May 03, 2015

Breakthroough in Immortality?

Timothy Birdnow

Here is somethning interesting from Science Daily; an article claiming that the cause of aging has been discovered and it is possible to reverse the aging process in human beings.

From the article:

"A study tying the aging process to the deterioration of tightly packaged bundles of cellular DNA could lead to methods of preventing and treating age-related diseases such as cancer, diabetes and Alzheimer's disease, as detailed April 30, 2015, in Science.

In the study, scientists at the Salk Institute and the Chinese Academy of Science found that the genetic mutations underlying Werner syndrome, a disorder that leads to premature aging and death, resulted in the deterioration of bundles of DNA known as heterochromatin.

The discovery, made possible through a combination of cutting-edge stem cell and gene-editing technologies, could lead to ways of countering age-related physiological declines by preventing or reversing damage to heterochromatin.

"Our findings show that the gene mutation that causes Werner syndrome results in the disorganization of heterochromatin, and that this disruption of normal DNA packaging is a key driver of aging," says Juan Carlos Izpisua Belmonte, a senior author on the paper. "This has implications beyond Werner syndrome, as it identifies a central mechanism of aging--heterochromatin disorganization--which has been shown to be reversible.""


"In their study, the Salk scientists sought to determine precisely how the mutated WRN protein causes so much cellular mayhem. To do this, they created a cellular model of Werner syndrome by using a cutting-edge gene-editing technology to delete WRN gene in human stem cells. This stem cell model of the disease gave the scientists the unprecedented ability to study rapidly aging cells in the laboratory. The resulting cells mimicked the genetic mutation seen in actual Werner syndrome patients, so the cells began to age more rapidly than normal. On closer examination, the scientists found that the deletion of the WRN gene also led to disruptions to the structure of heterochromatin, the tightly packed DNA found in a cell's nucleus.

This bundling of DNA acts as a switchboard for controlling genes' activity and directs a cell's complex molecular machinery. On the outside of the heterochromatin bundles are chemical markers, known as epigenetic tags, which control the structure of the heterochromatin. For instance, alterations to these chemical switches can change the architecture of the heterochromatin, causing genes to be expressed or silenced.

The Salk researchers discovered that deletion of the WRN gene leads to heterochromatin disorganization, pointing to an important role for the WRN protein in maintaining heterochromatin. And, indeed, in further experiments, they showed that the protein interacts directly with molecular structures known to stabilize heterochromatin--revealing a kind of smoking gun that, for the first time, directly links mutated WRN protein to heterochromatin destabilization.

"Our study connects the dots between Werner syndrome and heterochromatin disorganization, outlining a molecular mechanism by which a genetic mutation leads to a general disruption of cellular processes by disrupting epigenetic regulation," says Izpisua Belmonte. "More broadly, it suggests that accumulated alterations in the structure of heterochromatin may be a major underlying cause of cellular aging. This begs the question of whether we can reverse these alterations--like remodeling an old house or car--to prevent, or even reverse, age-related declines and diseases."

End excerpts.


Does this mean that we are going to have an immortality drug in the not-too-distant future? And if not an immortality drug, then perhaps simply a drug that keeps us young until we die - no small gift there!

What would all this mean?

Science fiction writers have speculated on this extensively and come to conclude that it's not so great an idea; longevity would me a static society, one where someone at the top of their field would remain for a long, long time and newcomers would find themselves frozen out. The natural impulse would be to create a static balance in society, lest chaos erupt - and there would certainly be enough people chomping at the bit to justify a complete clamp-down on society. Even if population could be stabilized (not a certain thing) it would still mean a society that remain quite conservative.

People would doubtlessly fear danger far more than their shorter-lived counterparts, and would no doubt legislate to minimize the threat to their godhead. And there would seem to be plenty of time in every person's life, so the urgency to create and build would be minimized.

Even if the treatment only kept you young until death it would have a profound effect; a bunch of young people squabbling over control of society. The natural order, which has been with us for our entire history, would suddenly appear broken. Certainly the older folks would become terrible competitors to the young, who, not having achieved the status or wealth of their elders, would struggle with not only the problems of competing with the financial resources and connections the older folks have, but competing with them sexually and physically as well. Young women would go after older men who would be better and providing for a family - while retaining the vitality and appeal of youth. This probably would happen with young men chasing older successful women, too. A bad thing? Not necessarily from a relational perspective, but it would be bad from a biological one. Older people tend to pass along damaged genomes. As we age our genetic material decays, and often older parents wind up with sick children, children suffering from genetic disorders. Perhaps the repairs done in the treatment would fix this, but maybe not. It may become necessary to sterilize people past a certain age.

Do we really want that?

These sorts of speculations may be entirely wrong, I might add, and this could be the greatest thing to happen to mankind. It could be that the marriage of wisdom and experience acquired through age with the boldness and sharp thinking of youth may create a better type of Man, a race of people more adept, more capable, more inquisitive and yet past the foibles and follies of careless youth. One could hope.

But, despite a longing for immortality and youth in the human spirit, we have always recognized the importance of senescence and death to our existence. Our limitations define us in so many ways, and there have been many cautionary tales about immortality. In Greek mythology the Titan EOS asked Zeus to make her Lover Tithonus immortal, Zeus obliged - but did not think to keep him young. Tithonus eventually turned into a lizard.

In other words, be careful what you wish for.

But Man has always sought it, and will never cease seeking it. Death is at the very heart of Christian thought, for instance. The first Man and Woman sinned and were "punished" with death. (Actually, physical death was an act of kindness by God, who offered it as a way to keep the two dimwitted humans out of eternal separation from Him aka Hell. By physically dying there was still the chance of avoiding being cut off from God forever, despite their willful repudiation of the kindness bestowed on them.) The Bible asks "death, where is thy sting?" after Jesus walked out of the grave. And eternal life is the promise of Christ.

But this is a bit different than what is being suggested here, which is a continuation of our physical existence for an extended time, and in a more healthy and pleasing manner. It may be that, in the end, we find that this is really a curse and not a kindness, an extention of what in small doses is good. It is easy to become jaded and full of ennui over the years, and if those years be extended it may be that people begin clamouring to die. As the Book of Revelation makes clear "in those days men will seek death and death will flee from them". Perhaps extended life will be like that.

It is a marvelous thing that is coming to pass here, but sometimes our worst regrets begin as marvelous things. Time will tell.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 08:57 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1344 words, total size 9 kb.

May 02, 2015

Liberation Theology a KGB Hoax

Timothy Birdnow

Liberation Theology, the melding of marxism and Catholicism, was a creation of the KGB, according to a former top Romanian general who defected to the West.

"Ion Mihai Pacepa has been called "the Cold War’s most important defector,” and after his defection, the Romanian government under Nicolae Ceausescu placed two death sentences and a $2 million bounty on his head. During the more than ten years that Pacepa worked with the CIA, he made what the agency described as "an important and unique contribution to the United States.”

He is reported in fact to have given the CIA "the best intelligence ever obtained on communist intelligence networks and internal security services.”

"Liberation theology has been generally understood to be a marriage of Marxism and Christianity. What has not been understood is that it was not the product of Christians who pursued Communism, but of Communists who pursued Christians,” Pacepa said in a recent article. In his role as doctrinal watchdog, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger called liberation theology a "singular heresy” and a "fundamental threat” to the Church.

Pacepa says that he learned details of the KGB involvement with Liberation Theology from Soviet General Aleksandr Sakharovsky, Communist Romania’s chief foreign intelligence adviser, who later became head of the Soviet espionage service, the PGU.

In 1959, Sakharovsky went to Romania together with Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev, for what would become known as "Khrushchev’s six-day vacation.” According to Pacepa, Khrushchev "wanted to go down in history as the Soviet leader who had exported communism to Central and South America.” He chose Romania as his point of export, since it was the only Latin country in the Soviet bloc and provided a logical liaison to Latin America because of the similarity of language and culture.

Pacepa claims that the Theology of Liberation was not merely infiltrated by the KGB, it was actually the brainchild of Soviet intelligence services.

"The movement was born in the KGB, and it had a KGB-invented name: Liberation Theology,” Pacepa said."

End excerpt.

Pope John Paul II condemned Liberation Theology, as did Pope Benedict XVI. It is a heresy.

A heresy that is being embraced by Pope Francis I, the first Latin American Pope and closeted Peronista. Il Papa has met with Gustavo Guitierrez, the godfather of LT, and has expressed a great deal of sympathy for the condemned revolutionary belief.

Pope Francis has repeatedly condemned free markets as somehow oppressive to the poor. He has also called for a new regime to end "climate change" - something guaranteed to increase poverty and the accompanying suffering of the poor. This is right in his wheelhouse.

But Christ never called for revolution, or even for regime change in Rome. Remember when Peter sought to defend Jesus with his sword and was chastised by Him? Remember when Jesus showed the coin and said "render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's, and unto God that which is God's"? A large part of the reason many disciples left Jesus was because he was not a radical.

Liberation Theology is quite radical. It seeks to place the poor aka proletariat at the front and center of the raison d'etre of Christianity. That was never the case; Christ was interested in salvation, not worldly empowerment. He did love the poor because of their suffering, but he made it plain that there was more to his ministry. When Judas accused Jesus of waste for allowing Mary Magdalen to anoint him with expensive oils he rebuked "the poor you will always have with you." In other words, the poor are not the sole cocern of Christians. In fact, the poor are a gift to society because they offer an opportunity for people to freely practice charity. From my own article from 2011 at American Thinker:

"Jesus was commanding you to do these things; you are to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, visit the sick and imprisoned, comfort the stranger. This was not proclaimed the job of government. Jesus did not say "render to Caesar that he may feed the hungry" - he told you to do it.

What Caesar does is steal. Caesar steals money from the citizenry by force of arms (you will be arrested if you refuse to pay taxes, and if you resist arrest you will be killed). And those who receive the largess of the beneficent state become trapped in a cycle of dependency, a whirlpool of despond that traps them. They must support the eternal nipple at their mouths, since they can see no other way to survive. They become wards of the state, and their job is to vote for more of these programs and for the people who created them. This is one of the cruelest of actions, because it essentially turns free people into serfs, obedient to a government that gives them enough to survive but not enough to thrive. And it is a curse, a curse that passes on to their progeny, and their children's children."


"And it steals the opportunity to perform real acts of charity. Before the coming of the welfare state the Christian had many opportunities to perform acts of charity, and he did so eagerly. Now, government takes the money he would use to really help those in need and redistributes it for purposes that serve the master, the government. Those who would perform acts of mercy find their charity stolen.

This is what those oh-so compassionate professors at American Catholic universities think passes for Christianity; Hell doused in air-freshener!

Also, they think it kinder to throw a few crumbs to the poorer of our society (and many of those we deem poor have two cars, big screen televisions, computers, and cell phones) and worry nary a wit for the future - a future that will not be there if we do not get a handle on our overspending. Would any diocese or even parish in the Church spend so much giving to charity that it had to close, leaving those who have come to depend on this aid completely on their own resources? Government has more resources, but the end will be the same. There is nothing righteous about killing the golden goose, which is precisely what we are doing. A dead goose will do little but draw flies."

End excerpts.

Liberation Theology is an affront to all of this, demanding a restructuring of society ostensibly to make it "fair" but in reality to steal from some to give to others. In the end, such a system cannot help but be corrupt as those who dole out the goodies will do so to enhance their own wealth and power.

It is the ideal weapon to use against freedom, for it can disguise itself as compassion. It is like grifter and a mark; the mark may think the grifter is his friend, but the reality is the confidence man is only being friendly to hurt the mark. But to the casual observer the con man is a wonderful person.

Liberation Theology is precisely that; a con using Christian terminology and Catholic teachings to pull a scam. And the current Pope seems quite smitten with it.

I suspect Jesus would condemn the proponents of Liberation Theology as hypocrites and vipers. But then, Jesus was crucified by such.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 02:51 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1220 words, total size 8 kb.

Hustler for Hillary!

Dana Mathewson

With friends like this, who needs enemies?


As Hillary Clinton faces a raft of bad press over conflict-of-interest allegations at her family foundation, at least she's got one outspoken advocate in her corner: Larry Flynt.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 11:08 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 41 words, total size 1 kb.

Creepy Cracker George Soros Facing Ritzy Tax Bill

Dana Mathewson

Couldn't happen to a nicer guy!

"George Soros may soon face a monumental tax bill, after years of playing hard-to-get with the IRS."

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 11:06 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 34 words, total size 1 kb.

White Lives Don't Matter!

Timothy Birdnow

Three black Philadelphia teens gunned down a 51 year old white man who was out walking his dog. The man pled for his life and was executed by the youths anyway.

See the story here.

There has been no reaction from black leaders, and no protests. Strange; "hands up! Don't shoot!" only matters when a black man is on the receiving end - and even if it didn't happen that way. Why, it's almost as if white lives don't matter.

From the story:

"A 15-year-old boy surrendered to Philadelphia Police in the robbery and shooting death of a man who police say was targeted because he appeared old, police told NBC10. The boy was the third suspect sought in the deadly encounter.

Tyfine Hamilton's father helped negotiate the arrest, sources said. He is now being interviewed by homicide detectives at Philadelphia Police Headquarters in Center City.

Police arrested 15-year old Tyfine Hamilton, who they believe to be the gunman who shot 51-year old James Stulman to death while he was walking his dog. NBC10's Monique Braxton reports the investigation is far from over, however, as police are still looking for the deadly weapon. (Published Friday, Mar 20, 2015)

Hamilton was wanted for the murder of 51-year-old James Patrick Stuhlman. Last Thursday, Stuhlman was walking his dog, Molly, along the 6400 block of Woodcrest Avenue in the Overbrook section of the city when he was approached by three teenage boys, police said.

Homicide investigators said the teens planned to rob the man after playing a game of basketball. They chose him, investigators said, because he looked old and his dog was "weak." Stuhlman pleaded for his life before he was shot once in the chest, police said. He died on the street with his dog at his side.

Hamilton's alleged co-conspirator, 15-year-old Brandon Smith, was arrested Thursday and charged with murder after police spotted him in Overbook, police said. A 14-year-old was also arrested and charged with robbery, as well.

Stuhlman was shot over nothing, police said, as not one item was taken from him."

End excerpt.

Here is a compilation of black on white murders ignored by the media in 2014.

Writing in Townhall, Doug Giles looked at the matter back in 2012:

"Yep. Tyrone Woodfork, a black male who -- much like Trayvon Martin -- looks like Obama’s son, allegedly killed Nancy Strait and broke her husband Bob’s jaw, several ribs and shot him in the face with a BB gun last month in Tulsa. 20-year-old Tyrone also raped the nearly blind 97-pound Mrs. Strait, a great-great-grandmother, before he murdered her.

Did the above monstrous crime make the national news? Are you kidding me? Why, hell no. Of course not, silly!"

He goes on to report an heinous crime, and link to a few more. Nobody in the mainstream media seems to care. White Lives Don't Matter!

And here is a screenshot of a Facebook Post by Ted Nugent giving a partial list of forgotten victims of black racial violence:

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:20 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 507 words, total size 4 kb.

Prosecuting Girl Gone Wild: The Shame on Baltimore Prosecutor Marilyn Mosby

Former prosecutor Marilyn Mosby defeated Baltimore State’s Attorney ...

Timothy Birdnow

In the ongoing investigation of the death of Freddie Gray, the Baltimore man who died of a severed spinal cord while in Police custody, keeps taking strange twists, and the decision to charge the officers involved with a passle of crimes including murder seems a bit odd - and a bit premature.

The good folks at Conservative Treehouse are all over this.

First, the prosecutor in the case - Baltimore State Attorney Marilyn Mosby - appears to have inappropriate ties to the case. According to the Treepers:

"We have already outlined how Marilyn Mosby is married to the City Councilman, Nick Mosby, who facilitated the looting and told police to back off. Not coincidentally his wife then refused to file charges against the captured looters. Go figure.

However, this most recent decision by Mosby is even more troubling; especially since word is now leaking out that the Medical Examiner changed the cause of death from "accidental” to "homicide” after talking to her team.

billy murphy 2Mosby’s political team includes Billy Murphy (pictured right) who is the attorney for the family of Freddie Gray.

[…] State’s Attorney Marilyn Mosby ousted an established white opponent by promising to hold police accountable. She accused him of being too cozy with officers and out of touch with residents.

Mosby and her husband, a city councilman, are black and live just blocks from the poverty-stricken community where riots broke out following Gray’s funeral.

Some question her ties to Billy Murphy, the attorney representing Gray’s family and a big donor to Mosby’s election campaign last year."

End excerpt.

Mosby has also refused to file any charges against the rioters and looters. Why? Her husband is city councilman Nick Mosby, who has been a facilitator of the mob violence in the city.

The Treepers believe she filed these charges as a way to obtain an arrest; a Grand Jury may motify the charges later, but she needed the arrest to push this forward (she learned this from Ferguson, where authorities refused to arrest Officer Darren Wilson without probable cause, making the case for criminal charges more difficult to politically move.) Their analysis of the report suggests multiple errors, misleading statements, and just downright lies.

From the Treepers:

← Baltimore State Attorney Files Charges Against Six Officers Including Murder and Manslaughter…
Bumper Sticker Of The Day… →
Baltimore State Attorney Marilyn Mosby Is Presenting A Potemkin Village To A Racial Audience….
Posted on May 1, 2015 by sundance

There’s a big legal leap being made by Marilyn Mosby all the way to intentional killing. Charging the driver of the transport van with murder is a considerable leap based on currently available information.

Freddie gray jr arrestBaltimore State Attorney Marilyn Mosby is playing a dangerous game of racially motivated political and legal theatrics.

The construct of her Probable Cause Affidavit (as presented)is filled with misleading information, manipulation and obtuse political talking points.

Here’s a transcript of her entire PCA as spoken – This is where readers have to comprehend that Mrs. Mosby is playing a dangerous political game. The officers have not been indicted, nor has a Grand Jury delivered a finding to substantiate an indictment. Mrs. Mosely is simply filing a direct action PCA to support an arrest.

What she needed was an arrest, just an arrest, the direct PCA is a tool to achieve that goal.

The arrest is based on a direct action probable cause filing. After the arrest the SA then has 30 days to bring an actual indictment, or she can change/drop the charges. Within the 30 days she has to take this to a Grand Jury to create the indictment.

Most likely the actual indictment charges, if any, will be far different on an indictment sheet (if at all) than the PCA claims she is basing the arrest upon. Meaning, with almost virtual certainty, what’s going on now is pure theatrics.

Baltimore PD sources tell @joelwaldmanFOX the sentiment within dept. is "someone had to be given up", insist Gray never assaulted

— RickLeventhalFoxNews (@RickLeventhal) May 1, 2015

You might say that any SA who would file false charges (or overcharges) based on false information (or manipulated information) would be in trouble. However, not in this case. Who is going to go after Marilyn Mosby for a false arrest charge, given the internal political dynamics in Baltimore who all support such an approach.

Notice how she will DEMAND that all evidence remains under seal. This is not because she is trying to retain the integrity of evidence; this is because she needs to keep the media from seeing how her claims are not supported by the evidence in the case. It is a familiar strategy to avoid sunlight.

Freddie gray jr arrestmarilyn Mosby
THE Potemkin Village Approach: an impressive facade or show designed to hide an undesirable fact or condition.

SA Mosby is putting on a show for her Baltimore audience, her black Baltimore audience, while trying to hide the undesirable facts and conditions which don’t support her role play. Justice = Just Us.

We have already outlined how Marilyn Mosby is married to the City Councilman, Nick Mosby, who facilitated the looting and told police to back off. Not coincidentally his wife then refused to file charges against the captured looters. Go figure.

However, this most recent decision by Mosby is even more troubling; especially since word is now leaking out that the Medical Examiner changed the cause of death from "accidental” to "homicide” after talking to her team.

billy murphy 2Mosby’s political team includes Billy Murphy (pictured right) who is the attorney for the family of Freddie Gray.

[…] State’s Attorney Marilyn Mosby ousted an established white opponent by promising to hold police accountable. She accused him of being too cozy with officers and out of touch with residents.

Mosby and her husband, a city councilman, are black and live just blocks from the poverty-stricken community where riots broke out following Gray’s funeral.

Some question her ties to Billy Murphy, the attorney representing Gray’s family and a big donor to Mosby’s election campaign last year. (link)

Speaking earlier in the year about Grand Jury constructs Mosby was quite open about her opinion of Ferguson Missouri where Officer Darren Wilson was not indicted on charges in the death of Mike Brown. Mosby said she viewed the failure to charge officer Wilson as a prosecutor manipulating the Grand Jury system.

Mrs. Mosby and her husband Nick have made it known they intended to racialize the State Attorney’s office. Lead Baltimore prosecutor, Marilyn Mosby (35), took over the Baltimore State Attorney’s Office in January. Upon taking office, Mosby "purged” the office of several veteran prosecutors – STORY HERE –

Also: […] The changes were announced during a brief meeting with more than 300 employees Wednesday morning at police headquarters. Mosby said the new office structure was based in part on ideas from prosecutors’ offices in New York, Los Angeles and Atlanta. – STORY HERE –

Mosby campaigned by using racial division as a wedge issue and was openly using her antagonistic views toward police as a tool to gain political power"

End excerpt.

So Marilyn Mosby is part of the greivance establishment, and is not an impartial upholder of the law. If Robert McCulloch, St. Louis County Prosecuting Attorney, should have stepped down as so many in the "hands up" crowd demanded, simply because his father was an assassinated police officer, than why shouldn't Mosby be forced out?

In other news on this case, it appears that Mosby leaked a false story about a witness in the paddywagon to manipulate the narrative after the Washington Post published an account of Gray trying to injure himself.

From the Treehouse:

"Our research indicates the office of Baltimore State Attorney, Marilyn Mosby, used or allowed one of her deputy State Attorneys, Janice Bledsoe (who was in charge of the investigation as assigned by Marilyn Mosby), to willfully and intentionally place a false story using Bledsoe’s lover, WBAL-TV reporter Jayne Miller, and thereby create a fictitious story to imply Donta Allen as the passenger outlined in the Washington Post story."

End excerpt.

And indeed the Donta Allan presented in the WBAL report "walking back" the statement was not the same person interviewed by the WaPo. In short, this was a lie designed to stem the flow of blood.

In the end, there will be no justice done whatsoever in this case. I do not know what happened in this bizarre and tragic affair, and I doubt I will ever know, thanks to this sort of evidence tampering and racial politicing. This Mosby woman is absolutely out of control.

But then, to a leftist, truth is that which advances the struggle. That some innocent should be hurt along the way is just collateral damage.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:34 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1475 words, total size 12 kb.

Racism in the Baltimore Freddie Gray Case?

Timothy Birdnow

Baltimore 6Here is a photo of the "racist" police who are charged with the murder of  Freddie Gray. What is the first thing that catches your eye?:

Don't expect to see this photo in the media overmuch.

Hat tip: The Gateway Pundit.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 05:55 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 50 words, total size 1 kb.

May 01, 2015

Dishonesty in the Gay Marriage Arguement

Timothy Birdnow

Writing in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Kevin McDermott argued that same sex marriage is coming to Missouri like it or not, and that we had better get used to the idea.

According to McDermott:

"Piccola, like other marriage-rights advocates, points to the dramatic shift in states’ laws across America in the past few years as an indication of what the nine justices are likely to do.

"I don’t know how the Supreme Court could rule that 37 states that now give these rights to their citizens could no longer do that.”"


"Illinois and 35 other states recognize full marriage equality for same-sex couples, and 14 don’t — though the numbers aren’t entirely that simple, because of Missouri. National media and activists, when discussing the number of states that allow same-sex marriage, generally put it at "36 states, the District of Columbia and parts of Missouri.”

That’s because Missouri’s constitution prohibits same-sex marriage, but the St. Louis and Kansas City urban areas at both ends of the state have begunapproving such marriages anyway, based on a series of court rulings chipping at that prohibition.

Two of those rulings are still under appeal, through those appeals could both be rendered moot by whatever the high court decides in June.

Missourians in 2004 overwhelmingly passed Constitutional Amendment 2 prohibiting same-sex marriage anywhere in the state. By last year, as most polls showed dramatic public opinion shifts away from such bans, that law has been challenged from several fronts:

• In October, a Jackson County judgeruled in favor of 10 Missouri couples who had been legally married outside Missouriand argued that their home state was legally bound to recognize those marriages. That ruling currently stands.

• In November, a U.S. district judge ruled parts of Missouri’s same-sex marriage ban unconstitutional. Missouri Attorney General Chris Koster has appealed to the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals. Oral arguments are set for May 12 — earlier than the U.S. Supreme Court is expected to issue its ruling on the other states’ bans. But the high court ruling would ultimately supersede any conflicting ruling from the lower court.

• Last year, St. Louis Recorder of Deeds Sharon Quigley Carpenterbegan issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couplesin defiance of the state law. That spawned a legal battle that led St. Louis Circuit Court Judge Rex Burlison torule in November that Missouri’s marriage ban is unconstitutional. Koster appealed to the Missouri Supreme Court. That court has stayed action in the case, pending the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision."

End excerpts.

My brother Brian took umbrage with the disingenuous Post-Dispatch writer:

"Dear Mr. McDermott,
In your story on the front page of the PD this morning you made the questionable assertion that gay marriage is legal in parts of Missouri, including St. Louis. You know, however, that Mayor Francis Slay's publicity hound stunt of last year does not, in any way, negate the Missouri state constitution, which is explicit on this issue. The fact that another publicity hound, Democratic Attorney General Chris Koster chose, for political reasons, to ignore this flagrant breach of state law does not sanction the act. Gay marriage is not legal in Missouri, despite the sophistries spun by Post-Dispatch reporters and editors.

Brian E. Birdnow

And I followed up in a similar vein:

"If Same Sex Marriage (sic) is legal because a politician nullified the law (and in the case of the City of St. Louis it was done solely by the Mayor with no input from either the Board of Alderman or the People) than why, pray tell, does Mr. McDermott think the State - with a legally binding constitutional amendment - not have the right to nullify a federal order or whatnot? Remember, the Congress of the United States passed the Defense of Marriage Act, too. So if STL can nullify state law, so too can Missouri nullify the future ruling on Gay Marriage?

The states have the Tenth Amendment. What authority do the Courts have? They granted themselves the power of judicial review via Marbury v. Madison. Somehow I doubt Mr. McDermott will agree with state nullification, but he's happy to allow nullification by sole politicians.

Will he offer the same courtesy if, say, Ferguson would tell the DOJ to pound sand on their recommended police reforms? Somehow I doubt it.


Jack Kemp dropped us a note, pointing out the numbers of states that actually passed same sex marriage is less than those that had it imposed by imperial judges. He's right, and I made the following comment:

"Here is a wikipedia entry showing how all of these cases were decided first in either state or federal court. Only 10 states actually passed ssm, and most of those doubtlessly to avoid legal struggles. They are VA., RI,NY, MN., MA, MD, DE, HI, IL, and Maine, with the District of Columbia counting in the 11. The rest, as you see, were court rulings.See the supplied table and look at the last column, the one showing how same sex marriage wound up becoming laws in the different states.

WND also has a fine article explaining how this has happened.

According to this article, two dozen of the 36 were ordered to change their laws by one single judge.

See also this.

End comment.

The fact is, most of America is in opposition to this movement, but the media and the powers that be in the political establishment want this. It is true that many in the younger generation have bought into this idea that it is somehow unfair to not allow people the hold the power to redefine a fundamental institution, but that is largely a function of a near total shutout of the arguments against gay marriage, which is a nonsense phrase to begin with, like the term "corporate family". That is not to say that homosexuals cannot or do not often have loving, committed relationships that may mirror a marriage in some way, but it is to say that there is a definition of marriage that goes back into the mists of time and two people of the same sex cannot meet that definition. Neither can any number of heterosexual couples; mother and son, father and daughter, brother and sister, someone incapable of consumating the marriage, etc. Inanimate objects, house pets, and dead bodies do not meet that definitiion (except in Islam wehre an Imam ruled you could copulate with your dead wife for up to 12 hours after she expires, but then they also think women unclean, have no problem with marrying their first cousins, etc.)

The reality is that, unlike a demand for tolerance, this is a demand for not just societal approval but that we celebrate their choices. Everyone can agree to celebrate honest to goodness marriage, because we all had a father and mother. But this redefinition of marriage to include what is, to many religions, an abomination and which is also a most physically and emotionally unhealthy sexual relationship is asking a bit much.

History has not been kind to nations that embrace such alternative lifestyles. And this is a major experiment in social organization, one that is being conducted at a time when the societal fabric of America is already stretched very, very thin. Redefining marriage at a time of weak families and social, sexual upheaval is not in our nation's best interest. We need strong families now, more than ever. Gay marriage will ultimately cheapen the value of marriage, turning it into a purely legal contract between people.

And already the demands are starting to redefine marriage further. The push is on to bring back polygamy, and frankly polygamy actually has an historical precedent. There is also a move afoot to redefine pedophilia, to remove the stigma. This mirrors what happened with homosexuality back in the '70's, where it was declare by the AMA to no longer be a mental disorder. Forty years later and we are discussing gay marriage; how long before we have the fight over pedophilic marriage? With the doubling of Muslims in America in just a few years we could well have this fight; Muhammad married Aisha when she was six years old (he thoughtfully waited until she was 9 to consummate the marriage.)

How long before Muslims demand the right to wed underage children? Unthinkable, you say? Well, in 1970 two men marrying was unthinkable too. This is what Daniel Patrick Moynihan (the last good Democrat) meant by "defining deviancy down". What starts as a small seed grows into a giant carnivorous plant.

The primary argument made for gay marriage is that the homosexuals in question want it and that it is only some bigoted religious types who are opposed, that there is no practical arguments against it. Well, first off, Christians would really be hating gays if they acquiesced to this. By Chrisitan standards homosexuality should not be encouraged by society, because it leads to damnation. The Christian is not going to encourage homosexuality any more than he would give his car keys to a drunken teenager and tell him to go racing. He may love the kid, but he's not going to assist in the kid's damgerous behavior. Opposition of gay marriage is an act of love, not of hate. The real hatred is the silence of many, or the encouragement. Jesus said "your sins are forgiven you, go forth and sin no more" not "go forth and party on!"

As for practical considerations, there is the matter of public health, and there is the matter of public morals, which is not an inconsequential thing; public morals and a strong society go hand in hand. The Golden Age of Greece lasted less than a hundred years, and the death of that culture coincided with an acceptance of homosexuality. In fact, the Greeks earned a terrible reputation for being libertines, and for centuries after that people would try to keep their sons and daughters away from traveling Greeks. The reason seems fairly straightforward. And even the Greeks never had gay marriage.

And what is this societal damage I speak about? Well, speech codes for one; Americans can no longer speak freely on these issues, but must toe the pc line. A Christian baker is forced to bake for a gay wedding, or a florist provide flowers. If not... That is quite damaging to a society that supposedly holds free speech as a fundamental right. Does anyone remember the Miss USA Pageant where a contestant meekly stated that, while she bears no ill will to anyone, her religious faith says it is wrong? She was pilloried. Free speech is dying, and gay marriage is a strong force killing it.

And how about the children? Gender confusion is as much learned as anything; children have to be taught sexual role models from adults, and when the adults themselves offer no clear signals the kids have no clear path. Many homosexuals want this, thinking it should be no big deal, but the reality is that nature and nurture both play a part in our lives and without proper guidance children have to reinvent the wheel, a task often well beyond their abilities and something guaranteed to cause emotional and spiritual harm. The activists argue that society should be free of judgementalism, and kids should be whatever they like. But the activists are full of judgementalism for anyone who doesn't swallow their line, and societal roles are critical for a functioning society. A nation where people are whatever they choose to be at any moment regardless of what Nature intends is a society that will ultimately disintegrate into anarchy. Civilization is built entirely on conforming the individual to certain modes of behavior that benefit both the individual and the society at large. Making yourself into whatever you wish is to create a society of one. It cannot, will not work and in the end the atomization of the greater society will lead to collapse.

And let us not forget the health woes. And teh cost in terms of tax dollars.

No doubt I could go on, but you get the point.

This is not a matter of tolerance and it is not an isolated thing. Hillary Clinton once said "it takes a village to raise a child" and then what? The village and the child are intertwined. Gay marriage changes the raising of that child, and the child who grows up demanding the right to change definitions set by the society is then a rebel. You cannot have it both ways; either we have a tighter social structure that forces greater conformity from the individual or a losser structure that allows for more individuality. Here we come back to the basic disagreement; the Left wants a society ruled by a rigid authoritarian structure, one that forces obedience in return for libertine freedoms. The right wants a world of limited government that fosters self-control and a self-conforming to an ideal, one put forward by God. It really is ultimately a battle between the desire of men and the Will of God, or at least what is known as Natural Law. The Left says "do what you want, no matter, and we'll guide you, govern you, protect you from your mistakes with guardrails and whatnot". The Conservative says "do that which is right, learn as a child, govern yourself wisely and you will be free to do that which is right." The former has been tried, and tried, and tried through history. It has always failed. Men cannot live together if they cannot live with themselves.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:00 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 2268 words, total size 14 kb.

April 30, 2015

Bernie Sanders' Big Mouth Revisited

Jack Kemp

It's time to resurrect a story of mine from Dec. 2010, since Bernie Sanders has decided to run for President and is ranting about "income inequality" - from his protected position.

In 2010,we were treated to the spectacle of Bernie Sanders ranting on the Senate floor against people being able to pass their inheritance onto their children, asking "How much is enough?" and never answering the question. Bernie has been living off the public as an elected official for over 16 years.

I went to Wikipedia and checked out Bernie's biography. It states:

"Sanders, the son of Jewish Polish immigrants to the United States, was born in Brooklyn. He graduated from James Madison High School in Brooklyn and later attended the University of Chicago, graduating with a B.A. in political science in 1964.[4] After graduating from college, Sanders spent time on an Israeli kibbutz, an experience which shaped his political views.[5] In 1964, Sanders moved to Vermont, where he worked as a carpenter, filmmaker, writer and researcher, among other jobs.[4] "


First of all, I know something about kibbutzim and Israel. Like socialist folksinger and actor Theodore Bikel, Sanders fled the kibbutz to develop his individuality and make a more lucrative living in America. And since Bernie was born in Brooklyn and was not the only child of a Holocaust survivor, that means if he stayed in Israel, not only would he have to serve in its military, but it could be put in a combat position. And Bernie would have to serve in the IDF Reserves until age 55. Bernie came back to America to become an anti-war activist. The kibbutz "shaped his political views?" Rubbish. What spirit of national service for limited earnings did he bring back with him from Israel? Does a committee decide on whether he gets money for an overseas vacation, such as has happened on kibbutzim for many years, if not now? Did they ever give Bernie a rifle to stand as night guard on a kibbutz?

I believe that Bernie Sanders cherry picked his socialist values from the kibbutz, keeping the easy and high-sounding theory and avoiding the harder ones. And I think his socialist values come from himself and the U. of Chicago, rather than any kibbutz.

When someone tells you nonsense in Israel, they call it "shtooyot meh meetz agvaniot." That rhymes and means in English "silly stories from tomato juice." Have a V-8, Bernie.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 09:58 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 415 words, total size 3 kb.

Hillary Rejects Her Husband's Incarceration Policies

Timothy Birdnow

Recently Hillary Clinton went off on a rant about how America must "end the era of mass incarcerations" and release massive numbers of criminals. No doubt she is looking ahead to her own final destination, and hoping to use the unrest in Baltimore and Ferguson to help keep her own loathesome carcass under the blue sky.

This seems to have cheesed off Ace of Spades, who fired a few shots across Mrs. Clinton's ample bow:

"The article does not say if she listed Michael Brown-- though I assume she did. WaPo black-and-gay-issues writer Jonathan Capeheart got a round of approbation for admitting that everything he thought he knew about the Brown shooting was a lie, and then, a couple of weeks later, listed Brown anyway in the List of the Fallen Black Innocents.

Hillary Clinton is claiming that our jailed are filled with the indiscriminately-imprisoned -- that "masses" of people are just winding up in jail.

It is one thing to call for criminal justice reform. It is another thing entirely to demagogue the issue from a hard leftwing viewpoint and claim that "masses" of prisoners -- most of them -- are essentially politically prisoners.

She also called for an end to armored vehicles, just as those are being used to quell the Baltimore riots"

End excerpt.

Hillary is, of course, a power mad survivor, and at this point we should do more laughing at her than serious rebuttal. Oh, and it should be pointed out that SHE had her chance during the tenure of her husband as President of these United States (nee the United State).

In 1992 Clinton, eager to appear tough on crime but hold the line on spending, began contracting out of privately run prisons. Not a bad idea, but to the Left an act of supreme tyranny; private prisons are run for profit and, according to liberal thinking, apt to mistreat inmates.

According to historian Howard Zinn

"Clinton was eager to show he was "tough" on matters of "law and order." Running for president in 1992 while still governor of Arkansas, he flew back to Arkansas to oversee the execution of a mentally retarded man on death row. And early in his administration, he and Attorney General Janet Reno approved an FBI attack on a group of religious zealots who were armed and ensconced in a building complex in Waco, Texas. The attack resulted in a fire that swept through the compound, killing at least 86 men, women, and children.

Early in his first term Clinton signed legislation cutting funds for state resource centers that supplied lawyers to indigent prisoners. The result, according to Bob Herbert writing in the New York Times, was that a man facing the death penalty in Georgia had to appear at a habeas corpus proceeding without a lawyer.

In 1996, the President signed legislation that made it more difficult for judges to put prison systems under special masters to ensure the improvement of terrible prison conditions. He also approved a new statute withholding federal funds for legal services where lawyers used those funds to handle class action suits (such suits were important for challenging assaults on civil liberties).

The "Crime Bill" of 1996, which both Republicans and Democrats in Congress voted for overwhelmingly, and which Clinton endorsed with enthusiasm, dealt with the problem of crime by emphasizing punishment, not prevention. It extended the death penalty to a whole range of criminal offenses, and provided $8 billion for the building of new prisons."

End excerpt.

Mr. Clinton also saw to it that public housing could be denied for arrests, not for convictions, and he cut off federal financial aid to ex cons.

In short, the prisons filled up during the tenure of Mr. Clinton, and his lovely bride found no cause for complaint.

Incarceration rates have been dropping since Mr. Obama took office. Why? Doubtless because he wants to empty the prisons, to give himself an army of community organizees to create chaos. Obama was an Alinskyite,and Alinsky advocated chaos at every opportunity.

Also, please note that incarceration rates have been dropping during a decidedly bad economy, in defiance of all holy writ of liberal thought. Bad times lead to more crime, the thinking on the left goes, yet crime rose during the boom times and is dropping during the bad times - or at least so we are being told. Strange; it's as though the Left has it exactly backwards.

But I do disagree with aCE, who insinuates that the paramilitarization of the police is a good thing. One of the great talents of the Left is to open a new channel for events to turn the tide. Conservatives were coming down on the Obama Administration quite hard for selling military gear to the police, and now the Left has us defending the practice. So simple; just start some rioting and our natural inclination for defending law and order lead us to defend this practice,, which will be used against US at some point. Consider the repeated efforts to tar conservatives with the "domestic terrorist" label, and Obama's efforts to buy up all ammunition in the country, and his demands of generals and other high military appointees are willing to fire on U.S. citizens. All of this suggests an attempt to create an internal army operating at the pleasure of the Chief Executive. Militarized police are just one more attempt to put the yoke of tyranny around our necks.

Any way you slice it, Hillary is speaking out of a completely different face, not just another side of her mouth.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:15 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 938 words, total size 6 kb.

Whole Foods Attacked by Half-Wits

Timothy Birdnow

Whole Foods is taking it on the chin for giving sandwhiches to National Guardsmen in Baltimore.

Here are some tweets posted by The Blaze:

This is tone-deaf, especially when thousands of school kids in Baltimore need lunch, @WholeFoods. #TWiBNation

— Imani Gandy (@AngryBlackLady) April 28, 2015

I spent my last money with @WholeFoods last night. What you are doing is unconscionable. #BaltimoreUprising @WholeFoodsPR @wholefoodsnyc

— Jamilah Lemieux (@JamilahLemieux) April 28, 2015

As Baltimore's poorest kids are left hungry due to school closure (no school lunch), @WholeFoods feeds the oppressor

— Rania Khalek (@RaniaKhalek) April 28, 2015

The stunt @WholeFoods in #Baltimore pulled today opened my eyes. I used to love Whole Foods, but I can't support the company anymore. #Bye

— Robert Mitchell (@RLM_3) April 28, 2015

This is what Progressive politics does to a community.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:01 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 145 words, total size 3 kb.

The Blue and the Gray; Did the Police Really Kill Freddie Gray in Baltimore?

Timothy Birdnow

The Freddie Gray incident has sparked rioting and looting in that bluest of blue cities, Baltimore. Run for decades by Democrats, the riots have been spiraling out of control, an example of black rage at a racist system, or so we were told. Interesting that the places that have witnessed riots have been run by Democrats for long periods.

At any rate, something just doesn't add up about the death of Mr. Gray. How did he partially sever his spinal cord? That would be a hard thing to do with the kind of beating he might have received at the hands of the police. It does not excuse police negligence; they should have realized he needed medical attention, even if they were not responsible for his injuries. Once a man is taken into custody he is their responsibility. And if they did do it...

But something doesn't add up.

The good folks at Conservative Treehouse think Mr. Gray (what is it with these color names and police riots? First Brown then Gray) may have suffered an injury a week before.

From the post:

"Which brings us to a potential game changing discovery showing up in some social media about Freddie Gray having spinal surgery shortly before the events outlined within the controversial encounter. It must be noted however, that none of this is factually confirmed and we should research further.

The story is in essence:

"Freddie Gray had a pre-existing spinal and neck injury [from a car accident] and had severe damage and scar tissue from an accident that Allstate insurance was paying via a large structured settlement.

Freddie had several unsuccessful spinal fusion surgeries, and his most recent spinal/cervical operation was a week and a half before he was arrested. Freddie should have been at home in bed resting and recovering from this recent major operation.

If you look on Howard County Civil Court records you will find a case whereby Freddie Gray Jr. was trying to cash in his monthly structured Allstate settlement into a lump sum payout through Peachtree funding”.

Another report from The Fourth Estate essentially encapsulates the same story outlined in alternate (social) media:

[…] EXCLUSIVE: The Fourth Estate has learned that Freddy Gray’s life-ending injuries to his spine may have possibly been the result of spinal and neck surgery that he allegedly received a week before he was arrested, not from rough excessively rough treatment or abuse from police.

The Fourth Estate has contacted sources who allege that Freddy Gray received spinal and neck surgery a week before we was arrested, and was allegedly receiving a large structured settlement from Allstate Insurance. The surgery is allegedly related to a car accident in which Gray was involved (more)

Indeed there is a civil tort case in the Circuit Court for Howard County – Civil System listing Freddie Gray Jr. as party to a civil action structured between Peachtree Settlement Funding LLC and Allstate Life Insurance Company.

End excerpts.


Mr. Gray appears to have a pre-existing condition, one that required excessive care. His running from and resisting the police was a monumentally stupid thing. Stupidity has always carried the death sentence.

But wait! There's more!

Another prisoner in the police van with Gray says Mr. Gray was banging his head against the wall, trying to injure himself.

From a Washington Times article, quoting WAPO:

A fellow prisoner said Freddie Gray was banging against the walls of the Baltimore Police van that was transporting him and was deliberately seeking to hurt himself, The Washington Post reported.

Meanwhile on Wednesday night, a relative of one of the six officers who’ve been suspended in the case told CNN that she feared a railroading of the police to make a political point.

According to a police document obtained by The Post, the fellow prisoner couldn’t see Gray because of a metal partition.

But he could listen and he told police he heard Gray "banging against the walls” and could tell that he "was intentionally trying to injure himself.”

It isn’t clear how much other evidence backs up the prisoner’s account of the 30-minute van ride. The document was written by a Baltimore police investigator.

The possibility that Gray’s death could be the result of self-harm would be politically incendiary after more than a week of disturbances and a citywide curfew.

As a result, the police officer’s relative said she was suspicious of Baltimore’s political leadership.

"If they come out and tell the whole story,” she said of Baltimore’s politicians, "what do they do about the stuff that” had happened since Gray’s death.

"There’s been a riot, there’s a curfew” and it cannot all be for naught, she told CNN on condition of appearing on-camera with her face blurred.

She called the case a possible example of "when something bad happens and nobody stands behind you, including the city you served.”

The Post only obtained the currently-sealed document — related to a search warrant in the case — on condition that the second prisoner not be named. He is currently in jail and fears retaliation, the Post reported.

Gray had been arrested 18 times and had two drug-related charges pending against him when he died. He had been convicted several times, with his longest sentence being a two-year jail stint."

End excerpt

Now, the people at the Daily Kos wonder that a man would try to injure himself in such a fashion, but
it certainly happens to people who are high on any number of drugs. Mr. Gray had several arrests on drug charges.

In my youth I worked at a grocery store and had the honor of stopping shoplifters. One fellow tried to run for it, shoving down a couple of people blocking his way, and I tackled him, pinning him on the floor. (The customers were very polite the rest of that evening.) He bit my hand (I returned the favor by breaking his nose.) This guy was high on PcP, and the unfortunate thing was I could not even get access to his medical records to determine if he had HIV. The cops told me they never can either, and they sometimes work some bloody affairs. They just put it out of their minds. (This was during the peak of the AIDS epidemic, I might add, and a real cause for concern.) Fortunately I did not catch anything but I could well have. This is what high people do; the guy was physically overpowered, and yet he still tried to bite his way out of it. Stupid. He quit struggling only after I punched his face a few times. Had to do it, and the police never once considered charging me because we had caught him dead to right and he had tried to use violence to escape, pushing down a couple of people blocking his way. He was an ex con, and knew he was going back to prison if caught.

He definitely had drugs; the police found them on him.

So if a guy bites someone's hand when they are restraining him, is it so far-fetched he would bang his head on the wall to make bruises he could use for a court case? In a place like Baltimore where the liberals own the town he had a great chance of winning money, money, money! Cash prizes for police brutality! But Mr. Gray miscalculated, since he did not seem to take his auto injuries seriously.

That said, at some point the police should have realized this guy actually was in serious condition. They probably thought he was faking to get out of custody and to buttress a case against them (he may even have said he was going to sue them) and so they dismissed his injuries. Stupid. Maybe not stupid enough to receive the death penalty, but certainly stupid enough to cause riots and firings and perhaps even jail time for some of the people involved.

The medical examiner report is slow in coming; that leads me to believe there is exculpatory evidence there. Baltimore would be quick to publicize this otherwise. Being so slow in coming suggests they are embarassed by it. Not embarassed because it makes the cops look bad, but because it makes the political establishment's unwillingness to deal with the riots effectively glaringly obvious. Time will tell.

But that doesn't matter; this was a rent-a-mob, the same floating riot that burned down Ferguson, funded by George Soros and including the professional revolutionaries who move in the same circles our President formerly inhabited as a "community organizer". This stuff is being pushed and coordinated from a central committee of some kind. And I strongly suspect ties to a Chicago, and a certain politician who now lives in a whitewashed little mansion back east.

Welcome to post-racial America!

Oh, by the way, Baltimore has always had race riots, and it should be pointed out that Nancy Pelosi's family were a dominating force in Baltimore until rioting forced them out of the mayorship. Nancy migrated west to Frisco and married money so she could buy herself political power out there.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:30 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1528 words, total size 10 kb.

April 29, 2015

Hobby Lobby Ruling Working

Timothy Birdnow

The SCOTUS Hobby Lobby ruling is forcing lower courts to reject Progressive arguments demanding free contraception.

From The Hill:

"The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, which filed an amicus brief in the case, called it a "strong signal” that more courts will ultimately take their side in the longstanding fight against the ObamaCare mandate.

"It makes it less likely that lower courts will accept arguments the Supreme Court has rejected over and over and over again,” the group’s senior counsel, Mark Rienzi, wrote in a statement.

Monday’sMichigan Catholic Conference v. Burwellruling marks the sixth time that the court has thrown out decisions that upheld Obama administration policies, sending the cases back to the lower courts for reconsideration.

The court also gave hope to Catholic groups last month when it struck down a lower court’s ruling requiring the University of Notre Dame to follow the birth-control mandate. That court will now revisit the case from the Roman Catholic university.

The Michigan Catholic Conference, which describes itself as the "official voice of the Catholic Church in Michigan," had joined with other Catholic ministries to demand an exemption from the financial penalties for not providing contraceptives in employee healthcare plans.

Under current law, the groups can receive an exemption by writing a letter to the Health and Human Services Department or filling out a two-page form to document their objections.

But the groups said those extra steps created an "unjustified substantial burden” and called for the same kind of across-the-board exemption that houses of worship received under the law.

Lower courts have generally ruled in favor of the Obama administration, arguing that the extra form does not constitute a substantial burden for companies and organizations."

End excerpt.

That the leftist groups keep trying to force contraception and abortion financing on those whose religious beliefs preclude them is proof of the determination of the left.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 02:12 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 317 words, total size 2 kb.

Hillary’s Radioactive Scandal – Part 2 of 2

Jack Kemp forwards this:
Hillary’s Radioactive Scandal – Part 2 of 2

Posted on April 28, 2015 by Craig Andresen
By Craig Andresen – The National Patriot and Right Side Patriots on

Yesterday, in part 1 of this expose, I related the background info compiled by Peter Schweizer, author of "Clinton Cash” and by the NY Times but there is, I believe, more…MUCH more to all of this than the "donations” for "deals” we have all heard of by now.
Let’s get right to it.
The biggest player in the uranium mining ‘deal’ engineered by the Clintons and approved of by then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is Rosatom…the Russian uranium company that now, thanks to Hillary, controls 20% of all uranium mining in the United States. How big IS Rosatam?
HUGE…on the world stage.
Rosatom builds more nuclear power plants worldwide than any other company. Right now…Rosatom has projects in China, Vietnam, India, TURKEY and…IRAN. But that simply is not the scope of what they do. Rosatom is ALSO the primary EXPORTER of uranium in Russia and Russia controls not only 20% of OUR uranium mining but…since Russia holds sway over Kazakhstan and as Kazakhistan is the world’s TOP PRODUCER of uranium…Russia controls more of the world’s supply than anyone else.
Here’s a little something else…
What is done with old nuclear warheads? When a country needs to rid themselves of old warheads, what do they do? What do WE do with OURS? Well, the U.S. has but one trea 2company that "downblends” old nuclear warheads to use the uranium for power and it can’t handle the need so…we send OUR old warheads to RUSSIA and THEY handle that for us. So too do other countries which means…along with a corner on the uranium PRODUCTION market worldwide…RUSSIA also has a corner on the DOWNBLENDING market as well.
And why is THAT so important?
Ever hear of the Megatons-to-Megawatts agreement?
Officially, it is an "Agreement between the Government of the Russian Federation and the Government of the United States of America Concerning the Disposition of Highly-Enriched Uranium Extracted from Nuclear Weapons” and guess who put it in place…
BILL CLINTON back in 1993 and guess when it ended…
December of 2013…right before HILLARY CLINTON stepped down and just as she completed the ‘deal’ allowing RUSSIA control of 20% of the uranium mined in the United States.
Here’s a little something on which to chew…
trea 3While we all know that Putin doesn’t like Obama…at least it seems that way…I believe there is something much more nefarious going on here. There is something very important that both Putin and Obama share and it is also shared by the liberal elite of which the Clintons most certainly are a part…they all have a great deal of disdain for the role America has held in the world…that of the so-called policemen of the world and to that end…Obama…Putin and it seems the Clintons may well be in cahoots of ending that role.

BILL Clinton ceded the role of downblending warhead uranium to Russia…HILLARY made SURE that RUSSIA gained control of 20% of OUR uranium mining and Russia…controlling Kazakhistan…holding the world’s bulk of uranium production…the bulk of the world’s downblending…and the world’s bulk of uranium EXPORTING in its hands…ALSO owns 40% of all the world’s uranium ENRICHMENT as its own.
The Clintons and the Obama regime it seems has been engaging in making RUSSIA the world’s PRIMARY controller of all things nuclear since 1993.
In 2010…Russia was only the sixth largest producer of uranium but…in 2010…they didn’t have control of 20% of OUR uranium production. If you added in Russia’s downblending program in 2010…they were then the second largest uranium producer on earth and trea 4now…with 20% of OUR production in their control…well…clearly you can see where this is going.
Putin is cornering the market on uranium and he has it…from taking it out of the ground to refining it to exporting it and to downblending it and guess what…we…the United States…we are rowing the same boat as are China, India, France, South Korea, Japan and new players in the game…North Korea, Turkey and Iran in that WE cannot produce enough uranium for OUR needs and therefore…WE must IMPORT uranium.
Just take a guess at who we will end up buying our own uranium from in short order.
RUSSIA…thanks to the Clintons and the Obama regime and it won’t come cheap as Putin is setting the world up for a bidding war.
Not only is this a financial boondoggle of epic proportions for Putin and Mother Russia…it is a worldwide power grab of epic proportions for Putin and Mother Russia as they will now be THE deciding factor in who gets any grade of refined uranium…a role on the world trea 5stage WE used to hold.
While it would appear at first blush that the Obama regime’s part in all of this has been simply turning a blind eye toward Hillary’s ‘deal’ making for cash…there is a great deal more to it than just that.
Obama’s Iranian nuke ‘deal’ now comes into play.
THAT ‘deal’ should it go through and I believe, thanks to the nuttless wonders in congress it will…by hook or by crook…it will hold with it the immediate lifting of sanctions allowing Russia free trade with Iran. In fact, Russia’s announcement of their deal to provide Iran with the S-300 anti-missile defense system is just the beginning.
We now know that North Korea has been shipping ICBM technology to Iran and that Obama has known about it…we believe Iran already HAS enough highly enriched uranium for a nuclear weapon and, under the framework of the Obama Iran nuke ‘deal,’, Iran will have the ability, in about a decade, to go no holds barred into the nuclear weapons business and their trade partner, Russia, will become their go-to for the materials they need…making sure that Iran will have what they need to control the growing caliphate but not enough to be a serious concern to Russia herself.
Now then…here’s the big question…
Has Russia been exporting uranium from the United States against the protocol supplied by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission?
Senator John Barrasso of Wyoming, where a good deal of the Russian 20% control of U.S. uranium mining is located, thinks they have.
Last week, in an interview with Greta Van Susteren, Barrasso says that HE believes Russia may well, through shell and shill companies, be sending OUR uranium…THEIR uranium thanks to Hillary Clinton’s ‘cash for the deal’ set up…ILLEGALLY to…IRAN!!!
According to Barrasso… "Now you have [Russian President] Vladimir Putin owning 20 percent of American uranium – controlling that. And we know that Russia sends uranium to people who are not our friends, to our bitter enemies, including Iran.”
While there has been no official request for a license to export uranium by Russia…Barrasso went on to state… ”They (the Russians) have a number of different companies and shell organizations. When you talk to people on the ground, uranium has left the United States. It has gone to Canada, has gone overseas.”
trea 7For the record…the U.S. exports uranium to Canada…Canada exports uranium to China…China deals with North Korea and North Korea IS supplying Iran with ICBM technology, with Obama’s full knowledge so it is no stretch to believe that some uranium, mined in the United States IS finding its way TO Iran.
If this scenario proves to be correct…that North Korea is sending Russian mined uranium to IRAN…once again…the Clinton’s rear their hand in the transactions due to the 1994 ‘deal’ BILL Clinton made with North Korea that HE told the world would PREVENT North Korea from ever having a nuclear weapons program and just like the Obama ‘deal’ with Iran ( IF Iran doesn’t already HAVE a nuclear bomb and we believe they DO)…the time span from signing the ‘deal’ to a North Korean nuclear bomb was…12 years.
From WND…Here are the side by side words related to the respective ‘deals’ provided by Clinton and Obama.
trea 8
Oh, what a tangled web of deceit, treason and corruption the Clintons and Obama have woven.
Bill Clinton got the ‘deal’ started with Russia in 1993…Hillary CLOSED the ‘deal throughout her reign as Secretary of State by handing over 20% of OUR uranium mining to the Russians thus giving Putin the upper hand in production, refinement, export and power on the world stage while between Bill Clinton and Obama…nuclear weapons ‘deals’ with our enemies have allowed those enemies to build and possess the very nuclear weapons their respective ‘deals’ were supposed to have prevented.
Not only have the Clinton’s lined their pockets throughout the process but…OUR national security along with the security of the world and regional stability in the Asian theater as well as in the Middle East and North Africa has been compromised as well but whatever you do, don’t hold those responsible…accountable because…once again, according to Josh Earnest, Obama’s town liar…

"I’ve been in a position where there have been other, to put it mildly, conservative authors that have launched, written books based on what they report to be serious allegations against the president of the United States. And I’m often in the position of responding to those incidents and trying to defend the president from accusations that are not rooted or accompanied by any evidence. Right now, that is what is happ ening to Secretary Clinton.”
In other words…the author of "Clinton Cash” Peter Schweizer and the "vast right wing conspiracy” made the bed…it’s just that Bill, Hillary and Obama are laying in it.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 09:15 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1605 words, total size 11 kb.

Lerner e-mails and Saul Alinsky

Timothy Birdnow

It looks like thousands of e-mails have been recovered by the Inspector General from Lois Lerner's "lost" account showing massive targeting of conservative groups by the IRS.

According to Fox News courtesy of Gateway Pundit:

"The Treasury’s Inspector General for Tax Administration notified the Senate Finance Committee Tuesday that they have recovered thousands of Lois Lerner emails that were not previously produced to Congress, committee members told Fox News.

The inspector general recovered approximately 6,400 Lerner emails and will carefully examine them as part of the committee’s bipartisan IRS investigation.

The Hill reported that around 650 emails were from 2010 and 2011, while most of them were from 2012. The inspector general has found about 35,000 emails in all as it sought to recover emails from backup tapes.

The IRS, in a statement to the newspaper, said that it was pleased to hear the Treasury’s inspector general found the emails saying it was an "encouraging development that will help resolve remaining questions and dispel uncertainty surrounding the emails.”

End excerpt.

Now comes the true test; will Lerner hold fast or will she talk? Hold fast; there will be both carrot and stick employed here, and Lerner will have promises in both directions in the good old Chicago mob style. The key to organized crime is to maintain Omerta, and the Administration comes solidly from the Chicago mob experience.

Saul Alinsky was the right hand man of Frank Nitty, Al Capone's right hand man, after all. Alinsky was the godfather of "community organizers" in America, and Obama was a part of his machine. The people running the country are the step children of the infamous crime boss.

And this fits in with the rioting and looting that is happening in Ferguson, Baltimore, and around the country. Saul Alinsky sought destruction first and foremost.

Here is a little-remembered interview with Alinsky in Playboy in 1972. Does this sound familiar?

Here are some snippets (I couldn't find the entire original text online; it has been scrubbed):

PLAYBOY: The assumption behind the Administration's Silent Majority thesis is that most of the middle class is inherently conservative. How can even the most skillful organizational tactics unite them in support of your radical goals?

ALINSKY: Conservative? That's a crock of crap. Right now they're nowhere. But they can and will go either of two ways in the coming years -- to a native American fascism or toward radical social change. Right now they're frozen, festering in apathy, leading what Thoreau called "lives of quiet desperation:" They're oppressed by taxation and inflation, poisoned by pollution, terrorized by urban crime, frightened by the new youth culture, baffled by the computerized world around them. They've worked all their lives to get their own little house in the suburbs, their color TV, their two cars, and now the good life seems to have turned to ashes in their mouths. Their personal lives are generally unfulfilling, their jobs unsatisfying, they've succumbed to tranquilizers and pep pills, they drown their anxieties in alcohol, they feel trapped in longterm endurance marriages or escape into guilt-ridden divorces. They're losing their kids and they're losing their dreams. They're alienated, depersonalized, without any feeling of participation in the political process, and they feel rejected and hopeless. Their utopia of status and security has become a tacky-tacky suburb, their split-levels have sprouted prison bars and their disillusionment is becoming terminal.

They're the first to live in a total mass-media-oriented world, and every night when they turn on the TV and the news comes on, they see the almost unbelievable hypocrisy and deceit and even outright idiocy of our national leaders and the corruption and disintegration of all our institutions, from the police and courts to the White House itself. Their society appears to be crumbling and they see themselves as no more than small failures within the larger failure. All their old values seem to have deserted them, leaving them rudderless in a sea of social chaos. Believe me, this is good organizational material.

The despair is there; now it's up to us to go in and rub raw the sores of discontent, galvanize them for radical social change. We'll give them a way to participate in the democratic process, a way to exercise their rights as citizens and strike back at the establishment that oppresses them, instead of giving in to apathy. We'll start with specific issues -- taxes, jobs, consumer problems, pollution -- and from there move on to the larger issues: pollution in the Pentagon and the Congress and the board rooms of the megacorporations. Once you organize people, they'll keep advancing from issue to issue toward the ultimate objective: people power. We'll not only give them a cause, we'll make life goddamn exciting for them again -- life instead of existence. We'll turn them on.

PLAYBOY: You don't expect them to beware of radicals bearing gifts?

ALINSKY: Sure, they'll be suspicious, even hostile at first. That's been my experience with every community I've ever moved into. My critics are right when they call me an outside agitator. When a community, any kind of community, is hopeless and helpless, it requires somebody from outside to come in and stir things up. That's my job -- to unsettle them, to make them start asking questions, to teach them to stop talking and start acting, because the fat cats in charge never hear with their ears, only through their rears. I'm not saying it's going to be easy; thermopolitically, the middle classes are rooted in inertia, conditioned to look for the safe and easy way, afraid to rock the boat. But they're beginning to realize that boat is sinking and unless they start bailing fast, they're going to go under with it. The middle class today is really schizoid, torn between its indoctrination and its objective situation. The instinct of middle-class people is to support and celebrate the status quo, but the realities of their daily lives drill it home that the status quo has exploited and betrayed them.

PLAYBOY: In what way?

ALINSKY: In all the ways I've been talking about, from taxation to pollution. The middle class actually feels more defeated and lost today on a wide range of issues than the poor do. And this creates a situation that's supercharged with both opportunity and danger. There's a second revolution seething beneath the surface of middle-class America -- the revolution of a bewildered, frightened and as-yet-inarticulate group of desperate people groping for alternatives -- for hope. Their fears and their frustrations over their impotence can turn into political paranoia and demonize them, driving them to the right, making them ripe for the plucking by some guy on horseback promising a return to the vanished verities of yesterday. The right would give them scapegoats for their misery -- blacks, hippies, Communists -- and if it wins, this country will become the first totalitarian state with a national anthem celebrating "the land of the free and the home of the brave." But we're not going to abandon the field to them without a long, hard fight -- a fight I think we're going to win. Because we'll show the middle class their real enemies: the corporate power elite that runs and ruins the country -- the true beneficiaries of Nixon's so-called economic reforms. And when they swing their sights on that target, the sh-- will really hit the fan.

PLAYBOY: In the past, you've focused your efforts on specific communities where the problems -- and the solutions -- were clearly defined. But now you're taking on over 150,000,000 people. Aren't you at all fazed by the odds against you?

ALINSKY: Are you kidding? I've been doing this for 30 years now, and the odds haven't bothered me yet. In fact, I've always taken 100-to-one odds as even money. Sure, it's true that the middle class is more amorphous than some barrio in Southern California, and you're going to be organizing all across the country instead of in one city. But the rules are the same. You start with what you've got, you build up one community around the issues, and then you use the organization you've established as an example and a power base to reach other communities. Once you're successful in, say, Chicago -- one of the cities where we're organizing the middle class -- then you can go on to Cincinnati or Boston or Dubuque and say, "OK, you see what we did in Chicago, let's get movin' here." It's like an ink-blot effect, spreading out from local focal points of power across the whole country. Once we have our initial successes, the process will gather momentum and begin to snowball.

It won't be easy and, sure, it's a gamble -- what in life isn't? Einstein once said God doesn't throw dice, but he was wrong. God throws dice all the time, and sometimes I wonder if they're loaded. The art of the organizer is cuttin' in on the action. And believe me, this time we're really going to screw the bastards, hit 'em where it hurts. You know, I sort of look at this as the culmination of my career. I've been in this fight since the Depression; I've been machine-gunned, beaten up, jailed -- they've even given me honorary degrees -- and in a way it's all been preparation for this. I love this goddamn country, and we're going to take it back. I never gave up faith at the worst times in the past, and I'm sure as hell not going to start now. With some luck, maybe I've got ten more good productive years ahead of me. So I'm going to use them where they count the most.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 07:10 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1625 words, total size 10 kb.

CNN Newsreader Blames Military Vet Police Officers for Baltimore Violence

Jack Kemp

Brooke Baldwin, a CNN idiot, actually blamed Veterans for the rioting in Baltimore, according to Newsbusters:

CNN’s Brooke Baldwin suggested during the Tuesday afternoon edition of CNN Newsroom
that U.S. military veterans who become police officers were to blame for the recent string of violence involving police officers in that they return home "from war” and are "ready to do battle.” - See more at:

CNN’s Brooke Baldwin suggested during the Tuesday afternoon edition of CNN Newsroom that U.S. military veterans who become police officers were to blame for the recent string of violence involving police officers in that they return home "from war" and are "ready to do battle."
that U.S. military veterans who become police officers were to blame for the recent string of violence involving police officers in that they return home "from war” and are "ready to do battle.”
While speaking with Democratic Congressman Elijah Cummings (Md.), Baldwin recalled a conversation with a Baltimore City councilman about police officers not living "in the communities” they represent when she remarked that: "I love our nation's veterans, but some of them are coming back from war, they don't know the communities, and they're ready to do battle.”
- See more at:


Baldwin tried to walk back her comments in a half apology after they created a firestorm on the internet, but many readers weren't having it. Maybe she thinks conservatives live in caves and draw on the walls instead of watch television and read the stories on the internet.

Here below is what I personally tweeted to Brooke Baldwin. Because of Twitter space limitations, I couldn't add the last two word now in parentheses.

@BrookeBCNN U aren't sorry for what U said about Vets. U R a snotty arrogant media low life. U can't want back your vile attitude. Wallow. (in it)

On page 191 of "The Girls Come Marching Home: Stories of Women Warriors Returning from the War in Iraq," a woman veteran who had returned to the U.S. and was in a college classroom where another female student said that American soldiers should be killed - they deserve to die. The veteran said to the other coed that she had been a soldier Iraq and challenged the critic to kill the veteran right there on the spot - in explicit language. Needless to say, the offer of hand-to-hand combat to the death was declined. Brooke Baldwin has just received her challenges from many readers across America - and found out she wasn't up for the controversy or the fight.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:15 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 442 words, total size 3 kb.

Prager on Israel's legitimacy

Jack Kemp

This from Dennis Prager:

Why Is Pakistan More Legitimate than Israel?
Dennis Prager | Apr 28, 2015

Whenever I have received a call from a listener to my radio show challenging Israel's legitimacy, I have asked these people if they ever called a radio show to challenge any other country's legitimacy. In particular, I ask, have they ever questioned the legitimacy of Pakistan?

The answer, of course, is always "no." In fact, no caller ever understood why I even mentioned Pakistan.
There are two reasons for this.

First, of all the 200-plus countries in the world, only Israel's legitimacy is challenged. So mentioning any other country seems strange to a caller. Second, almost no one outside of India and Pakistan knows anything about the founding of Pakistan.

Only months before the U.N. adopted a proposal to partition Palestine into a Jewish and an Arab state in 1947, India was partitioned into a Muslim and a Hindu state. The Hindu state was, of course, India. And the Muslim state became known as Pakistan. It comprises 310,000 square miles, about 40,000 square miles larger than Texas.
In both cases, the declaration of an independent state resulted in violence. As soon as the newly established state of Israel was declared in May 1948, it was invaded by six Arab armies. And the partition of India led to a terrible violence between Muslims and Hindus.

According to the final report of the United Nations Conciliation Commission from Dec. 28, 1949, the 1948 war of Israel's independence created 726,000 Arabs refugees. Many sources put the figure at about 200,000 less. A roughly equal number of Jewish refugees -- approximately 700,000 -- were created when they were forcibly expelled from the Arab countries where they had lived for countless generations. In addition, approximately 10,000 Arabs were killed in the fighting that ensued after the Arab invasion of Israel.

Now let's turn to the creation of Pakistan. According to the United Nations High Commissioner on Refugees, the creation of Pakistan resulted in 14 million refugees -- Hindus fleeing Pakistan and Muslims fleeing India. Assuming a 50-50 split, the creation of Pakistan produced about seven million Hindu refugees -- at least 10 times the number of Arab refugees that resulted from the war surrounding Israel's creation. And the Mideast war, it should be recalled, was started by the Arab nations surrounding Israel. Were it not for the Arab rejection of Israel's creation (and existence within any borders) and the subsequent Arab invasion, there would have been no Arab refugees.

And regarding deaths, the highest estimate of Arab deaths during the 1948 war following the partition of Palestine is 10,000. The number of deaths that resulted from the creation of Pakistan is around one million.
In addition, according to the Indian government, at least 86,000 women were raped. Most historians believe the number to be far higher. The number of women raped when Israel was established is close to zero. From all evidence I could find, the highest estimate was 12.

Given the spectacularly larger number of refugees and deaths caused by the partition of India and the creation of Pakistan, why does no one ever question the legitimacy of Pakistan's existence?
This question is particularly valid given another fact: Never before in history was there a Pakistan. It was a completely new nation. Moreover, its creation was made possible solely because of Muslim invasion. It was Muslims who invaded India, and killed about 60 million Hindus during the thousand-year Muslim rule of India. The area now known as Pakistan was Hindu until the Muslims invaded it in A.D. 711.
On the other and, modern Israel is the third Jewish state in the geographic area known as Palestine. The first was destroyed in 586 B.C., the second in A.D. 70. And there was never a non-Jewish sovereign state in Palestine.

So, given all these facts, why is Israel's legitimacy challenged, while the legitimacy of Pakistan, a state that had never before existed and whose creation resulted in the largest mass migration in recorded history, is never challenged?

The answer is so obvious that only those who graduated from college, and especially from graduate school, need to be told: Israel is the one Jewish state in the world. So, while there are 49 Muslim-majority countries and 22 Arab states, much of the world questions or outright only rejects the right of the one Jewish state, the size of New Jersey, to exist.

If you are a member of the Presbyterian Church, send these facts to the leaders of the Presbyterian Church USA who voted to boycott Israel. If you are a student in Middle Eastern Studies -- or for that matter, almost any other humanities department -- and your professor is anti-Israel, ask your professor why Pakistan is legitimate and Israel isn't.
They won't have a good answer. Their opposition to Israel isn't based on moral considerations.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:13 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 824 words, total size 5 kb.

A Message for Pope Francis

Paul Driessen

April 28, the Vatican’s Pontifical Academy of Sciences will hold a "workshop” on climate change, to outline the Pope’s positions and pave the way for his forthcoming encyclical on the topic. A team of experts from the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow and Heartland Institute will be there.

This message to Pope Francis summarizes many of the points they will make – as discussed in my previous articles, and in an open letter to the Pope by the Cornwall Alliance’s Dr. E. Calvin Beisner, who joins the CFACT/Heartland team in Rome. The article explains how the "dangerous manmade climate change” agenda violates the scientific method, Judeo Christianity’s commitment to true science as the basis for tremendous improvements in human lives and environmental quality, and our obligation to care for the poorest and most vulnerable among us.

A message for Pope Francis

It’s not climate change – but energy restrictions based on climate fears – that threaten the poor
Paul Driessen

Pope Francis plans to deliver an encyclical on climate change this summer. To pave the way and outline the Pope’s positions, the Vatican’s Pontifical Academy of Sciences is holding  HYPERLINK "" a workshop on the topic, April 28 in Rome. The Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow and  HYPERLINK "" Heartland Institute will be there.
Cardinal Peter Turkson, director of the Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace and an author of the draft encyclical, says the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has determined that "our planet is getting warmer.” Christians have a duty to help the poor, "irrespective of the causes of climate change,” and address what Pope Francis apparently believes is an imminent climate crisis. The encyclical will likely present global warming as "a critical moral issue” and increase pressure for a new climate treaty.
That raises serious questions, which I have addressed in  HYPERLINK "" many articles – and which prompted Dr. E. Calvin Beisner and the  HYPERLINK "" Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation to write an  HYPERLINK "" open letter to Pope Francis. The articles and letter reflect our years of studying climate change assertions and realities, and the ways climate-related restrictions on energy harm poor families far more than climate change will.

At the most fundamental level, too many IPCC reports and the apparent new papal position represent the rejection of Judeo-Christianity’s illustrious tradition of scientific inquiry, which has brought monumental improvements to our understanding of nature and creation – and to humanity’s once "nasty, brutish and short” lives on this planet. As Nobel Prize-winning physicist Richard Feynman explained, we begin with a guess about a law of nature. Then we compute the consequences that would result if our hypothesis is correct – and compare actual observations, evidence and experimental data to the predicted consequences.

If the hypothesis and predictions are borne out by the observations, we have a new rule. But if the hypothesis "disagrees with the experiment, it is wrong,” Feynman says. That is honest, genuine science.
Alarmist climate science is precisely the opposite. That distorted version of science began with the hypothesis that carbon dioxide and greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels cause global warming. It served as the basis for computer models that assume rising CO2 and GHG levels will cause planetary temperatures and sea levels to soar, and hurricanes, tornadoes, floods and droughts to increase in number and intensity. The models predicted many such "scenarios” over the coming decades.
But Earth  HYPERLINK "" stopped warming 18 years ago; no major hurricane hit the USA for a record 9-1/2 years; seas are rising at barely seven inches per century; and even IPCC experts agree that long-term trends in weather disasters are not out of historic norms and are not attributable to human causes. The CO2-driven global warming disaster hypothesis and models do not reflect reality and are obviously wrong.

So alarmists began talking about "climate change,” blaming extreme weather events on human emissions and  HYPERLINK "" manipulating temperature data. They say terrible things are happening at unprecedented levels, when they are not. Worst, they say we must slash hydrocarbon energy use that has brought once unimaginable health, prosperity, living standards and life spans to billions of people, after countless millennia of crushing poverty, malnutrition, disease, and death before age 40. Fossil fuels still represent 85% of the world’s energy – and they are essential if the rest of humanity is to catch up and improve their lives.
Denying humanity the use of still bountiful hydrocarbon energy is thus not simply wrong. It is immoral – and lethal. This is the real reason that climate change is a critical moral issue. No one has a right to tell the world’s poor they cannot use fossil fuels to improve their lives, or to tell others they must reduce their living standards, based on speculation and unfounded fears about a manmade climate crisis.

As Dr. Beisner notes, "Alongside good science in our approach to climate policy must be two preferential options: for humanity and, among humanity, for the poor.” This does not mean pitting humanity against nature, any more than to pit the poor against the rich. It means any effort to protect the environment must be centered on scientific truth and human well-being, and in particular the well-being of the poor, because they are more vulnerable, and less able to protect themselves. Climate alarmism does not do that.

Over the past three decades, fossil fuels helped 1.3 billion people get electricity and escape debilitating energy poverty – over 830 million because of coal. China connected 99% of its population to the grid and increased its steel production eight times over, mostly with coal, energy analyst Roger Bezdek points out.
Abundant, reliable, affordable motor fuels and electricity empower people and support mobility, modern agriculture, homes and hospitals, computers and communications, lights and refrigerators, job creation, life and study after sundown, indoor plumbing, safe drinking water, less disease and longer lives. In conjunction with property rights and entrepreneurship, protected by laws enforced by limited, responsive, responsible governments, fossil fuels will continue transforming lives and nations the world over.

They will also enable people to respond and adapt to future climate changes and extreme weather events, floods and droughts, heat waves, new " HYPERLINK "" little ice ages” and other disasters, natural or manmade. More plant-fertilizing  HYPERLINK "" carbon dioxide in the atmosphere would enhance wildlife habitats and food production.

However, 1.3 billion people (the population of the United States, Canada, Mexico and Europe combined) still do not have electricity. In India alone, more people than live in the USA still lack electricity. In Sub-Saharan Africa, 730 million (equal to Europe) still cook and heat with wood, charcoal and animal dung. Hundreds of millions get horribly sick and four million die every year from lung and intestinal diseases, due to breathing smoke from open fires and not having clean water, refrigeration and safe food.

Imposing fossil fuel restrictions and renewable energy mandates – in the name of stabilizing planetary climate that has never been stable – would perpetuate Third World poverty, disease and death. In developed nations, it would reduce living standards, affect everything we make, grow, ship, eat and do – and cause thousands to die during cold winters, because they cannot afford to heat their homes properly.

It would be a needless tragedy – an unconscionable crime against humanity – if the world implemented policies to protect the world’s still impoverished and energy-deprived masses from hypothetical manmade climate dangers decades from now, by perpetuating poverty and disease, and killing millions tomorrow.
Just eight years ago,  HYPERLINK "" Pope Benedict XVI warned that any proposed "solutions” to global warming and climate change must be based on solid evidence, and not on computer models, unsupported assertions and dubious ideology. He suggested that concerns about man-made emissions melting ice caps and causing waves of unprecedented disasters were little more than fear-mongering. He argued that ecological concerns must be balanced against the needs of current and future generations of people.

Pope Francis apparently does not share his predecessor’s view about climate change fears. However, if he is truly committed to advancing science, the poor and creation, he should reject climate chaos claims unless and until alarmists can provide solid evidence to back up their assertions and models.
He should recognize that the issue is not global warming or climate change. It is whether human actions now dominate climate and weather fluctuations that have been common throughout Earth and human history – and whether those actions will cause dangerous or catastrophic changes in the future. Science-based answers to these questions are essential if we are to forecast future climate and weather accurately – and safeguard poor families, modern living standards and environmental quality.

Dr. Beisner has posted his  HYPERLINK "" letter to Pope Francis, for others to endorse this commonsense approach.

It is unwise and unjust to adopt policies requiring reduced use of fossil fuels, unless it can be conclusively shown that doing so will stabilize Earth’ fickle climate and prevent future climate disasters, Dr. Beisner concludes. "Such policies would condemn hundreds of millions of our fellow human beings to ongoing poverty.” We therefore respectfully ask Pope Francis to advise the world’s leaders to reject those policies.

Paul Driessen is senior policy analyst for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (HYPERLINK "", author of HYPERLINK ""Eco-Imperialism: Green power - Black death, and coauthor of HYPERLINK ""Cracking Big Green: Saving the world from the Save-the-Earth money machine.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 06:11 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1595 words, total size 12 kb.

April 27, 2015

The Wrong Scavenger on Page One

Jack Kemp

No, I'm not talking about famous politicians - at least not directly.

My local free newspaper has a cover story about coyotes, eagles and owls starting to move into New York City, but the real story is on the Editorial Page. It seems that even though President Obama signed legislation that calls for using other than Social Security numbers as account markers on Medicare's computers, that won't happen for a few years - and so Medicare recipients are at an  unnecessary risk. The article even voices skepticism about a government fix of a government created problem, showing that even mainstream New York free papers (read as liberal papers) don't totally trust the government these days. And the article didn't say this problem was limited to New York City.

It's a good thing that the coyotes can't read account numbers when they overturn a garbage can.

Here's the significant part of the small article:


At this pace, Medicare isn't protecting anyone's identity

Medicare officials are going to protect 50 million elderly and disabled enrollees from identity theft. Someday.

Unfortunately, middle-aged identity thieves will likely hit Medicare age themselves before the key change -- removing Social Security numbers from Medicare cards -- is completed. Legislation President Barack Obama signed April 16 gave Medicare officials four years to start issuing new cards with randomly generated health insurance claim numbers. And they have four years after that to reissue cards held by current enrollees. That's absurd.

Social Security numbers are like gold for identity thieves. That's why the Social Security Administration has long advised people not to carry their cards. The departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs have taken steps to remove Social Security numbers from their health insurance and identification cards, and private sector health insurers have also removed the numbers from their cards, according to the Government Accountability Office. But at Medicare, it's been the sort of slow stroll that gives bureaucracies a bad name.

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:54 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 336 words, total size 3 kb.

Global Warming? The Pope is Wrong

By Alan Caruba

I have devoted the better part of more than two and a half decades speaking out against the charlatans that have created and maintained the greatest hoax ever imposed on modern man. At the heart of this hoax has been the United Nations environmental program and at the heart of that program is an agenda to initiate a massive redistribution of wealth from industrialized, successful nations to those who have suffered, as often as not, from being ruled by despots of one description or another.

It is with profound sorrow and disappointment that I must now speak out against Pope Francis, the leader of 1.2 billion Catholics, whom observers have noted has "a green agenda.” He has become an outspoken advocate on environmental issues, saying that taking action is "essential to faith” and calling the destruction of nature a modern sin.

Before proceeding, let me note that I am not Catholic. My thoughts regarding the Pope are rooted in my knowledge of the long record of lies, false predictions, and claims by various environmentalists over the years.

When the Vatican announced it would hold a conference on April 28 called "Protect the Earth, Dignify Humanity: The Moral Dimensions of Climate Change and Sustainable Development”, I wondered why the Vatican is not holding a conference to organize the protection of Christians—particularly in the Middle East—against the wholesale genocide that is occurring. The Pope is not alone in this. There appears to be little urgency in addressing a threat comparable to the Holocaust of the last century that consigned six million Jews to death for being Jews.

I frankly do not know what is meant by "the moral dimensions of climate change.” Climate change is something that was occurring long before there was a human population on planet Earth. It is the measurement of the previous global cycles through which the Earth has passed for billions of years. It is profoundly natural. Applying a moral dimension to it makes no sense whatever.

As for "sustainable development”, that is a term that environmentalists use to deny any development that benefits the human population.

Environmentalism is deeply opposed to the use of any energy resource, coal, oil, natural gas, as well as other elements of the Earth we use to enhance and improve our lives with habitat of every description from a hut to a skyscraper. Over the last five thousand years we have gone from being largely dependent on wood to the use of fossil fuel energy that keeps us safe against nature—blizzards, floods, hurricanes, forest fires, et cetera.

At the heart of environmentalism, however, is a deep disdain and antagonism to the human race. From its earliest advocates, one can find allusions to humanity as "a cancer” on the Earth. The Catholic Church has been an advocate for the human race, most notably opposing abortion that kills humans in the womb. Its charitable work is legendary.

To grasp how far the forthcoming conference is from the most basic beliefs of Catholicism, one need only take note of the persons scheduled to speak. They include the UN Secretary General, Ban Ki Moon, the leader of the institution in which the hoax of global warming was created and advanced. Another is Jeffrey Sachs, the director of the United Nations Sustainable Development Solutions Network, another voice for global warming, but neither is going to tell those attending the conference that there is no warming and that the Earth has been a natural cooling cycle for the past eighteen years, tied entirely to a comparable cycle of the Sun.

The Green’s response to the voices of those scientists who courageously spoke out to debunk their lies has been to denounce and try to silence them. There is no science to support the global warming hoax.

The one-day summit will include participants from major world religions. The Pope will issue an encyclical on the environment later this year.

Is there a religious or spiritual aspect to opposing the forthcoming conference and encyclical? One need look no further than Genesis. In a Wall Street Journal commentary,William McGurndrew the lesson that it offers "a reminder that God’s creation is meant to serve man—not man the environment.

Quoting Genesis 2:15: "The Lord God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it” concluding that "the Earth is to be worked and that this work and the fruit it bears are also blessed.” The spiritual truth to be drawn from this is that man is the steward of the Earth. That does not mean its resources should be abandoned because of bogus claims that the Earth is doomed.

McGurn reminds us that "it is the have-nots who pay the highest price for the statist interventions so beloved the Church of St. Green.” There are more than a billion on Earth who do not have any access to electricity which, in addition to hydropower, is generated by coal, oil and natural gas. Lacking the means to deter the impact of insects and weeds on agriculture, much of the Earth’s annual crops are lost. Lacking access to the beneficial chemicals that protect humans from the diseases transmitted by insects, millions die needlessly.

The Heartland Institute, a free market think tank is leading the effort to alert people to the dangerous message of the Vatican conference because "many people of faith who are familiar with the science and economics of climate change are worried this event will become a platform for alarmism over a controversial scientific issue” noting that "there is no scientific ‘consensus’ on whether there is any need to reduce mankind’s use of fossil fuels.”

The conference agenda is "profoundly anti-poor and anti-life” says the Institute. Plainly said, the Vatican conference incomprehensively would advocate policies whose only result would be the reduction of human life in order to "sustain” the Earth.

"These unnecessary policies would cause the suffering and even death of billions of people. All people of faith should rise up in opposition to such policies.”

The Heartland Institute is sending a team of scientists and climate policy experts to Rome where they will be joined by Marc Morano of the think tank,CFACT. Says Morano,'Instead of entering into an invalid marriage with climate fear promoters—a marriage that is destined for an annulment—Pope Francis should administer last rites to the promotion of man-made climate fears and their so-called solutions.This unholy alliance must be prevented.”

© Alan Caruba, 2015

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 10:53 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1085 words, total size 8 kb.

<< Page 1 of 522 >>
155kb generated in CPU 0.05, elapsed 0.1324 seconds.
30 queries taking 0.0879 seconds, 177 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.