Friday, September 23, 2022

P&D Today


De Omnibus Dubitandum

By Rich Kozlovich 

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

In yesterday's P&D Today I discussed Putin's failures and his options and had an update regarding his order to add  300,000 additional fighters.  And how's that working out?  Apparently it's not going over well as protests are breaking out all over Russia, and any criticism is met with dictatorial tyranny.  Wow, isn't that a shock.

The Russian population has been largely shielded from the reality of this "special military operation", but this "partial mobilization" has now driven home....this is a war, a war where he's already lost over 80,000 troops. 

Regional governments quickly began issuing orders for reservists -- a huge category covering people who served as conscripts, contract soldiers, and part-time officers -- to prepare to be summoned and banning them from leaving the area, according to Pavel Chikov, a lawyer who advises on conscription cases. Doctors in Moscow also received mobilization notices, he said on Telegram............Authorities in some cases came in the middle of the night to round up conscripts in order to fill the regional quotas that the military sets. ..........“They took my 40-year-old son at night,”.......... “Everyone who was taken in our village was over 40, not a single young one. They’ll grab anyone. There’s total panic and confusion.”

The number of people trying to leave Russia has surged, and it appears more than 30 cities are seeing protests over this call for new and far more troops.  And what happens when they send these "recruits" into battle?  Will it be different?  No.  They'll continue making the same mistakes they made before, only they'll being doing it with older recruits, less qualified troops, troops that can't be replaced, and most likely troops that will not be well led or properly supplied.

Russia has a demographic problem.  That all important 15 to 50 age group isn't nearly as large as it needs to be to support the retirees, expand the economy and serve in the military.  They have issues with drug resistant TB, AIDS, and addictions.  Putin only had sufficient manpower to man three of their seven defensive gaps before this mess, and now he has less, and they simply don't have the manpower or the economic wherewithal to occupy Ukraine.  

The west is going to expand their sanctions, and now England is....gasp.....going to start fracking.  Imagine that.  So much for European ignorant, arrogant, self righteous looking down their noses at America, and Donald Trump.  And now Russia is losing "friends" such as India.  

Because of the very real threat China represents to India, and their need for Russian military supplies, they've been on the sidelines refusing to condemn Russia's invasion of Ukraine, but Putin's shelling of civilians is clearly a war crime, and that's disturbed India and they've openly condemned that activity and is slowly creating a separation between them.

It's getting worse for Putin.  At the United Nations British Prime Minister Liz Truss has called for an economic NATO in order to "defend prosperity against the malevolent influence of authoritarian regimes like Russia and China." 

Well whaddayaknow, it appears there's a Prime Minister with clarity of vision regarding these enemies of western civilization.  I've been reading about this lady, and she's formidable.  She's sort of a "talk softly but carry a big stick" kind of leader.  But, we'll see.    

Will Putin use nukes?  I don't think so, but he can't retire as did Gorbachev or Khrushchev.  His been a beast and if he's out of power, I think he's dead, and he knows it.  But let's say he does use nukes what will the west do?  What they need to avoid is another Guns of August scenario that started with an assassination and was turned into a world war. If he does use nukes Russia will become a world wide pariah, that even China may have to abandon, and I don't even think the radical thugs he's surrounded himself with will let him do it.  

But, we'll see. 

In the meantime, it's Friday, my week is over, I've got a bunch of outside work to get done before the weather turns, it was 47 here last night, and I've only posted two commentaries today.  Enjoy!

Free North Star Clipart, Download Free North Star Clipart ...

Constant as the North Star

 

African Feminist Slave Traders vs. White Male Slave Liberators

September 22, 2022

Sony, spurred by the success of Black Panther, decided to make the ‘Amazon’ Agojie warriors of Dahomey, the inspiration for the fictional female warriors of the comic book, into a movie.

The Woman King had a $50 million budget to bring the real Wakanda to life. It opened at the top of the box office as a black nationalist story of female empowerment about heroic slave traders. While a movie celebrating the Confederacy could never be made, African slave traders who sold hundreds of thousands of slaves and engaged in mass sacrifice are Hollywood heroes.

Despite the fact that the movie had originated with white actress Maria Bello of Coyote Ugly, Gina Prince-Bythewood, its half-black director, made sure “people of color” would be in charge during the production. Prince-Bythewood, who had been given up for adoption by her white birth mother and was raised by a white couple near the vineyards of Monterey, claimed that she cried about her “connection to the material” glorifying one of the worst slave trading tribes in Africa.

The Woman King’s absurd wokeness extended even to Prince-Bythewood claiming that she based the movie’s rape scene on “Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony at Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court nomination hearing.” And the media was appropriately fawning.

But then the protests on social media began.

The Dahomeys and the female warriors had sold hundreds of thousands of members of rival tribes into slavery. They had also overseen gruesome mass sacrifice rituals of their slaves.

While black nationalist movies routinely ignore history, this one hit home with some descendants of slaves, especially those from the Bahamas. The slaves sold by the Dahomeys tended to be shipped to Brazil which was notorious for the mass death of black laborers. The slave ships intercepted by the British Navy however occasionally set the slaves free in the Bahamas.

The actual history of the Dahomeys of the ‘Slave Coast’ has sabotaged what was supposed to be a smooth rollout for The Woman King and its mingled tale of female empowerment and black nationalism. But while The Woman King’s feminist warriors were real life villains who helped enslave countless black people, there were real heroes who fought the slave trade.

Unfortunately they were white men. Now long dead and defamed by leftist revisionist historians.

While Black Lives Matter has conducted its own rampage in the UK, it was the British Navy that fought African and Muslim slave traders. In Dahomey and the Dahomeyans, Frederick Forbes, a British naval officer who had come to lobby the monarch to end the slave trade, described “guards of amazons” following in a procession behind a member of the king’s harem using umbrellas to shade her. One such umbrella was “decorated with 148 human jaw bones.”

When wealthy Dahomeyans were dying, they took some of their wives and slaves with them as human sacrifices. Large scale mass sacrifices were practiced, including the brutal and horrifying killings of hundreds to thousands of slaves to honor Dahomey’s monstrous monarchs.

One account from 1860 presented in Parliament described how “a great pit has been dug which is to contain human blood enough to float a canoe. 2000 persons will be sacrificed on this occasion.” Those killed were captives from other tribes where the “young people among these prisoners will be sold into slavery, and the old persons will be killed at the great custom.”

The New York Times reprinted a description of “thousands of people are being sacrificed, (decapitated and afterwards cut in pieces,) and thousands are kept for the slaves.”

This was the real-life Wakanda.

It was the British and the Americans who put an end to this nightmare through colonialism and imperialism. Even before the Civil War, the United States had signed the Webster–Ashburton Treaty (for Daniel Webster) under which the US Navy and the Royal Navy conducted patrols to intercept slave ships.

US Navy efforts to intercept slave ships actually dated back as far as 1820 when Congress passed the James Monroe Piracy Act. Importing slaves had already been banned under the Jefferson administration in 1807, but the Monroe Act equated the slave trade with piracy.

Any American who would “on any foreign shore, seize any negro or mulatto, not held to service or labour by the laws of either of the states or territories of the United States, with intent to make such negro or mulatto a slave, or shall decoy, or forcibly bring or carry, or shall receive, such negro or mulatto on board any such ship or vessel, with intent as aforesaid, such citizen or person shall be adjudged a pirate; and, on conviction thereof before the circuit court of the United States for the district wherein he may be brought or found, shall suffer death.”

Famous naval vessels including the USS Constitution, USS Constellation, and USS Yorktown hunted for and captured slave ships bringing slaves from Africa to this hemisphere. The Navy’s African Squadron cruising off the ‘Slave Coast’ and patrolling as far as Cuba managed to capture over a hundred slave ships.

But it was the British whose embargo of Dahomey and pressure on Brazil and Portugal proved especially effective in shutting down the slave trade. All those dead white men shut down the trade in slaves across the water. Later, the British imperialists fought to stop the land traffic in slaves through Egypt and to the Muslim Middle East. They were successful until the end of colonialism restored the old and new kinds of slave trade bringing cargoes of human beings from Africa and Asia to the Middle East where, as in brutal Islamic tyrannies like Qatar, they are worked to death much as they were before the dreaded days of European imperialism.

These are movies to be made and stories to be told about the British white men, long since dead, who put their lives on the line to stop the slave trade practiced by the heroic African feminist warriors of Dahomey. And those movies will never be made, because they don’t fit the narrative propounded by the 1619 Project and Ibram X. Kendi in which slavery was a European crime against Africa, rather than an Islamic and African tribal crime ended by Europeans.

Specifically, by the European imperialism and colonialism that liberals love to hate.

The scope of the African slave trade was massive. It encompassed much of human history and the known world. There were black slaves in China over a thousand years ago. The Middle East is dotted with large populations of former black slaves and in some cases current slaves. The American role in the slave trade was relatively brief in both historic scope and scale. It’s a sin, but it was certainly not, as Obama put it, our original sin. It was a crime that began in Africa.

Westerners did not invent slavery, but they did more than anyone else to put an end to it.

That’s a truth that cannot be told. And Hollywood would rather make movies celebrating slave traders, as long as they’re black women, than the dead white men who fought to end slavery.

Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine. Click here to subscribe to my articles. Thank you for reading.

Quora is a Welcomed Open Source of Unbiased Information

by | Jul 27, 2022 | @ Malcolm Out Loud

 

Quora is among the best-kept secrets in our Information Age. Because it contains no known political bias, such as virtually all information carried in mainstream media and in Wikipedia, it is a danger to the political left, which hurls endless slings and arrows at it.

The Quora platform is a place where questions of all kinds may be asked in various topic areas without divulging the identity of the questioner. In contrast, the identity, including such things as education and degrees, relevant employment history, travel experiences, languages they speak, etc., of the person choosing to answer the question is made known as part of a public profile that everyone can see.

Questions come from across the globe. Quora will translate them from any language to any other. About 60% of the questions are from the USA; a lot come from the UK, Canada, Australia, Netherlands, South Africa, Germany, India, Eastern Europe, and occasionally from the Near East and Africa.

We have decided to tell the true story of Quora in hopes that you will avail yourselves of its vast information potential, an environment in which you can judge the source and draw your own conclusions. We are indebted to Terigi Ciccone, a valuable contributor to Quora, for his assistance with this article. Terigi will be our guest on THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STORY broadcast on America Out Loud Talk Radio this coming Saturday and Sunday, July 30 and 31, at both 11 am and 8 pm eastern time.

Agewise, we would guess about 60% of questioners are in their late 20s through 50s; about 15% are in their 50s and 60s, 10% are over 60, and the rest are in their teens/early 20s.

Education-wise, we would say over 80% are college graduates, and above, about 10% each are in high school and in college.

Anybody can sign up as a responder. But you need to be invited to a space by the space moderator to be a contributor. One can be a contributor in many spaces such as Science and Engineering, Science bulletin, Physics of global warming, New real climate science, Politics, and more.

As a contributor, you can post in the spaces you were invited to join. In those spaces, you can post detailed articles, post a question to yourself and respond to your own question. 

Many questions are answered in less than 100 words, about 40% in less than 50 words, and often accompanied by an image or two. There are some responses that amount to a few thousand words.

Terigi Ciccone published an important paper that began as a question to Quora. “WHY CAN’T CO2 AND GREENHOUSE EFFECTS CAUSE GLOBAL WARMING?” as a discussion item on Academia.edu. It was sent to about 1,010 people. About 100 “reviewed it,” and about 50 participated in the discussion over a three-month period, then published there and subsequently in Quora in five different Spaces. See here.

Some excellent examples of questions and answers we found on Quora include a few below, with Terigi both asking the question and providing the answer.

Is there any difference between rated [power] plant capacity and plant capacity?

Terigi Ciccone

Engineer/Scientist/Artist/EX-Sierra/author on climate (e.g., “A Hitchhiker’s Journey Through Climate Change)

Response:

Every power plant has a Nameplate Rating. For example, if a combined cycle power plant has a Nameplate Rating of 10 Megawatts, it is expected to produce 10 MW for every second it operates, and it will deliver it with a reliability of well over 99%.

But a “rating” of a wind turbine is ……. problematic. It will have a rating, say 10 MW when the wind turbine is operating under the ideal design conditions, say the wind is blowing at 29.5 miles per hour, and in exactly the perfect direction to the blades, meaning a straight line and not swirling around or gusting up and down. So, people now have to estimate what percent of the time that wind turbine can be expected to produce that power over a year’s time, and this guess is called a “Capacity Factor.” In Germany, they estimated this capacity factor at 25%, about 6 hours per day. OK, but what if the wind is blowing in those perfect conditions and you don’t need the electricity? Do you shut off the reliable fossil plant in the same electrical grid? Yes, German law gives absolute priority to wind turbines. Then, grid reliability and stability become even more problematic and increasingly complex to prevent blackouts. Best estimates that the real German capacity factor is maybe 12 to 17%. Then what do you do with that number? 

The German experience shows that, as windmills make up over 18% to 20% of the total electrical demand, the grid becomes more unstable and unreliable. Meaning they need to be backed up by gas-guzzling, fast-responding gas turbines to prevent blackouts. Thus, these gas turbines that back up the wind turbines end up burning more fossil fuels than they would burn if the wind turbines were not there at all.


President Biden and advocates of the Green New Deal say we must accelerate our Green New Deal energy policies to prevent the looming threat of global warming. Do you agree with that?

Terigi Ciccone

Response:

Here’s what the Wall Street Journal had to say on 5-28-22, addressing only the electrical outlook for the USA. 

“Perhaps they will address other consequences of the GND like shortages of gasoline and diesel, the looming food shortages, and skyrocketing inflation in future articles.

And yet, not one laboratory scientific test has ever been done producing data that demonstrates that CO2 and the Greenhouse Effect causes global warming.”  


Why isn’t the extra CO2 in the atmosphere being absorbed by plants? Why is it causing global warming?

Terigi Ciccone

Response:

There are two assumptions imbedded in the question that are a product of indoctrinating propaganda and no scientific understanding.

First, plants and phytoplankton absorb more CO2 when it is plentiful. As a result, plants grow faster, bigger and more plentiful. In addition, plants in higher levels of CO2 can grow and thrive with up to 70% less water. So, at higher CO2 levels, deserts shrink.

Second, the CO2/greenhouse effect idea has been around for more than 150 years. In the last 50 years, hundreds of billions in research grants have been squandered based on this flawed theory. And to date not one scientific experiment has EVER been done showing that an IR photon absorption by CO2 has EVER generated or CAUSED any warming of any kind.


What are some of the easiest things to do to protect the environment?

Terigi Ciccone

Response:

First protect the environment around you and your loved ones. That’s rule number 1. Make sure there’s no trash in your city or county. Report all spills or noncompliance to your local authorities.

And most importantly, stop worrying about the world’s climate. It will be just fine with or without your help.

If mainstream media were to follow Quora’s example, then their circulation numbers wouldn’t be plummeting. Tune in to our upcoming show with Terigi Ciccone to learn how you, too, can use this important media source!

 
Avatar

Dr. Jay Lehr is a Senior Policy Analyst with the International Climate Science Coalition and former Science Director of The Heartland Institute. He is an internationally renowned scientist, author, and speaker who has testified before Congress on dozens of occasions on environmental issues and consulted with nearly every agency of the national government and many foreign countries. After graduating from Princeton University at the age of 20 with a degree in Geological Engineering, he received the nation’s first Ph.D. in Groundwater Hydrology from the University of Arizona. He later became executive director of the National Association of Groundwater Scientists and Engineers.

Tom Harris is Executive Director of the Ottawa, Canada-based International Climate Science Coalition, and a policy advisor to The Heartland Institute. He has 40 years experience as a mechanical engineer/project manager, science and technology communications professional, technical trainer, and S&T advisor to a former Opposition Senior Environment Critic in Canada’s Parliament.

 

Thursday, September 22, 2022

P&D Today


De Omnibus Dubitandum

By Rich Kozlovich

Political Cartoons by Robert Ariail


There's been a lot of talk about Putin and that he's a failure and what his options are at this point.  George Friedman of Geopolitical Futures wrote this piece, The War, and since I'm not signed in I assume it's one of his free articles, noted this about this Russo/Ukrainian War.  None of Putin's military plans worked due to lousy planning, lousy training, lousy leadership and lousy equipment, and most importantly, bad intelligence.  

The Ukrainians had seriously updated their equipment and preparedness, and they didn't just roll over and die, although Putin has directly targeted civilians and killed untold numbers of non-combatants, without even a whimper from that corrupt cabal at the United Nations, including their Human Rights Council, for what must clearly be considered Crimes Against Humanity. 

For years, especially after the first Iran war, I believed their military hardware was overrated, but no one, including me, realized just how bad their equipment really is.  I used to think that without American support of NATO Russia would march right down the North European Plan into France.  They couldn't have held it, but I thought they could do it.  Wrong!  They've wouldn't have gotten past Poland.  

So, now what does Putin do?  George outlines a number of options.  

  • Stop all energy transfers to Europe hoping for a really cold winter forcing Europe to stand down in supporting Ukraine in order to regain sufficient energy to keep their citizens from freezing to death, and get the price of energy down to prevent their economy from tanking
  • Appeal to China for help, which really isn't sitting well with the Russians, as now they've pretty much turned into a vassal state to China.
  • He could attempt to negotiate a peace treaty, but in no way can Putin return to previous borders with only dead bodies of young Russians to show for it, so any negotiation requires someone to capitulate.
  • Launch an all out attack. 

Not gonna happen!  Neither Russia or the Ukraine have the financial wherewithal, yet Putin's now decided to strain his resources beyond what he can afford by calling up the reserves of 300,000 men, largely untrained, largely unwilling, and he's taking heat for his failures from "allies".  (Update 12:45 PM: This was sent to my by one of my correspondents this morning, Putin's Order for 300,000 Fighters Drives Russians to the Streets in Protest.) He's also threatening the use of nuclear arms.  Now you know, that he knows, he's in trouble.  

I suggested another option.  

The Russians kick Putin out.  Even with new well trained reinforcements I don't think Putin can win because morale is in the toilet, the people are now aware this is a farce, the politicians think Putin needs to go and some are demanding his resignation with others demanding he be arrested and I think he's willing to kill all of them to stay in power. 

He's not a Khrushchev who was able to retire, he's made some really vicious decisions and I'm sure there would be pay back, he can't quit, and at some point I'm thinking the military will back a coup since he's placed all the blame for this failure on them.  When the Praetorian Guard is threatened, Caesar's die.
 
Occasionally George responds, and did this time saying: Its an option but it hasn't happened yet.  Plus who knows who replace him? Could be a good general.  
 
I thought about that.  Putin is surrounded by a hand picked band of like minded radicals, but I have to believe there's a Claus von Stauffenberg cabal in the Russian military.  But no matter what happens here's the kicker.  None of them can pay for all this.  Russia's economy is no more stable than Europe's, and most likely worse off and getting worse, and China isn't going to risk economic sanctions to give total support to Russia.  One thing must be clear, and that China is looking at Russia, and Putin, as a weak sister. One who could be taken advantage of.  
 
It's my view Russia will never recover from this internationally, militarily, economically or socially until they dump their economic system of central planning and their system of government.  

It ain't gonna happen.  

Here are today's offerings.  Six commentaries, one by me.  

Enjoy!

Free North Star Clipart, Download Free North Star Clipart ...

Constant as the North Star

The ADL's Radical Boss Must Go

September 21, 2022 @ Sultan Knish Blog

 The latest numbers show that only 1 of the 118 thugs arrested for assaulting Jews in New York City since 2018 was sentenced to actual prison time. While attacks on Jews tripled, the ADL (Anti-Defamation League) is promoting police defunding in its curriculum. The lesson’s only mention of crime proposes that it can be fought through police defunding by “investing more money in education, health care.”

Another high school lesson plan claims that evidence of privilege is parents telling a child “to find a police officer if I need help”. The numerous Jewish children assaulted by thugs in New York needed a police officer, not because they were ‘privileged’, but because they were beaten while the ADL treated their attackers as the victims threatened by a “school-to-prison pipeline”.

And so the antisemitic violence continues through the complicity of the ADL.

The ADL’s lesson plans promote the racist hate group Black Lives Matter, despite its support for BDS, and the Women’s March, despite the overt antisemitism of its leadership at the time,

The latest outrage over critical race theory materials in the ADL’s curriculum isn’t shocking.

Two years ago, CEO Jonathan Greenblatt wrote a post defending BLM’s antisemitism and celebrating the “clarion call of ‘Black Lives Matter'” which in Los Angeles and a number of other communities were followed by pogroms against Jewish synagogues and businesses.  Last year he authored another op-ed opposing “divisive concept” legislation to keep hate out of schools. That’s understandable since many of the ADL’s teaching materials foster such extremism.

That racist concepts such as ‘white privilege’ and ‘intersectionality’ are harmful not only to all Americans, but to Jews in particular, inculcating antisemitism as a progressive value, does not trouble Greenblatt or the ADL who care nothing about the consequences of leftist antisemitism.

Much of this is the responsibility of Jinnie Spiegler, the ADL’s curriculum director, whose Twitter account is a steady stream of leftist derangement, but has nothing to say about Jews or antisemitism. Her philosophy can be summarized with the headline of one of her op-eds, “Forget Kindness. Schools Need to Foster Social Justice”.

“The first step is to facilitate students’ learning about the issues in a rigorous and complex way, and then to get them involved in action, advocacy and/or activism,” she has insisted.

Spiegler promotes antisemitic figures like AOC, Cori Bush, and Ilhan Omar.

The ADL has announced that it’s reexamining some of its hateful lesson plans, not because it’s truly sorry, but because it knows they run afoul of some of those “divisive concept” laws.

A variety of Jewish leaders whose organizations are actually fighting antisemitism, including Morton Klein of the ZOA, as well as Charles Jacobs and Avi Goldwasser of the Jewish Leadership Project have called for ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt to step down or be fired.

“The only thing ADL’s board and donors should be reviewing in the wake of this expose is the continued employment of Greenblatt. If the ADL really wants to demonstrate that it is rejecting CRT and the anti-Semitism that comes with it, then Greenblatt has got to go,” Jonathan Tobin, Editor-in-Chief of JNS, wrote in a recent editorial.

Greenblatt and his hires have spent the years in power building antisemitism into the ADL until the organization has become a stronghold of the antisemitic and anti-Israel element of the Left. All of this was accomplished under the false flag of fighting antisemitism. Even now the ADL keeps promoting antisemitism while claiming to be in the business of fighting antisemitism.

In August, the ADL announced the fellows for its inaugural Center for Antisemitism Research Fellowship, to identify “new approaches to combating antisemitism in society.”

One of its fellows, Michael Zanger-Tishler, has called for protesting Birthright Israel to “change Israeli policy toward the Palestinians” and his work has accused Israel of “constructing Palestinian criminality”.

Another, Sara Yael Hirschhorn, tweeted that, “the Palestinian case shares some common features with South Africa—population transfer/ethnic cleansing”, and falsely claimed that Israel is guilty of “daily violations of human rights.”

Hirschhorn has cultivated a career of bashing Israel with New York Times op-eds like, “Israeli Terrorists, Born in the U.S.A.” Her book, “City on a Hilltop”, attacking Jews living in their historical homeland in Judea and Samaria, was featured, along with the author, at a Foundation for Middle East Peace event. FMEP, a part of the Arab Lobby, accuses Israel of “apartheid”.

Her new book, “New Day in Babylon and Jerusalem: Zionism, Jewish Power, and Identity Politics”, already being promoted by the ADL, will discuss how “how the Six Day War and its aftermath transformed Zionism from a national liberation movement of the Jewish people to a colonialist enterprise in the Middle East in international eyes”.

Michael Boxer of Brandeis, has dismissed the reality of leftist campus antisemitism. “When I tell people the communal freak-out over antisemitism on campus is overblown, I’m usually told by people who haven’t set foot on any campus in decades that I don’t understand the climate today. Much Jewish communal discourse can be summarized by ‘ok boomer,’: he sneered.

He also argued that, “The American Jewish community’s fear that BDS permeates college campuses is almost entirely overblown.”

This is the level of contempt that the ADL has for the Jewish community and for its stated mission of fighting antisemitism. It’s a contempt that is a product of the Greenblatt era.

It can end when the Greenblatt era and everyone he hired are finally shown the door.

CEO Jonathan Greenblatt, an Obama administration veteran, has transformed the ADL, much as his counterparts have transformed the ACLU and other civil rights groups, from their original mission into another generic component of the national leftist network. And that network is venomously hostile toward Jews and aimed at the destruction of the Jewish State.

Under Greenblatt, the ADL has become a threat to Jews. Either he must go or it must go.

Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine. Click here to subscribe to my articles. Thank you for reading.

On the Bright Side, Here are Seven Wins for America First Patriots

There are many reasons to be concerned about what's happening in America and abroad. But there are also great things happening. Sometimes, I need to remind myself of this. 

JD Rucker Sep 22 @ America First Reports
 

It's no secret that I generally have a negative outlook on our prospects as a nation. Between the globalist cabal, the Biden-Harris regime, and the woke army of radical progressives backing both, it's often hard to find tangible victories to give us hope.

This week has seen several victories that point to what I hope is a trend. Is the tide turning? Are we getting closer to snatching victory from the jaws of defeat? Can we turn things around? If the seven stories below are any indication, there's reason to be hopeful.

 On today's episode of The JD Rucker Report, I explored all seven:

Here's today's show.

 

More on the Fetterman/Oz Senate Race

By Rich Kozlovich
 
 Political Cartoons by Margolis & Cox
I have a number of people I correspond with regularly from around the country, who are also in my list to receive P&D.  This is a comment from a correspondent in Pennsylvania who is somewhat politically active in Pennsylvania, and is thoroughly aware of what's going on, and I especially appreciate his noting the "possible" McCormick connection, who is a Republican.
 
 Here are his thoughts.
 
Just a note on your commentary about the Fetterman/Oz race. Because of the relentless TV ad attacks from the McCormick campaign and his supporting PAC(s) during the Republican primary, Oz’s “negative perception by voters” was around 38% - higher than the 31.1% or so who actually voted for him. No other PA Senate primary candidate on either side of the political aisle had such high negatives after the primary.
 
The ads in particular were quite vicious with themes of carpetbagging and the arrogance of being a media star. The ads were especially effective because:
 
(1) Oz had in fact spent very little time in the state getting to know party personnel on the local level; and 
(2) the attacks came from a member of his own party and therefore had added credibility with Republican voters.
 
The Fetterman campaign simply repackaged the McCormick ads, and kept hammering away with continued success.
 
To his credit, Oz has since spent a great deal of time touring the state and getting to know PA Republicans and what they want. But it has been difficult to overcome the devastating effects of the McCormick campaign.
 
I often wondered in the primary whether the McCormick PACs were getting money from Democrats, and whether McCormick the hedge fund manager was a Democrat stalking horse who didn’t mind carrying a hunting rifle and pretending he was a regular Joe. I had seldom seen such relentless personal attacks between Republicans in a primary campaign.
 
It has been fortunate for Oz that he now has the Fetterman stroke issue to help him. Oz’s own ads mostly attack Fetterman as soft on crime, and fleetingly mention Oz’s accomplishments as a physician and son of immigrants at the end of the ads.
 
So yes, PA has not been good about producing good Republican candidates in recent elections. But Oz’s wounds have mainly been inflicted by a member of his own party. 
 
It should be clear to the most casual observer John Fetterman has an abysmal record regarding crime and criminals.   What in the world would possess the Democrats to choose  a person as their pick for the United States Senate who brags about freeing murderers?  Fetterman is a disaster, and yet it's my contention he'll get "elected".  Why? Two words.  Voter Fraud!

COVID or CLIMATE: The Manipulation of Data is the New Science

By | Jul 26, 2022 |   @ America Out Loud

A lot of people just look at data and say, Well, this is the data, so this is what we must believe.” But data in the modern age is a leaky vessel. There is such competition to produce innovative provocative research that scientists are manipulating their data so they can win funding as well as personal and professional prestige. This is the big irony of the Information Age. We are awash in information, but we are drowning in lies.

Just look at what has transpired in the world of COVID-19. The manipulation of data from government agencies to achieve a specific outcome. Incentivizing doctors and hospitals with money for death certificates linked to SARS-CoV-2. Vaccine manufacturers ignore, and in some cases, hide injuries and death counts as profits soar into the hundreds of billions of dollars.

“Follow the Science,” became synonymous with whoever was pushing their version of the facts.

National Review captured this exchange with Fauci perfectly… While it is absolutely true that some Republican senators calling for the legal prosecution of Fauci are cynical showmen, Fauci is responding in kind. “I have to laugh at that. I should be prosecuted? What happened on Jan. 6, Senator,” he said, referring to Senator Ted Cruz. But all this was prelude to the truly grand peroration. Saith Fauci:

“So it’s easy to criticize, but they’re really criticizing science because I represent science. That’s dangerous. To me, that’s more dangerous than the slings and the arrows that get thrown at me. I’m not going to be around here forever, but science is going to be here forever. And if you damage science, you are doing something very detrimental to society long after I leave. And that’s what I worry about.”

So why do government bureaucrats make false, misleading statements under the guise of science and manipulated data?

For example, we were told by NASA that 2014 was the hottest year on record.” This fiction has been repeated year after year, even though all databases show temperatures declining since 2016. The fiction is exposed once you get into the data set and find that NASA is only about 35 percent confident of the statement. In fact, NASA has proclaimed most of the last 20 years as the hottest on record,” with less than 50 percent confidence in the proclamations.

NASA (and NOAA) have also been adjusting” the historical data to reflect the climate crisis narrative. Thats right, historical temperatures are being changed by your government. For more information on this deliberate deception, see the 2021 hottest year’” post at Climatedepot.com. Also, check out the excellent videos created by Tony Heller at RealClimateScience.com. Heller has a fondness for using NASA and NOAAs own graphs to expose deceptions that cannot possibly be errors.

Keep in mind that even with the adjusted” data (i.e., fabricated data), the difference between the most recent warmest year” and the last warmest year” is typically so small and within the margin of error that its meaningless.

Science is supposed to be self-correcting. Peer review is supposed to allow only the best ideas to surface. But peer review ceased to provide a reliable scientific check on fraud many years ago. Inside the academic world, peer review” is not-so-jokingly called pal-review” because an insular club of academics checks the work of others in the club.

Those reviewing the research rarely, if ever, put papers through a rigorous stress test, questioning methodology, and assumptions. Not surprisingly, history has demonstrated that at least half of all scientific research is incorrect, misleading, or just plain fiction. Theres also the problem of ideology reinforcing confirmation bias.

In the peer review process of today, papers that suggest the prevailing consensus” is wrong, get rejected, whereas the papers that support the phony consensus get accepted. Researchers are looking for confirmation of their theory rather than attacking their theory with every idea possible to prove that it is solid. The willingness to mercilessly attack your favored theory is the bedrock of good science. Do you see that happening?

Consensus is not science. Consensus is a tool to suppress opposition. For example, the thoroughly debunked claim that 97 percent of scientists believe humans are causing catastrophic human-caused climate change” is repeated so often by the mainstream press that its no longer questioned. But lets set that aside. The more troubling problem is that people skip right over the fact that even if an overwhelming number of scientists believe a theory, that doesnt make it true. A sustained and rigorous testing of a hypothesis using credible data constitutes proof, not what any number of scientists believe to be true, but cannot prove to be true. In other words, belief is not evidence, and its certainly not science.

Climate change is being positioned as an either-or proposition. Either you believe man is having no impact on the climate, or you believe an increase in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere due to human activities is causing a climate catastrophe. This is whats known as a false binary choice.” In reality, there are many places along the spectrum between the extremes of no impact” and catastrophic impact.” This truth has been pointed out by the highly-credible authors of several recent books such as Unsettled” by Steve Koonin, Apocalypse Never” by Michael Shellenberger, and False Alarm” by Bjorn Lomborg.

The use of the disparaging term climate denier” is especially egregious. When you call someone a denier, you are saying his or her position is so ridiculous, so despicable, that he or she is the equivalent of a Holocaust denier. We should reject this kind of unscientific rudeness in our public discourse. The term denier” is such transparent hyperbole anyone can see it is really just a tool intended to intimidate and shame people and ultimately to shut down legitimate debate. Such tactics are unworthy of people interested in true scientific inquiry.

Legitimate investigators dont deny there may be an impact by man or that the greenhouse effect occurs, but they are convinced from data, analysis, and observation of the politicization of science that the impact is likely manageable, small, or even insignificant. Objective observers also take note of the fact that there are many positives to the increase in CO2 in the atmosphere. Would any true scientist only obsess over computer modeling of potential negative effects while ignoring the positives?

Consider the fertilizer effect. Additional amounts of CO2 cause plants to grow more quickly. More greenery on the planet enables us to produce more food while decreasing drought. Then theres the observable fact that higher uses of fossil fuels directly equate to lifting people out of poverty.

For example, between 1990 and 2010, 100 million people gained access to electricity in Indonesia. In that 20-year time period, Indonesias per capita income increased by 440%, and the GDP rose by the same amount. Life expectancy rose by 8 years; infant mortality fell by 45%; child malnutrition fell by 65%; illiteracy declined by 77%. This is not a coincidence. Its directly due to poor people gaining access to electricity and fuels for heating, cooling, cooking, and transportation.

In the developing world, people in China, India, Malaysia, Africa, and other regions want to live as people do in the US and Western Europe. To do that, they are going to exploit energy (most of it being coal), so they can advance their societies as we have. That is going to happen. We cant stop it, nor should we want to.

The societies that care most for the environment are those rich enough to do so. This is the sound logic of serious thinkers such as Bjorn Lomborg, who argues the best way to make environmental improvements across the globe is to make poor people as rich as possible as fast as possible. Doing so will reduce exploding populations in the worlds poorest nations while giving them the resources they need to care for the land, sea, and air around them.

The only way to make this happen is through energy abundance



Dr. Jay Lehr

Dr. Jay Lehr is a Senior Policy Analyst with the International Climate Science Coalition and former Science Director of The Heartland Institute. He is an internationally renowned scientist, author, and speaker who has testified before Congress on dozens of occasions on environmental issues and consulted with nearly every agency of the national government and many foreign countries. After graduating from Princeton University at the age of 20 with a degree in Geological Engineering, he received the nation’s first Ph.D. in Groundwater Hydrology from the University of Arizona. He later became executive director of the National Association of Groundwater Scientists and Engineers.