Thursday, April 27, 2017
Happy Earth Day, Happy Science Day, Happy Liberal Crazy Day
This last Saturday was Earth Day. It all started back in 1970 to bring awareness to what damage humans have done to the earth over the billions of years we have been here (or not). This “movement” led to the making of the demonic EPA, the Environmental Protection Agency.
I say demonic not because I don’t think the planet needs protecting at all but because the Gestapo-style tactics of the EPA hurt many business who really didn’t deserve it. They could have worked a little better at helping businesses get in line with the laws.
Somewhere along the way Earth Day was turned into a “March for Science!” WHAT? A March for Science? I just happened to be in Pasadena while a group of young people were very excited about participating in this march. As it happened I was waiting to cross the street with a group of giddy girls with the signs and pom-poms in support of “science”.......... Please stop issuing false news from someone who has made millions off his climate fear mongering and a self-identified “science guy.” You might as well get science reports from Bozo the Clown!
Long live Nancy Pelosi!....To Read More....
New Study Reveals Just How Tolerant Liberals Are…The Results Are Dumbfounding
The last several months have been eye opening for political observers in the Western Hemisphere, as republican President Donald Trump has polarized the United States. From the onset of his candidacy, the idea of a Donald Trump nomination or presidency has been jarring to the American political left.
The businessman was repeatedly written off, chastised, and mocked in the media. The ignorance of Trump’s successes as civilian notwithstanding, the democrats were so certain that Hillary Clinton would obliterate The Donald in the general election that they actually worked on ways to help him win his party’s nomination........The social impact of the liberal lifestyle and social justice warrior training is that you can no longer tolerate those who disagree with you.
It’s one of the tenets of the New Fascism movement being perpetrated by the left, in which they replace Stalin’s nationalism with their own political allegiances, effectively pretending that the United States has been split in two.........To Read More....
My Take - Perhaps this is another good time to view, "The Communist Takeover Of America - 45 Declared Goals"
Big Labor Robs Members to Support Democrats
Business Review Board · Apr. 18, 2017
If you’re wondering why millions of workers are abandoning the idea of unionization, this statistic provides a clear answer: At least $1.7 billion — three-quarters of which came straight out of workers' pockets — was used to promote 2016 political campaigns, according to the National Institute for Labor Relations Research.
Two things stick out in the report.
1): “labor unions, which have the ability to tax employees via forced-dues, [are] the only 501(c)5 entities capable of sustaining this kind political expenditure for the past decade”; and
2): “Union officials spent $1.3 billion directly from union treasuries (filled with forced dues and fees) to spend it on politics, dwarfing George Soros' and the Koch Brothers' reported combined political spending during the same period.”
Democrats talk a lot talk about voters “making their voices heard” by “getting out the vote,” but most of this money is being siphoned from workers who don’t have a voice in how political contributions are allocated. And, needless to say, Democrats are the biggest beneficiaries. The most recent data reveals that just 14.6 million Americans (or 10.7% of the workforce) were unionized last year. This is a 9.4% reduction from 1983, when membership was 17.7 million (a participation rate of 20.1%). This might explain why, according to The Washington Free Beacon, there is a disparity between Big Labor’s political activism and the votes cast by subordinates: “Trump received votes from 43 percent of union households, while garnering two endorsements from unions representing Border Patrol agents and police officers.”
As National Right to Work Foundation’s Mark Mix put it, “This election was a case study in the disconnect between union bosses and their members, and the chasm is growing.” If unions truly believed in the idea of democracy, they’d quit forcing members to fund partisan politics.
SOURCE
If you’re wondering why millions of workers are abandoning the idea of unionization, this statistic provides a clear answer: At least $1.7 billion — three-quarters of which came straight out of workers' pockets — was used to promote 2016 political campaigns, according to the National Institute for Labor Relations Research.
Two things stick out in the report.
1): “labor unions, which have the ability to tax employees via forced-dues, [are] the only 501(c)5 entities capable of sustaining this kind political expenditure for the past decade”; and
2): “Union officials spent $1.3 billion directly from union treasuries (filled with forced dues and fees) to spend it on politics, dwarfing George Soros' and the Koch Brothers' reported combined political spending during the same period.”
Democrats talk a lot talk about voters “making their voices heard” by “getting out the vote,” but most of this money is being siphoned from workers who don’t have a voice in how political contributions are allocated. And, needless to say, Democrats are the biggest beneficiaries. The most recent data reveals that just 14.6 million Americans (or 10.7% of the workforce) were unionized last year. This is a 9.4% reduction from 1983, when membership was 17.7 million (a participation rate of 20.1%). This might explain why, according to The Washington Free Beacon, there is a disparity between Big Labor’s political activism and the votes cast by subordinates: “Trump received votes from 43 percent of union households, while garnering two endorsements from unions representing Border Patrol agents and police officers.”
As National Right to Work Foundation’s Mark Mix put it, “This election was a case study in the disconnect between union bosses and their members, and the chasm is growing.” If unions truly believed in the idea of democracy, they’d quit forcing members to fund partisan politics.
SOURCE
Settled science? 107 cancer papers retracted due to peer review fraud
New papers were found through investigations into previous fraud.
How Conservative States Should Handle Academia
By Bruce Walker
Conservatives need to use the political power already in their hands to begin a grassroots transformation of academia. The totalitarian exclusion of Ann Coulter from a state university in California is one reminder of the need for reform. The grotesque of politically correct "science" recently paraded around Earth Day is another.
In fact, the Orwellian control of academia by the left virtually guarantees that tens of millions of young Americans will not only lack knowledge – that can be remedied by study and reflection – but have instead noxious stews of pseudo-knowledge percolating out of their ears and guiding (or rather misguiding) their whole lives.
There is precious little conservatives can do in places like the People's Republic of California. The so-called "Berkeley Free Speech Movement" of the early 1960s was a fraud from beginning to end. Nearly all the faculty and university administration comprised people who were radically leftist, and it was only the method of protest (screaming obscenities) that bothered anyone......To Read More....
My Take - Good thoughts but wrong tools. There is one way and only one way to change the way academia functions.....end funding entirely.
First - education is way over rated. It turns out these kids are coming out of college incapable of doing the jobs available. So what did they go into all that debt for? What were they teaching them for all those years, and if they're incapable of doing the jobs available that must mean they graduated them fraudulently.
Secondly - there are a bunch of kids coming out of college - with massive debt - and holding degrees that won't give them jobs that pay enough to pay off that college debt. Some of these loonie social degrees like gender studies are virtually worthless - unless you plan on a job at a university to teach this leftist nonsense. Just how many of those jobs can possibly be available.
Third - About 25% of people holding large debt for college loans don't even graduate ;
Fourth - Funding just made college more expensive. The more money provided by Congress and others just allowed to them to raise tuition even higher.
Fifth - All this funding isn't going toward teaching, or even research. It's going to administration personnel with oversized salaries and benefits.
Sixth - If all funding is ended then these universities will have to compete for societies money and that will mean getting results. Those that don't get those dollars will go out of business, and good riddance. Tuition will drop dramatically, administrative overhead will drop massively, and those overpaid, pampered, obnoxious professors will have to actually start teaching their classes rather than dumping their work on underpaid Teaching Assistants. And although they're underpaid - they're an unnecessary expense that will be eliminated. Or even better - end tenure and hire the TA's permanently and get rid of the professors. They're over rated also.
Finally - Get government out of education entirely - End funding - Make them all for profit institutions - and watch the world of academia change dramatically because competition brings the best to the fore and the worst are cast aside. And make no mistake about this - a bunch will go out of business because if they practice the leftist dogma they teach these poor misinformed kids - they're too incompetent to be capable of running anything.
Goodbye Berkley!
Conservatives need to use the political power already in their hands to begin a grassroots transformation of academia. The totalitarian exclusion of Ann Coulter from a state university in California is one reminder of the need for reform. The grotesque of politically correct "science" recently paraded around Earth Day is another.
In fact, the Orwellian control of academia by the left virtually guarantees that tens of millions of young Americans will not only lack knowledge – that can be remedied by study and reflection – but have instead noxious stews of pseudo-knowledge percolating out of their ears and guiding (or rather misguiding) their whole lives.
There is precious little conservatives can do in places like the People's Republic of California. The so-called "Berkeley Free Speech Movement" of the early 1960s was a fraud from beginning to end. Nearly all the faculty and university administration comprised people who were radically leftist, and it was only the method of protest (screaming obscenities) that bothered anyone......To Read More....
My Take - Good thoughts but wrong tools. There is one way and only one way to change the way academia functions.....end funding entirely.
First - education is way over rated. It turns out these kids are coming out of college incapable of doing the jobs available. So what did they go into all that debt for? What were they teaching them for all those years, and if they're incapable of doing the jobs available that must mean they graduated them fraudulently.
Secondly - there are a bunch of kids coming out of college - with massive debt - and holding degrees that won't give them jobs that pay enough to pay off that college debt. Some of these loonie social degrees like gender studies are virtually worthless - unless you plan on a job at a university to teach this leftist nonsense. Just how many of those jobs can possibly be available.
Third - About 25% of people holding large debt for college loans don't even graduate ;
Fourth - Funding just made college more expensive. The more money provided by Congress and others just allowed to them to raise tuition even higher.
Fifth - All this funding isn't going toward teaching, or even research. It's going to administration personnel with oversized salaries and benefits.
Sixth - If all funding is ended then these universities will have to compete for societies money and that will mean getting results. Those that don't get those dollars will go out of business, and good riddance. Tuition will drop dramatically, administrative overhead will drop massively, and those overpaid, pampered, obnoxious professors will have to actually start teaching their classes rather than dumping their work on underpaid Teaching Assistants. And although they're underpaid - they're an unnecessary expense that will be eliminated. Or even better - end tenure and hire the TA's permanently and get rid of the professors. They're over rated also.
Finally - Get government out of education entirely - End funding - Make them all for profit institutions - and watch the world of academia change dramatically because competition brings the best to the fore and the worst are cast aside. And make no mistake about this - a bunch will go out of business because if they practice the leftist dogma they teach these poor misinformed kids - they're too incompetent to be capable of running anything.
Goodbye Berkley!
Wednesday, April 26, 2017
GWPF Launches Energy Manifesto
GWPF Manifesto Calls For Reforms That
Ensure Cheap And Reliable Energy Future
‘The first priority of British energy policy should be to enable business and households alike to have access to cheap and reliable sources of energy.’ This is the key message of the Global Warming Policy Forum’s Energy Manifesto 2017 published today.
In the run-up to the general election on 8 June, the GWPF is calling on all parties to adopt policies that prevent further economic harm to the UK economy and halt the rising policy costs to energy bills for households.
The GWPF manifesto calls on the next government to undertake a comprehensive review of energy and climate policies to ensure that the UK can prosper as an independent trading nation after leaving the European Union.
The cost of Britain’s unilateral renewable energy policies is running out of control, the inevitable result of replacing cheap and reliable energy with expensive, intermittent sources.
In 2016, the combined costs of the Levy Control Framework (LCF) and carbon taxes reached over £9 billion.
According to official figures, the Climate Change Act will cost the UK economy over £300 billion by 2030, costing each household £875 per annum.
‘Only through radical reform of current policies can the UK hope to take full advantage of low-cost technologies, tackle the scourge of fuel poverty and improve the competitiveness of the UK economy,’ said Dr Benny Peiser, director for the GWPF.
The GWPF Energy Manifesto
The first priority of British energy policy should be to enable business and households alike to have access to cheap and reliable sources of energy.
The new government should take immediate steps to prevent further economic harm and rising policy costs while simultaneously undertaking a comprehensive review of energy and climate policies to ensure that the United Kingdom as a whole can prosper as an independent trading nation after leaving the European Union.
The new government should
- Undertake a new and up-to-date review of the economics of climate change.
- Suspend commitment to the Carbon Budgets in line with the House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee’s recommendation.
- Suspend the Carbon Price Floor, a unilateral carbon tax that puts an unequal and unfair burden on British industry.
- Suspend commitments post-2020 under the EU Renewables Directive which puts an unequal burden on the UK economy.
- Phase out subsidies for renewable energy generators of heat and electricity. The renewables industry repeatedly claims that they are now cheaper than conventional energy. Government should take them at their word and cut all support after 2020.
- Freeze commitments to ethanol and biodiesel under the Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation, which is distorting international food and crop markets.
- Remove mistaken incentives for the use of diesel in passenger vehicles.
- Remove all fiscal obstacles to further realisation of the potential of the North Sea reserves of oil and natural gas.
- Promote hydraulic fracturing to exploit the full potential of the massive UK shale resources.
- Increase research budgets for nuclear fission and fusion, and also for electricity storage.
- Redirect the UK’s international climate diplomacy towards equitable, joint approaches instead of the self-harm of unilateral target and virtue signalling.
Contact
Dr Benny Peiser
Director, Global Warming Policy Forum
55 Tufton Street
London SW1P 3QL
e: peiser@thegwpf.com
tel: 0207 3406038
mob: 07553 361718
Club For the Galacticly Stupid: Meet Shelly Garland
By Rich Kozlovich
On April 16, 2016 I posted this article - Observations From the Back Row: Nobody Owes You Anything! - responding to an article on April 12, 2017 - "Could It Be Time To Deny White Men The Franchise?" - by Shelly Garland - at least that's who everyone thought who wrote that obnoxious piece published by the Huffington Post who described him as follows:
His goal?
On April 16, 2016 I posted this article - Observations From the Back Row: Nobody Owes You Anything! - responding to an article on April 12, 2017 - "Could It Be Time To Deny White Men The Franchise?" - by Shelly Garland - at least that's who everyone thought who wrote that obnoxious piece published by the Huffington Post who described him as follows:
Shelly Garland is an activist and a feminist completing an MA degree in Philosophy. When she's not gagging at South Africa's unique brand of rainbow politics she's working on ways to smash the patriarchy.It turns out the Huff and Puff was completely taken in by this loon who isn't a woman at all. Shelley Garland's real name is in fact Marius Roodt - a white male disguised as a woman.
His goal?
"He told HuffPost his mission was to see “what was the most outrageous piece he could get published – and his next effort was to have been a blog titled Why The Khmer Rouge Weren’t All That Bad”. "I want to see what is the silliest thing I can get published.”
Now the Huff and Puff is at the center of controversy for publishing a fake writer with a nasty message. A message of hate and conflict, and here we thought the Huff and Puff was a liberal bastion. Well.....they are.....and that's a liberal for you. Perhaps the world should thank this fraud. It exposes who and what media outlets like the Huff and Puff really are. The fact of the matter is if they didn't think exactly the way this loon wrote - this would have never happened. What sane person would publish such nonsense?
And where's the main stream media? As far as I can tell the editor isn't being fired for this blunder, and if she is fired - it will not for publishing those views - it will be for publishing views from a fraud.
One last thought. Should we believe these views would have been any more acceptable if they came from Barbara Walters? That's the question that should be asked of the Huff and Puff, who might be more than qualified to be part of the Club For the Galacticly Stupid.
Update 4/27/17 : The editor at Huff and Puff has resigned.
One last thought. Should we believe these views would have been any more acceptable if they came from Barbara Walters? That's the question that should be asked of the Huff and Puff, who might be more than qualified to be part of the Club For the Galacticly Stupid.
Update 4/27/17 : The editor at Huff and Puff has resigned.
Al Gore Puts A Price Tag on Global Warming Hoax “Fix”, And It Is ENORMOUS
By Andrew West April 25, 2017
For some strange reason, liberal climate change hoaxers are continuing to put a microphone or a camera in front of former Vice President Al Gore. As the most recognizable face in the litany of lunatic leftists who foolishly subscribe to the phony narrative behind the global warming hoax, Gore has been an integral part of developing the culture of ignorance that permeates the entire movement.
Gore’s interest in the subject began as a business venture; a fact that many democrats would like us all to forget. The former Vice President first established a “carbon credits” company in which he would prey on the guilt of entitled Americans who believed that the way in which they lived their lives was further enhancing their carbon footprint – a term that had barely been used previous to Gore’s involvement in the hoax.
Then, after Al Gore’s company was ready to receive customers, and their money, the former politician released his now-infamous propaganda film “An Inconvenient Truth”. The film was a box office success, riding the leftist wave that was permeating the nation at the time, and it propelled. Gore’s carbon credits company into a massive windfall of Americans’ guilt-money.........As with all trendy pseudoscience, the global warming hoax will likely go the way of spiritualism and Uri Geller’s bending-spoon tricks.............To Read More....
For some strange reason, liberal climate change hoaxers are continuing to put a microphone or a camera in front of former Vice President Al Gore. As the most recognizable face in the litany of lunatic leftists who foolishly subscribe to the phony narrative behind the global warming hoax, Gore has been an integral part of developing the culture of ignorance that permeates the entire movement.
Gore’s interest in the subject began as a business venture; a fact that many democrats would like us all to forget. The former Vice President first established a “carbon credits” company in which he would prey on the guilt of entitled Americans who believed that the way in which they lived their lives was further enhancing their carbon footprint – a term that had barely been used previous to Gore’s involvement in the hoax.
Then, after Al Gore’s company was ready to receive customers, and their money, the former politician released his now-infamous propaganda film “An Inconvenient Truth”. The film was a box office success, riding the leftist wave that was permeating the nation at the time, and it propelled. Gore’s carbon credits company into a massive windfall of Americans’ guilt-money.........As with all trendy pseudoscience, the global warming hoax will likely go the way of spiritualism and Uri Geller’s bending-spoon tricks.............To Read More....
The One Lesson of the Holocaust
Posted by Daniel Greenfield 7 Comments Monday, April 24, 2017 @ The Sultan Knish Blog
Yom HaShoah comes and goes. A day for looking back at what has happened and a day for looking away from what will happen.
Millions of dollars have been spent building memorials to the victims of the Holocaust, even as Iran is spending its millions on building another kind of memorial to the Holocaust, in the form of nuclear technology that will be used to finish that piece of history that the Islamic terror state claims never took place.
Millions more are spent, by some of the same groups that claim an interest in Holocaust education, on bringing Muslim migrants to America and Europe to carry out the promise of an Islamic apocalypse in which, as the Hadith states, "The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say: Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him." That is what the Islamic Holocaust looks like. And it's underway.
A Jew is murdered in France. Another in Jerusalem. And another and another.
The Final Solution, with its immediate extermination of the Jews, has been replaced by the Two State Solution, an intermediate process in which the land on which Jews can live in security is partitioned into smaller and smaller pieces.
The Lebensraum of Islam demands ever more breathing room. And fewer breathing Jews. Israel is carved up into smaller indefensible ghettos. The number of places where the world decides that Jews can be allowed to live, shrink. The rest become "settlers" who must be evicted for the sake of peace. Even if the place they're "settling" is Jerusalem. The oldest Jewish city on earth.
And this Two State Solution, this intermediate process, has the almost universal backing of the major Jewish organizations who are so very deeply concerned about the Holocaust. It has the backing of the diplomats and politicians who put out canned statements urging that we learn the lessons of the Holocaust. The only lesson they have learned though is that another Holocaust needs better marketing.
It is comparatively easy to build a memorial. You hire the architect, raise the money, buy the land and then cut the ribbon. It is a much harder thing to do something about the need for those memorials in the first place. That is what learning the lessons of the Holocaust is about.
It is easier to build another memorial than to look into your heart and ask why two generations later, the majority of the American Jewish community was still too cowardly to stand up to a liberal icon in the White House... when the lives of millions of Jews were on the line.
From FDR to Obama, American Jewish leaders had two opportunities to stand up to a liberal icon and save Jewish lives. No amount of memorials can disguise the fact that they learned nothing.
The reassurances from American Jewish leaders that Obama meant well, that he will not sell out Israel and that he cares sounded familiar. The American Jewish leaders of the 30's and 40's echoed the same sentiments. Even as the St. Louis was turned back and its passengers were sent to the gas chambers, even as every effort made to aid or save Jews from the Holocaust was frustrated and shut down with the active complicity of the liberal American Jewish leadership who were loyal to FDR.
The same people who let millions die went on to light candles and issue their hypocritical sanctimonious statements of mourning for the dead. More candles have been lit. More memorials have been built. But the lessons of the Holocaust continue to go unlearned.
Regardless of which administration is in office, the Two State Solution and any support for the Islamic terrorists seeking to exterminate the Jews, as they have already exterminated many of the Christians in the region, must be fought. When we fail to do this, then whatever our politics are, we abandon our obligations to the dead and to the living.
The most important lesson of the Holocaust is that the details of how it happened don't really matter. Had Hitler not come to power, had Germany not turned National Socialist, the Holocaust would have happened anyway. Stalin had one planned too before his death. Had it not been Hitler or Stalin, it would have been someone else. It still might be.
The Holocaust did not happen because of intolerance or fascism, as most liberals would like you to believe. It happened for the same overriding reason that any person or group of people is murdered. Because the Jews lacked the means of defending themselves against it.
There have been two Jewish responses to the Holocaust, on the one hand promoting tolerance and assimilation and on the other hand the State of Israel. Tolerance has done nothing to prevent the hatred and murder of Jews. In many cases it has actually served to promote it.
Every Muslim attack in Europe and America can be laid at the door of tolerance. When a Jewish woman is thrown out of a window in Paris or a Rabbi is beaten in Brussels, the true perpetrator is "tolerance".
The State of Israel stands as the only meaningful response to the Holocaust. Rather than building stone memorials and going back to business as usual, the State of Israel is not only a living future for the Jewish people, it is a response to the fundamental lesson of the Holocaust. The Holocaust happened because it could happen to a people who couldn't defend themselves. The State of Israel with its armies and borders was the best physical defense against it happening again.
Today the two responses to the Holocaust are battling out to the death, Tolerance and Assimilation vs the State of Israel. And the State of Israel is getting the worst of it. The teachers of tolerance blame Israel for the failure of their own ideology, manifest in the rising hatred of Jews around the world. If Israel wouldn't exist, somehow Jews wouldn't be hated, their thesis goes. As if Anti-semitism had been discovered lying around in a dustbin sometime after 1948.
But it is tolerance meanwhile that is killing Israel. The left has pushed Israel to the wall, because it represents the inversion of their ideology, it represents the reality that the best hope of the persecuted is not in multiculturalism or in tolerance classes, but in taking responsibility for their own safety and survival.
Yom HaShoah comes and goes. A day for looking back at what has happened and a day for looking away from what will happen.
Millions of dollars have been spent building memorials to the victims of the Holocaust, even as Iran is spending its millions on building another kind of memorial to the Holocaust, in the form of nuclear technology that will be used to finish that piece of history that the Islamic terror state claims never took place.Millions more are spent, by some of the same groups that claim an interest in Holocaust education, on bringing Muslim migrants to America and Europe to carry out the promise of an Islamic apocalypse in which, as the Hadith states, "The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say: Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him." That is what the Islamic Holocaust looks like. And it's underway.
A Jew is murdered in France. Another in Jerusalem. And another and another.
The Final Solution, with its immediate extermination of the Jews, has been replaced by the Two State Solution, an intermediate process in which the land on which Jews can live in security is partitioned into smaller and smaller pieces.
The Lebensraum of Islam demands ever more breathing room. And fewer breathing Jews. Israel is carved up into smaller indefensible ghettos. The number of places where the world decides that Jews can be allowed to live, shrink. The rest become "settlers" who must be evicted for the sake of peace. Even if the place they're "settling" is Jerusalem. The oldest Jewish city on earth.
And this Two State Solution, this intermediate process, has the almost universal backing of the major Jewish organizations who are so very deeply concerned about the Holocaust. It has the backing of the diplomats and politicians who put out canned statements urging that we learn the lessons of the Holocaust. The only lesson they have learned though is that another Holocaust needs better marketing.
It is comparatively easy to build a memorial. You hire the architect, raise the money, buy the land and then cut the ribbon. It is a much harder thing to do something about the need for those memorials in the first place. That is what learning the lessons of the Holocaust is about.
It is easier to build another memorial than to look into your heart and ask why two generations later, the majority of the American Jewish community was still too cowardly to stand up to a liberal icon in the White House... when the lives of millions of Jews were on the line.
From FDR to Obama, American Jewish leaders had two opportunities to stand up to a liberal icon and save Jewish lives. No amount of memorials can disguise the fact that they learned nothing.
The reassurances from American Jewish leaders that Obama meant well, that he will not sell out Israel and that he cares sounded familiar. The American Jewish leaders of the 30's and 40's echoed the same sentiments. Even as the St. Louis was turned back and its passengers were sent to the gas chambers, even as every effort made to aid or save Jews from the Holocaust was frustrated and shut down with the active complicity of the liberal American Jewish leadership who were loyal to FDR.
The same people who let millions die went on to light candles and issue their hypocritical sanctimonious statements of mourning for the dead. More candles have been lit. More memorials have been built. But the lessons of the Holocaust continue to go unlearned.
Regardless of which administration is in office, the Two State Solution and any support for the Islamic terrorists seeking to exterminate the Jews, as they have already exterminated many of the Christians in the region, must be fought. When we fail to do this, then whatever our politics are, we abandon our obligations to the dead and to the living.
The most important lesson of the Holocaust is that the details of how it happened don't really matter. Had Hitler not come to power, had Germany not turned National Socialist, the Holocaust would have happened anyway. Stalin had one planned too before his death. Had it not been Hitler or Stalin, it would have been someone else. It still might be.
The Holocaust did not happen because of intolerance or fascism, as most liberals would like you to believe. It happened for the same overriding reason that any person or group of people is murdered. Because the Jews lacked the means of defending themselves against it.
There have been two Jewish responses to the Holocaust, on the one hand promoting tolerance and assimilation and on the other hand the State of Israel. Tolerance has done nothing to prevent the hatred and murder of Jews. In many cases it has actually served to promote it.
Every Muslim attack in Europe and America can be laid at the door of tolerance. When a Jewish woman is thrown out of a window in Paris or a Rabbi is beaten in Brussels, the true perpetrator is "tolerance".
The State of Israel stands as the only meaningful response to the Holocaust. Rather than building stone memorials and going back to business as usual, the State of Israel is not only a living future for the Jewish people, it is a response to the fundamental lesson of the Holocaust. The Holocaust happened because it could happen to a people who couldn't defend themselves. The State of Israel with its armies and borders was the best physical defense against it happening again.
Today the two responses to the Holocaust are battling out to the death, Tolerance and Assimilation vs the State of Israel. And the State of Israel is getting the worst of it. The teachers of tolerance blame Israel for the failure of their own ideology, manifest in the rising hatred of Jews around the world. If Israel wouldn't exist, somehow Jews wouldn't be hated, their thesis goes. As if Anti-semitism had been discovered lying around in a dustbin sometime after 1948.
But it is tolerance meanwhile that is killing Israel. The left has pushed Israel to the wall, because it represents the inversion of their ideology, it represents the reality that the best hope of the persecuted is not in multiculturalism or in tolerance classes, but in taking responsibility for their own safety and survival.
13 Most Ridiculous Predictions Made on Earth Day, 1970
Jon Gabriel, Ed.
Saturday was Earth Day — an annual event first launched on April 22, 1970. The inaugural festivities (organized in part by then hippie and now convicted murderer Ira Einhorn) predicted death, destruction and disease unless we did exactly as progressives commanded.
Sound familiar? Behold the coming apocalypse, as predicted on and around Earth Day, 1970:
- “Civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.” — Harvard biologist George Wald
- “We are in an environmental crisis which threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation.” — Washington University biologist Barry Commoner
- “Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the race from intolerable deterioration and possible extinction.” — New York Times editorial
- “Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make. The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years.” — Stanford University biologist Paul Ehrlich
- “Most of the people who are going to die in the greatest cataclysm in the history of man have already been born… [By 1975] some experts feel that food shortages will have escalated the present level of world hunger and starvation into famines of unbelievable proportions. Other experts, more optimistic, think the ultimate food-population collision will not occur until the decade of the 1980s.” — Paul Ehrlich
- “It is already too late to avoid mass starvation,” — Denis Hayes, Chief organizer for Earth Day
- “Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable: by 1975 widespread famines will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include all of India, Pakistan, China and the Near East, Africa. By the year 2000, or conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine conditions…. By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine.” — North Texas State University professor Peter Gunter
- “In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution… by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half.” — Life magazine
- “At the present rate of nitrogen buildup, it’s only a matter of time before light will be filtered out of the atmosphere and none of our land will be usable.” — Ecologist Kenneth Watt
- “Air pollution…is certainly going to take hundreds of thousands of lives in the next few years alone.” — Paul Ehrlich
- “By the year 2000, if present trends continue, we will be using up crude oil at such a rate… that there won’t be any more crude oil. You’ll drive up to the pump and say, ‘Fill ‘er up, buddy,’ and he’ll say, ‘I am very sorry, there isn’t any.’” — Ecologist Kenneth Watt
- “[One] theory assumes that the earth’s cloud cover will continue to thicken as more dust, fumes, and water vapor are belched into the atmosphere by industrial smokestacks and jet planes. Screened from the sun’s heat, the planet will cool, the water vapor will fall and freeze, and a new Ice Age will be born.” — Newsweek magazine
- “The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years. If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.” — Kenneth Watt
Autism April by Mike Shaw
Another April, another National Autism Awareness Month. The statistics, of course, are appalling. The CDC states that about 1 in 68 children has been identified with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), according to estimates from CDC’s Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network. ASD occurs in all racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic groups, and is about 4.5 times more common among boys (1 in 42) than among girls (1 in 189). Consider that this incidence rate has more than doubled since 2000.
In previous articles, we have dealt with the disconnect between what Dr. Leo Kanner—who first described the disorder in 1943—and what now constitutes the diagnostic criteria for the condition. Kanner’s landmark paper, entitled “Autistic Disturbances of Affective Contact,” published in Nervous Child, is both widely cited and assiduously ignored.
Fearless contrarian and pioneering pediatrician Michael J. Goldberg MD has long railed against the conventional approach to autism—and has cured many of these kids. As he says…
“These children present with multiple symptoms that we were trained were medical, but somehow we’re writing it all off as ‘autism’ and ‘psychological.’ It’s impossible for a developmental or genetic disorder to ever become an epidemic, and yet we are condemning these parents and children to no future. I have essentially watched families go to experts around the country, go to leaders around the country, and realize that those experts, those leaders have completely turned their back on these families. They are desperate, they need help, and that’s supposed to be our job as pediatricians.”
“If you throw out autism, then you suddenly realize we have a massive medical epidemic affecting the brains and bodies of these children. It is time we recognize that these children are ill, and have autistic-like symptoms, but do not have autism.”
Which brings us to the human herpesviruses known as CMV (Cytomegalovirus) and HHV-6 (Human herpesvirus 6).
According to learned sources, CMV is ubiquitous and generally asymptomatic in healthy children and adults. Yet, it is also a major cause of morbidity and occasional mortality in newborn infants. Moreover, CMV has been identified as the most important cause of congenital infection in the developed world, that frequently leads to mental retardation and developmental disability.
If this weren’t bad enough, a body of evidence links CMV to a number of adult health problems, including immunosenescence (the age-dependent decrease in immunological competence) and an increased risk of malignancy and vascular disease. As with all human herpesviruses, they establish life-long latency and can become reactivated later in life.
HHV-6, which infects nearly 100% of human beings, typically before the age of three, is another potential baddie—associated with a shocking number of illnesses. We’re talking Hodgkin’s lymphoma, cervical cancer, chronic fatigue syndrome, epilepsy, multiple sclerosis, and myocarditis, among many others.
Listen to Dr. Goldberg:
“I was taught as a pediatrician, that when a baby is born severely brain damaged, CMV was one of the organisms you must look for, and rule out. Imagine my shock when I discovered that up to 1.5% of newborns have CMV—yet explained away as ‘asymptomatic’.”
He further notes that HHV-6 should become inactive and in theory not harmful. But, should it become chronically activated via a stressed immune system, it is known to cause chronic dysfunction and harm over time.
As such, Goldberg asks the medical establishment: Why not acknowledge that the evidence of activated viruses in ASD children is not normal, but rather is consistent with, and is a reflection of, their stressed immune systems? If so, ASD becomes a medical condition (phenotype) and not DSM autism!
Autism April—a bit more, April 10, 2017
Last week’s article generated a fair amount of e-mail—including some pointed questions from my friend Josh Bloom, of the American Council on Science and Health. Most of the questions and comments referred to the remarks and links that featured Michael J. Goldberg, MD.
As such, it seems appropriate to present more of Goldberg’s ideas…
This one comes from April, 2016: As another Autism Awareness Month begins, sadly nothing has changed. Even the March, 2016 publication from the University of Rochester, entitled “The Brain’s Gardeners: Immune Cells ‘Prune’ Connections Between Neurons,” hardly struck a note in the research community. The paper suggests a link between autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and immune dysfunction, whereby the immune system is not correctly pruning the neurons in the brain.
He also laments that an article from 2004, entitled “Neuroglial Activation and Neuroinflammation in the Brain of Patients with Autism,” should have piqued the curiosity of any researcher with an open mind. After all, this work from Johns Hopkins discusses neuro-immune inflammation, and certainly suggests a reasonable etiology for at least some ASD kids.
Indeed, with an explanation for the findings of “too many neurons in the brain of autistic children” the research community still will not admit this is an autoimmune disease, with an autistic phenotype, and not the current psychiatric label of “Autism.”
When it comes to medical/disease origin, the idea of phenotypes is a major clinical reality. A phenotype is a collection of symptoms that reflects how a disease presents, but doesn’t tell you the cause of the disease. For example, a specific group of signs and symptoms presents as “meningitis,” but that doesn’t tell a physician whether it is bacterial, viral, fungal, protozoan, TB, or other.
The 1:68 children are presenting with a phenotype of Autistic / ASD symptoms. But conventional medicine is making the mistaken assumption that the 1:68 phenotypes are all developmental, psychological, genetic, etc. As Goldberg has emphasized, one cannot have an epidemic of a genetic or developmental disorder. He observes: “Science doesn’t change; it can be ignored, or twisted to fit a popular mindset, but it doesn’t change.”
In his blog postings from last year, he reacted to comments from parents of ASD kids (with proper HIPAA-compliant redaction), who described their generally affectionate children, with few motor issues…
Dr. Leo Kanner, who first described infantile autism, stated that the children were never normal, never affectionate, and never had major motor issues. You are all subjected to a new set of subjective criteria to label your children as “Autistic” even though what is being described has nothing to do with the ideas of Dr. Kanner and other psychiatric experts of the 40s, 50s, and 60s.
Goldberg continues: As I was taught in medical school and confirmed at a medical symposium nearly twenty years ago, short of a known, definable degenerative disease, no child can develop normally until 12, 15, 18 months old, have language, lose it, then on good testing show up like a 10-month-old!
A child that has already developed normally past age 15 or 18 months old, cannot exhibit the dysfunctions above, with no objective findings on MRI, EEG, etc., unless a neuro-immune or neuro-infectious disease process is occurring. To keep thinking that the dysfunctions of these children are mental or developmental is beyond comprehension.
The gauntlet thrown down, how will mainstream medicine respond?
Google Readies Massive Algorithm Rewrite to Stifle Conservative Media
Google and their liberal media cronies have been doing their damnedest to eradicate the opinions of conservative Americans in the wake of Donald Trump’s electoral victory. Following the election, in which the democrats were brutally shocked and defeated by political newcomer Trump, the media was forced to sprint back to the drawing board to invent new ways in which they could stifle America’s imminent conservative uprising.
Hillary Clinton, Trump’s opponent in the 2016 presidential race, was seen as a sure thing by the left. Hillary herself acted with an air of inevitability that absolutely infuriated the supporters of her primary rival Bernie Sanders.
It was that same arrogance that made the republicans’ victory so much sweeter as well. Now, without a democrat in the White House, and a minority stake in the two houses of Congress, the party of The Clintons found themselves scrambling to keep the faith alive, as Wikileaks continued to rain down terrible revelations on them – some of which culminated with the dismissal of Debbie Wassermann Schultz from the DNC and a massive fracturing of the beleaguered party.......To Read More....
With Border Wall Stalled on Paul Ryan’s Account, Ted Cruz Has Genius Funding Idea
Paul Ryan made an ugly splash in conservative circles today, as he pushed the fight for President Trump’s border back to a 2018 start-date. The delay has come as a nasty surprise for Trump supporters, who flocked to the candidate en masse as he detailed his plan for border security throughout the long 2016 presidential campaign.
Paul Ryan has already been in the hot seat with the republican voter base, who believe that the Speaker of The House has yet to fully fall in line behind the newly anointed Commander in Chief. Now, a previous political opponent of both Ryan and Trump has a plan to get the border wall project started, and it’s just too brilliant to be ignored......To Read More.....
Are neonicotinoid insecticide seed treatments endangering wild bees?
“Federal protections may be the only thing standing between the bumble bee and extinction,” said Rebecca Riley, with the Natural Resources Defense Council, after the Trump administration released its hold in March and agreed to list the rusty patched bumble bee (Bombus affinis) as endangered.
Bee activists are now lobbying the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to list three other wild bumble bee species: the western bumble bee (Bombus occidentalis), the yellow-banded bumble bee (Bombus terricola) and Franklin’s bumblebee (Bombus franklini).
The designation has received mixed reactions in different quarters. While some environmental groups are celebrating, making the case that all bees are facing extinction pressure and that pesticides are the main driver, the decision has stirred a backlash among some farmers and supporters of the Trump administration’s nascent infrastructure rebuild plan. The designation could require landowners and businesses to apply for special permits in areas where the bee is thought to live, opening the door for legal battles over development.
Bee health concerns
The rusty patch designation has also stirred a good deal of controversy because of questions about what might be causing the bees’ health problems and whether endangered-species status is the best approach to deal with the problem. It’s a vague statute that poses serious implications for farmers and for infrastructure improvements—and the job creation that goes with them—because they will inevitably be challenged by opposition groups........Rusty patched bumble bees are “generalists,” meaning they feed on a variety of flowering plants and can live in many different habitats, such as prairies, woodlands, marshes and agricultural landscapes. If pesticides were to blame for their problems, then we would likely observe declines in areas where pesticides are most widely used, and we would see healthy populations where they are not. However, they’ve declined in areas where pesticides are never used, such as the Great Smoky Mountains National Park, a huge area that encompasses 816 square miles. .........To Read More....
The designation has received mixed reactions in different quarters. While some environmental groups are celebrating, making the case that all bees are facing extinction pressure and that pesticides are the main driver, the decision has stirred a backlash among some farmers and supporters of the Trump administration’s nascent infrastructure rebuild plan. The designation could require landowners and businesses to apply for special permits in areas where the bee is thought to live, opening the door for legal battles over development.
Bee health concerns
The rusty patch designation has also stirred a good deal of controversy because of questions about what might be causing the bees’ health problems and whether endangered-species status is the best approach to deal with the problem. It’s a vague statute that poses serious implications for farmers and for infrastructure improvements—and the job creation that goes with them—because they will inevitably be challenged by opposition groups........Rusty patched bumble bees are “generalists,” meaning they feed on a variety of flowering plants and can live in many different habitats, such as prairies, woodlands, marshes and agricultural landscapes. If pesticides were to blame for their problems, then we would likely observe declines in areas where pesticides are most widely used, and we would see healthy populations where they are not. However, they’ve declined in areas where pesticides are never used, such as the Great Smoky Mountains National Park, a huge area that encompasses 816 square miles. .........To Read More....
If There’s Going to Be a Government Shutdown, Do It for a Good Reason
April 25, 2017 by Dan Mitchell @ International Liberty
I’m normally a big fan of shutting down the government and I’ve tried to convince timid lawmakers that shutdown fights can be worthwhile.
And since I don’t favor any funding of non-essential functions, I view a partial shutdown as a good start. Indeed, while the various interest groups in DC hyperventilate about supposed disaster, I experience a feeling of joy and serenity (as illustrated by this modified cartoon, which originally was altered to show my reaction to sequestration).
As far as I’m concerned, the key lesson from shutdown fights is that our nation will be better off if bureaucracies such as the Department of Housing and Urban Development or Department of Education are permanently shuttered. And let’s add the Department of Energy, Department of Transportation, and Department of Agriculture just for the fun of it.
These entities shouldn’t get short-run funding or long-run funding.
That’s the point I made in the second half of this recent interview on Fox Business.
I’m not the only person who likes the idea of a partial shutdown.
Writing for the Resurgent, Erick Erickson explains how a shutdown fight would be valuable.
Unfortunately, that’s not the case. I view shutdown as a means to an end. I want those fights to occur in hopes that there will be reforms that shrink the overall burden of government spending.
In this case, though, the shutdown fight largely revolves around President Trump’s request for money to build part of a wall between Mexico and the United States. Some people think that’s a good idea and others think it’s a bad idea, but the one thing I can say with certainty is that it’s not a money-saving idea. Even if Trump wanted to finance the wall by reducing outlays in other parts of the budget, the net result would not be smaller government.
The bottom line is that even though I almost always cheer for a government shutdown, I’ll be sitting on the sidelines for this fight.
But if Trump and congressional Republicans at some point decide to fight for much-needed spending restraint (a naive hope, I realize), then I’ll be the first to cheer if that battle leads to a shutdown.
P.S. My favorite bit of shutdown humor is at the bottom of this post, and other examples of shutdown-related humor can be enjoyed by clicking here, here, here, here, and here.
I’m normally a big fan of shutting down the government and I’ve tried to convince timid lawmakers that shutdown fights can be worthwhile.
- I wrote a day-by-day analysis of new reports during the big shutdown fight that took place in the Clinton years and showed that there was no downside for Republicans.
- I also vigorously defended Ted Cruz and others who tried to kill Obamacare as part of the 2013 shutdown battle, and later explained that there was no damage for the GOP.
And since I don’t favor any funding of non-essential functions, I view a partial shutdown as a good start. Indeed, while the various interest groups in DC hyperventilate about supposed disaster, I experience a feeling of joy and serenity (as illustrated by this modified cartoon, which originally was altered to show my reaction to sequestration).
As far as I’m concerned, the key lesson from shutdown fights is that our nation will be better off if bureaucracies such as the Department of Housing and Urban Development or Department of Education are permanently shuttered. And let’s add the Department of Energy, Department of Transportation, and Department of Agriculture just for the fun of it.
These entities shouldn’t get short-run funding or long-run funding.
That’s the point I made in the second half of this recent interview on Fox Business.
I’m not the only person who likes the idea of a partial shutdown.
Writing for the Resurgent, Erick Erickson explains how a shutdown fight would be valuable.
Americans need to be reminded that the world will not end if the government shuts down. They need to be reminded to take care of themselves instead of relying on Uncle Sam’s teet. A government shutdown with the GOP in charge would be a far different thing from a government shutdown run by Democrats. President Obama tried to inflict maximum pain on the American people to force the GOP to reopen government. President Trump, instead, could take a different approach and use the experience to show Americans how out of control government has really gotten.And Larry Kudlow had a similar message in a column for National Review back in 2015.
…sometimes you have to make a point. Send a message. Show voters what you really believe. Take a stand. …Most of the Beltway media will blame Republicans. Democrats will blame Republicans. And GOP pundits will blame Republicans. Political death, they will say. Really? …during the Reagan-O’Neill era, most of the shutdowns were budget focused. Reagan wanted less spending; the Democrats wanted more. …The Reagan-O’Neill-era shutdowns were short, and in most of them Reagan prevailed. Meanwhile, the Reagan recovery flourished, the Republicans held the Senate (until 1986), and the Gipper was reelected in a landslide in 1984. Going back to the Obamacare-related shutdown of 2013, a bit more than a year later the Republicans swept the Senate and gained an even larger majority in the House. …shutdowns are a cumbersome way to make a point. …But perhaps Republican leadership in both Houses might think of this: There are too many deals and not enough principles, beliefs, and clear messaging.Having now provided all this evidence in favor of government shutdowns, you would think I’m excited about the possibility that there will be a partial shutdown this Saturday when a temporary funding bill expires.
Unfortunately, that’s not the case. I view shutdown as a means to an end. I want those fights to occur in hopes that there will be reforms that shrink the overall burden of government spending.
In this case, though, the shutdown fight largely revolves around President Trump’s request for money to build part of a wall between Mexico and the United States. Some people think that’s a good idea and others think it’s a bad idea, but the one thing I can say with certainty is that it’s not a money-saving idea. Even if Trump wanted to finance the wall by reducing outlays in other parts of the budget, the net result would not be smaller government.
The bottom line is that even though I almost always cheer for a government shutdown, I’ll be sitting on the sidelines for this fight.
But if Trump and congressional Republicans at some point decide to fight for much-needed spending restraint (a naive hope, I realize), then I’ll be the first to cheer if that battle leads to a shutdown.
P.S. My favorite bit of shutdown humor is at the bottom of this post, and other examples of shutdown-related humor can be enjoyed by clicking here, here, here, here, and here.
Tuesday, April 25, 2017
Next Plague: The Bacteria Strike Back
By Steve Schow — April 20, 2017
Antibiotic-resistant bacteria cause more than two million infections per year in the US, resulting in ~23,000 deaths. These infections incur an estimated $20 billion in direct healthcare costs and $35 billion in lost productivity, and these costs are expected to rise rapidly over the next several years.
The threat of antibiotic resistance is especially critical in the case of Gram-negative bacterial pathogens, such as Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Acinetobacter baumannii, and Klebsiella pneumoniae. Infections caused by MultiDrug Resistant (MDR) Gram-negative bacteria result in higher mortality rates, longer hospital stays and higher treatment costs compared to antibiotic-susceptible infections.
Patients with MDR Gram-negative bacterial infections have a mortality rate of 30-70%, which is approximately two to threefold higher than patients who have an antibiotic-susceptible infection. In 2005, there were 368,600 hospital stays with Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus (MRSA) infections in the US, at a resulting cost of $5 billion.
The incidence tripled between 2000 and 2005. Invasive MRSA resulted in 18,650 deaths in the US in 2005. The first case of MRSA appeared in 1961, just one year after the introduction of methicillin. MRSA was widespread in Europe by the end of the 70s and in the US by the end of the 80s. Nasal MRSA carriage is a major risk factor in hospital community infections. In 2002, 2 million hospital patients succumbed to hospital-acquired infection leading to 99,000 deaths.......To Read More......
Antibiotic-resistant bacteria cause more than two million infections per year in the US, resulting in ~23,000 deaths. These infections incur an estimated $20 billion in direct healthcare costs and $35 billion in lost productivity, and these costs are expected to rise rapidly over the next several years.
The threat of antibiotic resistance is especially critical in the case of Gram-negative bacterial pathogens, such as Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Acinetobacter baumannii, and Klebsiella pneumoniae. Infections caused by MultiDrug Resistant (MDR) Gram-negative bacteria result in higher mortality rates, longer hospital stays and higher treatment costs compared to antibiotic-susceptible infections.
Patients with MDR Gram-negative bacterial infections have a mortality rate of 30-70%, which is approximately two to threefold higher than patients who have an antibiotic-susceptible infection. In 2005, there were 368,600 hospital stays with Methicillin Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus (MRSA) infections in the US, at a resulting cost of $5 billion.
The incidence tripled between 2000 and 2005. Invasive MRSA resulted in 18,650 deaths in the US in 2005. The first case of MRSA appeared in 1961, just one year after the introduction of methicillin. MRSA was widespread in Europe by the end of the 70s and in the US by the end of the 80s. Nasal MRSA carriage is a major risk factor in hospital community infections. In 2002, 2 million hospital patients succumbed to hospital-acquired infection leading to 99,000 deaths.......To Read More......
Political Islam: Democracy’s Lurking Iceberg
Why would European Turks rally to Turkish President Erdogan Islamist agenda?
Instead of a congratulatory call to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan two Sundays ago, perhaps President Donald Trump should have made a condolence call to the leaders of Germany, France, Austria, Belgium, and the Netherlands.
Since 2009, it is estimated that 4.5 million Turks have emigrated to those countries. In the Netherlands, 71 percent of Dutch Turks enthusiastically supported the passage of the pro-Erdogan referendum, which effectively supercharged his already autocratic control of the Turkish government. Turkish populations in Belgium, Austria, France, and Germany registered similarly lopsided majorities who, despite the president’s repressive campaign of imprisoning journalists and secular critics, approve of Erdogan’s promise of accelerating the transformation of Turkey to a more Islamist state. Among other theocratic measures, Erdogan aims to abolish secular education and demolish separation of church and state.
Once the poster child of promise for the unique model of a Muslim-majority nation — capable of legislatively upholding an ironclad firewall between the harsher, less tolerant edicts of Islam and the secular, more pro-Western version — Turkey under Erdogan has steadily regressed towards a theocracy resembling Saudi Arabia.......To Read More.....
Instead of a congratulatory call to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan two Sundays ago, perhaps President Donald Trump should have made a condolence call to the leaders of Germany, France, Austria, Belgium, and the Netherlands.
Since 2009, it is estimated that 4.5 million Turks have emigrated to those countries. In the Netherlands, 71 percent of Dutch Turks enthusiastically supported the passage of the pro-Erdogan referendum, which effectively supercharged his already autocratic control of the Turkish government. Turkish populations in Belgium, Austria, France, and Germany registered similarly lopsided majorities who, despite the president’s repressive campaign of imprisoning journalists and secular critics, approve of Erdogan’s promise of accelerating the transformation of Turkey to a more Islamist state. Among other theocratic measures, Erdogan aims to abolish secular education and demolish separation of church and state.
Once the poster child of promise for the unique model of a Muslim-majority nation — capable of legislatively upholding an ironclad firewall between the harsher, less tolerant edicts of Islam and the secular, more pro-Western version — Turkey under Erdogan has steadily regressed towards a theocracy resembling Saudi Arabia.......To Read More.....
America’s Education System and the Lesson of Competition
For all their shortcomings, our colleges are fonts of freedom compared to our public schools.
April 25, 2017
Capitalism’s two centuries have proved competition is its essential element. No place in America’s 21st century demonstrates this like its educational system. On the positive side stands America’s world-leading college system; on the other stands America’s world-lagging public school system. The big difference between them is competition.
Capitalism requires several things to operate well. Private property is one. The rule of law, for enforceable contracts, is another. Stable money is also important.
However, for each of these there are replicas with which capitalism, at least in a primitive form, can exist. If there are societal limits on private property ownership, capitalism will take hold surreptitiously in sub-sectors where it does. Communism’s thriving black markets have continually proved this......To Read More.....
My Take - This article's concept of competition is accurate as far as it goes. Higher education does compete for all the things he says they do, but the problem is - it's not real competition because the government funds so much of what they do. In short - it's not all their money. The competition they need to be doing is competition of ideas, not funding for overpriced professors who rarely teach and way over paid - and way too many - administrative personnel, who merely suck funds away from the real work universities should be doing - teaching kids stuff that works.
April 25, 2017
Capitalism’s two centuries have proved competition is its essential element. No place in America’s 21st century demonstrates this like its educational system. On the positive side stands America’s world-leading college system; on the other stands America’s world-lagging public school system. The big difference between them is competition.
Capitalism requires several things to operate well. Private property is one. The rule of law, for enforceable contracts, is another. Stable money is also important.
However, for each of these there are replicas with which capitalism, at least in a primitive form, can exist. If there are societal limits on private property ownership, capitalism will take hold surreptitiously in sub-sectors where it does. Communism’s thriving black markets have continually proved this......To Read More.....
My Take - This article's concept of competition is accurate as far as it goes. Higher education does compete for all the things he says they do, but the problem is - it's not real competition because the government funds so much of what they do. In short - it's not all their money. The competition they need to be doing is competition of ideas, not funding for overpriced professors who rarely teach and way over paid - and way too many - administrative personnel, who merely suck funds away from the real work universities should be doing - teaching kids stuff that works.
America’s Campus: The Necessity of Violence
If you think that the mobbing of Charles Murray at Middlebury College in early March was the final stage of campus bullying, especially after denunciations came from conservatives and liberals alike, you missed the events at Claremont-McKenna College two weeks ago.
People who came to hear Heather Mac Donald, who argues that the excessive scrutiny of policemen has led them to back off from their work and thus has increased crime levels, couldn’t enter the building. Protesters screamed at and pushed them, also threatening bystanders and journalists if they got too close. Heckling the speaker wasn’t enough. We saw full-on intimidation of anyone interested in the event.
Meanwhile, in the northern part of the state, a decision was made that tells us indirectly how we must respond to these actions. The student government at University of California-Davis voted to make the American flag display optional at future meetings. Some of the members don’t like the flag. As one of them put it, “The flag to a lot of people represents capitalism, colonialism and the genocide of indigenous people, and this is why we don’t want the flag in meetings.”
From now on, members who do honor the flag must petition the body 24 hours in advance in order to request the flag’s presence in the proceedings..,.....To Read More....
My Take - Eliminate government funding in all forms and this problem will go away. Higher education is over rated. Education has now become a religious tenet of the left, and anything that speaks against it is heresy, which must be attacked with vigor. Education at the lower levels is a farce, since it's now more about indoctrinating children with leftist dogma than it is about reading, writing and arithmetic. It's time we got the federal government out of education and in most cases - state control of education needs to be diminished.
Liberals 'Don’t Understand What’s Happening in the Country'
In the bonfire of the vanities that is the aftermath of Hillary Clinton’s campaign of 2016 one quote from Shattered, the book of the week, stands supreme. [C]lueless Hillary Clinton... to a close friend, “I don’t understand what’s happening in the country.” People like Hillary Clinton won’t understand what is happening to the country until they carve out the cataracts in their eyes that prevent them from seeing what their politics hath wrought. And it is pretty obvious that the same applies to the rest of elite liberaldom. The political movement that built the welfare state and the administrative state and the liberal cultural hegemony is going on the rocks, and liberals can’t believe it.
The political movement that gave us Reagan and won the Cold War is also on the rocks. But we conservatives are not that shocked that good old gentlemanly libertarian conservatism is done. We conservatives went through our five stages of grief in the year between the Descent of Trump and the nomination of Trump, and now face the world without illusion. Unlike liberals, still hysterically sobbing in their liberal safe space. More........
The Bundy verdict, the government, and American justice
The next big step in a long battle between David and Goliath. How did the Bundys do against the Fed?
By Leesa K. Donner April 25, 2017
Perhaps it is not too much to say there is no other event in America today more polarizing than the standoff at Bunkerville. Liberty-minded folks who wish to dial back the reach and power of the federal government see Bunkerville as a touchstone. Others, however, see the case of the United States v. Cliven Bundy et al. as a bunch of vigilantes and a law-breaking cowboy out make their own rules and ignore those the rest must follow.
Yesterday, a jury in the first of several trials reached a partial verdict regarding six men who joined Mr. Bundy in his fight against the federal authorities in the 2014 standoff. Each defendant faced ten charges, including obstruction, extortion, weapon violations, threatening and assaulting a federal officer, and conspiracy. ........More
By Leesa K. Donner April 25, 2017
Perhaps it is not too much to say there is no other event in America today more polarizing than the standoff at Bunkerville. Liberty-minded folks who wish to dial back the reach and power of the federal government see Bunkerville as a touchstone. Others, however, see the case of the United States v. Cliven Bundy et al. as a bunch of vigilantes and a law-breaking cowboy out make their own rules and ignore those the rest must follow.
Yesterday, a jury in the first of several trials reached a partial verdict regarding six men who joined Mr. Bundy in his fight against the federal authorities in the 2014 standoff. Each defendant faced ten charges, including obstruction, extortion, weapon violations, threatening and assaulting a federal officer, and conspiracy. ........More
Women's rights oppressor elected to UN's women's rights commission
The UN has placed Saudi Arabia on its commission on women. Is this an Alice in Wonderland-style joke?
By Ethel C. Fenig April 25, 2017
Ah, the UN. Spewing poisoned hot air with all its hateful talk, thus contributing to the oh-so-feared climate change while polluting the planet and endangering it even further with its corrupt and harmful actions, it really should be abolished for the safety of humanity, new sheriff in town, Nikki Haley, notwithstanding.
Consider the latest Alice-In-Wonderland, reverse film negative (remember those?) where black is white and white is black (calm down sensitive, safe-space culture appropriation victims) oxymoronic action: Saudi Arabia has just been elected to the UN's Commission on the Status of Women (CSW), reports Hillel Neuer of UN Watch. Yes, you read that correctly, Saudi Arabia, the country where women can't drive or be seen in public without a man, among other repressive restrictions, has been elected to a commission which is, according to their official statement "the principal global intergovernmental body exclusively dedicated to the promotion of gender equality and the empowerment of women...established 21 June 1946 " ............More
By Ethel C. Fenig April 25, 2017
Ah, the UN. Spewing poisoned hot air with all its hateful talk, thus contributing to the oh-so-feared climate change while polluting the planet and endangering it even further with its corrupt and harmful actions, it really should be abolished for the safety of humanity, new sheriff in town, Nikki Haley, notwithstanding.
Consider the latest Alice-In-Wonderland, reverse film negative (remember those?) where black is white and white is black (calm down sensitive, safe-space culture appropriation victims) oxymoronic action: Saudi Arabia has just been elected to the UN's Commission on the Status of Women (CSW), reports Hillel Neuer of UN Watch. Yes, you read that correctly, Saudi Arabia, the country where women can't drive or be seen in public without a man, among other repressive restrictions, has been elected to a commission which is, according to their official statement "the principal global intergovernmental body exclusively dedicated to the promotion of gender equality and the empowerment of women...established 21 June 1946 " ............More
Who Really Controls the Modern Democratic Party?
They're out there, and they mean to take control. Who really controls this octopus?
Politically, the Democratic Party is the home of progressivism, or liberalism. At least today’s Democratic Party. JFK, a Democrat from fifty years ago, would be politically to the right of many current Republicans. Compared to today’s Democrats, JFK would be in Trump territory. Conventional wisdom views the media as the public relations arm of the Democratic Party.
Commonly referred to as “Democrat party operatives with bylines,” big media trumpets the progressives' message 24-7, from the nation’s major newspapers, network news shows, and most cable outlets, with a few exceptions, such as at Fox News. But where is the mothership of progressivism? The media, or the Democratic Party? Or is it something larger?
Rush Limbaugh, self-described as “the big voice on the right,” recently revised his thinking on Democrats and the media.
His new view is that, “the Democrats are an arm of the media, not that the media is an arm of the Democrats.”
Not just a chicken-and-egg argument, but an actual reversal of the conventional wisdom. “The foundational base of the progressive movement is in the nationwide media,” according to Rush.........More
Unearned Prosperity for Washington’s Ruling Class
April 24, 2017 by Dan Mitchell @ International Liberty
Every so often, I share an image that is unambiguously depressing. Usually because it suggest that freedom is slowly eroding.
Just as the Minneapolis Federal Reserve has an interactive website that allows users to compared recoveries and recessions, which is very useful for comparing Reaganomics and Obamanomics, the St. Louis Federal Reserve has an interactive website that allows users to compare national and regional economic data.
And that’s the source of today’s depressing chart. It shows median inflation-adjusted household income for the entire nation and for the District of Columbia. As you can see, the nation’s capital used to be somewhat similar to the rest of the nation. But over the past 10 years, DC residents have become an economic elite, with a representative household “earning” almost $14,000 more than the national average.
By the way, I put quotation marks around “earning” in the previous sentence for a very specific reason.
There is nothing wrong with some people accumulating lots of wealth and income if their prosperity is the result of voluntary exchange.
In the case of Washington, DC, however, much of the capital’s prosperity is the result of coercive redistribution. The lavish compensation of federal bureaucrats is a direct transfer from taxpayers to a gilded class, while the various lobbyists, contractors, cronyists, politicians, and other insiders are fat and happy because of a combination of direct and indirect redistribution.
I should also point out that the entire region is prospering at the expense of the rest of the nation.
By the way, some people will be tempted to argue that rising income levels in DC are simply a result of gentrification as higher-income whites displace lower-income blacks. Yes, that is happening, but that begs the question of where the new residents are getting all their income and why the nation’s capital is an increasingly attractive place for those people to live.
The answer, in large part, is that government is a growth industry. Except it’s not an industry. It’s increasingly just a racket for insiders to get rich at the expense of everyone else.
P.S. To close on a semi-humorous note, some cartoons are funny even if the underlying message is depressing.
- A chart showing that corporations are using cronyism to pad their bottom line.
- A table on the rapid rise of dependency in the United States.
- A grim chart on the ever-growing number of pages in the internal revenue code.
- A PowerPoint slide on the ratio of producers vs. consumers in Denmark.
- A chart showing the relentless expansion of Medicaid dependency.
Just as the Minneapolis Federal Reserve has an interactive website that allows users to compared recoveries and recessions, which is very useful for comparing Reaganomics and Obamanomics, the St. Louis Federal Reserve has an interactive website that allows users to compare national and regional economic data.
And that’s the source of today’s depressing chart. It shows median inflation-adjusted household income for the entire nation and for the District of Columbia. As you can see, the nation’s capital used to be somewhat similar to the rest of the nation. But over the past 10 years, DC residents have become an economic elite, with a representative household “earning” almost $14,000 more than the national average.
By the way, I put quotation marks around “earning” in the previous sentence for a very specific reason.
There is nothing wrong with some people accumulating lots of wealth and income if their prosperity is the result of voluntary exchange.
In the case of Washington, DC, however, much of the capital’s prosperity is the result of coercive redistribution. The lavish compensation of federal bureaucrats is a direct transfer from taxpayers to a gilded class, while the various lobbyists, contractors, cronyists, politicians, and other insiders are fat and happy because of a combination of direct and indirect redistribution.
I should also point out that the entire region is prospering at the expense of the rest of the nation.
By the way, some people will be tempted to argue that rising income levels in DC are simply a result of gentrification as higher-income whites displace lower-income blacks. Yes, that is happening, but that begs the question of where the new residents are getting all their income and why the nation’s capital is an increasingly attractive place for those people to live.
The answer, in large part, is that government is a growth industry. Except it’s not an industry. It’s increasingly just a racket for insiders to get rich at the expense of everyone else.
P.S. To close on a semi-humorous note, some cartoons are funny even if the underlying message is depressing.
New Study Finds Interesting Trend in Survey of Best and Worst States
I bet you won’t be able to guess what the 10 richest states in the nation have in common… Or what the 10 poorest states have in common… I’ll give you a hint – the richest states are all run by one party, and the poorest are all run by another. Now, do you think you can guess which party runs the 10 richest states, and which party runs the 10 poorest? I think you can…
The latest study from the folks at the American Legislative Exchange Council should offer some important instruction for voters across the nation, sadly liberals don’t usually vote based on facts, data, or logic. As you look at the data you’ll see that the states with the best economic outlook are all heavily influenced by the Republican Party. Most of those states see the GOP leading both chambers in the legislature, as well as occupying the Governor’s mansion. However, even on the rare occasion that the Democrats hold the executive branch or one of the chambers… the GOP holds sway in the other. Here’s the list: .......To Read More....
Liberal Washington Post/ABC Poll Proves Trump Right
By Onan Coca April 24, 2017
A just released poll from the liberals at the Washington Post and ABC has the media stunned into stupidity today. Before I get to the heart of the poll let me show you what one of the headlines about the poll said… from the Hill, “Poll: 85 percent of Clinton supporters would vote for her again.”
From that headline, it’s hard to tell that this poll could cause an earthquake of fear on the left… but let’s dig past the Hill‘s terrible headline. While 85% of Clinton’s supporters would vote for her again, the same poll finds that 96% of Trump supporters would cast their ballot the same way they did in November.......To Read More.....
My Take - A number of my customers are very rich and very democratic - meaning if Adolf Hitler was resurrected and nominated as the Democrat Party for President of the United States - they'd vote for him. This has always fascinated me. The number of them who are conservative are very small. These are prominent people in their fields of endeavor and their communities.
I had a conversation with one of them yesterday and her objection to Trump is - he lies. Trump lies, but claims about Hillary's lies were overstated and unproven. Really? I keep asking everyone - what lies? It's clear it was the Democrats who were colluding with the Russians, not Trump or his campaign. And it's becoming abundantly clear Obama did "tap" the Trump campaign. So what lies are they so worried about?
One thing is clear to me at least. The Trump administration must prosecute Hillary, Obama and their cabal for the crimes they've committed while in office in order to destroy this false narrative by the left.....no matter how much the press attacks them for it. They must be officially investigated - but first they must drain the swamp at the FBI, CIA, NSA, IRS and any other intelligence gathering, law enforcement or investigative body.
If Brazil can prosecute their ruling elite for crimes they've committed while in office, we certainly must be able to do it. Or is America the real banana republic?
A just released poll from the liberals at the Washington Post and ABC has the media stunned into stupidity today. Before I get to the heart of the poll let me show you what one of the headlines about the poll said… from the Hill, “Poll: 85 percent of Clinton supporters would vote for her again.”
From that headline, it’s hard to tell that this poll could cause an earthquake of fear on the left… but let’s dig past the Hill‘s terrible headline. While 85% of Clinton’s supporters would vote for her again, the same poll finds that 96% of Trump supporters would cast their ballot the same way they did in November.......To Read More.....
My Take - A number of my customers are very rich and very democratic - meaning if Adolf Hitler was resurrected and nominated as the Democrat Party for President of the United States - they'd vote for him. This has always fascinated me. The number of them who are conservative are very small. These are prominent people in their fields of endeavor and their communities.
I had a conversation with one of them yesterday and her objection to Trump is - he lies. Trump lies, but claims about Hillary's lies were overstated and unproven. Really? I keep asking everyone - what lies? It's clear it was the Democrats who were colluding with the Russians, not Trump or his campaign. And it's becoming abundantly clear Obama did "tap" the Trump campaign. So what lies are they so worried about?
One thing is clear to me at least. The Trump administration must prosecute Hillary, Obama and their cabal for the crimes they've committed while in office in order to destroy this false narrative by the left.....no matter how much the press attacks them for it. They must be officially investigated - but first they must drain the swamp at the FBI, CIA, NSA, IRS and any other intelligence gathering, law enforcement or investigative body.
If Brazil can prosecute their ruling elite for crimes they've committed while in office, we certainly must be able to do it. Or is America the real banana republic?
People in “Real” America still LOVE Donald Trump
By Onan Coca April 24, 2017
ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos is having a difficult time understanding how it is that President Trump can keep such a strong grip on his voter base when the media keeps telling them how unpopular he is. To try to understand the dynamic better Stephanopoulos invited Ohio radio host Bill Cunningham on to Sunday’s episode of This Week and got a lot more than he bargained for when he asked Cunningham to explain the attraction to Trump. Cunningham immediately explained, in the strongest terms possible, that “real” America loved Donald Trump and the coastal elites were deluding themselves if they thought his popularity was slipping........... To Read More.....
ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos is having a difficult time understanding how it is that President Trump can keep such a strong grip on his voter base when the media keeps telling them how unpopular he is. To try to understand the dynamic better Stephanopoulos invited Ohio radio host Bill Cunningham on to Sunday’s episode of This Week and got a lot more than he bargained for when he asked Cunningham to explain the attraction to Trump. Cunningham immediately explained, in the strongest terms possible, that “real” America loved Donald Trump and the coastal elites were deluding themselves if they thought his popularity was slipping........... To Read More.....
Greens? Nein Danke
Germany’s Once Powerful Green Party Faces Existential Crisis
Brought to you by Benny Peiser's Global Warming Policy Forum
Brought to you by Benny Peiser's Global Warming Policy Forum
For Germany’s long-successful Green Party the political situation is slowly becoming precarious. Meanwhile, their support in the polls is approaching the parliamentary five percent hurdle. On Sunday, the opinion research institute Emnid presented its latest survey. According to the pollsters, the Greens are now on only six percent – the worst support the Institute has measured for the party in 15 years. It is not so long ago that the Greens debated whether they were already a big tent party. In the aftermath of the Fukushima nuclear disaster in March 2011 the polls saw them on 25 percent while the state of Baden-Wuerttemberg elected a green as prime minister. No one expected at the time that the party would fear not to get into the next German parliament by failing to jump the five percent hurdle. --Süddeutsche Zeitung, 24 April 2017
More than 330,000 German households had their electricity turned off last year. Germany’s green energy obsession is hurting the poor and vulnerable hardest. The DPA German press agency reported yesterday on the rapidly spreading energy poverty now engulfing the country. The main driver is Germany’s skyrocketing electricity prices – primarily due to the legally mandatory feeding-in of wind and solar power. Currently regular household consumers are paying nearly 30 cents a kilowatt-hour – almost three times the rate paid in the USA. Many households are no longer able to afford electricity and are seeing themselves catapulted back to the 19th century. --No Tricks Zone, 3 March 2017
While claiming to care deeply about the poorest among us, environmentalists ignore the harm their policies inflict: soaring electricity prices, fewer jobs, lower living standards in the West – and perpetual poverty, disease, malnutrition and premature death in developing countries. We pay more and more each year for de minimis further improvements in environmental quality, combined with ever-expanding government and activist control of our lives, and steadfast opposition to reliable, affordable energy in the Third World. For the wealthy and increasingly powerful radical environmentalist movement, it is no longer about addressing real pollution problems, protecting the environment or improving human health. As UN climate officials have proudly proclaimed, it’s really about ending fossil fuel use and capitalism, redistributing the world’s wealth, and controlling people’s livelihoods, living standards and liberties. --Paul Driessen,
GWPF Opinion, 24 April 2017
A new report ranking countries with “the most environmentally friendly people” shows the greenest nations are also some of the poorest in the world. A MoneySuperMarket report listed Mozambique, Ethiopia and Zimbabwe as having “the most environmentally friendly people in the world,” while ranking Americans as being some of the least eco-friendly people on the planet. That may not be a bad thing, though, given the greenest countries also tend to be poor and run by authoritarian regimes. --Andrew Follett, Daily Caller, 22 April 2017
Now that coal has been toppled from its perch as America’s biggest source of power, environmentalists are ready to move on down the fossil fuel list and tackle what they perceive as another enemy of the planet: natural gas. U.S. environmentalists have vowed to go after gas-fired power plants with the same vengeance they’ve used to force the retirements of hundreds of coal facilities. Even coal miners are warning their fossil fuel kin to beware. Gas producers “will be next on the list of the industries to be destroyed,” says Robert Murray, chief executive officer of U.S. coal miner Murray Energy Corp. This is a farce, if for no other reason than because natural gas — not environmentalist lobbying or renewables — is responsible for dethroning Old King Coal. If there’s any silver lining to this sorry example of the folly of the modern environmental movement, it’s that greens have been proven to be as ineffective as they are misguided. --The American Interest, 23 April 2017
Student thuggery against non-leftist viewpoints is in the news again. Agitators at Claremont McKenna College, Middlebury College, and the University of California’s Berkeley and Los Angeles campuses have used threats, brute force and sometimes criminal violence over the past two months in efforts to prevent Milo Yiannopoulos, Charles Murray, Ann Coulter and me from speaking. This soft totalitarianism is routinely misdiagnosed as primarily a psychological disorder. Campus intolerance is at root not a psychological phenomenon but an ideological one. At its center is a worldview that sees Western culture as endemically racist and sexist. The overriding goal of the educational establishment is to teach young people within the ever-growing list of official victim classifications to view themselves as existentially oppressed. One outcome of that teaching is the forceful silencing of contrarian speech. --Heather Mac Donald, The Wall Street Journal, 23 April 2017
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)