patrick.net

Kamala Harris panned for requiring ID to enter Arizona rally after previously painting voter ID laws as racist

Harris rallygoers outside Phoenix were required to present IDs upon entry

https://ground.news/article/kamala-harris-panned-for-requiring-id-to-enter-arizona-rally-after-previously-painting-voter-id-laws-as-racist_95d3bc

Kamala Harris panned for requiring ID to enter Arizona rally after previously painting voter ID laws as racist

Harris rallygoers outside Phoenix were required to present IDs upon entry

I've talked about Jungian Shadow Projection in previous blogs, but let's go deeper into
defining and analyzing what is Jung's concept of shadow and projection? Jung's concept
of the "Shadow" is a central idea representing the unconscious part of the personality that
contains repressed weaknesses, desires, and instincts. The Shadow includes everything
outside the light of consciousness and often holds aspects of ourselves that we don't
want to acknowledge or accept, such as selfishness, aggression, or envy. Projection, in
tandem with the shadow, is a psychological mechanism where an individual attributes
their own unconscious thoughts, feelings, or traits to another person. Jung believed that
when people are unaware of their Shadow, they project these hidden aspects onto
others. For example, someone who is unwilling to recognize their
own anger may perceive others as being unusually angry or hostile.

this is a really big idea: you have unconscious thoughts and desires that you fail to acknowledge. instead, you project them onto others as a defense mechanism for yourself. ...

it’s why liars think everyone else lies and racists like to accuse others of racism.

But now would be a good time to bring up Democrats propensity for lying on campaign peomises.

"All Animals Are Equal but Some Animals Are More Equal Than Others"

Facebook to Continue Using ‘Fact-Checkers’ to Censor Content, despite Zuckerberg’s Vow to End Censorship...

In recent years, these “fact-checkers” have unfairly targeted conservative viewpoints, leading to many fleeing Facebook for more free speech-focused alternatives such as Gab, Truth Social, or Elon Musk’s X.

In a sane 3-0 decision Tuesday, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a federal law prohibiting illegal immigrants in the U.S. from owning guns, finding it was legal and was Constitutional. "We should not extend rights to illegal aliens any further than what the law requires," U.S. Circuit Judge James Ho, a Trump appointee, wrote in his concurring opinion.

In the latest weird Democrat inversion, liberals are actually arguing for more guns — just for illegal aliens rather than for citizens. I mean, what could possibly go wrong with giving criminal invaders legal weapons?

Never say the Democrats don’t stand up for gun rights. Just, not your gun rights.

Yesterday’s zaniest story ran in the Washington Post headlined, “Republican Liz Cheney says she will vote for Kamala Harris this election.” Well, of course. Who else? That’s her “jam.” How is this even ‘news?’

When I read it, that headline produced a strange echo. The other day, I described a slightly surreal conversation with a liberal relative. When I read the Journal’s caption, I recalled how my relative mentioned disgraced former Congresswoman Cheney in the exact same context. He’d urged me to consider how “lots of big Republicans” supported Harris. Skeptical, I asked, like who? Earnestly, without any sense of irony or self-awareness, he tossed out Liz Cheney, adding for emphasis how she spoke at the DNC last month.

Putting two and two together, I realized my relative was regurgitating MSNBC talking points. Aha! A new narrative! It was like spotting a blue-beaked crested wren or something. (Apologies to bird watchers.)

Corporate media is busily slinging its new narrative to Democrats, not to we Republicans, who reflexively emit horse laughs just hearing the name Cheney. Let’s not dwell on Dick, either.

It’s a rollicking narrative, too. Explaining the breaking news that Cheney “broke with the Republican Party on Wednesday” —but not before!— the Wall Street Journal scribbled her roundly despised name onto its “growing list of Republicans against Trump.” The Journal’s expanding list has two names on it so far, and I’ll give you one guess who is the second...

The article failed to mention that Cheney and Kinzinger were the only Republicans who “served on the House select committee,” or that they already broke with the party back in 2021 to do so. While it did note that Cheney lost her seat in the primary, the article didn’t mention the same thing happened to Kinzinger, nor did it bring up the fact both politicians are now homeless pariahs relegated to making the rounds on late-night MSNBC news panels.

So I went looking for the narrative, and immediately found it everywhere...

If endorsements are newsworthy, then conspicuously absent from this week’s corporate media reporting was the much more interesting story about Tim Walz’s extended family, which came out for Trump:



https://www.newsweek.com/tim-walz-family-support-donald-trump-2024-election-1948797

They have the guns and therefore we are for peace and for reformation through the ballot. When we have the guns then it will be through the bullet.

Saul Alinsky (2010). “Rules for Radicals: A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals”, p.37, Vintage