Saturday, September 29, 2018

OK, Now It’s Really ‘I’m Spartacus’ Time!

Men also deserve to be believed.

Dov Fischer September 27, 2018

(For the record, these words are being written before the Ford-Kavanaugh hearings.)
Much was made a few weeks ago of Cory Booker’s infamous “I am Spartacus” reference. If you actually saw and remember the Stanley Kubrick movie, the referenced scene saw hundreds, perhaps thousands, of vanquished gladiators captured by the Roman general, Marcus Licinius Crassus. Crassus stands before them, prepared to let the gladiators live, albeit returned to slavery, as long as they turn over to him their rebellion leader, Spartacus. However, if they refuse to point out Spartacus, Crassus will crucify all of them. Heroically, one by one, each gladiator rises to proclaim “I am Spartacus!” For a greater cause than themselves, each one rises to proclaim a lie. Amid the chaos of hundreds shouting cacophonically, Crassus decides to crucify them all. They lied. They knew they would be martyred for it. But they believed they were lying for a cause greater than themselves.
Booker may have destroyed his Democrat presidential chances for 2020 by playing the fool, but even a broken clock is correct twice daily (except, perhaps, on the two nights annually when we change the times). He inadvertently uttered a prophecy, auguring a veritable “I am Spartacus” moment in American history. We now have women rising, one by one, proclaiming in true “I am Spartacus” form: “Kavanaugh tried to rape me.” There was the Christine Ford allegation. Then Deborah Ramirez rose: “No, I am Spartacus — it was I to whom Kavanaugh exposed himself.” And then the man whom Tucker Carlson calls the “Creepy Porn Lawyer” now has a third #MeToo gladiator proclaiming “No, I am Spartacus — Kavanaugh did it to me.”.........To Read More....

Friday, September 28, 2018

Kavanaugh/Ford Media Aftermath

By Rich Kozlovich

Such media coverage, such media frenzy, such insanity, such amazing disrespect for common decency. It's disgusting how they've lied and destroyed a good man's life and caused so much suffering for he and his family, and for what?  Political gain. I've not seen anything as disgusting as this since the Thomas hearings. 

I thought Ted Kennedy was the epitome of disgusting.  I was wrong. 

One thing seems clear to me though, and that's Americans generally recognize a set up, they recognize disgusting behavior, they recognize corruption, and they resent it.

This won't backfire on the most slimy committee members like Feinstein, Booker,  Hirono, Harris, Blumenthal and Leahy, because they're absolutely representative of their constituents. But it will have an impact on others running for office. 

So why did the Democrats pick contemptible people to represent their party on the Judicary Committee?  Do they have a choice? 

Cartoon of the Day


Europe Wants Regulated Media to ‘Prevent Hate,’ America Next

By Warner Todd Huston September 26, 2018

An EU justice minister has proposed that the media be regulated in order for liberals to “prevent hate” in the media. This is how liberal fascists think and don’t fool yourself into imagining that this is only coming from wacky, left-wing Europeans. Liberals here in America would dearly love to do the same thing here. This is how fascist liberals end all forms of freedom. They move in with regulations to “help” you. Remember Ronald Reagan’s famous warning: “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I’m from the government and I’m here to help.”..........To Read More.....

RIP Jane Newton

By Hank Campbell — September 24, 2018
 
I am writing today about a woman you may never have heard of - but she was a hero of science, and I want to share her story.
Credit: OSU
Professor Mike Newton worked at Oregon State University for 58 years, published almost 400 papers, and was, in his words, a very healthy guinea pig after voluminous and nearly continuous exposure to compounds like Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin, which the science community calls TCDD and activists simply call "dioxin" in their fundraising campaigns.
 
I got to know him(1) after we published a piece on continual dioxin hype in our Priorities magazine and he read it and wrote me a nice email about his studies on human skin absorption of 2,4,5-T and the half-life of 2,4,5-T acid in the body (23 hours, I learned). He told me he evaluated the concentration of TCDD in wildlife (Aplodontia rufa, the mountain beaver, and Odocoileus hemionis, the blacktailed deer) whose habitats were sprayed at operational rates used in forest weed control. No symptoms from 2,4,5-T or TCDD were detected, he noted. All fine science, but that dioxin horse is not going back in the barn, statisticians beat scientists there.(2)

Then an email told me something really fascinating. In 1972, he was asked by the National Academy of Sciences to evaluate the effects of herbicides in Vietnam. Most of you know now they were talking about Agent Orange (and White - Picloram/2,4-D). He was the field guy and created hundreds of sprayed plots at various rates including the 3 gallons per acre rate of the undiluted defoliants. With a backpack sprayer connected to a spray boom, he experimented in vegetable gardens, rice paddies, mangrove wetlands, forests, inland and coastal areas, you name it, anything that might have been exposed to the chemicals.


He literally wrote the book on Agent Orange, I realized.(3) Why didn't he lead with that? That is the nature of scientists, of course. Most are too humble.(4)

But he was passionate about one thing. His wife Jane. In our correspondence and phone conversation she came up numerous times.

When he started out in academia in the 1950s, it was not the high-paying career it is now. While the average professor makes a very nice six-figure income these days, thanks to the Reagan boom in government funding of basic research starting in the 1980s, it was not so then. As a young grad student-professor at Oregon State University College of Forestry, he handled high-dioxin herbicides for 20 years. He spoke of his days with a leaky backpack sprayer and varied phenoxy herbicide esters in diesel fuel at dilutions from 25% down to 4%.

After a hard day of having chemical goop soaking his clothes, he came home and his wife Jane would launder them by hand, after her own long day of caring for the children. They couldn't afford a washing machine. No one used protective clothing then.(5)

I stopped him at one point during our talk and said, "Mike, I feel like Jane is the real science hero in the story. She didn't sign up for any of that."

He laughed and noted she was 87 and the picture of health.

That was in 2016. She passed away a short while ago, and it took me this long to write about it. But we are coming up on our 40th anniversary celebration and a lot of the people who we want to celebrate, or celebrate with us, have either passed on or don't feel well enough to travel.

And some don't get enough attention when they are with us. Mrs. Newton didn't just keep the Professor in clean clothes, she was a staunch advocate for responsible land management. As a founding member of Oregon Women in Timber, she educated the public and Congress about balancing the needs of natural resource industries. I can't say this is true but it is rumored that Doug Costle, one of the architects of the United States Environmental Protection Agency and Administrator from 1977 to 1981, learned to hide when she was around. Today the organization has evolved into the statewide Talk About Trees organization and they educate 150,000 students per year about forestry.

Just recently I wrote how Europe is going back to burning wood because it is renewable and under their legalese it doesn't cause smoke. They could sure use a Jane Newton to talk some sense into them right about now.

NOTES:
 
(1) He obviously loves the land, like me, but he started hunting at age 9, three years earlier than I did. He was also a military officer. But our similarities end there. He did science, I write about it. And my feet are a rather mediocre 11D.
 
(2) The linear no-threshold model (LNT) is also probably here to stay after 70 years, despite it being the worst form of junk science, and while our EPA has literally written the book on how to spray DDT inside the homes of people in developing nations where malaria runs rampant, it will not get re-registered here. Heck, we once exposed how Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and their hand-picked PR outfit Fenton Communications manufactured the alar pesticide scare, and the product was cleared, but it is no longer made because scaremongering sticks around even if science debunks it.
 
(3) I chuckled when he talked about the airline losing his luggage and since they were on a strict time frame he had to spray the plots in bare feet. Viet Nam didn't have any size 15 EEEEEE boots. And when they duplicated the plots elsewhere he did the same thing. I asked him why he continued to endure the cuts and such in bare feet and he replied that the experiments had to be replicated exactly for him to feel they were valid. (!) 
 
(4) Activists win a lot of fights because they yell and when scientists are calm, it makes it look like they don't believe passionately in their work. Journalists love people who yell.
(5) Today, activists making movies about how scary evil science is put their kids in haz-mat suits to even look at GMO corn.
 

We must all sacrifice for the environment

But I meant you – not me! We’re supposed to be exempt from rules we inflict on others.

Greg Walcher
 
Have we become a society of people who want to regulate others, but not ourselves? We laugh at those who suddenly object to a policy that seemed perfectly OK when (they thought) it only applied to others.
 
We make fun of Al Gore demanding that “we” end “our” fossil fuel use, while he travels the world in private jets and SUVs. We chortle about politicians and Hollywood stars advocating gun control while surrounded by heavily armed bodyguards.
 
In truth, such hypocrisy is common, because the desire to control other people’s behavior is human nature, at least for many. Yet our attempts at control frequently come back to haunt us.
In Hamlet’s most famous speech, he predicted that a would-be assassin might end up being “hoist with his own petard.” A “petard” is a bomb, so Hamlet meant the bomb maker might be blown up (“hoisted” off the ground) by his own explosives.
 
Today that Shakespearean phrase is a common proverb describing poetic justice, another way of saying “caught in his own trap,” or “what goes around comes around.”
 
San Francisco officials are once again learning this, as they struggle yet again with water shortages. Several times, endangered species issues have come back to haunt some of the nation’s most unyielding environmental campaigners and their elected officials. (San Francisco is the birthplace and headquarters of the Sierra Club.)
 
Yet the City has never moderated its in-your-face, holier-than-thou environmentalism. When President Trump announced the U.S. exit from the Paris climate deal, San Francisco announced that it would comply with the intent anyway, by limiting local fossil fuel use.
 
The City has also banned plastic straws, grocery bags and Styrofoam containers. It even requires solar panels on private buildings. If something is on the environmental industry wish list, San Francisco is leading the way.
 
But when the same activists insist on leaving more water in the rivers, to protect salmon, they mean water from Central Valley farmers – not their own water. Up to now, state regulators have obliged, and water restrictions have been imposed on farms to the south for 25 years.
 
Hundreds of billions of gallons of water previously used for irrigation have been flushed to the ocean, rather than sent through the California Aqueduct to the Central Valley, supposedly to protect salmon migration and spawning. Nevertheless, area salmon remain endangered.
 
So now the California Water Resources Control Board proposes further restrictions, this time including water that is part of San Francisco’s municipal supply.
 
Public hearings are generating numerous angry responses. That’s hardly surprising, since the plan would double the flow of water in the Tuolumne, Stanislaus and Merced Rivers, leaving more water for salmon, but less for the City – a lot less.
 
In fact, it could mean an annual reduction of 300,000 to 675,000 acre-feet of water for the Bay Area. In everyday household terms, that’s 98 billion to 220 billion gallons per year! Imagine how many baths, showers, laundry and dishwasher loads, lawn waterings and restaurant glasses of water that would mean.
 
Imagine how many almonds, walnuts, tomatoes, grapes, olives, apricots and peaches, how much cotton and rice, how much milk and cheese would not be produced in the Central Valley, if that much additional water is taken from farmers. 
 
While San Francisco’s water supply has been mired in controversy for a century, today the city has some of the purest water in the nation. That’s because its water comes from the Hetch Hetchy reservoir in Yosemite National Park.
 
The losing battle against building that dam and reservoir was a defining battle cry of Sierra Club founder John Muir, who vigorously opposed it. The dam was built anyway, and since the 1920s it has delivered Tuolumne River water to San Francisco, and to farms near Modesto.
 
But San Francisco’s water rights are junior to the agricultural rights, so the City could actually face the largest reductions.
 
Golden Gate City leaders, their environmentalist allies and normally ultra-green citizens are outraged. They never intended that water reductions they so strongly support would have any effect on themselves.
 
Meanwhile, a local group called “Restore Hetch Hetchy” advocates tearing down the dam. In 2012 it got an initiative on the local ballot for that very purpose. But San Francisco voters voted it down.

They support tearing down other people’s reservoirs, not their own.
 
The opponents then went to court, and have been there ever since. Ironically, they’re fighting the City itself, which argues that the legality of Hetch Hetchy is “settled,” and that the reservoir’s water supply is now indispensable.
 
Adding still more to the petard-like irony, the reservoir doesn’t just supply water to 2.7 million residents and businesses in more a dozen Bay Area communities. It also generates significant hydroelectric power, which is vital for a city and state that have vowed to end all electricity generation from nuclear, coal and natural gas facilities.
 
Suddenly, the once vital salmon somehow seem less important to City leaders.
 
Their alternative is (predictably) to have the State spend vastly more on “river restoration,” including killing competing fish. But even if that helps the salmon, it won’t satisfy the environmental industry, which still wants more water restrictions.
 
Perhaps water leaders across the West can be forgiven for thinking, “Welcome to our world,” if San Francisco is being hoist with its own petard. It is a world the Golden Gate City helped create.
 
Greg Walcher is president of the Natural Resources Group, author of Smoking Them Out: The Theft of the Environment and How to Take it Back, and a former head of the Colorado Department of Natural Resources.
 

Thursday, September 27, 2018

America’s Biggest Battle, 100 Years On

The Meuse-Argonne Offensive of 1918 was the largest battle ever fought by Americans.

By Dan McLaughlin

One hundred years ago this morning, at 5:30 a.m. Central European Time, the 1.2 million–man American Expeditionary Force launched all of its available combat strength into the largest and arguably the bloodiest battle in American history: the six-week Meuse-Argonne offensive that continued through the armistice at the eleventh hour of the eleventh day of the eleventh month of 1918. The horrific and protracted battle brought a decisive end to the first war in which Americans fought on European soil. Though it was filled with then-famous incidents and notable Americans, the ordeal of the Meuse-Argonne is far less remembered today than Gettysburg, Normandy, Yorktown, Okinawa, or New Orleans. We should keep that memory alive, as it tells us a lot about the America of 1918 and the century that followed................

With the Americans added to the defensive lines from the late spring on, and the arrival of the “Spanish flu” epidemic, the Germans simply ran out of men to press the attack. Like the British and the French, they no longer had any reserves of men left to draw on except teenagers waiting to be old enough to fight. Yet ship after ship, Americans kept arriving...............

The resulting casualties, while dwarfed by those endured by the European armies and spread over the 1.2 million men ultimately engaged in the fight, were nonetheless shocking: Over 26,000 killed and 95,000 wounded, about triple the number of Americans killed at Gettysburg even though Americans made up both sides of that battle. And yet, in the end, it was the very fact that the Americans were so willing to spend their young men so cheaply in 1918 that demoralized the Germans the most; nobody else had enough young men left to spend to act that way in 1918, and the Europeans knew it. More than any advances of territory, more than any skill in fighting, the mere fact of the Americans on the field with no end of their arrivals in sight decided the war............To Read More....

Cartoon of the Day!


We must believe survivors...right?

By Sam Younnokis September 27, 2018

Recently, after reading about Christine Blasey Ford's alleged sexual assault by Brett Kavanaugh, I have recovered some memories of my own. I had to do it without the help of Democrat activist lawyers, but that makes the memories no less valid.

At some point in the past fifty years, I was rape-groomed and sexually assaulted by all of the currently elected Democratic senators.

Yes, all of them, including the women.

I can't remember exactly where or when. I didn't tell anyone because I feared retaliation. But you have to believe survivors, and I self-identify as a survivor, so quid est demonstrandum.

It didn't all happen on one night. That would be unbelievable. But it repeated at every party, with different Democratic future senators. I'm told there were lines outside the bedroom door, though I don't actually recall a bedroom, much less a door. I was pretty drunk, maybe because they rufied me at those unchaperoned parties. Back then, everyone was pretty drunk, and so it's understandable if there were no witnesses...................Read more

My Take - This is - in my opinion - the definitive post on this outrage being perpetrated by the corruption of the Democrats on Kavanaugh, his family, and the nation.. 

Bombshell: I remember Brett Kavanaugh shooting Abraham Lincoln

By Ed Straker September 27, 2018

I've always thought, as most people do, that John Wilkes Booth shot Abraham Lincoln at Ford's Theater on April 4, 1865. But after spending six days talking with lawyers from the Democratic Party to help me refresh my memory, I've come to realize that it wasn't John Wilkes Booth at all, but rather Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

I had no memory of this happening as recently as last week, but today, it is as clear as day. I remember Kavanaugh coming up from behind the president of the United States and aiming a pistol at him. Only I'm not sure it was at Ford's Theater. It might have been at Ford's Theater, but it might also have been on the Mall, or in the White House, or on Capitol Hill.

I'm a little hazy on the day, too. It might have been April 4, 1865, but it also could have been a few days before or after, maybe even as early as 1864. The problem is that I had a few minor memory gaps. I don't remember what happened right before or right after the shooting. I don't remember exactly who was there and who wasn't. All I remember clearly is that Brett Kavanaugh did it. Trauma experts say it is perfectly normal to remember one detail of a traumatic incident while forgetting everything else................Read more

Scuttling Sanity to Repeat History and Sink a Country

By Jarod Paul Young September 27, 2018

On the morning of April 18, 2000, a Zimbabwean farmer, Martin Olds, mounted a defense of his 12,000-acre holding 400 miles southwest of Harare, after 70 men wielding automatic weapons arrived to lay claim to his land. For two hours, the 43-year-old former Rhodesian soldier used a shotgun and long rifle to fend off the invaders, wounding several while suffering multiple disabling injuries himself.

 He died there, his body treated indignantly by his murderers – communist thugs acting under the auspices of then-president Robert Mugabe. There were no arrests. Olds's property, like 4,000 other white-owned commercial farms in Zimbabwe, was swarmed by squatters and ultimately seized by the state for redistribution to those loyal to the ruling ZANU-PF party.

The seizures had predictable results: mass starvation, economic ruin, and citizens fleeing in droves for fruited plains – mainly South Africa............Read more

Feel the Bern: 'Yanqui come home'?

By Silvio Canto, Jr. September 27, 2018

Over the weekend, I spoke with a Venezuelan living in Virginia. He was in the Dallas area at a religious retreat. So I asked him the same question I've asked many others: "What about a U.S. intervention to remove Maduro?" His answer is the same as I've heard from others: "Everybody in Venezuela wants it to happen."

To be fair, I have not done a scientific survey, and I am speaking with anti-Maduro exiles living in the U.S. At the same time, Maduro is not that popular down there. I wouldn't be surprised if many Venezuelans living in the country agree with an intervention, too...........Venezuela is more than a failed state.  It is a disaster.  Venezuelans are hungry.  They are ill lacking medicine supplies.  The country cannot provide basic services, from electrical power to a police force.  Let's not forget that violence is rampant, in large part because the state has failed.........To Read More....

Muslim Refugees Perpetrate a New Kristallnacht

Wednesday, September 26, 2018 by Daniel Greenfield 0 Comments @ Sultan Knish Blog

In the winter of last year, a dozen Muslims tried firebombing the 163-year-old Gothenburg Synagogue.

The attackers threw firebombs at the house of worship forcing dozens of Jewish teens to take refuge in the cellar while waiting for the police.

The synagogue was already protected by heavy concrete barricades and bulletproof doors. A frail Star of David hangs over the formidable stone building made more so by added barriers and defenses against terrorist attacks. A quarter of the membership fees for the congregants go to cover security costs.

Three years earlier, the Rabbi had received a threat in broken Swedish warning, “Soon will come the time when the Gothenburg synagogue will be destroyed to the ground with you inside, and then you too, you pig, will be killed in the eternal fire.”

The police only caught three of the attackers. All three were refugees, one from Syria and two others claimed to be, “Palestinians”. Instead of being sent to prison for arson, they were only convicted of vandalism. Two had residence permits while the third, a Gazan, had his asylum application denied.

The Muslim racist was supposed to have been deported and banned from returning until 2028. But a Swedish appeals court overturned his deportation because his “basic humanitarian rights” might be threatened by Israel since firebombing a synagogue “could be perceived as a threat to other Jews.”

Unlike Sweden.

"We have freedom of religion here in the country. This may not apply to the right of the Jews to practice their religion in their synagogue," a 2004 article observed. A member of the congregation described reporting an attack to the police only to have them drop it due to "the absence of evidence".

“There are no signs of increasing antisemitism in Sweden, say the police. Was this not how it started in the 1930s. In another country. In another Europe. Do we want to see it again?” the article asked.

Fourteen years later, it’s a fact of life.

Sweden is not the only European country to legalize Muslim synagogue burnings.

Earlier that same year, a German high court ruled that the attempted firebombing of the Bergisch Synagogue in Wuppertal was not anti-Semitic, but a protest against Israel. The three Muslim “Palestinian” attackers had been let off with a slap on the wrist and suspended sentences.

A lower court had ruled that “no anti-Semitic motivation could be identified in the arson committed by the defendants”, instead the Muslim terrorists were trying to draw “attention to the Gaza conflict”.

(And the Nazis were trying to “draw attention” to the death of a Nazi diplomat with Kristallnacht.)

Such decisions finding that hatred of Israel justifies violent attacks are not unusual in European courts.

In 2010, a British judge all but cheered on leftists who had smashed up a factory exporting components to Israel.

Judge George Bathurst-Norman compared Israel to Nazi Germany, and suggested that the leader of the vandals deserved a medal. “You may well think that hell on earth would not be an understatement of what the Gazans suffered in that time,” he had told the jury.

Last year, Saleh Ali, a Syrian Jihadist refugee, made headlines when he was caught on video smashing the windows of a kosher restaurant in Amsterdam. The police were also caught on video allowing him to smash HaCarmel’s windows without interfering.

He was back on the street in two days.

The court convicted him of vandalism and gave him a suspended sentence even though Ali had refused to answer the judge’s questions, and gave an interview in which he had declared that he did not regret his actions. He had also told officers that the attack on the Jewish restaurant was “only the first step”.

The court did not convict Ali of a hate crime. Nor did the authorities charge him with anything more than vandalism. The same vandalism that the police had done nothing to stop while it was happening.

The judge, like a number of lefty politicos in the Netherlands, instead blamed President Trump, but generously suggested that Trump’s recognition of Jerusalem was not the fault of the restaurant.

The HaCarmel restaurant was reportedly on the verge of shutting down after a series of attacks and threats including phone calls shouting, “Allahu Akbar”.

HaCarmel wasn’t located in a Muslim no-go zone. The Heineken Experience and the Van Gogh Museum are less than two miles away. If this is what it’s like in “the new place to be in Amsterdam Old South”, imagine what it’s like in less touristy areas where the police don’t show up at all when you call for help.

In November, it will be the 80th anniversary of Kristallnacht. In those dark days, Nazis smashed up Jewish synagogues and businesses. Like the attempted firebombing of the Bergisch Synagogue (also targeted by the Nazis) and the assault on the HaCarmel restaurant, the Nazi thugs claimed that they were acting in retaliation for Jewish atrocities: the assassination of a gay Nazi diplomat in Paris.

And, like the Nazi thugs, the Muslim thugs throwing firebombs at synagogues and smashing Jewish store windows, are acting with the covert sanction of the authorities, which offer them a slap on the wrist.

Instead of the explosive violence of a single Kristallnacht, a slow-motion Kristallnacht is taking place.

For the 75th anniversary, Berlin stores put plastic stickers on their windows to make them appear cracked. But who needs the illusion of smashed windows when for the 80th you can get the real thing?

A firebomb here and there. An assault or two a week. A store shuts down. And then another. There’s nothing as startling as the original Kristallnacht. No single day of massive violence to shock the conscience of the world. Instead an accumulation of incidents is shuttering Jewish businesses, turning synagogues into medieval fortresses and emptying European cities of their Jewish populations.

Without a single conglomeration of atrocities, there are only statistics, incidents and anecdotes.

You read one and then you move on.

The slow-motion Kristallnacht lacks the obvious endorsement of the authorities enjoyed by the Nazis. But the covert endorsements can be spotted in the actions of the police, prosecutors and judges who ignore crimes, fail to act, and even when acting, do as little as possible, in the rhetoric of judges who find every possible loophole and excuse for the Islamic thugs staging their very own Kristallnacht.

Call it collaboration.

In November, the eightieth anniversary of Kristallnacht will dawn on a Europe where Jews are once targeted and on the run. This time there will be no populist leader to blame and no easy scapegoat. Instead the villains are who they were all along, not the scowling mustachioed men on the posters, but the officials and the bureaucrats who pretend to only be following orders, when they’re really the ones giving them. And the Islamic Kristallnacht doesn’t even require them to do either one. They just have to step aside, keep the borders open and then offer Muhammed an understanding wink in the dock.

Then they will nod and agree that anti-Semitism is a serious problem, but they have it under control. There will be photo ops at a march, an appearance at a synagogue, a condemnation and then more firebombings, murders and smashed windows as the slow-motion Kristallnacht continues.

“Death to the Jews” has a new slogan: “Refugees Welcome.” 
 
Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine.

Click here to subscribe to my articles. And click here to support my work with a donation.

Thank you for reading.

Ok, I broke into your house - so what?

Editor's Note:  This was sent as an e-mail and I don't know who originated it. RK

A lady wrote and sent the following letter to the Editor of her local newspaper. She should be asked to moderate the discussion on the question of Immigration How would the networks react? She is more rational than all the "talking heads" on network TV and probably more than half of our Congress

Her point:
Recently large demonstrations have taken place across the country protesting the fact that Congress is finally addressing the issue of illegal immigration. Certain people are angry that the US might protect its own borders, might make it harder to sneak into this country and, once here, to stay indefinitely. 
Let me see if I correctly understand the thinking behind these protests.  
Let's say I break into your house. Let's say that when you discover me in your house, you insist that I leave.  But I say, 'No! I like it here. It's better than my house. I've made all the beds and washed the dishes and did the laundry and swept the floors. I've done all the things you don't like to do I'm hard- working and honest, except for when I broke into your house. 
According to the protesters:
  • You are Required to let me stay in your house.
  • You are Required to feed me.
  • You are Required to add me to your family's insurance plan.
  • You are Required to Educate my kids.
  • You are Required to Provide other benefits to me and to my family.
My husband will do all of your yard work because he is also hard-working and honest, except for that breaking in part.  If you try to call the police or force me out, I will call my friends who will picket your house carrying signs that proclaim my RIGHT to be there.  It's only fair, after all, because you have a nicer house than I do, and I'm just trying to better myself.  
I'm a hard-working and honest, person, except for well, you know, I did break into your house. And what a deal it is for me!!! 
I live in your house, contributing only a fraction of the cost of my keep, and there is nothing you can do about it without being accused of cold, uncaring, selfish, prejudiced, and bigoted behavior. Oh yeah, and I DEMAND that you learn MY LANGUAGE!!! so that you can communicate with me.
Why can't people see how ridiculous this is?  America is populated and governed by idiots it seems.

As Debt Rises, the Government Will Soon Spend More on Interest Than on the Military

Wednesday, September 26, 2018

Today's Kavanaugh Roundup: A bad 24 hours for journalism.

By Silvio Canto, Jr. September 25, 2018

Since last night, we've witnessed several lessons about acceptable news reportage. First, a new woman emerged against Judge Brett Kavanaugh, but even some journalists can't believe what they are watching. The new woman's story is based on a corroborating witness who wasn't at the party. What? Apparently, he heard something about the party after it happened. Again, what? Jedediah Bila wrote this:.........

It looks as if the second woman's story has more holes than the first woman's story. How can a business continue to be this sloppy? Don't these news organization have editors or people on staff who double-check this stuff?...........Read more

We Are Living Nineteen Eighty-Four By Victor Davis Hanson
Truth, due process, evidence, rights of the accused: All are swept aside in pursuit of the progressive agenda. George Orwell’s 1949 dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty-Four is no longer fiction. We are living it right now. Google techies planned to massage Internet searches to emphasize correct thinking. A member of the so-called deep state, in an anonymous op-ed, brags that its “resistance” is undermining an elected president. The FBI, CIA, DOJ, and NSC were all weaponized in 2016 to ensure that the proper president would be elected — the choice adjudicated by properly progressive ideology. Wearing a wire is now redefined as simply flipping on an iPhone and recording your boss, boy- or girlfriend, or co-workers...............

The Smearing Of Brett Kavanaugh Is Truly Evil By       
Democratic senator Mazie Hirono has it totally wrong when she says we should consider the assault charges against Brett Kavanaugh credible because he doesn't support abortion. After all, who has a greater need for abortion to remain legal: a faithful family man like Kavanaugh or a sexual predator like Bill Clinton? Women like Hirono who back the sexual exploitation of women through legalized abortion are actually traitors to their sex..............

A tawdry, disgusting, and distasteful week By John David Powell
I received no reply on my social media accounts to the question of whether I missed the throng of hundreds of angry protesters demanding justice for Cosby's victims, even for one of them. Where were the TV talking heads laying out all of their moral reasons why the White House should take back his Presidential Medal of Freedom, or why the folks who hand out the Golden Globes, Emmys, and Grammys should demand he return all of them.  None of that happened. That seemed strange, given the procession of protesters and talking heads carrying pitchforks and torches while demanding justice for the women whose unsubstantiated claims against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh come nowhere close to sinking to the sick level of the crimes that are sending Cosby to the pen. The lack of moral outrage is its own moral outrage..................

What Brett Kavanaugh means to this country By Rick Hayes
Brett Kavanaugh not being confirmed to the United States Supreme Court boils down to the most qualified judge being rejected. It would indicate the hijacking of the selection process where truth, decency, and due process were absent throughout. And Democrat senators either ignorant of the Constitution or just filled with unquenchable hatred have gleefully embarrassed themselves and the rest of country in front of the entire world. There is a considerable disadvantage on the side of conservatives when it comes to defending and protecting the Constitution against leftist Democrats.  It's like a pilot trying to keep the plane in the air while the co-pilot is hell-bent on crashing it into the sea. When one doesn't care about the place one lives, starting a fire in the living room to keep warm for one night is perfectly fine.............

Is this the hill they die on? By Anna L. Stark
Ask yourself the following question: Is the repugnant and egregious behavior of the Democrats on Senate Judiciary Committee and their enablers the hill they want to die on? Is the hideous, unfounded, but well-coordinated attack on Judge Brett Kavanagh worth it, considering that President Trump may have the opportunity to nominate not one, but perhaps two more people to the Supreme Court during his tenure in the White House? Given the better than average chance that Judge Kavanagh will be confirmed by the Senate by the end of this week, it’s not too farfetched to imagine that future Senate Judiciary committee hearings will be tainted from the outset, clouded by doubt, much more nefarious behavior by Democrats, and punctuated with despicable vulgarity...........

Democrats have viciously overplayed their hand By Patricia McCarthy
This tragedy that became a farce is now a crime, the crime of purposeful defamation of an innocent man. Leftists are so determined to prevent Kavanaugh from becoming a justice on the Supreme Court that they have exposed themselves as the lowlife cheaters they are, without shame or any sense of decency. When they do not win, they will do anything to undo their loss. This is what has motivated the left since the 2016 election. From the moment Trump won, leftists set about their plans to remove him from office by any means necessary. The cabal that put this plan into motion cares nothing for the law, the Constitution, or the people its members set out to ruin as they have Brett Kavanaugh. There are no words to adequately describe how venal these conspirators among the congressional left are, how low they are prepared to go. To this day, not one Democrat has spoken out against this monstrous plan to destroy a fine man who has led an impeccable life. Not one. Each and every one of them knows that this is an odious campaign based on lies, but not one of them will admit to this fact. The Democratic Party is officially deplorable in every sense of the word............

Democrats Have a Gang Rape Fantasy Daniel J. Flynn
Michael Avenatti can’t help himself.  Democrats have a gang rape fantasy. “We are aware of significant evidence of multiple house parties in the Washington, D.C. area during the early 1980s, during which Brett Kavanaugh, Mark Judge and others would participate in the targeting of women with alcohol/drugs to allow a ‘train’ of men to subsequently gang rape them,” cable news personality Michael Avenatti claims. “There are multiple witnesses that will corroborate these facts and each of them must be called to testify publicly.”...........

About Ms. Blasey Ford and the Democrats Gary Lieberthal
Watching the confirmation hearings for Judge Kavanaugh I was appalled but hardly surprised by the rude and churlish behavior of the Democrats. From interrupting the proceedings some 40 times in the first hour, to Senator Harris using her time to run for President, to Cory Booker’s astonishingly comparing himself to Spartacus (Kirk Douglas must have choked over his coffee when he heard that one), the Democrats demonstrated yet again their indifference to our political institutions through their scorched earth tactics..........

Leftist Sliming Rising Michael Ledeen 
As progressives witness the death of their political fantasies, character assassination is all they have left. It’s uncanny the way perhaps the three most distinguished Supreme Court nominees in my lifetime—Robert Bork, Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanaugh—have all been brutally slimed.  Those nominees who sailed through, and now sit on the court, are all distinguished citizens with admirable careers, but their places in the legal history of the United States are unlikely to be as significant as those of Bork, Thomas and Kavanaugh. In other words, it strikes me as notable that the best of the best get the worst treatment. I think we’d do well to ponder this..............

Flashback: That Time Joe Biden Said You Can't Rely On FBI Reports Into Sexual Misconduct Matt Vespa
Well, look at what we have here. From NTK Network, a flashback from the Clarence Thomas hearings, who also face allegations of sexual misconduct from Anita Hill. Thomas was eventually confirmed, but by a razor thin margin. There was an FBI report, but then-Senate Committee chair Joe Biden (D-DE) said it was worthless to cite. Why?   “FBI explicitly does not, in this or any other case, reach a conclusion, period. Period,” said Biden at the time.............

Report: Ford's Team Wants to Dictate Which Media Outlets Are Present at Committee Hearing Beth Baumann
In an interesting term of events, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford's attorney, Michael Bromwich, sent emails to the Senate Judiciary Committee asking them to limit which press will be given access to Thursday's scheduled hearings, The Washington Times reported. Emails obtained by The Washington Times said Bromwhich has requested:
  • Access for three robocams which he wants ran by "the CSPAN TV pool."
  • Three specific wire services.
  • Photographers from the Associated Press, Reuters and one other identified media outlet.
  • A pool reporter for newspapers and magazines.
  • Space for a radio reporter.
The only time committees tend to place limitations on press at hearings is when space is a concern or when witnesses need their identities to be kept secret................
.
 Byron York
For Democrats in Ford-Kavanaugh Fight, Believing is Enough

 Brent Bozell and Tim Graham
The Vast Anti-Kavanaugh Conspiracy 
 
 Jonah Goldberg
Belief Now Outweighs Truth in the Kavanaugh Hearings

 Star Parker

 John C. Goodman
Lessons From the Clarence Thomas/Anita Hill Hearings

 Bob Barr
Democrats’ Reign of Terror

This Has To Be Stopped! When Will the FBI Start Arresting These Misfits?

By Rich Kozlovich

Daily Caller posted this article entitled, Ted Cruz Chased Out Of DC Restaurant By Anti-Kavanaugh Protesters, saying:
Republican Texas Senator Ted Cruz was chased out of a DC restaurant by protesters on Monday night, according to video posted on Twitter. 
Two videos were posted by “Smash Racism DC” and they show a large group of protesters chanting “We believe survivors” in reference to sexual assault allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh at Sen. Cruz and his wife, Heidi Cruz. 
One video shows a protester confronting Sen. Cruz and his wife as they entered the restaurant. Sen. Cruz tells the woman “God bless you” before attempting to take a seat at a table.
Inforwars posted this article entitled, "Leftist Group That Harassed Ted Cruz Vows: “You are not safe – We will find you, saying:
Antifa mob clearly violates Twitter rules on targeted harassment, doxxes Gavin McInnes .,,,,,,,Cruz and his wife Heidi were confronted by a mob who chanted, “we believe survivors,” as they tried to block the couple from leaving.  After the video went viral and began trending on Twitter, the group behind the stunt, Smash Racism DC, tweeted the following;
 “This is a message to Ted Cruz, Bret Kavanaugh, Donald Trump and the rest of the racist, sexist, transphobic, and homophobic right-wing scum: You are not safe. We will find you. We will expose you. We will take from you the peace you have taken from so many others.”.
To be clear, I'm not a fan of Infowars, or much of anything Alex Jones does, even when I agree with him.  I think he's an obnoxious jerk.  But this is a clear example of how everything on the left works.  There are no boundaries on the left, or for the left. 

The questions I have are:
  • Why isn't anyone being arrested for this behavior? 
  • Why would an owner of a restaurant allow anyone to get away with this in their establishment?
  • Why weren't the police called?
These loons can be grateful they're not in Cleveland. 
 
Threatening government officials of the United States is a felony under federal law  Threatening the President of the United States is a felony under 18 U.S.C. § 871, punishable by up to 5 years of imprisonment, that is investigated by the United States Secret Service. Threatening other officials is a Class C or D felony, usually carrying maximum penalties of 5 or 10 years under 18 U.S.C. § 875, 18 U.S.C. § 876 and other statutes, that is investigated by the Federal Bureau of Investigation.  
When a threat is made against a judge, it can be considered obstruction of justice.[2] Threatening federal officials' family members is also a federal crime; in enacting the law, the Committee on the Judiciary stated that "Clearly it is a proper Federal function to respond to terrorists and other criminals who seek to influence the making of Federal policies and interfere with the administration of justice by attacking close relatives of those entrusted with these tasks."[3]  
There are three elements of the offense of making an illegal threat: (i) there must be a transmission in interstate commerce; (ii) there must be a communication containing the threat; (iii) and the threat must be a threat to injure the person of another.[4] Threats can also sometimes be punished under the statutes criminalizing assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain United States Government officers or employees[5] or assassinating, kidnapping, and assaulting government officials of the United States
United States Sentencing Guidelines take a number of factors into consideration in determining the recommended penalty, including evidence of the person's intent to carry out the threat; disruption to the government function; and the possibility of inciting others to violence.[6] There is also a 6-level official victim enhancement, which makes the recommended penalty, per the sentencing table, approximately double that which would apply if an ordinary citizen were the victim.[7] There can be many motives for making threats, including political motives or a desire to frame someone else for making the threat.[8] The person's intent can greatly affect the sentence. 
In determining what constitutes a true threat, the courts hold that what must be proved is that a reasonable recipient of the communication would consider it a threat under the circumstances. Thus, a statement to a judge that "You and your family are going to die" would be regarded as a true threat, even if the defendant claimed that he meant it as a literal, biological truth.[9] If a threat is made to multiple individuals, it may be considered to be outside of the guidelines heartland, and therefore to warrant an enhancement.[10]

It would appear to me this meets the definition of a criminal threat, and these criminal misfits need to be arrested and put in jail.  Furthermore they should be sued in civil courts, including that misfit who owned the Red Hen restaurant in Virginia who kicked Sarah Sanders out because she didn't like Sander's politics. 

That was probably a violation of some federal law against discrimination, and the owner should have been sued for it, as so many on the left has done in other cases.  But then comes the blatantly illegal activity of this leftist hypocrite.

After the Sander's party politely left they went across the street to another restaurant, but Stephanie Wilkinson, owner of the Red Hen couldn't leave it alone.  She then proceeded to yell at them when they tried to go to a different restaurant and actually "followed them across the street, called people, and organized a protest yelling and screaming at them from outside the other restaurant and creating this scene”.

Kicking her family out of her restaurant was bad enough, but harassing them further was illegal.  

Stephanie Wilkinson needs to be sued, and at some point Maxine Waters needs to be prosecuted for promoting this illegal activity. 

She's encouraged the "recent protests against President Trump as seen in several Washington, DC and Virginia area restaurants, saying that she has "no sympathy" for those who serve in the administration and that the public should "turn on them" and "absolutely harass" White House officials while they are doing normal every day activities."

That's an admonition to her misfit followers to commit an illegal act. She needs to be arrested, prosecuted and she needs to be sued by those who suffer for her involvement.   She also needs to be sanctioned by the Congress right now!

But, that takes Congressional leadership with a spine stiffer than Jell-o. 



Stop Appeasing the Democrats

Appeasing an aggressor invites only more aggression.

September 25, 2018 Bruce Thornton 122

From the playground to geopolitics, appeasing an aggressor invites only more aggression. This timeless truth of human nature is one that we moderns can’t seem to accept. We reflexively assume that a rational accommodation or concessions will be reciprocated by those proven to be ready to use any means necessary to achieve their aims, no matter how amoral, unfair, or vicious. Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearings for the Supreme Court illustrate that this false assumption leads only to more demands, and ultimately to defeat.

The last-minute accusations from Christine Blasey Ford, a woman who claims that decades ago Kavanaugh groped her at a high school party, and Deborah Ramirez, who accused Kavanaugh of exposing himself to her at a frat party at Yale, are transparent acts of aggression against the judge and Republicans, one engineered by the Democrats.

Senator Dianne Feinstein sat for months on Ford’s letter and then––just as the Dems did in 1991with Anita Hill’s charges of sexual harassment against Clarence Thomas’s during his hearings––released it only when Kavanaugh appeared to be heading for confirmation. Feinstein still hasn’t given the Judiciary Committee an unredacted copy of the letter. A few weeks after Ford went public, and after Kavanaugh said he had dairies from that summer detailing his whereabouts, The New Yorker published Ramirez’s account of a drunken party filled with obscene drinking games where he exposed himself to Ramirez...........To Read More.....

Tucker Carlson: Republicans ‘Don’t Really Care’ About Protecting Either You or Kavanaugh

By Craig Bannister | September 25, 2018

"Republicans in the Senate don’t really care about you" for the same reasons they aren’t interested in protecting Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh from “obvious smears,” Tucker Carlson said Monday on his Fox News television program.

People who do care about other people actually try to protect them, Carlson argued:
"Republicans in the Senate don’t really care about you. If they did care about you, they would protect you. That’s what you do for people you care about: you protect them.”
Apathy is the reason that Republicans aren’t trying to protect Americans from a wide-range of serious threats – and it’s also why Republicans won’t protect Judge Kavanaugh, Carlson said:.........To Read More....

DiGenova: Ford 'Doesn't Want to Testify' For She'll 'Look Like the Loon That She Is'

By Michael W. Chapman | September 25, 2018

The attorneys for Chistine Ford, who has accused Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexually assaulting her 36 years ago in high school, are now raising objections about the scheduled hearing for this Thursday because a sex-crimes attorney may question Ford and this doesn't seem "fair and respectful" toward Ford, they claim.

They are hinting at the possibility that Ford may not show up on Thursday and may not testify, a decision that was predicted by former U.S. Attorney Joe diGenova last week when he said Ford's requests were "another delaying tactic" because she does not want to testify for it will make her "look like the loon that she is." He added that Ford's lawyer "is even loonier."..........To Read More......

Fox News interview shows that the Kavanaugh family are the real victims

By Thomas Lifson September 25, 2018

The blowback begins.

The entire appeal of the assault on Brett Kavanaugh's character has been based on the left's adherence to the ideology of victimology. In any political situation, there are oppressors and victims, and "justice" demands that the victims triumph. Regardless of the facts. That is why Senator Mazie Hirono, with enough intelligence to graduate Phi Beta Kappa from the University of Hawaii and graduate from Georgetown Law School, forever discredited herself by telling men to "shut up and step up." Women are the victims of sexual harassment, and that's all that matters.

But with the moving Fox News interview of Judge and Mrs. Kavanaugh yesterday, embedded below, Americans got a view of the way in which this man and his family have been deeply hurt. If you have not already watched it, I urge you to view the whole thing. It starts a little slowly, but after Martha MacCallum's attempts to lead Judge Kavanaugh into venturing onto risky ground, by, for instance, speculating on the motives of his opponents, the talk turns to such matters as how the Kavanaughs are talking to their two young daughters about the horrendous accusations against their father.

Both parents come across as more sad than angry. You can see the sadness in their eyes almost throughout.......To Read More.....