in a given year, divide that number by how many women worked at any point in that year, and then do the same for men, you’ll see that the earnings-per-working-woman are quite a bit lower than the earnings-per-working-man, so clearly there is a gender pay gap. However, despite what leftists like the people at the IWPR want you to believe, this gap has nothing to do with sexism.

This was demonstrated in a report, also published in November 2018, by two PhD Candidates in Economics at Harvard University. In the report, titled Why Do Women Earn Less Than Men? Evidence from Bus and Train Operators, the two students examined the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority in order to figure out why such a heavily unionized agency in such a notoriously progressive city (Boston) still paid its female employees $0.89 for every $1.00 it paid its male employees. The answer was, once again, incredibly simple. Women were less likely than men to work overtime hours while also being more likely to take unpaid time off. That’s it. That’s all there is to it.

Men tended to prefer making more money to having more free time, while women tended to prefer having more free time to making more money. While an argument could be made that more employers should account for the different preferences of men and women, something the report actually advises on how to do, there’s no basis for the argument that the gender pay gap is a result of sexism.

It should be noted that the Harvard report examined just one industry in one metropolitan area, which means the findings aren’t applicable everywhere, but the gist of them is. Yes, there is a gender pay gap. That’s an objective fact. However, it has nothing to do with sexism. The causes of the gap vary from industry to industry and place to place, but they almost always have to do with the inherent differences between men and women. I think there’s a conversation to be had about whether or not this is an issue, and if it is, whether it’s up to employers, society, or women themselves to solve it, but to even have that conversation requires us to abandon the idea that sexism is the cause. There are certainly some instances where it is the cause, but the vast majority of the time, it’s not.

Liked it? Take a second to support NOQ Report on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

A guide to classical liberalism

Published

on

A guide to classical liberalism

The modern interpretation of the ideology known as “liberalism” is usually associated with the progressive left. Despite the roots of true liberalism – individualism, Natural Rights, and liberty itself – the modern understanding of liberalism has been skewed to make people think more of illiberal politicians like Bernie Sanders instead of Constitutional originalists like Antonin Scalia as liberals.

This 27-minute video does a fine job of breaking down the historical ideas that brought about classical liberalism and the men who brought them to light. It also accurately points out that equality of opportunity for individuals is necessary for a modern society, thus it was this mentality that brought about the end of slavery and the promotion of women’s rights.

From John Locke to James Madison, from the thinkers of Great Britain to the founding fathers of the United States, this video from The Academic Agent brings us through the history of classical liberalism.

For a brief introduction we posted a shorter video earlier:

What classical liberalism is, briefly

http://noqreport.com/2018/12/12/classical-liberalism-briefly/The progressive left and the Democratic Party have undergone many transformations over the last century. They’ve masterfully spun American understanding of language and labels to the point that history has been in a constant state of being rewritten to conform to their machinations. One of the most perverse examples of this is how they now claim the mantle of “liberalism.”

Sadly, those who embrace Natural Rights, limited government, and individualism have been forced to amend our label as liberals to become “classical liberals” for the sake of escaping confusion. Most Americans today would assume if we call ourselves “liberals” that we must be big fans of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

Liked it? Take a second to support NOQ Report on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

Fine-tuning and incredible calibration points to creation over random chance

Published

on

Fine-tuning and incredible calibration points to creation over random chance

Homicide investigator J. Warner Wallace is familiar with looking for tampering. His job makes him look for things that don’t fit. At his core, he is forced to ask questions about the various situations he investigates in order to see where the evidence points.

When he’s not catching bad guys, he’s a Christian apologist. In this role, he utilizes the same skills he’s honed over the decades as an investigator to demonstrate why it makes much more sense to believe in creation than a randomly generated universe.

The author of Cold-Case Christianity started off as a skeptical atheist, but as he investigated deeper, he soon realized it was impossible for the secular worldview to be correct as it pertained to the origins of the universe and life on the planet.

Liked it? Take a second to support NOQ Report on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Facebook

Twitter

Trending

Copyright © 2018 NOQ Report