“When a Man [Woman] stops believing in God he [she] doesn’t then believe in nothing, he [she] believes anything.” — G. K. Chesterton
Dennis Prager discusses a couple articles about “feminist science” and Leftists having sex with nature. You read that right. Here are the two articles in order of Dennis reading them:
Dennis Prager reads from a COLLEGE FIX article recapping some of the more publicized hate crimes on campuses… except… they ended up being hoaxes. While there are MANY hate hoaxes (see MOONBATTERY’S list for instance), this article is a good recap of last years deplorably bored youth on campuses swallowing the victim pill spoon-fed to them by their professors.
Dennis Prager reads from a TRUTH REVOLT article. What I liked about the article is the empty seat the Viking put in. The NFL is disgraceful… and Prager is right, it is not “national” any longer.
John Coleman profiles scientist Roger Revelle, the grandfather of the Global Warming myth and Al Gore’s mentor. For more of a real tribute to Roger, see WUWT’s post.
Larry Elder goes through an interview where CNN’s Brooke Baldwin presses Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) about what the Democrats got in return for shutting down the government. Even Brooke Baldwin is taken back by the spin. Other clips from CNN show that the onus lays at Schumer’s feet… what I mean by that is when you have lost CNN, you know you are in deep doo-doo.
Larry Elder introduces the millennial and Leftist to law. “Illegal Alien” is the term used in our statutes. “Undocumented immigrant, for instance, is a made up term, not found anywhere on our law books. A montage of Democrats agreeing with President Trump finishes out a good portion of the audio.
Is the term “illegal alien” racist? What is the appropriate term to describe the status of those who broke our laws either by illegally entering or over-staying the time allowed under a student, work or other temporary permit?
Cindy Rodriguez of the National Association of Hispanic Journalists considers the term “illegal” to be a pejorative, used by “reactionary commentators and politicians” and “radio talk shows.”
“If you can control the words people use,” Rodriguez says, “you can frame the issue… That’s how propaganda works. Repeat the words continually until it reshapes the way people think.”
Attorney Gloria Allred represented gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman’s Mexican-born housekeeper. Allred said the term “alien” should apply only to those “from outer space.”
Words matter.
The term “illegal alien” does not only apply, of course, to persons of Mexican or Hispanic heritage. “Illegal alien” is a race- and ethnicity-neutral term. The U.S. Code defines an “alien” as “any person not a citizen or national of the United States.”
The word “alien” appears numerous times in the U.S. Code and is applied to those who live here legally (tourists, resident aliens, students on visas), as well as to those who live here illegally.
The term “illegal alien” is used throughout U.S. law in statutes and court cases – all referring to non-U.S. citizens who illegally enter and/or unlawfully stay here. The code painstakingly defines the procedures to grant “immigrant status” to an alien – a privilege reserved for those who follow the law.
Guess what term doesn’t appear in U.S. immigration law? “Illegal immigrant.”……………
Rupert Darwall explains why climate change has cynically been adopted as the cause célèbre by America’s wealthy elites, in particular in Silicon Valley.
Rupert Darwall chronicles how the fraud of the acid rain scare created a playbook for today’s climate change movement.
Some stright facts:
Myth: Acid rain has caused a large portion of U.S. lakes to become acidic.
Fact: In a recent study of 7,000 Northeastern lakes, only 3.4% were found to be acidic. Most of these lakes are just as acidic as they were before the Industrial Revolution. Furthermore, most of the acidic lakes in the United States are in Florida, where there is the least acid rain.
Myth: Data taken by proponents of the acid rain theory is accurate and conclusive.
Fact: Proponents of the acid rain theory have rested their claims on a deeply flawed series of articles by G.E. Likens and his co-workers in the 1970s. A careful evaluation of Likens’ research conducted by a group of scientists at Environmental Research and Technology, Inc., reveals that his data collection and selection was deliberately biased to support the desired conclusions.
Myth: Acid rain destroys vegetation.
Fact: Acid rain actually has a positive impact on vegetation. The nitrogen and sulfur characteristic of acid rain, act as nutrients essential for plant growth. The world’s first acid rain study concluded that, “the principle effect of acid rain is the improvement of crop yields and crop protein content.”
Myth: Acid Rain is unnatural.
Fact: Rainwater is naturally acidic. Because water is such a good solvent, even in the cleanest air, rainwater dissolves some of the naturally present carbon dioxide, forming carbonic acid. According to EPA regulations, Ph levels any lower than 5.0 are environmentally harmful. Yet, an analysis of ice from the Antarctic and the Himalayas, deposited hundreds and thousands of years ago when the environment was presumably pristine, had Ph values ranging from 4.8 to 4.2.
Information from Environmental Overkill by Dixy Lee Ray (Regnery Gateway, 1993); Trashing the Planet by Dixy Lee Ray (Regnery Gateway, 1990).
In a great example of how the media guides it’s listeners down a path full of narratives they [said media] wish were true… we find in a touted “honest” Clinton documentary many lies and missteps (Clinton | American Experience). Larry Elder is in his element here as he excoriates the depths of this false narrative. His article is a must read for those interested in this. Near the back-half of the audio Larry offers other media silence on issues surrounding Democrats. They [Democrats] apparently have a no fly zone in regard to honest reporting.
I came across this post on Facebook a friend was involved in. My friend and others were responding to this post (as well as others)… but it got me thinking…
… we should really be thanking people like Jon M. Why? Well, because of the growth in minorities who say they are going to vote for Trump or feel they are better off now than a year ago… despite the ad-hominem attack. People like Jon M. are making more people sick of the lies and labels and more likely to vote GOP. Let me explain with my Facebook response to Jon
FB Response
[media enhanced]
(CAUTION, reading required… I know this is a stretch beyond simple bumper sticker mantras I see above… but facts have been scarce, so I thought I would bring some to the party. You do not have to follow the links… they are meant for people who care to check their positions at the door and do critical thinking.)
This is why blacks and Hispanic/Latino people will vote for Trump more in 2020 (or the GOP) than they already did in 2016. People who have a common sense understanding about border security, jobs, taxes, and want to fix properly what was promised to Reagan and was essentially double crossed on…
… they are now called white supremacists. They are sick of the violent bumper sticker labels.
There isn’t a single thing Trump has done that has endeared him to white supremacy (WS). I have spent some time in jail and know intimately the viewpoints of white-power individuals… not to mention having studied the views of four racist cults in-depth (Christian Identity [defunct for the most part], the KKK [5,000 members], the Nation of Islam [NOI], and the Five-Percenters). Unannounced to the bumper sticker mantras above, almost all KKK’ers are socialist, and vote almost entirely Democrat.
QUESTION:So, if the majority of KKK’ers who did vote voted for Obama… does that make Obama a white supremacist???
QUESTION:Are the thirteen percent of Muslims voted for Trump, triple the amount that voted Romney, are they are Islamophobic, white supremacists???
QUESTION:Eight percent of blacks voted for Trump, seven percent more than Romney — not to mention the black men and women who didn’t vote for the president at all in a higher percentage. These same men and women previously voted twice for Obama. These persons of color… if I understand my detractors correctly, are white supremacists???
Mind you, I noted months before the election of Obama his racist tendencies in this video: “Obamacon – Twenty Years In A Racist Church” (Mind you, I look like a white supremacist… but that is why I spend the first 6-minutes giving my bio):
…but even Obama’s bigotry wouldn’t fall towards supporting white supremacists.
I also wish to commend my discussion with an older Democrat on my vacation:
BUT, AGAIN, this is why Trump will win again, that is, because people are sick of being called racist for believing the same thing all politicians did a generation ago, what Cesar Chavez (UFW founder) fought for.
QUESTION: Is the co-founder of the United Food Workers Union, Cesar Chavez, a white supremacist???
And the worst name calling has been against black persons who are Republicans and/or are starting to support the GOP via Trump. (You should see the stuff said of Larry Elder that I censor on my YouTube — the nicer ones are “coon” and “Uncle-Tom.” — agains, people don’t actually read so they don’t know that character in Harriet Beecher Stowe telling was the hero.)
HERE is a poll to further my point that people like Jon M. are helping Trump, not hurting him (via BLACKSPHERE):
Not one, but TWO new polls show President Donald Trump’s rising support among black voters. And this news has Leftists panicked.
After all the genned up nonsense about Trump being racist, the president has doubled his support from blacks.
According to the Atlanticamong black men, Trump’s “2017 average approval rating significantly exceeds his 2016 vote share,” The article points out that now “23 percent of black men approved of Trump’s performance versus 11 percent of black women.”
On average, Trump’s support among blacks is around 17 percent, versus 8 percent score reported in 2016 exit polls.
At that time, Trump received 13 percent support among black men and 4 percent support among black women.
The poll was based on “a cumulative analysis of 605,172 interviews Survey Monkey conducted with Americans in 2017.”
Doubling Down
A second poll by CBS showed a similar level of black support for Trump, reporting 18 percent of blacks now support President Trump.
Interestingly, only 41 percent were firmly against the president. Thus, 59 percent of blacks are willing to give him a chance.
I honestly can’t imagine how Democrats must feel after evaluating the information in this report. Talk about taking a swift kick to the nether region. Check out Question 2:
That HAD to hurt!
35 percent of blacks believe they are better off under President Trump, while 21 percent say the same. The 43 percent are “hold outs”, stuck in the Afro/Daishiki/Platform Shoes Era.
Could Trump garner 35 percent of the vote in future elections? As Sarah Palin would say, “You betcha!”
Camille Paglia explains her thesis that celebrations of androgyny and transgenderism and attacks on masculinity are harbingers of cultural and societal collapse.
A Report was released in April of 2017 that received no publicity until recently.
The report was a ruling on the results of an investigation or audit into FISA searches made by Obama’s FBI and DOJ during Obama’s time in office.
The report shows Obama’s FBI and DOJ participated in widespread criminal searches and criminal sharing of data with non authorized entities outside of government.
On April 26, 2017, an unsealed FISA Court Ruling unveiled a number of criminal activities that Barack Obama’s FBI and DOJ participated in during his time in office. The report to date received little attention. Now interest is brewing due to the recent actions of Congress and the report that is expected to be released in the upcoming weeks….
Here is the report referenced in GP’s post:
FISA searches can be conducted on any foreign person without issue. All non-U.S. citizens on the entire planet can be searched 24/7/365 no issues. FISA searches on foreign people have no restrictions at all.
However, when the FISA search returns data identifying a U.S. citizen, everything changes. Those changes are under the identifying term “702”. A “702” is an American person.
All U.S. citizens are protected by the fourth amendment against unlawful search and seizure. All searches of U.S. people must have a valid reason. Title III says any search for a potential criminal investigation must have a judicial warrant. Additionally, any criminal search of the FISA database must also have a warrant (technically, ‘approval’).
Any FISA searches of foreign subjects, might need FISA Court approval if the returned data includes a U.S. subject (“702”).
[…..]
A non-compliance rate of 85% raises substantial questions about the propriety of using of [Redacted – likely “About”] query FISA data.
(SEE ALL the pertinent released FISA/FBI documents at THE MARKETS WORK)
To wit, Democrat Representative Adam Schiff — leading on the “Russia Collusion” and impeachment thingies — says the public should not view the memo because the American public would not understand its talking points without the accompaniment reports to which the memo refers (GP h-t):
CABRERA: “Why not allow peel to look at it and let Americans make the decision for themselves about whether it’s useful information or not?”
SCHIFF: “Well, because the American people unfortunately don’t have the underlying materials and therefore they can’t see how distorted and misleading this document is. The Republicans are not saying make the underlying materials available to the public. They just want to make this spin available to the public. I think that spin, which is a attack on the FBI, is just designed to attack the FBI and Bob Mueller to circle the wagons for the White House. And that’s a terrible disservice to the people, hard working people at the bureau, but more than that, it’s a disservice to the country.”
Lo-and-behold… Schiff’s wish is gonna be granted — although I doubt that is what he wanted. Ooops.
According to the Washington Examiner‘s Byron York, Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-VA), Oversight Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy (R-SC) and Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-CA) huddled together Saturday to discuss a “never-before-used procedure” for releasing the “shocking” FISA abuse memo.
Washington Examiner reports:
There’s no doubt Republicans want the public to see the classified memo. To get it out, they are studying a never-before-used procedure whereby House Intelligence Committee members would vote to make the memo public, after which the president would have five days to object.
If the president had no objection, the memo would become public after those five days. If the president did object, the matter would go to the full House, which could vote to overrule the president’s objections and release the memo anyway.
In addition to the procedure, the three lawmakers are plotting how to go about releasing additional intelligence in support of the FISA memo. In a statement to CNN, Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) said he is in favor of the move.
CNN reports:
Republicans appear to be charging ahead with their plan to publicly release the document and potentially some of the underlying intelligence so long as sources and methods are not disclosed. “If we’re going to go through the process anyway of declassifying the memo, are there some of the supporting documents that might not reveal sources and methods but might answer key questions that the memo does raise?” said Rep. Matt Gaetz […] “Chairman Goodlate and Chairman Gowdy and Chairman Nunes each sort of have jurisdiction over elements, and they are meeting and discussing a process now that I think will lead to greater transparency.”
[…..]
While one may not think these are related…. they are. We are uncovering a massive cover up of illegal activity meant to sway an election:
