Larry Elder gets into the Iowa voter who wanted her vote back after she found out that Pete Buttigieg was gay and married. Kinds funny. You can read more about it at RIGHT SCOOP:
Author: Papa Giorgio


TIE BREAKERS: Democrats Flip Coins (PLUS: #NeverTrump Fail)
WEASEL ZIPPERS hat-tip
(GATEWAY PUNDIT) Yes, coin tosses are used in Iowa’s caucuses to determine winners in precincts with tied results.
[….]
A coin toss determined who got the last delegate out of one of Iowa’s precincts after Buttigieg and Klobuchar were tied.
Democrat Pete Buttigieg ‘randomly’ won the coin toss in Iowa Monday night.
Maybe this is how Hillary Clinton won 6-for-6 coin toss victories in Iowa in 2016?
Watch how Buttigieg ‘randomly’ wins this coin toss pic.twitter.com/vn1FEv12l7
— Jack Posobiec ?? (@JackPosobiec) February 4, 2020
(BIZ PIC) Democrats already under fire for the trainwreck caucuses in Iowa on Monday are facing new outrage over how votes in several precincts were determined by a coin toss.
Monday’s caucus results ended with no official vote totals as the Iowa Democratic Party blamed “inconsistencies” in some precinct reporting. But in some locations, tied caucus votes that were too close to call were broken with an actual flip of a coin.
[….]
One tie-breaker between Pete Buttigieg and Sen. Amy Klobuchar gave the win to the former South Bend, Indiana mayor. Apparently the student who executed the questionable coin toss must have realized his lack of expertise in the area.
[….]
Buttigieg won another coin flip against Sen. Elizabeth Warren that raised audible protest from some gathered at the venue.
AS an aside…. the #NEVERTRUMPERS failed in their “challenge” to run against Trump.
Here the WASHINGTON EXAMINER details the above a bit more:
For six months, some of President Trump’s most implacable foes have invested great hope in two Republicans, former Rep. Joe Walsh and former Massachusetts Gov. William Weld, who are challenging the president for the GOP nomination. Could they do some damage to Trump’s reelection prospects?
Tonight, in Iowa, that hope was put to a first test. It failed.
In the state’s Republican caucuses — yes, there were Republican caucuses, even though the competitive Democratic caucuses received all the attention — the Walsh and Weld candidacies fizzled.
In the end, Trump won 97.16% of the vote, to Walsh’s 1.08% and Weld’s 1.27%. Others, write-ins of various people, totaled 0.47%. It was a striking show of strength for the president.
Beyond that, turnout was high for a year in which an incumbent president is assured of re-nomination. In the last election, 2016, about 180,000 Republican voters turned up for caucuses. But that was a highly competitive year in which Trump battled Ted Cruz, Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush, and a bunch of other candidates. The last time there was a noncompetitive GOP caucus, that is, a caucus with an incumbent president, was in 2004, when President George W. Bush was in the White House. That year, about 8,000 Republicans showed up for what were essentially meaningless caucuses…..

Michael Bloomberg’s Golf Caddie (Mark Steyn)
Mark Steyn fills in for the indomitable Rush Limbaugh and was making me howl today as I delivered to Hollywood studios. Here is just a sample of the wit and humor of STEYN ONLINE!

Talk Radio Reacts To Rush’s Cancer News

“This Guy!” Schiff Is Crazy

SKITS: Nightmare In Paradise | 3-year Old Chooses Gender
MOONBATTERY hat-tip:
- A recent arrival from Kansas learns what it is like to run a business in the People’s Republic of California…. You can see why the pathologically despotic Michael Bloomberg sees hyper-regulated California as a model to emulate. You can also see why moving vans tend to be full when they leave California and empty when they return. But the Third World still keeps the state’s population growing, if slowly.
Another skit where a 3-years old “chooses” his gender:

Hispanic Trump Supporters Interviewed by Jorge Ramos
Hat-Tip — MRC LATINO:
RAMOS: Let me ask you about the trial currently underway against President Donald Trump. They are trying to remove him, I don’t know if you are following it. Do you believe that President Donald Trump tried to cheat for personal gain…
RAY BACA, BORDER HISPANICS FOR TRUMP: No.
RAMOS: …when he had this call with the president of Ukraine?
BACA: I heard the call when…
RAMOS: From July 25th.
BACA: From July 25th. I didn’t see a problem. What is most interesting to me about this situation is- why don’t the Democrats want to know what happened with…with Biden and his son. How is it that Democrats are ready to plunge this country into a very difficult time- to force a president out over something he said? Saying, “Hey, can you look into what you can do about that issue”.
RAMOS: Isn’t he asking for a favor? Many people believe that he was asking for a favor in exchange for their investigation of a political opponent.
BACA: I didn’t see it that way, but at the same time, I’ll tell you this: why is it that if the Democrats have a Vice President who has a son that is making 80 thousand dollars a month in a company that is supposedly…that’s cheating in another country, why don’t they want to know?
RAMOS: There are no formal charges against the Bidens, let me make that clear. What do you think about attempting to remove President Trump?
ANTHONY AGÜERO: It’s the same thing we go back to, right? We have cases of over 4,800 families (being) trafficked along the border with fake documents, right? We have over 600 of those children that have been “recycled”, we have many more important things that we should be focusing on. That call that the president made clearly has nothing to do with him trying to persecute anybody. He’s just doing his job and seriously trying to investigate something that is going on, because he is opposed to corruption, and the moment we have someone like Joe Biden’s son, who has no experience whatsoever, none to do with that sort of work, who is making over 80,000 dollars a month, we should investigate what’s going on. The same thing with a relative of Nancy Pelosi’s, who is also very well connected in Ukraine.

Rand Paul’s Question Rejected… Again
Kentucky Senator Rand Paul’s whistleblower question blocked in Senate impeachment trial by Chief Justice John Roberts. (Watch that moment HERE)
LEGAL INSURRECTION adds some thoughts to this:
So do people know the whistleblower’s identification? If not then let Paul ask his question.
Chief Justice John Roberts once again rejected a question from Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) since it supposedly names the impeachment whistleblower… even though supposedly NOBODY knows the identification of the whistleblower.
He asked: “Are you aware that House intelligence committee staffer Shawn Misko had a close relationship with Eric Ciaramella while at the National Security Council together and are you aware and how do you respond to reports that Ciaramella and Misko may have worked together to plot impeaching the President before there were formal house impeachment proceedings.”
@RandPaul should ask Schiff to identify the other person in this picture. pic.twitter.com/lmK3J5OLKV
— Alex Goldin (@alexgoldin74) January 30, 2020
POWERLINE continues with Rand Paul’s question rephrased (<< video at link):
- I believe that Senator Ron Johnson rephrased the question Senator Paul submitted to Chief Justice Roberts as set forth in the adjacent post. Chief Justice Robert having declined to read the question, Senator Johnson gave it another go. The question alludes to the RCP columm by Paul Sperry that we also published last week in “Whistleblower overheard.” Not surprisingly, Chief House impeachment manager and House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff declines to answer the question.

Dem House Managers Voted Against Lethal Aid To Ukraine
Hilarious. She [Democrat House Manager and Representative from Florida’s 10th congressional district, Val Demings] argues the U.S. abandoned Ukraine during Obama Admin! “Demings suggested that Ukrainians died in their war with Russia but those soldiers died during the Obama years” (GATEWAY PUNDIT):
JONI ERNST gets it right…
BREITBART notes this about the above:
….Ernst made it clear she was irritated with what she portrayed as hypocrisy by the Democrats.
Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY), she said, voted against the most recent National Defense Authorization Act, “which included lethal aid to Ukraine.” Reps. Zoe Lofgren (D-CA), Hakeem Jeffreys (D-NY), and Nadler (D-NY) voted against the last one, which also included such spending.
“This president has done more than they have, and he has done more than the previous administration did,” she said.
Ernst noted that Russia had invaded Crimea in 2014, and President Obama did nothing but send blankets and non-leah military aid. “Blankets don’t throw lead down-range,” said Ernst, a U.S. Army veteran.
In contrast, she noted, President Trump had armed Ukraine with actual weapons, giving it the opportunity to mount a defense against Russia.
“House Democrats, these House managers, did nothing of the sort to provide that assistance to Ukraine, and yet now they are on their high horse about President Trump not doing enough for Ukraine.
“This administration has done more than the previous administration did when Crimea was being invaded. I have very strong feelings about that.”
Ernst later added that the president’s temporary hold on security assistance had not affected current spending for Ukraine.
Of course the VERY AWESOME Elise Stefanik made this point a while back!
Day 3 of Adam Schiff’s flimsy case for impeachment. This is the weakest case for impeachment of a President in our nation’s history.
The facts remain the same. The American people are tired of this charade. pic.twitter.com/3S6zd4ZHeI
— Rep. Elise Stefanik (@RepStefanik) January 24, 2020
THE WASHINGTON TIMES as well throws ice on the Dems:
…The Iowa Republican also said Rep. Jerrold Nadler, who is an impeachment manager, along with House Democratic Reps. Zoe Lofgren of California, Sylvia Garcia of Texas and Hakeem Jeffries of New York, all who either opposed or didn’t vote for national defense bills that included lethal aid to Ukraine.
“Four of the House managers have voted against lethal aid to Ukraine and they can sit there and lecture about this President not doing enough for Ukraine,” Ms. Ernst said. “This president has done more than they have and he has done more than the previous administration did.”…

RNC Ad Focuses On “How The Left Views Us”
POWERLINE notes of the original video (which you can watch the linked story at said website):
- This is the kind of thing that insures President Trump will be re-elected in November–or would, if anyone watched CNN. It is hard to imagine a less attractive 80 seconds of television. What is it about liberals (and formerly conservative never-Trumpers like Rick Wilson) that makes them so smug and self-satisfied? Especially given that, as in this case, they are generally people of so little accomplishment.
I posted previously on Rick Wilson… who is supposedly a Republican… definitely in name only: “Rick “Darker Than a Latte” Wilson” — at any rate, the RNC capitalized on this narrative that all us Trump supporters are idiots:
PJ-MEDIA hopes the MSM keeps it up:
…Personally, I hope all of the Democratic candidates, as well as their flying monkeys in the MSM, keep on labeling all Trump supporters as stupid racists. These too-smart-for-the-room Dems and Never Trumpers (redundant, I know) are completely clueless about the fact that their behavior is minting new Trump voters every day.
There were probably more than a few of the new voters at the president’s rally in New Jersey Tuesday night:
If you want your children to inherit the blessings that generations of Americans have fought and died to secure—then we must devote everything we have toward victory in 2020. Only this way, can we save the America we love – and drain the Washington Swamp once and for all! pic.twitter.com/5NeC0mFWfU
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 29, 2020
People in a union-dominated blue state began lining up in frigid temperatures two days early for that rally.
Who knew New Jersey had so many drawling yokels?
TO WIT,
BLACKSPHERE notes the following:
…With 175,000 tickets requested, the mayor is preparing for thousands of visitors. Also, he’s added additional security since there will be Leftists protesting the president.
But the people in the area are excited.
“It’s just history in the making for the generation ahead of me,” said Selena Wollk, of Northeast Philadelphia. “And it’s just a once in a lifetime event.”
“New Jersey has been a blue state for a long time,”‘ said Ed Talmo, of Vernon. “I think just by the turnout hours and days before the event, it just shows his presence is really wanted in New Jersey.”
Ticket numbers came courtesy of the president’s daughter-in-law, Lara. She reported on a radio show that over 175,000 tickets were requested–a record even for President Trump.
While many people won’t get inside the venue, they will still play a part in history. And there will be a giant television monitor set up for overflow, so people can see the president in the likely event they can’t get inside.
“This is like being in Disneyland for Trump supporters,” said Justin Mack, of Guttenberg. “This is like being Christmas, 5 years old. This is the best day of my life.”
While Duke Lea was the first arrival, aerial video from sister station WPVI-TV showed people still gathering, some with tents and others with lawn chairs, as early as 6 a.m. Monday….
In early 2010 I posted this audio from Dennis Prager regarding how the Left views Republicans…
MORE:
Harry Reid and the End of the Liberal Mind ~ Dennis Prager
The highest-ranking Democrat in America, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, described the Senate bill making English the national language of the American people as “racist.” And the New York Times editorial page labeled the bill “xenophobic.”
Welcome to the thoughtless world of contemporary liberalism. Beginning in the 1960s, liberalism, once the home of many deep thinkers, began to substitute feeling for thought and descended into superficiality.
One-word put-downs of opponents’ ideas and motives were substituted for thoughtful rebuttal. Though liberals regard themselves as intellectual — their views, after all, are those of nearly all university professors — liberal thought has almost died. Instead of feeling the need to thoughtfully consider an idea, most liberal minds today work on automatic. One-word reactions to most issues are the liberal norm.
This is easy to demonstrate….
….Here is a list of terms liberals apply to virtually every idea or action with which they differ:
- Racist
- Sexist
- Homophobic
- Islamophobic
- Imperialist
- Bigoted
- Intolerant
And here is the list of one-word descriptions of what liberals are for:
- Peace
- Fairness
- Tolerance
- The poor
- The disenfranchised
- The environment
These two lists serve contemporary liberals in at least three ways.
First, they attack the motives of non-liberals and thereby morally dismiss the non-liberal person.
Second, these words make it easy to be a liberal — essentially all one needs to do is to memorize this brief list and apply the right term to any idea or policy. That is one reason young people are more likely to be liberal — they have not had the time or inclination to think issues through, but they know they oppose racism, imperialism and bigotry, and that they are for peace, tolerance and the environment.
Third, they make the liberal feel good about himself — by opposing conservative ideas and policies, he is automatically opposing racism, bigotry, imperialism, etc.
Examples could fill a book.
Harry Reid, as noted above, supplied a classic one. Instead of grappling with the enormously significant question of how to maintain American identity and values with tens of millions of non-Americans coming into America, the Democratic leader and others on the Left simply label attempts to keep English as a unifying language as “racist.”
Another classic example of liberal non-thought was the reaction to former Harvard University President Lawrence Summers’ mere question about whether the female and male brains were wired differently. Again, instead of grappling with the issue, Harvard and other liberals merely dismissed Summers as “sexist.”
A third example is the use of the term “racist” to end debate about race-based affirmative action or even to describe a Capitol police officer who stops a black congresswoman who has no ID badge.
“Phobic” is the current one-word favorite among liberal dismissals of ideological opponents. It combines instant moral dismissal with instant psychological analysis. If you do not support society redefining marriage to include members of the same sex you are “homophobic” — and further thought is unnecessary. If you articulate a concern about the moral state of Islam today, you are “Islamophobic” — and again further thought is unnecessary. And if you seek to retain English as America’s unifying language, you are not only racist, you are, as the New York Times editorial describes you, “xenophobic” and “Latinophobic,” the latest phobia uncovered by the Left.
There is a steep price paid for the liberal one-wording of complex ideas — the decline of liberal thought. But with more and more Americans graduating college and therefore taught the liberal list of one-word reactions instead of critical thinking, many liberals do not see any pressing need to think through issues. They therefore do not believe they have paid any price at all.
But American society is paying a steep price. Every car that has a bumper sticker declaring “War is not the answer” powerfully testifies to the intellectual decline of the well educated and to the devolution of “liberal thought” into an oxymoron.
Liberal Professor Says Insulating Liberal Students To Opposing Views Hurts Them
A liberal professor interviewed in INDOCTRINATE U explains that insulating students by teaching from one ideological viewpoint harms students who are liberal and retards their ability to properly defend and coherently explain their views in the real world — i.e., outside the classroom. This excerpt is taken from two parts… Part 1 is HERE, and Part 2 is HERE.

Walrus Haulouts vs Netflix (Updated)
UPDATED VIDEO:
…Unfortunately, despite Attenborough’s despicable attempts to yank on heartstrings, the population of dangerous polar bears is not falling.
The actual victims here are children young enough to take this crap seriously; ecoanxiety can be a serious psychiatric disorder, as Greta Thunberg demonstrates.
Hoo Boy… now Netflix and other Media and environmental orgs are saying Walruses are a proof of Global Warming… except… this phenomenon has been observed for a long, long time. And IS NOT NEW like shown in popular media:
…Hype from the *Netflix/Attenborough ‘climate change is gonna destroy the world’ fearmongers earlier this year notwithstanding – or the media this summer trying to stir up climate change fever – the US Fish and Wildlife Service determined in October 2017 that the Pacific walrus is not being harmed by climate change and is not likely to be harmed within the foreseeable future (USFWS 2017). The IUCN Red List (2015) lists the Pacific walrus as ‘data deficient‘.
Large herds onshore are a sign of population health, not climate change, and walruses have come ashore in the Chukchi Sea during the ice-free season in summer and/or fall for more than 100 years (Crockford 2014; Fischbach et al. 2016; Lowrey 1985). Those are the relevant scientific facts….
(WUWT)
Dr Susan Crockford explains why the media coverage and statements by scientists and environmental organisations mislead people about the massive walrus haulout seen in Sept/October 2014. Read Susan Crockford’s paper, which refutes claims that Arctic walruses are in distress and danger due to global warming at: On The Beach: Walrus Haulouts Are Nothing New (PDF)
From POLAR BEAR SCIENCE:
I had an opportunity last night to watch the original Netflix ‘Frozen Worlds’ walrus episode and have some addition thoughts.
One big eye-opener was the final shot of the walrus sequence: a polar bear approaching from the water to feed on the carcasses below the cliff at Cape Kozhevnikov. This is additional proof that polar bears were in the area while the crew were filming. Yet the narrative in the film was silent on the risk to walruses on the cliff from polar bears and not a word was spoken of the hundreds of walruses that had fallen off that very cliff just days before after being spooked by approaching bears.
Oddly, I have also discovered that the Russian scientific advisor to the film, Anatoli Kochnev, wrote a scientific report in 2002 (translated into English) on walrus deaths at two regularly used beach haulouts on Wrangel Island from 1989-1996, when walrus population numbers were much lower than today and summer sea ice extent was higher (Kochnev 2002). He concluded that stampedes initiated by polar bears were responsible for most of the walruses found trampled to death.
This means Kochnev knew that polar bears nearby were a huge risk factor for walrus stampedes over the cliff but went along with the official ‘Our Planet’ narrative that no polar bears were involved and only lack of sea ice and poor eyesight were to blame for the carnage presented in the Netflix film.
In addition, a Google-translated photo-essay published by Kochnev’s friend Yevgeny Basov who had been invited to witness the spectacle at Cape Kozhevnikov in the fall of 2017 (posted 11 November 2017, original link here)(h/t WUWT commenter “it doesn’t add up”). The metadata on the photos in this essay shows that Kochnev was there on 16 Septmber 2017 (photo #2) and that walruses were already dying from falls off the cliff on 17 September (photo #22, see below), two days before the ‘Our Planet’ footage was shot.
This is almost certainly the event reported in The Siberian Times, when 20 polar bears were said to have spooked walruses at the top of the cliff, with hundreds fell to their deaths on the rocks below…..

Patrick Philbin – Impeachment
Patrick Philbin is Deputy Counsel to the President and Deputy Assistant to the President in the Office of White House Counsel and is one of the lawyers on the White House legal team that is presenting the President’s defense. I particularly like that he clerked for my favorite US Supreme Court Justice, Clarence Thomas. (RED STATE)