Russian Roulette: Troops In Ukraine-Not Just Crimea

See more at The Interpreter Magazine

(From Video Description) In dispatch six, VICE News correspondent Simon Ostrovsky travels to the Kherson region of mainland Ukraine to both the Ukrainian and Russian checkpoints. At the Ukrainian checkpoint, Simon goes inside one of their tanks, and speaks to the commander, who says that despite his Russian blood he will defend all invaders. But at the Russian checkpoint, the exchange isn’t quite as cordial.

The New York Times points to the amassing of troops on the border as counter to earlier Russian press releases:

MOSCOW — Russia’s Defense Ministry announced new military operations in several regions near the Ukrainian border on Thursday, even as Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany warned the Kremlin to abandon the politics of the 19th and 20th centuries or face diplomatic and economic retaliation from a united Europe.

In Moscow, the military acknowledged significant operations involving armored and airborne troops in the Belgorod, Kursk and Rostov regions abutting eastern Ukraine, where many ethnic Russians have protested against the new interim government in Ukraine’s capital, Kiev, and appealed to Moscow for protection.

A day after a deputy minister denied any military buildup on the border, the Defense Ministry released a series of statements beginning early Thursday that appeared to contradict that. They outlined what was described as intensive training of units involving artillery batteries, assault helicopters and at least 10,000 soldiers….

…read more…

Gay Patriot Touches on the Failures of Feminism

Yes, I am stealing pretty much the entire post… it is GREAT commentary. But PLEASE at least click through to their LINK [link is still good even though there is a line through it] and to let GP know I love their work (minus the many spelling errors, which I fixed):

(V the K) So, aside from lowering standards to the point where Lena Dunham is considered smart and pretty, what has Feminism achieved?

The feminization of our politics has brought about the unsustainable welfare state; whose crowning achievement is Obamacare, a program championed by a Feminist Speaker of the House and implemented by a Feminist Secretary of Health and Human Services.

American Colleges are well on the way to becoming puritanical matriarchies. Already overwhelmingly female, new laws are being worked that will define virtually all sex as rape, and there are efforts underway to make it mandatory to expel males who are merely accused of rape. Rape itself is being  redefined to include the circumstance of a woman changing her mind after consenting to sex with a man, with no statute of limitations.

The foregoing may be an effort for women to reclaim through legalism what they lost in the sexual revolution; control over sex. The culture of single parenthood and permanently single women is a consequence of men no longer needing to commit to a woman in order to receive sex….

At one point, Feminists assailed pornography as demeaning to women. Now, it’s hailed as empowerment when a Womyn’s Studies Major at Duke University (Annual Tuition: $40,000) makes porn. [The coed in question claims it’s the Patriarchy’s fault because she doesn’t get enough financial aid; never mind she was offered a full-ride (no pun intended) at another university.]

Social Conservatives get knocked around a lot for believing that motherhood and family give women more dignity than porn careers, for believing that men should commit to their women and women to their men and both should commit to their families; for believing that empowerment comes through strength of character and self-reliance, not by performing lewd acts for the sexual gratification of strangers. Given the alternative, it should be conceded that social conservatives have a point.

U.S. Timetable According to Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (1589)

1789? 1589? or 1614?

This would mean that the Constitution was signed in 1614, the year Pocahontas married John Rolfe in Jamestown, Virginia. (The Blaze)

 

Via HotAir:

I don’t typically like to give anyone too much grief for what could easily be an innocent mental-to-verbal lapse, but… c’mon, now. Given that she took to the House floor to explicitly argue against the constitutionality of the GOP’s proposed Enforce The Law Act, I must say that her argument might have been a teeny bit more convincing if she was a little more firm in her background knowledge of the actual Constitution. Yikes.

Huh. I didn’t know.

Now Democrats Want Control Over the Calendar

First Democrats want control over weather (see below), their fight against global warming is all the rave. Then they wanted to control nature more by blurring the lines of gender. Now they want to rewrite the calendar.

The above tweet comes from Gateway Pundit, and shows — apparently — the type of thinking from the top. Here’s what is said about it at GP:

Tara McGuinness is the Obama White House Senior Communications Advisor. Her Twitter profile says she’s “all health care all the time.”

Today McGuinness responded to Aaron Blake at the Washington Post when he asked her why there were fewer people signed up for Obamacare in February than January. Well, because… “there are fewer days in January than February.”

Obviously she made a simple mistake. But in the world of the blogosphere, it is one that will live on… and on… and on. I just wish that the Democrats made similar silly mistakes instead of wanting to spend trillions of dollars to control weather by a fraction of a degree, regulating businesses out of the economy through eco-fascist ideology, and controlling the certificates of birth nature intended. Sick!

Hillary Clinton Blow: Money Bundler Jeffrey Thompson Pleads Guilty

OUCH! But in a good way. Libertarian Republican has this breaking story:

Just breaking… Jeffrey Thompson has pleaded guilty in a Washington D.C. courtroom to multiple counts of illegal campaign fundraising.

Backgound from the WashingtonTimes a few days ago, “Hillary Clinton campaign got illicit funds from D.C. scandal figure – Terry McAuliffe, now Va. governor, was Clinton campaign chairman at time”

Despite Hillary Rodham Clinton’s promise that she had scrubbed illegal cash contributions from her 2008 presidential campaign, prosecutors revealed Monday that the mastermind of Mayor Vincent C. Gray’s “shadow campaign” also funneled hundreds of thousands of dollars to aid Mrs. Clinton’s bid for the White House.

Jeffrey E. Thompson’s scheme included diverting more than $608,000 in illicit funds to a New York marketing executive, Troy White, who organized “street teams” to raise Mrs. Clinton’s visibility in urban areas during her Democratic primary battle against Barack Obama.

Mr. White pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor in the case. Prosecutors said that from February to May 2008, Thompson used two firms to disburse $608,750 in “excessive and unreported contributions to pay for campaign services in coordination with and in support of a federal political candidate for president of the United States and the federal and the candidate’s authorized committee.”

That candidate was Mrs. Clinton.

Read It All

The First Union To Endorse Then-Senator Obama~Pissed

This story comes via Breitbart:

The 300,000-member union that was the first to endorse then-Senator Barack Obama has released a devastating Obamacare report that says Obama’s controversial healthcare program will slash worker wages by up to $5 an hour, reduce worker hours, and exacerbate income inequality.

The report by Unite Here–a North American labor union that represents workers in the hotel, gaming, food service, manufacturing, textile, distribution, laundry, and airport industries–is titled: “The Irony of ObamaCare: Making Inequality Worse.”

“Ironically, the Administration’s own signature healthcare victory poses one of the most immediate challenges to redressing inequality,” states the 12-page report. “We take seriously the promise that ‘if you like your health plan, you can keep it. Period.’ UNITE HERE members like their health plans.”

The report features first-person testimonials and photos of union members describing how Obamacare is personally hurting them and their families–the same kinds of stories that Majority Senator Harry Reid said are “all untrue” and that progressive New York Times columnist Paul Krugman mocked as”nonexistent” in his piece “Health Care Horror Hooey.”

[….]

Last week, Unite Here Donald Taylor discussed the possibility of a union worker strike over Obamacare and said, “Even though the president and Congress promised we could keep our health plan, the reality is, unless the law is fixed, that won’t be true.”

The Unite Here report further exacerbates Democrats’ already daunting electoral hurdles heading into the  midterm elections, now less than eight months away.

Union members are not alone in opposing Obamacare. According to the latest RealClearPolitics average of polls, just 38% of Americans now support Obamacare.

(Read It All)

Settled Science! Yeah Right (Prager Reads Krauthammer)

A great article by Charles “the Hammer” Krauthammer, can be found over at the Washington Post. In it, Krauthammer shows that science advances… and really… science is screaming at the climate deniers (the anthropogenic global warming crowd) to “advance.”

…”The debate is settled,” asserted propagandist in chief Barack Obama in his latest State of the Union address. “Climate change is a fact.” Really? There is nothing more anti-scientific than the very idea that science is settled, static, impervious to challenge. Take a non-climate example. It was long assumed that mammograms help reduce breast cancer deaths. This fact was so settled that Obamacare requires every insurance plan to offer mammograms (for free, no less) or be subject to termination.

Now we learn from a massive randomized study — 90,000 women followed for 25 years — that mammograms may have no effect on breast cancer deaths. Indeed, one out of five of those diagnosed by mammogram receives unnecessary radiation, chemo or surgery.

So much for settledness. And climate is less well understood than breast cancer. If climate science is settled, why do its predictions keep changing? And how is it that the great physicist Freeman Dyson, who did some climate research in the late 1970s, thinks today’s climate-change Cassandras are hopelessly mistaken?

They deal with the fluid dynamics of the atmosphere and oceans, argues Dyson, ignoring the effect of biology, i.e., vegetation and topsoil. Further, their predictions rest on models they fall in love with: “You sit in front of a computer screen for 10 years and you start to think of your model as being real.” Not surprisingly, these models have been “consistently and spectacularly wrong” in their predictions, write atmospheric scientists Richard McNider and John Christy — and always, amazingly, in the same direction.

Settled? Even Britain’s national weather service concedes there’s been no change — delicately called a “pause” — in global temperature in 15 years. If even the raw data is recalcitrant, let alone the assumptions and underlying models, how settled is the science?

But even worse than the pretense of settledness is the cynical attribution of any politically convenient natural disaster to climate change, a clever term that allows you to attribute anything — warming and cooling, drought and flood — to man’s sinful carbon burning.

Accordingly, Obama ostentatiously visited drought-stricken California last Friday. Surprise! He blamed climate change. Here even the New York Times gagged, pointing out that far from being supported by the evidence, “the most recent computer projections suggest that as the world warms, California should get wetter, not drier, in the winter.” ….

(WaPo)

“Soak the Rich” Luxury Type Taxes Kill Jobs ~ Larry Elder

Via Pantagraph.com

The talk coming out of Washington these days sounds like 20 years ago when “soaking the rich” was thought to solve budgetary problems. As a result, a 10 percent luxury tax was imposed in 1990 on high-end yachts, planes, etc. Democrats such as Sens. Dick Gebhardt and Ted Kennedy were saying back then the same thing Democrats are saying today: The super-rich need to pay “their fair share.”

So, what happened to the infamous luxury tax? The rich simply avoided the tax by buying yachts and planes elsewhere — not in the United States. By 1991, an estimated 25,000 blue-collar jobs were lost in the boat-building industry — not to mention job losses in the plane industry and elsewhere. Many companies went out of business.

Expected tax revenues fell far under projected levels. Congress recognized its folly and repealed the luxury tax in 1993 — but not until thousands of jobs were lost and could not easily be regained.

Democrats today still have not learned the lesson. Soaking the rich does not help budgetary problems. It only eliminates badly needed jobs.

If the financially successful in this country do not see a future for their companies due to a negative business climate orchestrated by Democrats, there will be no business expansion — and correspondingly there will be no jobs forthcoming.

So why do Democrats continue their “soak the rich” rhetoric when it doesn’t work? They still haven’t learned the truth found in the old saying: Don’t kill the goose that lays the golden egg.

Putin Wrestles Bears — Obama Wears #MomJeans

Watch the entire Sean Hannity segment HERE.

People are looking at Putin as one who wrestles bears and drills for oil. They look at our president as one who wears mom jeans and equivocates and bloviates. We are not exercising that peace through strength that can only be brought to you courtesy of the red, white and blue, that only a strengthened US military can do.

Oscar Winning John Ridley’s “Manifesto of Ascendancy”

John Ridley is the Oscar winner for Best Adapted Screenplay, for 12 Years a Slave. While he is reliably left leaning on such current affairs as same-sex “marriage,” he is on-the-spot with the following commentary on cultural anchors.

Via Esquire Magazine:

…In the forty years since the Deal was brokered, since the Voting Rights Act was signed, there have been successes for blacks. But there are still too many blacks in prison, too many kids aggrandizing the thug life, and way too many African-Americans doing far too little with the opportunities others earned for them.

If we as a race could win the centuries-long war against institutionalized racism, why is it that so many of us cannot secure the advantage after decades of freedom?

The author, last night. Jason Merritt/Getty

That which retards us is the worst of “us,” those who disdain actual ascendancy gained by way of intellectual expansion and physical toil—who instead value the posture of an “urban,” a “street,” a “real” existence, no matter that such a culture threatens to render them extinct.

“Them” being niggers.

I have no qualm about using the word nigger. It is a word. It is in the English lexicon, and no amount of political correctness, no amputation into “the n-word”—as if by the castration of a few letters we should then be able to conceptualize its meaning without feeling its sting—will remove it from reality.

Media Bias Noted

…The Big House of the Liberal Plantation, The New York Times, opined that economic discrimination was at the heart of the riot (though it failed to explain why poor whites rarely did the same)…

So I say this: It’s time for ascended blacks to wish niggers good luck. Just as whites may be concerned with the good of all citizens but don’t travel their days worrying specifically about the well-being of hillbillies from Appalachia, we need to send niggers on their way. We need to start extolling the most virtuous of ourselves. It is time to celebrate the New Black Americans—those who have sealed the Deal, who aren’t beholden to liberal indulgence any more than they are to the disdain of the hard Right. It is time to praise blacks who are merely undeniable in their individuality and exemplary in their levels of achievement.

This, then, is how the praise begins. We need to burn into our collective memory the event that marked the beginning of our new timeline: an event from early in this millennium that seemed, for its moment in time, auspicious but that is now all but forgotten. It was lost in the ash of fires in Over-the-Rhine. Buried in the rubble of 9/11. But I for one will not let it go, won’t let it get dumped into a potter’s field of U. S. politics. It was too important. Far too significant. It was eleven days when two blacks ran America.

IF THE SITUATION were just slightly altered, Condoleezza Rice might have been, and would have made, a better Mrs. George W. Bush than the current Mrs. George W. Bush. Same as George, Condi’s politics are right. Her worldview is faith based, courtesy of her reverend pops. A protege of Brent Scowcroft’s, she served as a special assistant for national-security affairs to George H. W. Bush, so she was preapproved by Dad. And should anyone posit that a woman of color would not be welcome to Thanksgiving dinner in Kennebunkport, well, Bush brother Jeb had married himself a minority, so even that trail was previously blazed.

But for G. B. the second, much to his credit, his interest in Condi was less about her being a woman, let alone a black woman, and more about her being an accomplished individual.

And Dr. Condi is accomplished as hell: a Ph.D. in poli-sci from the University of Denver. Former provost of Stanford. At thirty-five, barely a kid in Washington years, she was a staffer at the National Security Council. She came onto the foreign-policy train wreck that was the early days of G. W. Bush’s 2000 campaign. Helped mold his malapropism-afflicted worldview into a demicoherent one. After the certification of Bush’s election, Dr. Condi got herself easily appointed as national-security advisor.

Firsts all the way around.

Black America should have been singing hosannas.

But Condi was Republican. So never mind. Never mind she’d spent a lifetime facing down racism. Born in Birmingham at the peak of race hate, Condi was a schoolmate of Denise McNair, one of the “four little girls” bombed to death in September of ’63 at the Sixteenth Street Baptist Church. Niggers and old-school shines couldn’t abide her. Same as with Clarence Thomas, they let her politics obfuscate her accomplishments. They stamped her: Not Officially Black. Bloggers tagged her a “Sally Hemings for the Twenty-first Century.” Left-leaning pundits smeared her with the slurs “Aunt Jemima” and “brown sugar.” Julian Bond, reaching deep into the old-school bag of tricks, turned to rhyme to asperse Dr. Rice’s authenticity: “Just because they are your skin folks, doesn’t mean they’re your kinfolks.”

Cute.

Then they went back to entertaining themselves with another Wayans-brothers movie….

…read more…

WOW