Quote of the day—Sindy Benavides

What’s important to us is addressing mental health, gun control reform, addressing misinformation, disinformation and malinformation. We want policy makers to focus on common sense solutions so we don’t see this type of violence in our communities. And we want to see the implementation of policies that reduce violence.

Sindy Benavides
August 19, 2022
Biden to host unity summit against hate-fueled violence
[Via email from Chet.

I interpret this as insistence the First and Second Amendments be deliberately infringed based on the delusional belief this will reduce criminal violence.

Prepare and respond appropriately.—Joe]


9 thoughts on “Quote of the day—Sindy Benavides

  1. It is important to note that this summit is not targeted towards ‘routine’ crime such as the release of a suspect in a double brutal home killing just a few miles from where I live, but is targeted toward the ‘threat’ from those who oppose the policies of the current administration.

  2. “This type of violence” – based on information that the liberals don’t like. In other words, any behavior that a democrat doesn’t like = violence. However, violence in the name of social justice is A-OK.

  3. She sounds like Charlie Brown’s teacher. Wah, what-wah wah, wah wah wah. Communist globo-speak for disarm and subjugate the wee peoples.
    I have to agree with the mental health thing though. Everyone in DC/UN is certifiable. Their f–k’in insane. Gonzo, rubber room time.
    Show me one of them that isn’t a pathological lair? A kleptomaniac? A psychopath? All three? Or just plain batshit gone in the mental upstairs?
    Ya, we got real bad mental health problems all right. And it’s running our world. Into Hell I might add.
    Cut the crap, Sin-dy. All you really want to discuss is; What would Stalin do?

  4. They want to address right-wing extremism. OK, fine. How about we ALSO address left-wing extremism? Or does that not exist?

    • I know! I know!

      I was in a meeting with a “threat intelligence vendor” and they were going on at length about all the “right wing” groups they were tracking. I was somewhat shocked because my impression was these groups were almost entirely peaceful.

      When they didn’t mention any violence risk from the political left I asked about “left wing” groups. They replied that those type of groups do exist but were so small and rare they didn’t have many resource dedicated to them. My impression was “not many” meant zero.

      To be fair, this was before 2020 and the big BLM riots and looting. But there was ATIFA stuff going on.

      • 5 police being killed in Dallas by a BLM’er in 2016? Or ,oh that’s right, he just wanted to kill “whitey”. No affiliation to BLM. It just happened to be a BLM rally. Cops got in the way?
        Wonder at the stats if that was a III percenter, or maybe a tea party rally?
        How ’bout the granny that got her head cut off in Oklahoma by a mussie?
        Safe to say they look only for what they’re paid to look for?

  5. The only “common sense” to the Romish left is hierarchical authoritarianism. Nothing else makes “sense” to them, whatsoever. But of course it’s a ruse, pretending that whatever you happen want just also happens to be the only thing that “makes sense” at the moment.

    I don’t for a second believe that their leaders are delusional in the sense that you suggest. Power-mad, and evil, sure, but not delusional. They want their followers to be delusional, of course, because it’s a better way, and possibly the only way, to keep them in line. Coming out up front and declaring in your mission statement that you intend to enslave the world and reduce the population by billions so you can feel like a god and express your hatred and lusts to the nth degree is probably not a good idea, therefore the chief perpetrators of the left have to work continuously on various methods of deception. Substantially then, the whole enterprise becomes a deception business.

    So when the pope comes out with Laudato Si it’s not because he’s delusional at all. I don’t think that he actually believes any of his own crap. If he did, he wouldn’t be employing those masterful, Jesuitical deception, manipulation and intimidation tactics, which by the way are among the best anywhere.

    The big reveal is that the left is opposed to open dialogue while claiming that they always want a “conversation” on this or that. It’s like the abusive, gaslighting husband who needs to keep his abused wife from talking to other people. She might learn that there’s a better way to live, that there might be such a thing as real love and real peace and real security, and at the same time she might inadvertently expose her son-of-a-bitch husband for the filthy son-of-a-bitch that he really is.

    Free speech is always dangerous, but it’s always the MOST dangerous to liars!

    One’s position on free speech is therefore a pretty good litmus test for whether he is,
    1. Truly delusional or,
    2. Practicing willful, calculating, tactical deception.

    And let’s not forget or ignore the huge chasm which separates the two.

    Again and again I keep pointing out that a state of delusion on the part of a defendant may be forgivable in a court of law, but willful, planned, calculated and artfully executed deception for the specific purpose of advancing crime is proof of certain guilt. Don’t give the left what is possibly their best and only defense!

    “And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them.” Ephesians 5:11

  6. I don’t think anyone should be lecturing me on common sense until they can figure out which bathroom to use.

Comments are closed.