Lori Lightfoot is now a Harvard professor who will teach “Health Policy, and Leadership,” okay?

Lori Lightfoot is the first Chicago mayor in 40 years to lose re-election.

She will now assume a teaching role at Menschel Senior Leadership Fellow at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.

Ironically, Lightfoot will teach a course titled “Health Policy, and Leadership.”

While there are worse choices to educate students about leadership, we can’t think of one off hand.

Nonetheless, Michelle A. Williams, Dean of Faculty at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, considers Lightfoot an impressive addition:

“I’m delighted to welcome Mayor Lightfoot to Harvard Chan School as a Menschel Senior Leadership Fellow. As mayor, she showed strong leadership in advocating for health, equity, and dignity for every resident of Chicago, from her declaration of structural racism as a public health crisis to her innovative initiative to bring mental health services to libraries and shelters. And of course, she led the city through the COVID-19 pandemic.”

We hope her students agree with what she preaches. If not, she might just call them racist. Or sexist. That’s, after all, how she handled her election defeat earlier this year.

“I’m a black woman in America. Of course, [I lost],” Lightfoot said of her L.

(Photo by Jonathan Daniel/Getty Images)

“I am a black woman,” she repeated. “Let’s not forget. Certain folks, frankly, don’t support us in leadership roles.”

Blaming her skin color and gender combinations was wise. Especially compared to citing the actual reasons Chicago voted her out.

Such as an explosion of crime under her leadership, as well as a disastrous Covid response and a population exodus.

She also showed a precarious eye for the truth:



Yeah. It was the racism and sexism that led to her political downfall.

Anyway, she is about to teach Harvard students about “leadership.” Though if students prefer someone else, they are in luck. Former CNN host Brian Stelter also teaches at Harvard. As does schmuck former Mayor of New York City Bill de Blasio

As Thomas Sowell once said, “The road to hell is paved with Ivy League degrees.”

Act of Consecration of the Human Race to the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus

June is the month of the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus.

Let us pray.

Most sweet Jesus, Redeemer of the human race, look down upon us humbly prostrate before Thine altar. We are Thine, and Thine we wish to be; but, to be more surely united with Thee, behold each one of us freely consecrates himself today to Thy most Sacred Heart.

Many indeed have never known Thee; many too, despising Thy precepts, have rejected Thee. Have mercy on them all, most merciful Jesus, and draw them to Thy sacred Heart.

Be Thou King, O Lord, not only of the faithful who have never forsaken Thee, but also of the prodigal children who have abandoned Thee; grant that they may quickly return to Thy Father’s house lest they die of wretchedness and hunger.

Be Thou King of those who are deceived by erroneous opinions, or whom discord keeps aloof, and call them back to the harbor of truth and unity of faith, so that there may be but one flock and one Shepherd.

Be Thou King of all those who are still involved in the darkness of idolatry or of Islamism, and refuse not to draw them into the light and kingdom of God. Turn Thine eyes of mercy towards the children of the race, once Thy chosen people: of old they called down upon themselves the Blood of the Savior; may it now descend upon them a laver of redemption and of life.

Grant, O Lord, to Thy Church assurance of freedom and immunity from harm; give peace and order to all nations, and make the earth resound from pole to pole with one cry: “Praise be to the divine Heart that wrought our salvation; to it be glory and honor for ever.” Amen.



Misinformation Is a Word We Use to Shut You Up

BY    MAY 31, 2023


The policing of “information” is the stuff of Naziism, Stalinism, Maoism, and similar anti-liberal regimes. To repress criticism of their dicta and diktats, anti-liberals label criticism “misinformation” or “disinformation.” Those labels are instruments to crush dissent.

This paper offers an understanding of knowledge as involving three chief facets: information, interpretation, and judgment. Usually, what people argue fervently over is not information, but interpretation and judgment.

What is being labeled and attacked as “misinformation” is not a matter of true or false information, but of true or false knowledge—meaning that disagreement more commonly arises over interpretations and judgments as to which interpretations to take stock in or believe. We make judgments, “good” and “bad,” “wise” and “foolish,” about interpretations, “true” and “false.”

On that understanding, the paper explains that the projects and policies now afoot styled “anti-misinformation” and “anti-disinformation” are dishonest, as it should be obvious to all that those projects and policies would, if advanced honestly, be called something like “anti-falsehood” campaigns.

But to prosecute an “anti-falsehood” campaign would make obvious the true nature of what is afoot—an Orwellian boot to stomp on Wrongthink. To support governmental policing of “information” is to confess one’s anti-liberalism and illiberality. The essay offers a spiral diagram to show the three chief facets of knowledge (information, interpretation, and judgment) plus a fourth facet, fact, which also deserves distinct conceptualization, even though the spiral reminds us: Facts are theory-laden.


Writing at Discourse, published by the Mercatus Center, Martin Gurri describes “disinformation” as follows:

The word means, ‘Shut up, peasant.’ It’s a bullet aimed at killing the conversation. It’s loaded with hostility to reason, evidence, debate and all the stuff that makes our democracy great. (Gurri 2023)

That is from Gurri’s excellent piece, “Disinformation Is the Word I Use When I Want You to Shut Up.” The piece prompted the present essay, the title of which is a variation on his.

With such titles, Gurri and I are being polemical, of course. Not all usages of “disinformation” and “misinformation” come from people intent on shutting someone up. But a lot are. The “anti-misinformation” and “anti-disinformation” projects now afoot or in effect are about shutting up opponents.

In 2019 the Poynter Institute for Media Studies published “A Guide to Anti-misinformation Actions around the World.” There you survey examples of anti-misinformation and anti-disinformation projects and policies, which have no doubt soared further since 2019.

The policing of ‘information’ is the stuff of Naziism, Stalinism, Maoism, and similar anti-liberal regimes. In my title “Misinformation Is a Word We Use to Shut You Up,” anti-liberals are the “We.” To repress criticism of their dicta and diktats, they stamp criticism as “misinformation” or “disinformation.” Those stamps are Orwellian tools that anti-liberals wield in the hope of stamping out Wrongthink—for example, on climate, election integrity, the origins of the Covid virus, therapeutics such as Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine, the effectiveness of masking, the effectiveness of the Covid injections, the safety of the Covid injections, and the effectiveness of lock-downs. “Anti-misinformation” could be deployed in keeping with whatever the next THE CURRENT THING might be, with associated slogans against, say, China, Putin, Nord Stream, racists, white supremacists, MAGA Republicans, “deniers,” et cetera. And then, of course, there’s all that “misinformation” disseminated by “conspiracy theorists”.

In speaking of “policing,” I mean government throwing its weight and its coercion around against “misinformation” or “disinformation.” And, besides government coercion, there are allies. These allies often enjoy monopolistic positions, stemming either from government handouts, privileges, and sweetheart deals, as with broadcasters, universities, and pharmaceutical companies, or from having cornered certain network externalities, as with certain huge media platforms. Allies of various sorts sometimes do the bidding of the despots because they themselves are threatened and intimidated. The ecosystem leads to their debasement.

To support governmental policing of “information” is to confess one’s anti-liberalism and illiberality. Even worse, it is to flaunt them. The motive is to make and signal commitment to anti-liberalism, in a manner parallel to how religious cults sets up rituals and practices for making and signaling commitments (Iannaccone 1992). Vice signals vice, the ticket in some spheres to promotion and advancement.

Also, vicious action spurs more of the same to defend against exposé and accountability for past wrongs. In protecting their rackets, the wrongdoers verge upon a downward spiral

Read the rest HERE.

This isn’t going to end well

Drones attack Russian oil refineries; Germany closes Russian consulates in retaliatory move

Amanda Macias
Natasha Turak

Drone attacks on Russian soil continued into their second day, with reported strikes on two oil refineries roughly 50 miles from Russia’s highly important Black Sea oil export terminals, local authorities said.

The strikes come just a day after drone attacks in Moscow that damaged buildings and prompted the Kremlin to say it reserves the right to take “severe measures” in response.

Meanwhile, several people have been killed in shelling in the central and eastern Ukrainian regions of Dnipropetrovsk and Russian-occupied Luhansk, according to local officials.


Germany closing Russian consulates in tit-for-tat move

Germany will close four out of its five Russian consulates, the German government said Wednesday, in response to a move from Moscow to limit the number of German diplomats in the country.

Russia will still be allowed to operate its embassy in Berlin and one general consulate, according to Reuters. Germany, meanwhile, will only be allowed to have 350 officials in Russia.

The move comes amid deteriorating ties between the two countries amid Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Germany’s foreign ministry specifically cited Russia’s new limits on staff when it announced the consulate decision.

“This unjustified decision is forcing the federal government to make very significant cuts in all areas of its presence in Russia,” a spokesperson said, according to Reuters.

— Michele Luhn

The Maid of Orleans, my birthday saint

St. Joan of Arc, convicted of heresy by Bishop Pierre Cauchon, a legitimate prelate of the Roman Catholic Church, along with a corrupt bench of judges. Burned at the stake at Rouen, 30 May, 1431.

“About Jesus Christ and the Church, I just know they are one in the same thing.”

“One life is all we have and we live it as we believe. But to surrender who you are and to live without belief is more terrible than dying – even more terrible than dying young.”

In response to the trick question as to whether she was in the state of grace: “If I am not, may God put me there; and if I am, may God so keep me.”

“It is better to be alone with God. His friendship will not fail me, nor His counsel, nor His love. In His strength, I will dare and dare and dare until I die.”

“You say that you are my judge; I do not know if you are; but take good heed not to judge me ill, because you would put yourself in great peril.”

“Children say that people are hung sometimes for speaking the truth.”

“Go forward bravely. Fear nothing. Trust in God; all will be well.”

“All battles are first won or lost in the mind.”


“I am not afraid, I was born to do this.”

Upon being chained to the stake: “Hold the Cross high, that I may see it through the flames.”

Her sentence was reversed and annulled by the Church in 1455. Beatified 11 April 1909. Canonized 16 May 1920.

St. Joan of Arc, pray for us.

FDA Says “Misinformation Can Spread 6x Faster Than Facts”

The FDA released a video on May 16 warning the public of the dangers of misinformation. At one point in the video, the FDA says, “Misinformation can spread 6x faster than facts,” without any data or facts to back the statement up. The FDA ostensibly shared the video because they continue to worry about the impact of “dangerous” misinformation on public health.

The video and the PDF viewer on the FDA rumor control page direct Americans to “trusted sources” like “independent fact checkers” or government websites. However, given what we saw during the pandemic concerning effective treatments for COVID-19 that were not approved by the government narrative, it is hard to trust advice from a governmental website fully. The FDA continues to toe the line, evoking terms used during the pandemic to enlist the public’s help to “stop the spread” of harmful online misinformation. The language used here is purposely manipulative, eliciting memories and behavior when the public was much more controlled by such language.

The rumor control page is yet another example of the way the U.S. government continues to lead Americans by the nose back to what it deems to be “trusted information.” The page also shows messaging from the government that seems to cover all the bases, just in case “the science” doesn’t work out. Its “recommendations evolve” with the science, and “the science” is determined by the ones in power.

Think back to the CDC’s and Fauci’s waffling about masking, or better yet, think about how thousands of years of science about viruses were conveniently thrown out the window during the pandemic to suit their purposes. “Trust the science” was really more about “trusting the government’s” version of it at the time.

One governmentally opposed narrative seen during the pandemic surrounded the use of Ivermectin as an effective treatment for COVID-19. The manic pushback on using the well-tested and safe medication was perplexing, to say the least. It is one of the “safest drugs in the world and is on the World Health Organization’s list of safe drugs.”

It seems the government and the media orchestrated a full-frontal assault on Ivermectin to frighten and discourage the use of the drug. As a result, Ivermectin was almost impossible to obtain from pharmacies for many months during the pandemic. Prescriptions went unfilled, and many did not receive what may have been a life-saving treatment. In some cases, individuals desperate to recover from COVID-19 used horse paste obtained from the local Tractor Supply containing Ivermectin, sending the government into a frenzy of misinformation on the drug’s safety.

Many doctors who did not relent to the fear-mongering used Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine with great success to treat patients with COVID-19. However, getting the correct information to the public was enormously difficult because of the government’s disinformation campaign, and fear of the drug persisted well into the pandemic. It is thought that many died because of disinformation from the U.S. government and its public servants.


A post from Rep. Thomas Massie seems to demonstrate just how far the government is willing to go to prevent the public from obtaining certain drugs without a prescription—drugs that have been used for decades by farmers for animals. On June 11, the FDA will make a list of medications no longer available over-the-counter at feed stores for animal use. Given what happened during the pandemic, the worry is that the FDA and the government will gradually tighten their grip on safe and efficacious over-the-counter medicines for humans as well.




New study shows antagonistic narcissism and psychopathic tendencies predict left-wing antihierarchical aggression

by Eric W. Dolan

Narcissistic individuals and those with psychopathic tendencies are more likely to strongly endorse left-wing antihierarchical aggression, according to new research published in Current Psychology. Antihierarchical aggression refers to a specific type of hostility aimed at challenging or opposing hierarchical power structures or authority figures. The new findings shed light on psychological mechanisms that motivate some individuals to participate in violent political activism.

The majority of research on authoritarianism has focused on individuals with right-wing political ideologies. This focus has resulted in a gap in understanding authoritarianism among individuals who support left-wing political ideologies, which the authors behind the new work sought to address.

“We were interested in the psychological factors behind authoritarianism,” explained study authors Ann Krispenz, a postdoctoral associate, and Alex Bertrams, the head of the Educational Psychology Lab at the University of Bern. “There is a wide range of literature and research in the field of right-wing authoritarianism (RWA). However, research on authoritarianism observed in individuals who are supportive of left-wing political ideologies are still rare.”

“By many researchers, the notion of left-wing authoritarianism (LWA) is even been met with skepticism. Thus, we wanted to investigate LWA and its personality correlates using a recently published measure for LWA by Costello and colleagues (2022).”

Costello and colleagues conceptualized LWA as a tripartite construct consisting of three correlated dimensions: anticonventionalism, top-down censorship, and antihierarchical aggression.

“Authoritarianism can be found on both sides of the political spectrum,” Krispenz and Bertrams said. “Indicators of authoritarianism on the political left are anticonventionalism (i.e., the absolute endorsement of progressive moral values), top-down censorship (i.e., the preference for the use of governmental and institutional authority to suppress any speech that is considered as offensive and intolerant), and antihierarchical aggression (i.e., the motivation to use force and aggression to overthrow established hierarchies).”

“For example, an individual high in LWA might declare anyone to be ‘old fashioned’ who is opposing their own ‘progressive values,’ strive to suppress free speech to regulate the expression of right-wing beliefs in educational institutions, and even endorse the use of violence to reach their own political goals.”

Krispenz and Bertrams investigated the relationship between narcissism and left-wing authoritarianism in two studies, and utilized the online research platform Prolific to recruit samples of U.S. participants.

Their first study included 391 individuals with an average age of 46 years. The participants completed various online assessments using the Qualtrics software…

Read the rest HERE.