lern
Author: Papa Giorgio
Amnesty Will Destroy Conservatives ~ Ben Shapiro
How To Speak Leftist, Part II (Liberal Dictionary)
US NAVY Flexing Tech Muscle in Persian Gulf (Bad-Ass!)
(Bloomberg) The U.S. Navy has deployed on a command ship in the Persian Gulf its first laser weapon capable of destroying a target.
The amphibious transport ship USS Ponce has been patrolling with a prototype 30-kilowatt-class Laser Weapon System since late August, according to officials. The laser is mounted facing the bow, and can be fired in several modes — from a dazzling warning flash to a destructive beam — and can set a drone or small boat on fire….
Rachel Maddow Defending Obama by Rewriting History
Via NewsBusters:
As Stanley Kurtz writes in “Radical-In-Chief: Barack Obama and the Untold Story of American Socialism” (2010) —
Barack Obama and Bill Ayers — that famously unrepentant revolutionary terrorist of the sixties — were longstanding political partners. For eight years, Ayers and Obama worked together at two leftist Chicago foundations. Obama praised Ayers’s writings and funneled major financial support to the projects of Ayers and his radical allies. Ayers helped launch Obama’s political career and joined with the future president in the battle over an Illinois juvenile crime bill. Ayers played an important role in elevating Obama to the position of board chairman of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, an educational foundation Ayers himself helped create. Evidence suggests that Obama was responsible for bringing Ayers onto the board of the Woods Fund of Chicago, where the two worked together to increase funding for radical community organizations, including ACORN and the Midwest Academy. Evidence also suggests that despite official denials the Obama-Ayers connection long predates 1995, when the Obama camp claims it began.
The significance of 1995? That’s when Ayers co-founded the six-year, $160 million Chicago Annenberg Challenge — with Obama as its first board chairman — not that they had anything to do with one another. Later that year, Obama launched his campaign for Illinois state senate in the Hyde Park home of Ayers and his wife, fellow ex-Weather Underground terrorist Bernadine Dohrn. Which again should not be interpreted as evidence that Ayers had anything to do with Obama, who could have launched his political career in any number of Chicago living rooms.
Obama’s years of collaboration with Ayers, which mysteriously occurred without the two men ever conversing, became problematic for the ambitious Illinois pol due to a deeply unfortunate coincidence — a story about Ayers touting his new book, “Fugitive Days” and the glories of bomb-throwing in the New York Times … with the story running on the morning of Sept. 11, 2001.
The piece, under the headline “No Regrets for a Love of Explosives,” began with this memorable quote from Ayers: “I don’t regret setting bombs — I regret we didn’t do enough.” A sentiment surely shared by Osama bin Laden to his dying day.
“I can’t quite imagine putting a bomb in a building today — all of that seems so distinctly a part of then,” Ayers writes in “Fugitive Days” (page 295). “But I can’t imagine entirely dismissing the possibility, either.” The book was published in 2001, the same year Obama and Ayers served together on the Woods Fund Board while magically having nothing whatsoever to do with one another.
What is worse than the above “Madcow” saying Ayers didn’t know Obama is the fact that Ayers was Obama’s ghost writer:
This is from an older post Via Gateway Pundit:
American Thinker has the story,
Google, which sits atop more data than anybody outside the NSA, is presenting Bill Ayers as the author of Barack Obama’s purported first autobiography, Dreams from My Father. Follow this link (below) and see it while you can. If it is gone by the time you read this, a screen shot of the page, and a close-up on the Dreams entry are provided for posterity.
Google knows so much about us already that privacy activists are alarmed. What data are its algorithms sifting through to come to the conclusion that yes, the stylistic parallels to Ayers’ other books are formidable and Barry never showed any sign of an ability to write this way before or after, and yes, Christopher Anderson’s friendly biography includes the information that Obama found himself deeply in debt and “hopelessly blocked.” At “Michelle’s urging,” Obama “sought advice from his friend and Hyde Park neighbor Bill Ayers.”
What does WIKI say?
Bill Ayers – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Ayers
William Charles “Bill” Ayers (born December 26, 1944) is an American elementary education theorist and a former leader in the movement that opposed U.S. involvement in the Vietnam War. He is known for his 1960s activism as well as his …
And a Google book search? All results for bill ayers »
- Fugitive Days: A Memoir
- Fugitive Days: Memoirs of an Antiwar Activist
- To teach: the journey, in comics
- Dreams from My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance
- Race course against white supremacy
- Teaching the personal and the political: essays on hope and justice
- Sing a Battle Song: The Revolutionary Poetry, Statements, and …
- A Kind and Just Parent: The Children of Juvenile Court – Page 208
- Teaching toward freedom: moral commitment and ethical action in … – Page 172
And one last piece of information showing Ayers and Obama are close… a book appearance by Ayers had this flyer via Gateway Pundit:
A recent Baltimore book store—Red Emma’s— announced an appearance event byBill Ayers promoting his recent book “Public Enemy,” the Red Emma’s book store post states the following:
“Ayers reveals how he has navigated the challenges and triumphs of this public life with steadfastness and a dash of good humor — from the red carpet at the Oscars, to prison vigils and airports (where he is often detained and where he finally“confesses” that he did write Dreams from My Father)”
Well, Maddow does say her politics are to the Left of Mao… so should we be surprised if she uses propaganda? Who believes her anymore?
Obamacare Architect Calls Democrats Stupid! (UPDATED AGAIN!)
Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber bragging about deceiving the American people, who he thinks are stupid:
Purposely made the law confusing to fool the CBO, the American people, etc. Except… not one Republican passed it.
The 178 Republicans in the House of Representatives unanimously opposed the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) that constituted the biggest expansion of insurance to Americans in decades, illustrating the huge divide that remains between the two parties on key issues and setting up a major debate in next year’s elections. Thirty-Four Democrats also opposed it.
So is he saying that the Democratic Congress persons and the electorate [Democrat voters] are stupid?
Yes. That is the logical conclusion… want proof of this stupidity?
- “But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it”
This wasn’t the first time he said that Democrats are Dumb!
Pin-Ups For Vets – Short Documentary (Raising $$$ for Vets)
Out of the Closet, Born-Again… Republican
Media Silence In The Face Of The World’s Most Persecuted Group
The most persecuted and victimized people in the world today are Christians in the Middle East. The perpetrators of the widespread destruction of that region’s Christian community? Islamists. Middle East expert Raymond Ibrahim lays out the grim details.
Sharyl Attkinsson Claims CBS Hid Benghazi Clip To Sway Election
Left leaning media bias is nothing new to those who are of the investigative mindset. But this example is a little more than having a 5-to-1 ratio of those that oppose the 2nd Amendment to those that support it. It is done to sway elections.
And I often hear about how horribly biased Fox News is. I will take a right leaning bias as compared to CBS, NBC, ABC, MSNBC, CNN, NPR, and the like — any day!
Investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson said in a Fox News appearance that her former CBS News bosses purposely hid a clip of President Obama refusing to call the Benghazi attacks an act of terrorism in order to help him get re-elected.
Mr. Obama told Steve Kroft of “60 Minutes” the Sunday after the attack, “Well, it’s too early to know exactly how this came about, what group was involved. But obviously, it was an attack on Americans.”
The clip didn’t air, though the transcript with that portion was sent to “CBS Evening News” staff, Ms. Attkisson told Fox.
Mitt Romney, the 2012 GOP presidential nominee, took Mr. Obama to task during a presidential debate for his failure to call the attack an act of terror for 14 days — a perfect, and missed, opportunity for CBS to air the clip, Ms. Attkisson said.
“That exchange, I believe, should have been pulled out immediately after the debate, which would have been very newsy at the time,” she said. “It was exclusive to CBS. It would have, it appears to me, proven Romney’s point against Obama. But that clip was kept secret.”
Ms. Attkisson said she was covering Benghazi at the time, yet no one at CBS advised her to use that clip from Mr. Obama as part of her coverage. Instead, she was directed to use other clips that showed Mr. Obama suggesting he had called the attack an act of terror from the very beginning, she said.
“And it was only right before the election that somebody kind of leaked out the transcript to others of us at CBS and we were really shocked,” Ms. Attkisson said during the interview. “We felt that … something very unethical had been done.”….
There Is Peace For Veterans from ALL Wars
Geography or Gerrymandering? Both Sides Guilty!
The AP has this insightful article (remember… all my graphics are typically linked):
….Democrats blame Republicans for drawing districts that favor GOP candidates. “We’ve never seen a level of gerrymandering as severe as in 2010,” said Matt Bennett, a former aide to President Bill Clinton.
But some experts say geography may be just as responsible as gerrymandering for the Republican advantage.
Living patterns in many states make it relatively easy to pack Democrats into fewer congressional districts because they are much more likely than Republicans to live in dense urban areas, said Norman Ornstein, an expert on Congress at the American Enterprise Institute. Republicans are more likely to live in suburban areas, which can be more politically diverse, or in geographically large rural areas.
“Democrats are at a disadvantage here,” Ornstein said. “It’s not as difficult for Republicans doing a redistricting to concentrate the Democrats in districts where they can win 80 or 85 percent of the vote.”
[….]
But aggressive gerrymandering isn’t always necessary for Republicans to gain an edge, said Thomas Mann, an expert on Congress at The Brookings Institution.
“A lot of the Republican advantage — by no means all of it — a lot of it is the result of living patterns,” Mann said.
Two political scientists, Jowei Chen at the University of Michigan and Jonathan Rodden at Stanford University, are popularizing the idea that geography is more important than gerrymandering. They did a study using computer simulations to see whether the political makeup of Congress would be any different if congressional maps were drawn without partisan bias.
“In the vast majority of states, our nonpartisan simulations produced Republican seat shares that were not much different from the actual numbers in the last election,” Chen and Rodden wrote in a New York Times article. “In short, the Democrats’ geography problem is bigger than their gerrymandering problem.”….
Real Clear Politics has this piece back in the middle of 2013… which plays into some persons thinking this 2014 election sweep:
Both Sides Guilty!
Politico leads its website Monday with an article pressing the argument that Republican gerrymandering could actually end up hurting the party. By creating safe districts where Republicans have to worry more about losing a primary than losing the general election, the GOP is being pushed rightward, potentially hurting its national prospects.
These types of arguments are nothing new. Neither are the fairly compelling arguments against them.
First, the underlying assumption about the cause of district polarization is wrong. As I’ve suggested before, the natural geographic concentration of the Democratic vote is more responsible for polarized districts than any efforts by Republicans. For that matter, states where Democrats controlled the redistricting process yielded pretty heavily Republican districts as well. Illinois has two evenly matched districts (one represented by a Republican, one by a Democrat), but the remainder of the Republican-leaning districts went for Mitt Romney by healthy margins (even as he lost nationally by four points).
Remember, the primary goal of redistricting isn’t to create safe districts for your party (though that is probably a secondary goal). The primary goal is to place as many supporters of the other party into as few districts as possible, leaving your supporters in a lot of districts that are just partisan enough to fend off general election challenges.
This leads to the second point: If Politico is correct, then Democrats should be in big trouble, because there are more overwhelmingly Democratic districts than there are overwhelmingly Republican ones. The New York Times’ Nate Silver, making a related point, has created the following chart…
…which shows the cumulative number of districts sorted by Obama’s share of the vote.
The asymmetry is self-evident. There were 44 Congressional districts in which Mr. Obama won by at least 50 percentage points last year, compared with only eight for Mr. Romney. These hyper-partisan districts are far past the point where a Democratic candidate for Congress could lose under almost any circumstance, so they create wasted votes for Democrats.
Put differently, 68 Republicans — 29 percent of the caucus — occupy what we might call heavily Republican districts: districts that voted 15 points more Republican than the country as a whole. Eighty-three Democrats — 41 percent of the Democratic caucus — occupy districts that voted 15 points more Democratic than the country as a whole….