April 10, 2017
According to the U.K. Daily Mail Crowdstrike, the cyber security firm hired by the Democrats to conclude that Russia "hacked" the election and denying Hillary her birthright, is coming under fire.
From the article:
"But now the first expert company to make a link between the DNC hacks and the Kremlin is facing a damaging series of questions over its credibility, DailyMail.com can disclose.
Cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike has had to retract portions of a report supporting its allegations of Russian cyberattacks – and is also refusing to address Congress about its findings on Moscow's election hacking.
CrowdStrike was hired by the Democratic National Committee to investigate suspicious network activity last May. In June it declared that the committee had been hacked by the Russian government, starting a firestorm over the campaign.
CrowdStrike, based in Irvine, California, is also the only group that the DNC allowed to directly examine its servers.
Not even the FBI has been granted access to the servers."
Get that? The "concensus" report by national security agencies was all based on the Crowdstrike report, meaning that if the Democrats hired Crowdstrike to make certain findings then we have no way of knowing if it is true or not. It is rather like a suspect of a crime supplying all the forensic reports to the Court.
The Daily Mail continues:
"DailyMail.com can disclose that in March CrowdStrike quietly retracted portions of a December report that had made further Russian hacking claims, after the firm was found to have relied on inaccurate data posted online by a pro-Putin 'propaganda' blogger.
The errors prompted both the Ukrainian military and a prominent British think tank to issue public statements disputing CrowdStrike's data.
The errors, and retraction, surrounded a report in December which claimed that Fancy Bear, the same Russian hackers it said were behind the DNC attacks, were working on behalf of Russia's military intelligence agency, the GRU.
CrowdStrike said it found evidence that Fancy Bear had also hacked into Ukrainian military technology using the same software it used to infiltrate the DNC.
According to the report, the hackers were targeting an app used by Ukrainian soldiers to improve the efficiency of ther 122mm howitzers. The hack resulted in Ukraine losing 80 percent of these weapons in its ongoing low-level battle with Russian forces in the east of the country, the report said.
The report received widespread attention, including from NBC News, Foreign Policy, and The Guardian."
Even an incompetent investigator knows enough to demand to examine the evidence himself, rather than relying on a for profit company hired by the claimant. As this has had serious domestic and national security implications, the F.B.I. was more than duty bound to make it's own inquiries. That it did not shows that this whole story is as legitimate as the million dollar bill someone tried to pass a number of years ago.
The Democrats strategy is to deligitimize Donald Trump any way they can. Claiming the Russians stole the election for Trump (something that makes no sense as trump is by far the more aggressive of the two candidates and he wants cheap oil and gas - something that would destroy the Russian economy) goes a long way to marginalizing the winner of last November's election. (Hillary actually made huge amounts of money from the Russians by brokering a deal for a Russian controlled Canadian company to buy a quarter of all American uranium in return for a hefty donation to the Clinton Foundation.)
An old saw for mystery novel fans is that a case against someone is built on three legs - means, motive, and opportunity. The Democrats clearly have motive. They also have the means. We can now see that, thanks to the lazy or dishonest American security apparatus, the so-called "deep state" of Obama quislings - we now see they had opportunity as well. This whole Russian hack business is as phony as Potemkin's false front village.
He who pays the bills is the boss. The Democrats hired a private company and kept the F.b.I. and C.I.A. out of the loop for a reason. They prefered to spend their own money on this than turn it over to a better funded and more capable U.S. government agency. Why? It's almost as if they didn't want the truth to come out.
Seems to me that served their purposes just fine.
I'm reading a funny and interesting book called "The 188th Crybaby Brigade: A Skinny Jewish Kid from Chicago Fights Hezobllah."
In it, the author Joel Chasnoff takes a few days off from his Tank Corps duty in Lebanon and comes to Tel Aviv to arrange his wedding to his girlfriend Dorit, an Israeli. But first he must go to an Orthodox rabbi to prove he is truly Jewish. After showing the rabbi documentation that his mother converted to Orthodox Judaism, the rabbi makes fax inquiries in Texas to verify the rabbi doing the conversion was Orthodox. So far, so good. But the rabbi that Joel Chasnoff's mother studied Judaism with before her conversion was a conservative Jewish rabbi - not orthodox. The Tel Aviv rabbi tells him he is not a Jew. This lead to his cancelling the wedding hall rental and later going to New York to go through a full Orthodox studies course and Orthodox conversion. Later he marries Dorit in Israel.
But getting back to initial meeting with the Orthodox rabbi in Tel Aviv, Joel has brought along two religious friends as witnesses and also Dorit. Dorit gets angry at hearing that her fiance isn't considered Jewish and says "A young man risks his for the Jewish state, and you have the chutzpah to say there's no connection?"
"It's not churzpah, it's religious law."
"Let me ask you something, Rabbi," Dorit says, and glares at him. "Did your sons serve in the army?"
"Dorit, don't," I mutter (Joel talking).
"Why not?" shrieks Dorit. "He thinks he's king of the Jews, I'm allowed to ask!" She turns to the rabbi. "Nu?" (Yiddish for 'what?' or 'what gives?')
Rabbi: "My sons went to yeshiva," he says.
"Oh, yeshiva!" Dorit howls. "So when the Katyushas fall, you sons recite Psalms?"
The room goes quiet. Then, in a voice just above a whisper, the rabbi says, "Look. I'm not saying he doesn't live a Jewish life. I'm saying that according to Jewish law, this young man is not a Jew"
Joel: I look down at the floor. I feel sick.
END OF BOOK QUOTE
I have my own real life Joel Chasnoff-type story.
Sunday morning I was sitting at my computer and rubbed my right eye, scratching it with part of an untrimmed nail on my left finger. My eye immediately closed and I couldn't see out of it. I grabbed my clothes and walked to outside to a cab stand where I told the driver to take me to the emergency room of a local hospital. After about a half hour, the eye opened by itself and the doctor looked at it, testing for scratches with a UV light - all was fine. But the Joel Chasnoff-type story occured when a staff member, a black woman, took my personal information as I waited for the doctor and we had the following exchange...
Staff member: "What is your race?" (as if she couldn't figure out by looking at me but I guess I could have been a light skinned Hispanic or Arab).
Me: "I'm white and Jewish."
Staff member: "What is your religion?" (a question asked to determine which clergy - or funeral home - to contact in case someone dies or is near death)
Me, angrily: "I just told you I'm Jewish. What? Are you going to ask me how many times a year I go to synagogue?"
Staff Member, defensively: I'm just doing my job. If you don't want to answer, you can say you refuse to answer this (religion) question."
Me: "I refuse to answer" (I figured that was quicker and easier than going into a more complicated sociological and theological discussion with a staff member who barely understood the questions she was ordered to ask me. After the staffer left, I said to the couple from India sitting next to me that I guess she wanted to know if I had converted to Christianity or Buddhism. I was more concerned about seeing a doctor and assessing the damage to my eye than figuring out which cemetery they would ship my body to if their treatments failed)
A few days ago I had an exchange in the comments section of an Amer. Thinker blog piece on the subject of feminists being angry at VP Mike Pence not wanting to eat dinner alone with any other woman but his wife. The irrationality of feminists came up in both a retelling of a surprising discussion I had with a feminist in 2012 and in a surprising reply I got on the Amer. Thinker discussion boards
JackKemp • 2 days ago
A few years ago I was in a writing class in NY. One woman there, a feminist, wrote a piece about some nice food item and that both sides in the U.S. Civil War should have gone home to eat such a food item instead of fight. To this I replied in class that if both sides went home, slavery would had continued to exist in America.
She had no reply to this, acting as if I, the class conservative, was not worthy of a reply, nor would anyone else making this observation be worthy of a reply to this obvious result of her wish that both armies would go home early in 1861-65.
Before taking that class, if anyone had suggested to me that a feminist in favor of equal rights, etc., would publicly advocate for a de facto continuation of slavery after 1861, I would have said they were going too far in their accusations and they were absurd to suggest such callousness by a feminist to the plight of black people. Yet here I was listening to exactly that from a feminist with a university education. The feminists are, in many cases, really quite self absorbed and quite nuts.
gerald carbonneau (replies to) JackKemp • 2 days ago
She may have been right. Slavery would have ended on its own. And 700,000 lives would have been saved.
JackKemp (replies to) gerald carbonneau • 2 days ago
If slavery would have ended on its own, it would have happened a number of years later and with much additional suffering by blacks. It would, gerald, probably not involved any additional suffering to you or your family. For a woman who was more or less a social justice warrior, it was very surprising to hear her say this. I cannot give too many details about her here to avoid identification but there is one other thing she said in a private conversation with me before class started (in an
otherwise empty room).
When I mentioned the case a few years ago of the boy who thought he was a girl - and his mother's efforts to get him into a Girl Scout troup which had sleepover weekend camping trips the feminist just sat there with total indifference to the problems that could arise. The local Girl Scout troop leaders (I believe in Texas) disbanded the troup, even as the national Girl Scout organization advocated for allowing this confused boy to join them, probably in defiance of local laws that protect children. When I then asked the feminist if she had (was the mother of) a girl, she angrily said to me, "No, do you have a girl?" I said no, I don't - but even without being the father of a girl I was interested in young girls being protected in our society.
I submit to you, gerald, that my answer was that of a regular person with decent standards (and I'm not claiming sainthood here) - versus the answer of a feminist with total indifference to the safety and privacy of the young Girl Scouts. Hers was the attitude of someone who either wants to tear down society or has no concept of what a workable society should do to protect its children, especially its female children.
Once again, I state that this woman's remarks were totally the opposite of what one would expect - or at least expected 15 years ago, let alone in the 1950s - from someone advocating for females and their rights. She was - and probably still is - a feminist loon, a total nut.
April 09, 2017
Comment from Mike on the Yahoo Target comments board, as Target nears 30 point drop for one full year to $53.25...
"I have been watching the TGT stock tank and was looking for an entry point because of all the blood on the street. My wife - like many moms in our neighborhood - spent a ton of money every month at the local Target on food, clothes, toys, personal care, prescriptions(now CVS). Once they announced the bathroom policy, her (sic) and her circle of friends stopped shopping. Shredded the credit cards too. "Everything is going to zero" she said. We even know Target employees that stopped shopping or quit the company. Anyway...fast forward...I told her last night I might buy some TGT stock because of how bad it has tanked. She looked at me - hands on hips - and said something else will go to ZERO if I bought any stock."
MilitaryCorruption.com reports that Rather had been verbally referring to himself as having been a Marine, or in the Marine
Another Dan Rather Scandal
By Cliff Kincaid
Ever since his forced resignation in disgrace, Dan Rather has continued on a downward spiral. His career, such as it is, has been kept alive by appearances on the Rachel Maddow show on MSNBC, where he takes potshots at his former employer and President Donald Trump. It is a sad spectacle.
Rather has now suffered another major embarrassment. The former anchorman of the CBS Evening News has been accused by a website devoted to exposing military corruption of falsely claiming to have been a member of the U.S. Marine Corps.
The editor-in-chief of the website www.MilitaryCorruption.com, retired U.S. Army Major Glenn MacDonald, says he stumbled across a published photo of Rather in a dress blue Marine Corps uniform in his book Rather Outspoken and decided to investigate the claim. The photo caption, "as a young Marine,” clearly indicates Rather had been a member in good standing of the Marine Corps.
I love it when the left eats its own. Actually Brian Williams' remarks were insensitive from either a left wing, a right wing and also purely military combat veteran's point of view. No wonder this clown is off of the NBC Nightly News.
And Hillary is also sabre rattling against the Russians these days, calling for a strike on Syrian airfields, perhaps starting leading to a warlike footing against Russia. http://www.wjbdradio.com/politics/2017/04/06/hillary-clinton-calls-for-strikes-against-syrian-airfields She did that realizing that they not only won't draft her but they also won't draft Chelsea or even Bill. Maybe Hillary hopes they'll draft Ivanka...just saying...
NEW YORK — Brian Williams is facing online criticism for waxing poetic about what he called "beautiful pictures" of U.S. missiles launching during an attack on a Syrian air base.
Video released by the military shows Tomahawk missiles targeted for a Syrian airfield launching from the decks of U.S. warships in the Mediterranean Sea on Thursday.
During his MSNBC program, "The 11th Hour," late Thursday night, Williams said the "beautiful pictures at night" tempted him to quote a line from a Leonard Cohen song: "I am guided by the beauty of our weapons." He went on to call the images "beautiful pictures of fearsome armaments."
Williams was quickly mocked and criticized on Twitter for the remarks, with some users suggesting they were insensitive to the realities of war.
MSNBC didn't immediately respond to a request for comment Friday.
Actually, Brian Williams should have quoted Leonard Cohen's song "There is a War" - and these verses from the chorus:
Why don't you come on back to the war, don't be a tourist,
Why don't you come on back to the war, before it hurts us,
Why don't you come on back to the war, let's all get nervous.
"Science is the belief in the ignorance of the expert"
We all know who HE is! Feynman, titan of physics (he won the Nobel Prize for his work in quantum electrodynamics)and one of the creators of the atomic bomb, had exploded the greenhouse theory which has been used to promote Climate Change hysteria. According to The Hockey Schtick
"Only one 33C greenhouse theory can be correct, either the 33C Arrhenius radiative greenhouse theory (the basis of CAGW alarm and climate models) or the 33C Maxwell/Clausius/Carnot/Feynman gravito-thermal greenhouse effect, since if both were true, the surface temperature would be an additional 33C warmer than the present. As we have previously shown, the Arrhenius greenhouse theory confuses the cause (gravito-thermal) with the effect (radiation from greenhouse gases).
In addition, the US Standard Atmosphere, the International Standard Atmosphere, the HS 'greenhouse equation,' Chilingar, et al derive the observed atmospheric temperature profile without use of a single greenhouse gas radiative transfer equation or calculation, and using the same basic atmospheric physics discussed by Feynman in his lecture below. Feynman does not make a single mention of radiation, radiative transfer, greenhouse gases, CO2, nor does he derive any radiative transfer equations to derive the atmospheric temperature profile, and instead utilizes the barometric and statistical mechanics formulas necessary to describe the gravito-thermal greenhouse effect of Maxwell et al (who Feynman quotes extensively below). Feynman demonstrates that an atmosphere comprised solely of the non-greenhouse gases N2 & O2 (99.94% of our atmosphere, but 100% in Feynman's demonstrations) would establish the temperature gradient/"greenhouse effect" observed in the troposphere.
Feynman demonstrates that the conservative force of gravity does indeed do continuous thermodynamic Work upon the atmosphere (a common false argument by those who do not accept the gravito-thermal GHE theory is that gravity allegedly can't do Work upon the atmosphere), and describes gravitational potential energy (PE) accumulated as air parcels rise/expand/cool, which is then exchanged for kinetic energy (KE) as the air parcel descends/compresses/warms, creating the temperature gradient & greenhouse effect."
Here is Feynman's lecture:
By the way, I used the Feynman quote at the beginning to illustrate his cantankerous nature; Feynman was an iconoclast, and were he alive today I suspect he would be strongly against the "concensus" notion of science being peddled, especially by the Gang Green.
April 07, 2017
A negative article from the Right about Neil Gorsuch. Perhaps he should have been vetted a bit more stringently by "our side?"
From Business Insider:
"A badass airplane with a big gun on it."
That's how Republican Congresswoman Martha McSally described the A-10 Warthog to President Donald Trump, as she told the Center for Strategic and International Studies on Tuesday.
McSally, the first female fighter pilot and a veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan, told the crowd at the CSIS event about her experiences as an A-10 pilot laying down close air support for US troops during the 2000s.
"It's an amazing airplane to fly, but it's really cool to shoot the gun," said McSally. "The folklore as A-10 pilots that we pass around is that we built the gun, and told the engineers 'figure out how to fly this gun.'"
"The gun, 30 millimeters is just amazing." said McSally. "When you shoot the gun, the whole airplane shakes. The first time you shoot the gun, you think the airplane's breaking up."
Perhaps better known is the iconic "BRRRT" sound of the A-10's 30 mm, 1,174 round gun as heard from the ground, a sound that US infantrymen have come to equate with salvation and safety.
In practice, the A-10's gun is actually more precise than even the newest, most accurate GPS or laser-guided bombs, which can often cost up to a million dollars each.
"In Afghanistan ... we used mostly the gun," said McSally, "It's a very precise weapon and it allows for minimizing collateral damage and fratricide because the weapon's footprint is so tight. We can roll in and precisely go after the target while it keeps Americans safe."
The article, with pictures, is at http://www.businessinsider.com/martha-mcsally-a-10-warthog-gun-2017-4
From a musician friend back in Buffalo, NY. No, I don't have a citation. But the donkeys are gonna have a snit about this, raving (probably) about the "Constitutional separation of Church and State."
Sharp contrast to the many Muslims appointed by Obama! No more prayer rugs in the Whitehouse.
Our Lord has everything under control!
Nine members of Trump's Cabinet Identify as devout Christians.
President-elect Donald Trump has now appointed nine members to this Leadership -- either White House or Cabinet, each of whom profess publicly to be Christians. Is this a huge answer to prayer?
"For many years, we have prayed that God would raise up men and women of God to positions of leadership and influence in our country. However, since the end of the George W. Bush administration, there have been previous few answers to that prayer," writes author and pastor David Murray. Who would have thought that Donald Trump might be the answer to that prayer?"
At the heart of these appointments is Vice President Mike Pence who has previously said, "My Christian faith is at the heart of who I am," and "I'm a Christian, a conservative and a Republican, in that order."
Then there is Chief of Staff Reince Preibus, who has previously tweeted "Christ's sacrificial work provides an example for us all, and we join with the Psalmist in saying: 'You make known to me the path of life.' "
Next we've got Attorney General Jeff Sessions (who is a Sunday school teacher at his family's church)
Housing and Urban Development's Dr. Ben Carson, who believes that God spoke clearly to him that Trump would be president.
In addition to this, there is Education's Betsy DeVos, a Christian committed to bringing God's Kingdom' through schooling.
Next we have newly-announced Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, EPA's Scott Pruitt, CIA's Mike Pompeo (whose family attends Eastminster Presbyterian Church), and Ambassador to UN Nikki Haley.
They are all Christians!
The number of believers in the upper echelons of the Trump administration is quite incredible.
Please remember to PRAY often for all of them. Their Jobs are NOT EASY in the face of such opposition.
A NOTE FROM TIM:
I would only include half of them as grounds for celebration. Pence, Sessions, and Carson are good, but Preibus is a snake, and so is Tillerson, a very left-wing christian in the mold of Pope Francis more than John Paul II, and Betsie has always worried me. Some bad things have been done by liberal self-professed Christians. Take John Brown. or Father Coughlin. Or Michael Pfleger. OrFather Daniel Berrigan, once on the F.B.I.'s most wanted list. (Berrigan is the "radical priest" mentioned in the Paul Simon song "Me and julio Down by the Schoolyard"). Or Miguel D'Escoto Brockmann, the Sandanista who was booted from his postiion in the Maryknolls for his working with the communists in Nicaragua and was recently restored by Peronista Pope Francis.
We need spiritual Christians and not worldly ones.
April 06, 2017
In 2005 the U.S. Congress passed the Real I.D. Act. Officially designed to fight terrorism, the act imposes Federal standards on the individual states in regards to legally recognized identification of citizens. The Real I.D. Act requires states to make "tamper proof" cards that are machine readable - either via bar code or smart card or RFID chip - and personal information will be maintained in a Federally accessed database. In other words, we are to be chipped like a pet and tracked at the Federal government's pleasure.
It was a terribly Orwellian scheme from the beginning.
And despite all that the DHS final rule http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2008-01-29/pdf/08-140.pdf relaxes the requirements on documentation, making it possible for states that are in compliance with the regulation (such as terrorist riddled Florida) to accept dubious proofs of identity and citizenship. Thus it is possible to for an illegal alien to get a Real I.D. compliant card. In short, while all Americans are forced to accept being numbered like a textile product and followed by Big Brother those who actually break the rules are largely exempted from them.
According to the Department of Homeland Security:
"Secure driver's licenses and identification documents are a vital component of a holistic national security strategy. Law enforcement must be able to rely on government-issued identification documents and know that the bearer of such a document is who he or she claims to be. REAL ID is a coordinated effort by the states and the Federal Government to improve the reliability and accuracy of state-issued identification documents, which should inhibit terrorists’ ability to evade detection by using fraudulent identification."
And yet we have illegal aliens in numerous states granted driver’s licenses on a regular basis - even in Real I.D. compliant areas. We still have massive vote fraud despite this. Why?
There are criticisms of Real I.D. for violating the 10th Amendment, and violating the First (based upon it's denial of the right to assemble or petition the government as citizens without such an I.D. would not be allowed on government property.) One must also question the huge database that this establishes; if it was such a crisis that the DNC was hacked by a foreign entity, why are we even thinking about putting EVERYONE'S information in a database? Is that any safer than the DNC? Than the Federal Employees data, which was hacked a while back? http://www.npr.org/2015/07/10/421684368/the-hack-of-federal-employee-data-is-even-worse-than-first-thought Oh, and it should be pointed out that the implementation of the Real I.D. Act has done nothing to advance border security or to make voting more secure; you don't even need identification to vote these days.
So what is the value of this? It is almost exclusively a tool for government surveillance of the American People.
Which is what makes this http://www.kansascity.com/news/politics-government/article141762724.html so puzzling. Under duress from the Federal government, Missouri - one of the last holdouts in implementing the "I've got my eyes on you" act is wilting as badly as Hillary Clinton's election day results - the Republican-controlled House has approved a bill to impose Real I.D. on the Show Me State (or is it the We‘ll Show You State now?) . Missouri’s Republican Governor Eric Greitens has contacted the Trump Administration and asked for a reprieve from the execution of the federal final solution, but a number of lawmakers won't wait. According to the KC Star article:
"Several of the bill’s critics latched onto the governor’s comments, saying the state need not pass the bill until the new president has had time to act.
But Corlew said the House vote had been delayed for a month to give the federal government time to act. It hasn’t, he said, and there is no indication that Trump will ever call for changing the law.
"None of our congressional leaders have told us anything to suggest there is any movement on the Real ID issue,” he said. "I can’t find that Donald Trump in a public setting has ever even discussed the Real ID Act.”
Sen. Ryan Silvey, a Kansas City Republican, said it would be foolish to wait for the federal government to act."
It appears that this is not just because DHS cracked the whip (and is threatening to stop Mo. citizens from flying on planes and whatnot); Missouri has been taking grant money from DHS precisely to implement the program that was banned "in whole or in part" in the state just 8 years ago. http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread933200/pg1 Interestingly enough, the Missouri Department of Motor Vehicles attempted to collect data on gun ownership from license applicants in compliance with Real I.D., and in violation of state law. They were getting ready.
Missouri law is quite clear on the subject. http://house.mo.gov/content.aspx?info=/bills091/bilsum/truly/sHB361T.htm and yet there were efforts being taken under former Governor Jay Nixon (D-lost somewhere) to use this act as a backdoor gun registration in direct violation of state law.
And the State Highway Patrol admitted to handing over a list of concealed carry permit holders to the Feds, no doubt collected by the License Bureaus in compliance with Real I.D.
Missourians want to be protected from terrorism, but we do not want to become permanent suspects in the process. The way this so-called war has been fought has been essentially to force American citizens to prove their innocence rather than for law enforcement to seek out the guilty. There seems to be more concern for the rights of radicals and immigrants and alien colonists than for the rights of America's own people. There are tried-and-true methods for dealing with spies and saboteurs, but what is being done is a radical departure from traditional, time tested ways to deal with the problem, and that is because of a culture of political correctness and a lust for power in government circles. Real I.D. steals a fundamental right of Americans to be left alone and remain anonymous. We can no longer be said to be secure in our persons or papers and effects.
And if this last election taught us anything it is that the American People do not want business as usual. The enforcement of Real I.D. was an Obama-era scheme, and one which a great many Americans do not want. We now have a Republican President, House, Senate, Governor, Mo. State House, and Mo. Senate and STILL we are having this rammed down our throats! What, pray tell, didn't the political class understand? This last election was about change. We are tired of being treated like subjects rather than citizens, and seeing our leaders kowtow to aliens and special interests.
The most heinous tyranny, history’s most terrible atrocities, were not born full grown, but rather came about from "good ideas” like this. Tyranny starts as a small growth which metastasizes until it kills the host. It is important to remember that.
One final thought
"Since the general civilization of mankind, I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of freedoms of people by gradual and silent encroachment of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.”
Read more from Tim and friends at The Aviary
There's more text of various tweets in the article below.
"Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.) failed to acknowledge Equal Pay Day for the first time in her Senate career after it was reported on Tuesday that women working in her Senate office earned just 71 percent of what was earned by men.
Warren has used Equal Pay Day, which fell on April 4 this year, in years past as an opportunity to speak out on the gender pay gap. Last year she took to the Senate floor to call Equal Pay Day a "national day of embarrassment" and pledged to continue her "fight" until the pay gap was erased. She gave similar statements on Equal Pay Day in 2015, 2014, and 2013, her first year in the Senate.
This year, Warren was the only female Democratic senator who ignored Equal Pay Day entirely, and it was not due to a lack of opportunity.
She delivered a nearly 10 minute speech Tuesday afternoon and made no mention of equal pay. The topic of speeches during the session was the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch, but that didn't stop fellow Democratic Senators Mazie Hirono (Hawaii), Tammy Duckworth (Ill.), or Kamala Harris (Calif.) from acknowledging Equal Pay Day.
Warren didn't even bother to send out a tweet recognizing Equal Pay Day—setting her apart from the other 15 Democratic women in the Senate."
Read the re
Seems Big Hairy Squaw blowing smoke signals here. Coming from under squaw's dress bottom.
2p from Dana:
Whatcha wanna bet she finds an aide to blame for this, and goes after him (it'd have to be a "him") with a tomahawk?
Hope he wears a tupee because she'll scalp him...
""On Monday (April 3), eighteen U.S. Senators penned a letter to President Donald Trump urging him to sign an executive order that would require agencies of the federal government to respect religious freedom. The letter, drafted by Senator Roy Blunt (MO-R) and signed by Sens. Cruz, Rubio, Sasse, and fourteen others, calls for the President to take swift action to protect religious liberty.
"We were encouraged to learn of your consideration of an executive order that would require the agencies of the federal government to respect religious freedom throughout their activities and respectfully request you issue such an order without delay” write the Senators."
April 05, 2017
"Peter Lundgren – a right-wing politician of the Sweden Democrats party who hailed Article 50 "a breath of fresh air” – says his homeland is next in line for its very own "Swexit”.
We can fervently hope so. Let's break the power of Belgium and the un-elected bureaucrats of the EU. Who knows? Trash the EU and the UN might be next."
Brother-in-law Dave Dickinson sent me this excellent article from the Washington Examiner.
When you read this you'll already be aware that Sen. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has played the "nuclear option." Or has he? As this article points out,
This week, in all likelihood, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell will put the judicial filibuster to death. But when he does, it will not be accurate to say he is triggering the "nuclear option," because Democrats already nuked everything that could be nuked in 2013. McConnell and Republicans are really just clearing away the rubble.
It also would not be appropriate to blame "both sides" and suggest that the Senate sank to its current nadir because the two parties took turns to drive it down. Nearly every outrage in the judicial wars of the past two decades has been perpetrated by Democrats, and mostly Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and his predecessor Harry Reid.
News media, infatuated with "both sides" journalism, is often either unable or unwilling to accept that there is a great partisan imbalance in many aspects of politics. So it's worth recounting that Democrats did 90 percent of the work in breaking down the bipartisanship that used to accompany judicial nominees. More specifically, Schumer brought us to this point.
[...]Etc., etc. I think it's fun to read about how the game is played, especially when "we" end up holding more cards than "they" do (I did tell you that McConnell changed the rule today -- Thursday 4/6).
After the 2002 elections, when Republicans took back the Senate, first-term Sen. Schumer led the charge on this innovation of filibustering lower court nominees. He started with Miguel Estrada's nomination to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, where Schumer could find a logical-sounding but dishonest reason to prevent a vote. The senator argued that he would allow an up-or-down vote on Estrada when Estrada turned over the confidential memos he had produced as solicitor general.
This was literally asking Estrada to breach attorney-client privilege, and every living former solicitor general signed a letter declaring Schumer's request inappropriate. It's anyway disingenuous, for Schumer knew he was making a demand that would have to be refused. Democrats asked for the material because it clearly would never be produced. It was a transparent tactic to block conservative judges from the circuit courts, because their appointments might set them up for the Supreme Court someday.
Democratic staffers admitted as much in a memo that was leaked to the Wall Street Journal. The liberal groups who were calling the shots had instructed Democrats whom to filibuster. The groups "identified Miguel Estrada (D.C. Circuit) as especially dangerous, because he has a minimal paper trail, he is Latino, and the White House seems to be grooming him for a Supreme Court appointment."
Democrats swiftly escalated from there to filibuster almost every circuit court nominee they could. Schumer had a mendacious excuse at this stage, too. He said they weren't filibustering all nominees, just "controversial nominees," by which he meant any judge who couldn't get 60 votes. It set a 60-vote threshold for all judicial nominees. It was another escalation, and again Schumer led the charge.
In 2006, Democrats took back the Senate, and beginning in 2009, a Democratic president began nominating judges. Democrats then began gnashing their teeth when Republicans responded in kind, filibustering every Democratic judge they could. Again, this was only what Schumer had begun. So Democrats escalated again.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in 2013 brought filibustered Obama court nominees to the floor. Republicans voted against cloture. So Reid said he would change the rules so that it took only 51 votes instead of 60 to invoke cloture on a judicial nominee.
But under Senate rules, it takes a two-thirds supermajority, 67 Senate votes, to change Senate rules. Blasting this two-thirds requirement was the real nuclear bomb. Reid moved to overturn the ruling of the parliamentarian that it took two-thirds to change the rules.
With a majority vote, then, Democrats ruled that 51 equals 67. Reid didn't just nuke the judicial filibuster but nuked the idea that the Senate has rules beyond what the majority wants. And rules that the simple majority can change hardly count as rules.
Reid and the Democrats in 2013 changed the rules only on lower court nominees. And so one could say that Republicans this week will be escalating the warfare by expanding this regimen to Supreme Court nominees. But that's a quibble. There is no logical reason to treat lower court nominees and Supreme Court picks differently.
Again, the real nuclear option was Reid's precedent that a 51-vote majority could change Senate rules.
Read the entire article at: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/the-house-er-senate-that-chuck-schumer-built/article/2619199
It’s amazing how many "conservative” organizations are stepping forward these days, to support "clean, green” energy and immediate action to stabilize Earth’s always fickle climate, while condemning President Trump’s actions to roll back many Obama Era anti-fossil fuel decisions. Among them are Young Conservatives for Energy Reform, Citizens for Responsible Energy Reform, ConservAmerica, RepublicEn (as in Republican Energy), Conservatives for Clean Energy, and the environmentalist Christian Coalition of America.
But even more interesting is that almost every one of these organizations is funded by "progressive” anti-fossil fuel billionaires and their numerous "charitable” foundations, including The Energy Foundation, which I profile and expose in this article.
Pretend conservatives for not so clean energy
Far-left ‘charitable’ foundations give millions to ‘conservative’ groups to drive climate agenda
More and more conservatives are proclaiming the virtues of clean energy. At least that’s what some groups want you to believe. In reality, far-left "charitable” foundations have given pretend conservatives millions of dollars to advance a climate chaos, renewable energy agenda – channeling the funds through intermediary groups, to OxiClean the transactions and limit transparency and accountability.
The huge Green Profiteers Network has to be at least somewhat bipartisan to ensure continued mandates, renewable portfolio standards, production and investment tax credits, regulatory exemptions and other subsidies that have made Climate Crisis, Inc. a $1.5-trillion international business. With global financial and insurance giants allying with that crowd and determined to procure some $93 trillion (!) by 2030 to create a "de-carbonized” and "sustainable” world economy, the effort has intensified.
But now it must contend with President Donald Trump. His growing list of executive orders and regulatory reviews is rapidly reversing eight years of Obama "Clean Power Plan,” "social cost of carbon” and other regulatory decrees; laying the foundation for reversing EPA’s absurd finding that plant-fertilizing carbon dioxide "endangers” human health and welfare; and putting the United States in a position to lead the world back from the brink of Paris pact pandemonium and wealth redistribution.
Other countries will likely follow these energy and climate actions, says Cornwall Alliance ethicist Calvin Beisner, thereby "sparing their citizens from the crushing costs of pointless policies to mitigate global warming, by raising energy costs and prohibiting the most reliable, affordable forms of energy.” These actions are vital, because "the greatest threat to the environment is not affluence. It’s poverty.”
Radical environmental groups are nevertheless preparing to battle every Trump action in our courts, legislatures, newsrooms … and streets. Preparing to join all the prominent big-name groups is a host of like-minded, tax-exempt, pseudo-free-enterprise outfits, many operating under the umbrella of the Conservative Energy Network. This 2016 creation includes Young Conservatives for Energy Reform, an environmentalist Christian Coalition of America, Citizens for Responsible Energy Reform – and Conservatives for Clean Energy (CCE), launched in 2014 as an "educational” and "charity” organization.
They all advocate the asserted need to "fundamentally transform” energy and economic systems, and switch from fossil fuels to "clean, renewable” energy, to save our civilization and planet from "dangerous manmade global warming, climate change and extreme weather.” The other thing they seem to have in common is funding sources that enable them to be so visible and active.
Prominent among those funding sources is The Energy Foundation. It launched CCE with a $350,000 grant in 2014, gave $535,000 to the Christian Coalition in 2013 and sent $925,000 to the North Carolina Solar Energy Alliance since 2008, the Civitas Institute notes, citing tax filings and other sources.
Between 2007 and 2014, Civitas points out, TEF also gave $4,476,000 to the Southern Environmental Law Center, a litigation factory that uses questionable climate and ecological claims to drive lawsuits against energy and other development projects, raising energy costs, killing jobs, and hammering the budgets, health and wellbeing of poor, minority and working class families.
As a 2014 US Senate Environment and Public Works Committee report explained, a virtual who’s who of ultra-wealthy leftist foundations and their "Billionaires’ Club” of donors is the financial force behind The Energy Foundation. TEF serves as a "pass-through” hub that helps donors make it seem that grant recipients have a more diversified base of support than they actually do; shields them from transparency and accountability; and at times hides contributions from donors that could raise serious "red” flags.
One such donor is the secretive Sea Change Foundation. Set up by billionaires Nat Simons and his wife, Sea Change has been exposed by multiple investigators as a shell corporation that funnels huge sums to radical anti-fracking and anti-fossil fuel activists from Vladimir Putin pals, giant Russian oil companies and investment groups, and more reputable sources like the Gates and Walmart Foundations.
The Energy Foundation received nearly $65 million from Sea Change between 1997 and 2015 – plus tens of millions more from the Hewlett, Packard, McKnight, MacArthur, Rockefeller, Pew, Bloomberg, Tomkat (Tom Steyer) and other foundations. All together, over 120 fat-cat foundations gave a whopping $534 million to the Energy Foundation between 1997 and 2015. During the same period, The Energy Foundation gave over $1.2 billion to more than 12,000 activist and agitator groups, investigative journalist Ron Arnold discovered.
It’s a bit daunting to have this kind of money and power allied with green, urban and government elites against Blue Collar America and the fossil fuels that still supply 81% of the USA’s energy.
This is the cabal of "consumer” and "environmental” groups that "Conservatives” for "Clean” Energy has in its corner. With offices in North Carolina and Virginia, CCE is heavily involved in fossil fuel and renewable energy political activism.
It is closely allied with the NC Solar Energy Alliance, to extend government mandates, tax credits and other government assistance to a marginal electricity source that brings higher prices, lower reliability, and reduced ability of families, hospitals, schools and businesses to meet tight budgets, says Civitas.
It has also partnered with the SELC and other groups pursuing new strategies to bankrupt and close coal-fired electricity generation plants, by generating misplaced fear about coal ash impoundments. Once public anxiety rose, activists demanded that the ash be dug up and moved "somewhere else,” regardless of the cost, which could be in the billions – and regardless of the fact that detected levels of chromium-6 (and other metals) do not pose health risks and come from natural rock formations, as well as from coal.
Keeping the ash where it is, and capping it with impermeable clay, is probably the best thing to do now.
But CCE then waded in with an opinion poll, which predictably found that North Carolinians want the ash moved but don’t want to pay for the removals, and support more wind and solar power. The groups are now poised to reprise the tactic in Virginia and other states with coal-fueled power generation.
TEF itself also weighed in, funding a study which predictably concluded that US renewable energy industries would "eventually” create 74,000 new jobs "from the ashes” of coal-related companies. Even if that were true, how many jobs would climate alarmism, chemical fear-mongering and costly renewable energy destroy in other sectors of our economy? Perhaps 740,000 or even 7,400,000?
President Obama’s Clean Power Plan alone could have imposed $1 trillion in lost output, 125,000 lost jobs and double-digit increases in electricity prices, the Wall Street Journal noted. The combined impact of all Obama Era climate and renewable energy programs would have cost the American economy $3 trillion and 6.5 million industrial sector jobs by 2040, Senator John Barrasso stated, referring to a National Economic Research Associates study.
To top it off, "clean” energy is not clean, renewable or sustainable. It requires perpetual subsidies, taken from taxpayers and consumers, and given to politically connected crony corporatists. It needs vast land acreage – for wind turbines, solar panels, long transmission lines … and backup fossil fuel generating plants. And all those facilities require enormous amounts of concrete, steel, copper, rare earth metals, fiberglass, fossil fuels and other non-renewable raw materials dug out of the ground, often in faraway lands that have few environmental, health or child labor standards.
Just imagine the tremendous good all those billions of dollars from all those "progressive” billionaires could do if – instead of lining the coffers of radical anti-energy agitator groups – they were devoted to actually helping poor families in the United States, other industrialized nations, and especially the most impoverished, energy-deprived, disease-ridden, malnourished countries on Earth? That would be real, long overdue social and environmental justice. If wishes were horses ….
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 and other books on the environment.
Awwwwww. Geeee. Home invasion is supposed to be fair for the three thugs that came into this Oklahoma home, don'tcha know. That's what their union, the ACLU, says...Maybe they should have brought grandpa and an ACLU lawyer with them. Then there would be FIVE less troublemakers for Oklahoma to deal with. Dana, as they sang in the musical "Oklahoma," "Poor Jud is dead, Poor Jud Fry is dead, he's looking so peaceful and serene...and serene."
"Three Oklahoma teenagers were killed last week when they broke into a house and were met by a homeowner with an AR15. Now the grandfather of one of the teenagers is speaking out about his grandson’s death.
According to KTUL-TV, Leroy Schumacher, grandfather of 17-year-old Jacob Redfearn, believes the death of Redfearn was unjustified because the homeowner’s AR15 gave him an unfair advantage over the three burglars.
Speaking to KTUL, Schumacher acknowledged that breaking into a house was "stupid,” but death was not the appropriate consequence.
"What these three boys did was stupid,” Schumacher said. "They knew they could be punished for it but they did not deserve to die.”
"Brass knuckles against an AR-15? C’mon. Who was afraid for their life?” Schumacher said."
33 queries taking 0.2087 seconds, 103 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.