Diversity, Equity & Inclusion Poker Rules in The Lindsey Clancy Case

In our culture one has to be aware of how the DEI poker rules work. For example one has to keep in mind that in any conflict or contest that a black male trumps a white male, and that a black female trumps both a black male and a white male and a white female. However, a white disabled lesbian female trumps a straight black female. Any combination is feasible and sometimes the rules shift depending upon the situation. However, one thing is certain about these rules is that a straight white Christian is the equivalent of holding a pair of twos. The straight white male in DEI poker always loses.

We recently, are seeing DEI poker being played again in our culture. The Lindsey Clancy case has brought up some interesting combinations for our DEI poker rules. On the one hand you have a black male juror who refused to vote with the other predominantly white female jurors who were obviously strong lib-tards. Which way would DEI poker rules go on this one?

Well, we are learning what the DEI poker rules instruct us in this case. The News media and the Defense Attorney and his wife are full on attacking the juror who did not vote w/ the rest of the jury on the Clancy case.

We’ve been told he was,

1.) A Black man (a real advantage in DEI poker)
2.) His landlord is currently trying to evict this Black man
3.) The Black male juror in question may have lied on his juror questionnaire
4.) The Black male juror we are being told by the media has a history of domestic violence

All this indicates that in DEI poker a psychotic white female murderer of her own children trumps a black male who exhibits all too often typical black behavior.

Now, any other time this too often typical Black behavior would be excused by the media and the cultural gatekeepers and all of it would be blamed on white people for being oppressive. As such, it would be considered bad form to even bring it up. However, DEI poker has some shifty rules that one has to be aware. DEI poker is kind of like playing “Calvin-Ball.” (This for those who were Calvin & Hobbes fans.)

BUT NOW, because the all too often typical Black man has the chutzpah to disregard the cultural zeitgeist DEI poker rules by voting against a psychopathic white female the left media machine is melting down about behavior they would only melt down over if somebody dared to commit the sin of noticing.

So… we learn here that in DEI poker, a psychotic white woman who viciously murders her three children trumps a black man who only,

1.) Can’t pay his rent
2.) May have had domestic abuse problems in the past
3.) May have lied on his juror questionnaire in order to get on jury

Now, these DEI poker rules are important to keep in mind. I wonder which way this would have tilted if Lindsey Clancy had the dropped the N bomb on the Black juror like Shiloh Hendrix did in Minnesota?

Would even doing that be enough to find her holding a weaker hand in DEI poker? I suspect that a psychotic white woman viciously murdering her three children due to post-partum blues would still trump a black juror even after dropping an N bomb on him… though it might be close for DEI poker rules.

Pay attention to these DEI poker rules and be careful out there. You don’t want to be holding a losing hand when playing DEI poker.

Author: jetbrane

I am a Pastor of a small Church in Mid-Michigan who delights in my family, my congregation and my calling. I am postmillennial in my eschatology. Paedo-Calvinist Covenantal in my Christianity Reformed in my Soteriology Presuppositional in my apologetics Familialist in my family theology Agrarian in my regional community social order belief Christianity creates culture and so Christendom in my national social order belief Mythic-Poetic / Grammatical Historical in my Hermeneutic Pre-modern, Medieval, & Feudal before Enlightenment, modernity, & postmodern Reconstructionist / Theonomic in my Worldview One part paleo-conservative / one part micro Libertarian in my politics Systematic and Biblical theology need one another but Systematics has pride of place Some of my favorite authors, Augustine, Turretin, Calvin, Tolkien, Chesterton, Nock, Tozer, Dabney, Bavinck, Wodehouse, Rushdoony, Bahnsen, Schaeffer, C. Van Til, H. Van Til, G. H. Clark, C. Dawson, H. Berman, R. Nash, C. G. Singer, R. Kipling, G. North, J. Edwards, S. Foote, F. Hayek, O. Guiness, J. Witte, M. Rothbard, Clyde Wilson, Mencken, Lasch, Postman, Gatto, T. Boston, Thomas Brooks, Terry Brooks, C. Hodge, J. Calhoun, Llyod-Jones, T. Sowell, A. McClaren, M. Muggeridge, C. F. H. Henry, F. Swarz, M. Henry, G. Marten, P. Schaff, T. S. Elliott, K. Van Hoozer, K. Gentry, etc. My passion is to write in such a way that the Lord Christ might be pleased. It is my hope that people will be challenged to reconsider what are considered the givens of the current culture. Your biggest help to me dear reader will be to often remind me that God is Sovereign and that all that is, is because it pleases him.

7 thoughts on “Diversity, Equity & Inclusion Poker Rules in The Lindsey Clancy Case”

    1. Hello Matt

      Everything I am reading is saying that the holdout male juror was black. Below from a news report.

      The holdout juror in the Lindsay Clancy case was the only Black man on the jury, which was predominantly composed of White jurors. This juror voted against the majority, leading to a mistrial after the jury was unable to reach a unanimous verdict

      Reply

      1. Welp, I reckon I stand corrected. When Vox posted his first article showing a picture of the supposed holdout juror, it fit his narrative and was easy to believe. Vox even made a second post the next day contrasting a picture of another white male juror who voted not guilty, and the contrast between the two white men was obvious. Vox is usually right on these matters, but apparently he fell for some AI trickery and his readers did too.
        On a similar note, I saw a supposed picture of Clancy’s attorney, Kevin Reddington, on a different site. The picture was clearly of a middle-aged tranny male. Given our nation’s, and especially Massachusetts degradation, it was easy to believe. But when I looked him up, Reddington is a legit male who’s about 70.
        With all of the AI, bloggers, and posters available and government and media outlets no longer even attempting to keep up pretenses, discerning truth will only get harder.

  2. Hoo boy, race, economics, and women for the last three blog posts, all bangers too. And street preaching.

    Why, it’s almost as if the Bible has something more to say than “go to church.”

    You know who else takes up those topics? Liberals who go to church, such as Talarico. So they get free reign in the culture as all the George Bush and Mike Pence types paint pictures, smile, and “build bridges.” Folks in my church have no response to the topics you brought up…..they seem to think strongholds will be demolished by hugs and striving for areas to agree upon. They don’t have the ability because they haven’t even thought about it in the first place. One of the greatest sins in university-area churches is to take a position that requires one to look bad to the left. Even pro-life conservatives, if they are university-affiliated, recoil from appearing as anything other than conciliatory to “good people on both sides” view. So you never ever commit the faux pas of pointing out a lefty belief. Ex, biology prof, what do you think about macroevolution? “Good people on both sides, really good scientists. I stay out of it.” But if a secular lefty mocks a creation view, the prof is friendly, but if a church brother says evolution is a ridiculous stronghold, then that brother is shunned. Committed the faux pas of having a conservative opinion without being a PhD in the topic.

    Same with economics. Family man with great personal life, kids becoming missionaries, yet always has more pushback for the capitalist point of view. Just doesn’t want to stand out for a righty viewpoint, but is willing to have a Bible study at work. That’s bridge building.

    Privatized faith that ruffles no feathers. Bring them to church, let the pastor and the Holy Spirit do the rest. Invite them to watch sports ball, and always appear reasonable. Since, race, nation, crime, rainbow is all divisive, be quiet and hope they follow the lead in 10, 20, 30 years.

    Dolly is the real model apparently, not Kirk, whom we never mentioned.

    Reply

  3. The simple fact is that America was far more free when white people openly and publicly used the word “nigger.”

    The causal connections between that freedom and that word usage, having to do especially with the social subordination of negroes to whites in that day, the social and political and moral philosopher can trace out.

    Historically, the word “nigger” has referred to an obvious racial-moral category of folk we all know and try to avoid, a group of folk our society would be far better off without.

    Now if negroes as a group behaved better, then I personally, as a white man, would rejoice in that improvement and would likely join the group that claims whites and all others, including negroes, should refrain from using that pejorative word.

    And while the word “nigger” can of course be used viciously as to demean, as a great many others words can be, it is also true that, statistically speaking, the negroes as a group have earned that negative appellation.

    Personally, as a proud white man, I am not willing to let folk who excel all others in crime and other dysfunction regulate my speech. I will not be silenced either by niggers or by their slimy white-lib keepers.

    Reply

    1. Pastor Bret, I was wondering if you had any thoughts on this above comment. Do you agree with it?
      I am on board with kinism and agree with ordo amoris, but I find it sickening that people legitimately think that people of different races are inferior. Do you agree with Winston? If not, what parts and what would you say to him or others who were sitting in your church with the same beliefs?

      Reply

      1. Hello JT,

        Thanks for writing.

        My position has been publicly stated numerous times. I think that inferiorities and superiorities run congruently in all races and people groups, which is to say that when two or more people groups are compared there will be some areas wherein where you will find superiorities in one or another race while at the same time there will be inferiorities that one will find in one or another race.

        I do think that the white man has been superior at building civilization over the black man when speaking in terms of generalities. Certainly there are black individuals who have contributed to building civilization but taken as a whole the white man is superior to the black man at building civilization. On the other hand there can be little doubt that the black man is superior to the white man in sheer athleticism, for example, speaking in a general sense, though there are individual white men who can be superior athletes.

        I also think the white man is superior when it comes to what is now called “suicidal empathy.” The white man has demonstrated little capacity to protect his own interest and this is because he has a capacity of empathy that is resulting in him suffering and seemingly embracing white replacement. Because the white man excels at suicidal empathy the consequence is and will continue to be an inability to help his own people as well as being the aid he has been to those who are inferior at building civilization.

        Of course, I believe it is because God has blessed the white man with the Christian faith that accounts for the larger measure of any superiorities the white man has. If the white man is superior it is a superiority born completely by God’s grace. Of course by rebelling against God, as he has done, the covenantal curses are now landing on white people and they are becoming the bottom rail of the social order they built.

        I also admit that in God’s economy it is theoretically possible that a Christian Yellow, Red, Black, or Brown culture/civilization could someday be superior to any civilization that pagan white people might build.

        I should go on to say that I believe that all men are ontologically equal before God. That is to say, that all individuals are fallen sinners and are in need of redemption. However, I also believe that economically speaking (role and function) races/ethnicities/people groups can be superior and inferior. IQ Statistics tell us these truths (see Charles Murray’s “The Bell Curve”). Also violent crime statistics tell us these truths (see the booklet, “The Color of Crime”).

        I do not believe that all men are created equal, if by that one means that all men are created with the same native abilities. I do not believe that two McAtee’s are equal to two Thomas’ in that sense. Races/ethnicities/families have different propensities, strengths, and weaknesses. Some of those will provide superiorities in certain areas while others will provide inferiorities in other realms.

        I hope that answers your question. If you’d like to probe the matter further please do so by asking more questions.

        Blessings,

        Pastor Bret

Leave a Reply

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