June 22, 2017
Turns out that 5.7 MILLION illegal votes were cast in the 2008 election, effectively stealing the Presidency for Barack Hussein Obama (Peace Be Upon Him!)
According to the Washington Times:
"The research organization Just Facts, a widely cited, independent think tank led by self-described conservatives and libertarians, revealed its number-crunching in a report on national immigration.
Just Facts President James D. Agresti and his team looked at data from an extensive Harvard/YouGov study that every two years questions a sample size of tens of thousands of voters. Some acknowledge they are noncitizens and are thus ineligible to vote."
Bear in mind Obama invited illegal aliens to vote. The chief law enforcer asked people to break the law for political gain - and we are supposed to be upset about some Russian hackers using the word Password as a password to get into the private e-mails of Democrats. Yah!
And the current President knows he won the popular vote in the November election, too:
In addition to winning the Electoral College in a landslide, I won the popular vote if you deduct the millions of people who voted illegally
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 27, 2016
"Trump could be referencing a series of fake stories on conspiracy websites that said he actually beat Clinton in the popular vote count,” CNN dismissed. "Trump’s transition team did not return requests for comment Sunday afternoon.”
But rather than dismiss the claim outright, let’s look at this claim.
Over at The Conservative Treehouse, they cite a paper in the scholarly journal "Electoral Studies” that suggests as many as 2.8 million illegal immigrants may have voted in the 2008 election.
Do Non Citizens Vote in US Elections? Richman Research Study… by The Conservative Treehouse on Scribd
Here’s some of what the paper states:
"How many non-citizen votes were likely cast in 2008? Taking the most conservative estimate (those who both said they voted and cast a veriﬁed vote) yields a conﬁdence interval based on sampling error between 0.2% and 2.8% for the portion of non-citizens participating in elections.
Taking the least conservative measure e at least one indicator showed that the respondent voted yields an estimate that between 7.9% and 14.7% percent of non-citizens voted in 2008.
Since the adult noncitizen population of the United States was roughly 19.4 million (CPS, 2011), the number of non-citizen voters (including both uncertainty based on normally distributed sampling error, and the various combinations of veriﬁed and reported voting) could range from just over 38,000 at the very minimum to nearly 2.8 million at the maximum”…
So while the press can deride Trump for his claim, it’s almost certain that there were illegal immigrants who voted in the election and I’m willing to bet you they didn’t vote for Donald Trump.
Was it more than 2 million? Who knows?
So now we know that the 2008 election was rigged, a massive fake news story. Why would we think this last election was suddenly different?
Just Facts also says that 1.2 to 3 million illegal votes were cast in 2012, too.
No wonder they are so desperate to get rid of Trump; his push to clean up the vote will fundamentally alter the political landscape for decades to come. Remember, too, that it isn't just the Presidential elections impacted, but House and Senate races as well as state government offices and even county and municipal. If people are voting who are not eligible then countless elections are being stolen.
Question; did the Russians steal these votes? Obama WAS awful chummy with Medvedev when he asked him to "tell Vlad - I'll have more flexibility after the election." Was that an invitation by Obama to hack the vote?
June 21, 2017
According to Pravda there have been over 101.820 suspected cases of CHOLERA in Yemen this year.
From the article:
"The war in Yemen has had a catastrophic effect on the population, with the virtual collapse of the healthcare system. 14.5 million people no longer have regular access to basic sanitation or clean water sources, health and sanitation workers have been unpaid for eight months and medical supplies are not entering the country at a rate which meets needs.
Dr. Meritxell Relano, the Representative of UNICEF in Yemen, says that "The cholera outbreak is making a bad situation for children drastically worse. Many of the children who have died from the disease were also acutely malnourished."
Strange how the American media has nothing to say about this; they are too busy crying about the results of the last election.
The degrading of Yemen happend on Barack Obama's watch, so don't expect this to be newsworthy to the MSM.
And it WAS Obama's policy. From the Atlantic:
"At times, the Obama administration’s support for the Saudis has thrown diplomatic efforts to end the war into confusion. In August, Secretary of State John Kerry flew to Jeddah to meet with officials from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Britain, and the United Nations. Some Yemenis were cautiously optimistic that Kerry—who says the war in Yemen does not have a military solution—would use his leverage with Riyadh to push for an easing of airstrikes. Instead, he left them with a vague "roadmap” for peace that offered the Houthis certain concessions, angering some in Riyadh, but did little to pressure the Saudis to implement the plan. Within 24 hours, the Saudi-led coalition had intensified its aerial campaign, while its allies on the ground launched a renewed offensive on the Houthi-controlled northwest of the country. The Houthis responded by escalating their own attacks over the border into the kingdom."
"In Yemen, where Washington has outsized influence due to its political and military relationship with Gulf nations, the White House is unlikely to take the kind of gamble Kerry recently took on Syria: a ceasefire between the Russian and Iranian-backed Bashar al-Assad and the rebels supported by the United States and its regional allies. That deal now lies in tatters, in the wake of the U.S. bombing of Assad’s forces and a apparent Russian air strikes against a UN-coordinated aid convoy. It has severely diminished hopes for any similar attempt to end the conflict in Yemen.
Even if Yemen cannot be solved via diplomatic miracle, it is puzzling that Obama’s apparent distaste for the kingdom has had remarkably little influence. A critic of the U.S.-Saudi alliance as a senator, the president’s White House has had a troubled relationship with the absolute monarchy since the Arab Spring uprisings of 2011—which saw a number of Saudi allies, including Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak, ousted from power—and more so since the Iranian nuclear deal. The once-improbable now seems imminent: unless the Obama administration ends refueling and logistical support for the Saudis, it appears all but certain to hand off the war in Yemen to his successor."
Liberal U.S. News actually called the Obama policy lawless in a 2016 article:
Yemen is the much-ignored third (or maybe fifth?) wheel of the American imbroglio in the Middle East, but recent days have seen a marked escalation of hostilities in the impoverished country, and with it, an escalation of U.S. entanglement. What has not escalated is the Obama administration's authority to wage this imprudent war, which is by no possible stretch of legal imagination permitted by the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force the White House claims as flimsy legal cover for its other undeclared and endless conflicts.
The newest development of American intervention is a series of skirmishes between Shiite Houthi rebels (the militants the Sunni Saudi-led and U.S.-supported coalition opposes) and two U.S. Navy Destroyers. It began recently when the rebels fired two missiles in an American ship's direction but missed. In response, the Destroyer sent back three missiles and one decoy of its own. Then, after militants launched an additional failed missile, another U.S. Navy Destroyer launched three Tomahawk missiles, taking out three coastal radar sites used by Houthi forces to direct their strikes.
These missiles mark the first time the United States has directly intervened in Yemen's Saudi-manipulated civil war. Previously, all U.S. intervention came in the form of assistance to Saudi coalition troops. Those forces are still active with plenty of strikes of their own. In fact, Sunday's exchange of missiles came close on the heels a Saudi-led strike that killed more than 140 people and injured at least 525 more on Saturday when it made a direct hit on a funeral. "The place has been turned into a lake of blood," said one rescue worker on the scene."
So, Obama's interventionist and incompetent policies has led to a hundred thousand cases of cholera.
Here is something of which I was unaware; Robert Mueller (along with James Comey) completely bungled the Anthrax investigation in the aftermath of the attacks.
According to Carl M. Cannon of Real Clear Politics:
"The third and most important factor tempering my enthusiasm for the new special prosecutor is that Comey and Mueller badly bungled the biggest case they ever handled. They botched the investigation of the 2001 anthrax letter attacks that took five lives and infected 17 other people, shut down the U.S. Capitol and Washington’s mail system, solidified the Bush administration’s antipathy for Iraq, and eventually, when the facts finally came out, made the FBI look feckless, incompetent, and easily manipulated by outside political pressure.
This, too, was an enormously complex case. But here are some facts: Despite the jihadist slogans accompanying the mailed anthrax, it had nothing to do with Saddam Hussein or any foreign element; the FBI ignored a 2002 tip from a scientific colleague of the actual anthrax killer, who turned out to be a Fort Detrick scientist named Bruce Edwards Ivins; the reason is that they had quickly obsessed on an innocent man named Steven Hatfill; the bureau was bullied into focusing on the government scientist by Democratic Sen. Patrick Leahy (whose office, along with that of Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, was targeted by an anthrax-laced letter) and was duped into focusing on Hatfill by two sources — a conspiracy-minded college professor with a political agenda who’d never met Hatfill and by Nicholas Kristof, who put her conspiracy theories in the paper while mocking the FBI for not arresting Hatfill.
In truth, Hatfill was an implausible suspect from the outset. He was a virologist who never handled anthrax, which is a bacterium. (Ivins, by contrast, shared ownership of anthrax patents, was diagnosed as having paranoid personality disorder, and had a habit of stalking and threatening people with anonymous letters — including the woman who provided the long-ignored tip to the FBI).
So what evidence did the FBI have against Hatfill? There was none, so the agency did a Hail Mary, importing two bloodhounds from California whose handlers claimed could sniff the scent of the killer on the anthrax-tainted letters. These dogs were shown to Hatfill, who promptly petted them. When the dogs responded favorably, their handlers told the FBI that they’d "alerted” on Hatfill and that he must be the killer.
You’d think that any good FBI agent would have kicked these quacks in the fanny and found their dogs a good home. Or at least checked news accounts of criminal cases in California where these same dogs had been used against defendants who’d been convicted — and later exonerated. As Pulitzer Prize-winning Los Angeles Times investigative reporter David Willman detailed in his authoritative book on the case, a California judge who’d tossed out a murder conviction based on these sketchy canines called the prosecution’s dog handler "as biased as any witness that this court has ever seen.”
Instead, Mueller, who micromanaged the anthrax case and fell in love with the dubious dog evidence, personally assured Ashcroft and presumably George W. Bush that in Steven Hatfill the bureau had its man. Comey, in turn, was asked by a skeptical Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz if Hatfill was another Richard Jewell — the security guard wrongly accused of the Atlanta Olympics bombing. Comey replied that he was "absolutely certain” they weren’t making a mistake.
Such certitude seems to be Comey’s default position in his professional life. Mueller didn’t exactly distinguish himself with contrition, either. In 2008, after Ivins committed suicide as he was about to be apprehended for his crimes, and the Justice Department had formally exonerated Hatfill — and paid him $5.82 million in a legal settlement — Mueller could not be bothered to walk across the street to attend the press conference announcing the case’s resolution. When reporters did ask him about it, Mueller was graceless. "I do not apologize for any aspect of the investigation,” he said, adding that it would be erroneous "to say there were mistakes.”
I have always suspected that the government was wrong on this being an act by either Hatfill or Ivins and suspected a real terrorist connection, but lost interest in the case when nothing seemed to happen. Now we know there was more happening.
And the Boss Hog of this was none other than Robert Mueller, the guy now persuing Donald J. Trump.
I am convinced Mueller is noting but a swamp creature, and a bad one. Read my thoughts on Mueller here here, and here.
Be prepared for a good old fashioned Charlie Foxtrot with this Mueller investigation.
Yale dean who called people ‘white trash’ to be replaced
By Fox News
June 20, 2017
The Yale University dean criticized for posting Yelp reviews that called people "white trash” is leaving her position, according to a report Tuesday.
June Chu, the dean of Yale’s residential Pierson College, had been placed on leave after her controversial postings surfaced.
Yale’s college paper, which broke the story about the Yelp reviews, reported on Twitter that Chu was leaving. The report didn’t say if she had resigned voluntarily or been fired.
In one review, she cited a restaurant as perfect for anyone who was "white trash.”
"This establishment is definitely not authentic by any stretch of any imagination and perfect for those low class folks who believe this is a real night out,” Chu wrote.
In another post, she said she was surprised that a New Haven, Conn., movie theater had a lack of "sketchy crowds.”
Many found her Yelp critiques elitist and offensive.
Pierson College Head Stephen Davis announced Chu was leaving in an email to members of the Pierson community, the Yale Daily News reported.
Davis said a new dean would be named before the fall semester, the college paper reported.
Davis announced in May that Chu had been placed on leave after initially sticking by her.
Read it all.
Also audio file at the website. All is legal, the creator claims. He is working on a "make your own Glock handgun."
‘Print’ your own AR-15 at home
Chris Salcedo Jun 20, 2017 8:48 pm
Last Wednesday, the United States suffered from two mass shootings on both coasts. Republicans were targeted at a baseball field in Alexandria, Virginia, resulting in injury to House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) among others. In San Francisco, California, a shooting at a UPS facility left 4 dead, including the shooter. More were injured.
Cody Wilson of Ghost Gunner talked to Chris Salcedo today about abuse of Second Amendment rights, ways to enjoy them as a law abiding citizen, and historically how much easier it was exercise them on "The Chris Salcedo Show” today.
Wilson has created a technology that legally allows people to manufacture their own gun at home to protect themselves in these terrifying situations. It utilizes plug and play software for your computer that directs a machine to manufacture mil-spec parts for the AR-15 and AR-308. They will soon create technology to build common and popular handguns.
He explained that before the commercial regulation of guns, the government didn’t know who owned a gun, nor what kind of gun or how many. He said this information is "not their business, and it’s often inappropriate to insist that it is.”
Amazon.com: Come and Take It: The Gun Printer's Guide to Thinking Free (Paperbac) by Cody Wilson (Author)
Article has some good points. He could not resist the chance to get a dig on Trump.
Eric Holder, the former Attorney General who spearheaded the Fast and Furious program (giving high powered weapons to drug cartels in Mexico) and point man for Barack Obama, is talking about - drumroll please! - running for President!
According to Yahoo News via Frontpagemag:
"More than two years after leaving the Obama administration, former Attorney General Eric Holder is reentering the political fray.
His goal: to lead the legal resistance to Donald Trump’s agenda — and perhaps even run against the president in 2020.
"But the most intriguing — and perhaps most consequential — aspect of Holder’s ambitious new effort is a scheme, still in its early stages, to create a national, privately funded, PAC-like organization that would develop and coordinate legal resistance strategies among various states and localities that are determined to stymie Trump.
For now, Holder will continue to set the stage in California. (Earlier this month, the state Assembly decided not to renew his $25,000-a-month contract; the state Senate, however, plans to retain his services indefinitely.)
This is the man who helped foment the rioting in Ferguson Mo. This is the guy who refused to prosecute the New Black Panthers when they blocked white people from voting at the polls with billy clubs. (Holder had been a member of the Black Panthers in college.) This is the guy who encouraged emptying out the prisons for "minor crimes" like drug dealing. This is the only AG in history to be found guilty of Contempt of Congress for both civil and criminal offenses on June 28, 2012. Under Holder's watch the government spied on Fox News, on the Associated Press, on journalist Sharyl Attkisson, and many others. Under Holder we had foreign terrorists granted Constitutional rights. Under Holder we had concealed carry lists composed in violation of law. Under Holder we had the DOJ legally challenge attemppts to purge voter rolls of bad registrations. We had the Feds attacking any state that tried to make illegals prove they had a right to vote. He admitted to lying to Congress in 2011. Holder approved and endorsed the Obama policy of killing American citizens with drone strikes (denying them their due process rights.) He refused to prosecute minorities for hate crimes (such as the knockout game). He protected Harry Reid from prosecution.
This is just the tip of the iceberg; the man belongs in jail. If he wants to continue his vandalization of America he should be put with the convicts he so loves.
It's time for the Trump Administration to start cracking heads. Eric Holder has the thickest.
June 20, 2017
Here is yet another example of wishful thinking on the part of conservatives. Howard J. Warner defends Robert Mueller and thinks we are in full panic for nothing.
Well, why didn't the Democrats complain? They - and the mainstream media - heartily approved his appointment. If you get support from them you know you are going to get the shaft. It really is that simple.
And he was Comey's best bud. That should disquiet you.
I don't know why so many on our side are unwilling to face the truth, but it is a sad truth.
I see this happening especially in urban centers. The libs mimic the Gestapo.
A NOTE FROM TIM:
Mr. Smith is entirely correct here. James Hodgkinson may be the equivalent of John Brown, who precipitated the Civil War by massacering southern settlers at Pottawatomie Creek in Kansas. Brown would eventually try to incite a slave uprising and would meet his Waterloo at Harper's Ferry. But even though he would be executed his acts of violence would spur the hatred of the North for the South and vice versa. That hatred is still alive today to a degree, and part of the modern political landscape is a disdain by the east coast elites for the "confederates" in the heartland.
Best line is at the end. Paraphrasing that should allow liberals to do scientific research.
From the article:
"Glyphosate is the active ingredient in RoundUp, the most widely used herbicide in the world. Glyphosate is a non-selective herbicide, meaning it will kill just about any plant. Since it would kill the crop as well as the weeds, for quite a few years it couldn’t be used over the top of an emerging crop. Instead, its use was restricted to lower-value burndown situations, where weeds in a field would be killed prior to planting, or, e.g., to keep down weeds on railroad rights of way.
The first commercially successful genetic modification, carried out by Monsanto, which owned the patents on glyphosate, was to make plants tolerant of glyphosate. A GMO variety, commonly referred to as "RoundUp Ready,” would survive a glyphosate application while the weeds in the field would die. The development of glyphosate tolerant crops (soybeans, corn, cotton, eventually others) was a marvel: farmers could apply RoundUp over the top of crops, killing weeds while the crop was unaffected. The result was cheaper food and clothing.
As a bonus, glyphosate was remarkably benign from an environmental standpoint. In general, insecticides are toxic to humans because humans are quite a bit like bugs. Herbicides, on the other hand, are generally not very toxic to humans, because we aren’t a lot like plants. But even in this context, glyphosate stood out as a harmless chemical. It targets an enzyme that is found in plants, but not in humans or animals. Moreover, glyphosate breaks down easily and does not persist in the environment. It is pretty much the perfect herbicide (until resistance starts to develop, but that’s another story).
This sounds like a win-win situation–cheaper food, better health, longer lifespans–but some people irrationally hate genetically modified crops, even though the modification–in this case, making the corn or soybean plant tolerant of glyphosate–has nothing to do with its nutritional value. After decades of world-wide experience with glyphosate, it was accepted that the product was safe. So it was a bombshell when the International Agency for Research on Cancer declared, in March 2015, that glyphosate is "probably carcinogenic,” based on tests on rodents.
Hundreds of cancer patients promptly sued Monsanto, claiming the company had concealed the danger of carcinogenicity, notwithstanding the fact that it would be hard to find a farmer who hadn’t been exposed to glyphosate. The European Union said it would consider IARC’s finding when deciding whether to continue to allow glyphosate to be used in Europe. "Environmentalists” had scored a major coup.
But the whole thing turned out to be a fraud. Reuters has investigated, aided by access to deposition testimony in one or more of the lawsuits against Monsanto, which evidently was not subject to a protective order. Briefly put, the author of the IARC’s carcinogenicity study, Aaron Blair, an epidemiologist from the U.S. National Cancer Institute, covered up his own research showing that exposure to glyphosate did not lead to a higher incidence of cancer in humans. The story, as reported by Reuters, is astonishing:"
READ THE rEST!
Steve Berman at the Resurgent had an intellectual and almost clinical psychology rebuke for CBS's Scott Pelley's vulgar, obnoxious and feral remarks about Rep. Scalise's shooting as something Scalise "had coming."
James Hodgkinson brought an SKS rifle, 7.62mm ammunition, and a list of six Republican House Freedom Caucus members to a suburban Virginia ball field. Rep. Steve Scalise brought his glove and a bat. But CBS New anchor Scott Pelley publicly pondered in his nightly newscast if Scalise’s shooting–which frankly, he was fortunate to survive–was "self-inflicted.”
But let’s first circle back to why Pelley would ask it in the first place.
Liberals like those at CBS New can’t fathom that other liberals would embrace violence and killing. They posit what philosophy majors call the "no true Scotsman” fallacy. The left incorrectly painted Jared Loughner as a "Tea-partier” then it turns out he was a liberal, and a nutter. "Well, he had to be a nutter, because no true liberal would shoot a member of Congress.”
Then along comes Hodgkinson, who makes Loughner look like Mary Poppins. Of course, that means Hodgkinson wasn’t a liberal, "because no true liberal would do such a thing.” It had to be incited by the right’s incendiary rhetoric.
June 19, 2017
Jesuit scholar rips pope for concessions to Islam
A Jesuit scholar with expertise in Islam is explaining why Muslims are terroristic and is warning members of his faith not to be taken in by the "liberal-left ideology” that advocates "tolerance” and "concessions.”
The verdict and warning comes from Egyptian Greek Melkite Jesuit Father Henri Boulad, who was interviewed by the National Catholic Register.
First, the reason for the terrorism is simple, said Boulad, 85, whose relative, Father Samir Khalil Samir, also is a Jesuit scholar of Islam.
The Quran orders Muslims to inflict "terror.”
He cites specific instructions from Islam’s holy book, such as Quran 8:12, which instructs, "Terrorize and behead those who believe in scriptures other than the Quran” and Quran 8:60, which states, "Muslims must muster all weapons to terrorize the infidels.”
Read the rest at WND
Second Lady Karen Pence and Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue recently installed a honeybee hive at the Vice President’s residence, claiming it will show how people can help "reverse the decline” in honeybee colonies. The hive is a neat idea, but continuing to talk about a "decline” reflects the misinformation that has long fueled misplaced public anxiety about bees.
Discussing the hive should begin with recognizing that honeybee populations are actually increasing. It should also focus on preventing the biggest single threat to honeybees, especially in small-scale hobbyist hives: infestations of Varroa mites. Otherwise this beehive gambit will play right into the hands of anti-pesticide environmentalists, who try to blame every bee problem on neonicotinoid pesticides, the widely used, safe seed treatments that protect both crops and bees. It will also undermine administration efforts to restore integrity to scientific and regulatory processes, promote modern technologies, and support crop production and exports.
My article lays it all out, and offers specific suggestions for actions Mrs. Pence and Secretary Perdue can take
Advancing scientific integrity on bees
Putting a beehive at the VP’s residence could spur people’s understanding of bee problems
Second Lady Karen Pence and Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue recently teamed up to install a honeybee hive on the grounds of the Vice President’s residence at the Naval Observatory in Washington, DC. This will serve as a "great example” of what people can do to help "reverse the decline” in managed honeybee colonies around the country, the secretary said.
Helping bees and educating people about bee problems is a good idea. However, if the hive is an attempt to reduce media and environmentalist criticism of Trump Administration policies – or put the Pences and Ag Department on the "right” side of the "bee-pocalypse” issue – it will backfire. It will also undermine administration efforts to advance evidence-based science, restore integrity to scientific and regulatory processes, promote safe modern technologies, and support continued crop production and exports.
A steady stream of misinformation has fueled misplaced public anxiety about bees. Being on the "right” side must therefore begin with recognizing that honeybee populations are actually increasing, as the decline in managed honeybee colonies reversed in recent years. Attention to the vice presidential hive should instead focus on preventing and controlling the biggest single threat to honeybees, especially in small-scale hobbyist hives: infestations of Varroa mites.
Anti-pesticide zealots and headline-seeking news media have been talking for years about domesticated bees (and now wild bees) serving as "the canary in the coal mine,” whose health problems portend yet another man-made environmental calamity. The future of agriculture, human nutrition, perhaps all life on Earth could be at risk if bees and other important pollinators "disappear,” they ominously intone.
That is nothing more than fear-mongering. Honeybee populations have been bouncing back nicely since the days when many worried about mysterious large-scale deaths in hives. In fact, the "crisis” was seriously (and sometimes deliberately) overblown, and honeybee populations are now at or near 20-year highs in North America and every other continent, except Antarctica.
Assiduous scientific investigation helped identify the mites, viruses and fungal pathogens that can infest hives, and beekeepers are learning to treat infestations without inadvertently killing bees or entire hives. That process has underscored the hard reality that, for professional and hobbyist beekeepers alike, maintaining healthy hives is complicated and difficult, especially when multiple pathogens invade.
However, in another sense, honeybees truly are canaries in the coal mine. They are harbingers of the ways environmentalist attacks on modern agriculture can damage one of the most productive, competitive and globally vital sectors of the American economy. American agriculture feeds the USA and world, while generating trade surpluses and supporting rural and small town communities across the country.
Unfortunately, determined anti-pesticide zealots have been trying for nearly a decade to use the alleged "bee crisis” to prevent farmers from using advanced-technology neonicotinoid pesticides that boost agricultural yields, reduce the need for other crop-protection insecticides that can harm bees, and reduce risks to humans, birds, other animals, non-pest insects, and bees.
Neonics are now the world’s most widely used pesticide class. They are mainly (some 90%) applied as seed coatings, which lets crops absorb the chemicals into their tissue and allows minuscule amounts to target only pests that feed on and destroy crops. Radical greens have tried for years to blame neonics for higher-than-normal over-winter hive losses, "colony collapse disorder” (in which bees mysteriously abandon their colonies, leaving the queen, food and unhatched eggs behind) and other bee problems.
The mere fact that neonics may be detected in negligible, below-harmful levels in the nectar and pollen of neonic-treated crops, in foliage near neonic-treated cropland, or in the food stored in honeybees hives, has fueled emotional campaigns to ban these crop protection products. The activists simply ignore large-scale field studies that have consistently shown no adverse effects on honeybees at the colony level from field-realistic exposures to neonics. They ignore the fact that bees thrive among and around neonic-treated corn and canola crops in the United States, Canada, Europe, Australia and elsewhere.
Anti-pesticide crusaders are determined to take neonics out of farmers’ pest-control "tool-kits.” They will not let scientific facts stand in their way.
This is the tug-of-war that Mrs. Pence’s beehive has plunged her into. What if her bee colony collapses and dies? Whatever embarrassment this may bring to her skills as a beekeeper (and those of USDA staff who will be charged with keeping the hive alive), activists will claim the bee deaths further confirm that the Trump Administration’s enviro-critics are right – and America’s farmers are wrong.
So what can we learn from the fate of one bee colony on the bucolic grounds of the Naval Observatory in the middle of urban Washington, DC? Potentially plenty – if Mrs. Pence and her USDA aides put on their thinking caps, learn more about "bee issue” realities, use this otherwise empty gesture to dramatize the real issues facing honeybees and their keepers, and help advance the cause of scientific integrity.
In recent weeks, the USDA-supported Bee Informed Partnership at the University of Maryland published its annual survey of honeybee colony losses for 2016-17. Although lower than last year and among the best since the decade-old survey began, over-winter losses of 21% and in-season (summer) losses of 18% are still troublesome numbers. However, a vitally important point must be kept in mind.
Those losses were suffered overwhelmingly by small, backyard, hobbyist beekeepers. (Barely 1% of respondents to the BIP survey are large-scale commercial beekeepers, which skews the survey.) This parallels other studies that show small-scale, hobbyist, backyard beekeepers suffer much higher rates of colony loss than do large-scale professionals, who handle the vast majority of US bees and hives.
Those other studies also show that small-scale beekeepers have the greatest difficulty keeping their bees alive in the face of the scourge of Varroa destructor mites. Epidemic since its 1987 arrival in the USA, this bee parasite is a triple threat. Bee larvae often hatch with Varroa mites already attached to them, and these parasites: (1) suck the bee’s hemolymph blood-equivalent out of them, (2) thereby compromising the bees’ immune systems, and (3) vectoring a dozen or more viruses and diseases into honey bees and colonies, turning what were just nuisance infections before Varroa arrived into devastating epidemics.
This has produced a striking paradox – which Mrs. Pence’s new bee colony could help explain. In the wake of widespread publicity about the supposed bee crisis, tens of thousands of well-meaning people across the USA – from the rural countryside to rooftops in densely populated urban areas – have set out to "help the bees” by setting up hobbyist beekeeping operations of one or a few hives. The problem, studies show, is that these well-intentioned initiatives often end up making things worse for honeybees.
Many newly-minted, nature-loving hobbyist beekeepers believe – contrary to the overwhelming bulk of beekeeping literature and practice – that treating their hives chemically for Varroa mites is "against nature,” and thereby hasten the inevitable disaster to their hives. When those hobbyist hives collapse under the weight of uncontrolled or poorly controlled Varroa mites and related diseases, surviving bees migrate in search of new homes, frequently among the healthy hives of some neighboring professional beekeeper – carrying Varroa mites with them. That’s how hobbyist beekeepers inadvertently contribute to the spread of this honeybee epidemic – and to the spread of misinformation about bee losses.
Mrs. Pence’s colony won’t provide lessons on supposed harmful effects on honeybees from exposure to neonic pesticides. The nearest neonic-treated canola and cornfields are well beyond her bees’ roughly 3-mile flight. However, it’s a golden opportunity to use the colony as an object lesson in what small-scale beekeepers should do to keep their hives alive and thriving: above all, control Varroa mites.
Mrs. Pence’s bee colony could become an exemplar for small-scale beekeepers on how to do right by honeybees. By implementing sound beekeeping practices (particularly properly timed Varroa counts and controls), live-streaming those practices and daily hive activity via the bee equivalent of the Panda Cam, and posting short how-to videos, she could teach millions about bees … and advance hobbyist efforts to help bees. That would help replace failure and disappointment with rewarding fun and satisfaction.
Paul Driessen is senior policy analyst for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow (www.CFACT.org) and author of Eco-Imperialism: Green power - Black death.
I did not watch the Megyn Kelly-Alex Jones interview on NBC but very much liked the fact that Jones secretly recorded all conversations with her as well as the unedited interview itself, thus making it easy for him to prove she is a liar and manipulator.
But previous to the interview, one of my favorite writers at American Thinker, Jeannie DeAngelis, wrote a piece about Megyn Kelly and her character where she sliced and diced Kelly as a predatory opportunist, akin to a black widow spider and praying mantis. It was called "Is Megyn the Man-Eater Receiving Her Just Reward?" http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/06/is_megyn_the_maneater_receiving_her_just_reward.html It was masterful (mistressful?). I recommend it to all readers for a deeper understanding of Megyn Kelly's character - or lack thereof.
I exchanged remarks in the comments section of the Amer. Thinker piece with Jeannie and here they are.
JackKemp • a day ago
There are true things that Jeannie DeAngelis says here that few if any male writers would either feel comfortable about saying (i.e., they'd fear a backlash of being called a chauvanist) - or capable of phrasing as elegantly as a woman. You nailed it, Jeannie.
Regarding the photo of Me-Again Kelly with Putin and the article's remark that "for a state dinner at Konstantin Palace in St. Petersburg Megyn showed up in a thigh-high slit skirt and stiletto heels," I'll attempt to be a bit blunter, although the previous words from this article are easy enough to understand as to the implied meaning of Jeannie DeAngelis's words.
When I previously saw that photo of Kelly meeting Putin in that dress with her somewhat disheveled hair, she looked to me like a woman who had just hopped a cab after hastily leaving a liason with Bill Clinton, Charlie Sheen or the late Sen. Ted Kennedy. Or all three men at once. Me-Again Kelly has gone from trying to look like Brigitte Nielson to trying to look like Amy Schumer.
Jeannieology (the blog piece's author) to JackKemp • 18 hours ago
Thank you sir.
JackKemp to Jeannieology • 17 hours ago
You're welcome, Jeannie. I think that Me-Again Kelly's tv show should use as her theme song "Big Spender" from the Bob Fosse musical "Sweet Charity." See https://www.youtube.com/wat... It would be most fitting.
June 18, 2017
Why Obama’s presidency didn’t lead to black progress
Excerpt from the article:
"Since the 1960s, black leaders have placed a heavy emphasis on gaining political power, and Barack Obama’s presidency represented the apex of those efforts. The assumption — rarely challenged — is that black political clout must come before black social and economic advancement. But as JASON L. RILEY argues in this excerpt from his new book, "False Black Power” (Templeton Press), political success has not been a major factor in the rise of racial and ethnic groups from poverty to prosperity.
The Voting Rights Act of 1965 was followed by large increases in black elected officials. In the Deep South, black officeholders grew from 100 in 1964 to 4,300 in 1978. By the early 1980s, major US cities with large black populations, such as Cleveland, Detroit, Chicago, Washington and Philadelphia, had elected black mayors. Between 1970 and 2010, the number of black elected officials nationwide increased from fewer than 1,500 to more than 10,000.
Yet the socioeconomic progress that was supposed to follow in the wake of these political gains never materialized. During an era of growing black political influence, blacks as a group progressed at a slower rate than whites, and the black poor actually lost ground"
A NOTE FROM TIM:
This was the fight between the NAACP and Booker T. Washington way back when. Washington argued that political power came from economic power and he pointed to the immigrant experience in America as proof. Some hated groups (like the Irish) found their children to be powerful members of the community once they amassed wealth, and Washington believed the blacks would be no exception. But W.E.B. Dubois and the others at the NAACP argued for a political power grab first, claiming racism would always keep them down. Naturally they won the argument, not because it was superior to Washington's but because it was the quicker and easier path. Who wants to work real hard and earn things inch by inch when someone is promising you a quick path simply by demanding it? Yelling and screaming is far more enjoyable than slaving away and counting your pennies.
But it failed because 1.when the day is through you still don't have any money 2.being obnoxious and aggressive doesn't make you many real friends - political allies, maybe, but nbot friends 3.you have to separate yourself from the majority to do it, something that is against the spirit of America's melting pot. What made the immigrants succeed (and that includes Chinese who were visibly different as well) was hard work and assimilation. The black community chose this easy path, which emphasized their differences.
Of course, with the rising tide of Socialism in the 19th and 20th centuries it seemed that the old ways wouldn't necessarily work in the worker's paradise many of the NAACP bigwigs wanted, but the end result is a subculture outside of the American mainstream, one that encourages things that are detrimental to the black community. Drugs, crime, illigitimacy, ignorance stalk the African American community, and they are all represented as "authentically black" and embraced as cultural goods. Of course, the children trapped in this culture (and it is unquestionably a toxic subculture) suffer horribly and pass that suffering to their own children.
And they have all believed the lie told that political power is the key. So they get what they want, a black President, a black Attorney General, etc. and not only does nothing change but things actually get worse. So now many in the community are doubling down on this failure.
Politics is the implementation of the general public will. Political power achieved by manipulation that is against the general public will may bring certain benefits but in the end will not bring any good lasting change. You can't shove your will down the throats of the majority (and white people STILL outnumber blacks 5 to 1 in America) and think your overall situation will improve much. Yes, some will get rich, and some will enjoy the fruits of power, but you have permanently cut yourself off from the people who you need to accept you. It's a terrible bargain.
It should be pointed out that the white community has tried and tried to assimilate the black community. Whites have adopted black music, black art, black cultural traits, in an effort to mainstream the African Americans but there is little interest on the black side. In fact, they often rail against "cultural appropriations" as if it were a bad thing. You can't have your cake and eat it too! Either you adopt all of America or you completely separate yourself. That is the deal, and thanks to the political power movement the blacks find themselves torn both ways, wanting the fruits of political and economic power but not the responsibilities.
And it's not as if African America hasn't appropriated many, many white cultural aspects. Every time Al Sharpton puts on a pair of pants he is stealing white man's culture. Those Facebook organizing pages that Black Lives Matter used so well are a white thing. And don't believe for a second that the black community forced anything from the hands of an unwilling white community; it was the white people themselves who gave the civil rights movement their victories. That is a point often lost on many of the angrier blacks, who somehow believe they forced it fromour cold, unwilling hands. It didn't happen that way; nothing had changed between 1875 and 1860 that would have forced the majority to surrender power. The Civil Rights movement was a direct result of the white community deciding they hadn't been fair with the blacks. The Second World War - and the way black soldiers did their duties to help an ungrateful nation, had a huge amount to do with it.
In conclusion, the black communty has been on the wrong path for a long time, and Obama's promise ws destined to be broken because it was the wrong one to make.
Every so often one encounters an article that is almost breath-taking in its simplicity and common-sense approach to a problem. This is one. I hope the President takes the action recommended herein
The pseudonymous Ishmael Jones is a former CIA case officer and author of The Human Factor: Inside the CIA’s Dysfunctional Intelligence Culture. He forwards the column below in the context of the proliferation of leaks attributed by reporters at the New York Times and the Washington Post to "current and former officials.” What is happening here? Mr. Jones explains in this column and offers a modest proposal to mitigate the problem. He advises that the CIA has approved the column for publication:
"Leaks of national security secrets with the intent to harm the Trump administration continue to bedevil our nation. Journalists often describe the sources of the leaks as "current and former officials.” There’s an important solution, and one that the Trump administration may not yet be aware of: Remove the "former officials” from the equation.
Nearly all intelligence officials who are fired, retired, pushed out, or resign from the intelligence agencies keep their security clearances. I do not know the specifics of any individual’s clearances but it is nearly certain that opponents of the current administration such as John Brennan, an aggressive Trump critic; James Clapper, who warns that Trump causes an "internal assault on our institutions”; Michael Morell, author of "I Ran the CIA. Now I’m Endorsing Hillary Clinton”; and recently fired leaker James Comey retain top-level security clearances.
Security clearances are a deep state guild or union card allowing the holders to swan about intelligence facilities, chatting, gossiping, and gathering intelligence that they can leak to journalists.
The traitor Edward Snowden was pushed out of the CIA. But because he kept his security clearances, he was able to get back inside as a contractor and exfiltrate massive amounts of intelligence.
Hillary definitely retains her security clearances. Huma Abedin probably retains hers as well. Surely Carlos Danger has none – but please check.
CNN journalist Phil Mudd believes House Intelligence Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy "ought to have his ass kicked” for questioning former CIA chief John Brennan. Mr. Mudd is a former CIA employee and likely holds high level security clearances.
President Trump knows how to fire people, but he’s never had the experience of firing people who walk back in the door the next day.
The solution is to cancel these security clearances. It is an administrative task which is easy to do.
These two guys shouldn't be investigating anything -- except maybe where to find the best defense lawyers in DC to keep their sorry asses out of jail. Mueller, in particular, shouldn't be investigating the president for anything. He's damaged goods, as much as his pal Comey is. And for his "work" in "sanitizing" FBI training materials dealing with Islam, he should be going to jail -- no, he should already be there.
WTF? The UN is as crazy as the Democrat Party.
U.N. Report Blames Israel for Palestinian Men Beating Their Wives
A new report by a United Nations expert, and submitted to the U.N. Human Rights Council, blames Israel in part for Palestinian men beating their wives — offering more fuel to those in the Trump administration seeking to leave the council over its anti-Israel bias. The document, first reported by U.N. Watch, which monitors the international body, was written by Dubravka Šimonović — the Special Rapporteur on violence against women — who filed dual reports based on her trips to the region in 2016. Read the full story
Although this centers on largely white small towns in West Virginia, the creation of jobs, which these pastors are encouraging in church, will help every person of every
ethnic background, i.e., ALL AMERICANS living in the area. These are the issues that Charles Murray wrote about in his book "Coming Apart" and was severely criticized by leftists, i.e., the deterioration of small town white communties. The leftists had no compassion for these people, but the local churches really didn't have enough ideas how to help poor kids with no job - or even junior high school kids subject to opiod addictions. A paster who formerly was a businessman has developed ideas how to create meaningful education and jobs to revive both the economy and the hopes of local people who did not have neither the skills nor desire nor capability to move away.
The New York Post has a profound article about this which I'll just quote a "fair usage excerpt" from. I very much suggest you read the whole thing. The article is about enlightened first steps, but not an instant magic solution. Hopefully, this can spread to become a movement among communities. And combined with Pres. Trump's aid to the ailing coal industry, the effects can be a positive rather than a vicious cycle.
Some brief quotes from "Can a new religious movement save America from drug addiction?" by Naomi Schaefer Riley:
"There is a problem underlying our drug epidemic,” says Travis Lowe.
"It’s an epidemic of despair.” Lowe, who is the pastor of Crossroads Church in Bluefield, W.Va., says that when he talks to kids in his community, "They’ve never even thought about what they want to be when they grow up.”
The despair has come in part from the economic crisis. Of the county next door to Lowe’s, Reason magazine recently noted, "Ninety percent of kids are . . . below the poverty threshold for free and reduced-price lunches, 47 percent do not live with their biological parents"...
Lowe and his congregants are helping local businesses to adapt to the modern economy. "People around here have always been makers. We just want to give them this century’s tools.” They are working with MIT to teach kids about engineering software and trying to find new markets for things they can produce in local factories.
His church has helped to organize a kind of "Teen Shark Tank” to encourage entrepreneurship.
END OF QUOTE
31 queries taking 0.0084 seconds, 95 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.