October 18, 2018
Is Brett Kavanaugh going to be another Scalia or Souter? Former Congressman Gil Gutknecht believes the latter.
"The Left predictably and immediately unleashed fire, furry and vitriol. They pledged millions to defeat her (Susan Collins) in her next election. Traitor! She would be forever banished from the feminist plantation. How could she turn her back on her gender? more...
This is not your father's Democratic Party. It's more like your father's Communist Party just after the Six Day War.
Schumer won't admit that the Dems are abandoning Israel
From the article:
Some Democrats are trying furiously to push back against a New York Times article reporting what's been patently clear for years to any honest observer: The party is abandoning its support of Israel.
"Senate Democrats are very strongly pro-Israel and will remain that way" declared Minority Leader Chuck Schumer.
Would that it were so. In fact, as the Times noted, several Democratic candidates, including some of the party's rising stars, are running on blatantly anti-Israel platforms.
Read it all at The New York Post.
I'm sure this will help end Warren's plans to become the Great White Father....errr...Great Indian Mother...in Washington.
I hear that Fauxcahontas's new political ad will begin this way.....
"Allow me to introduce myself. Princess Running Bull, at your service."
Rocky: "Gee, Bullwinkle, she doesn't look like any Indian princess to me."
Bullwinkle: "I don't know, Rock. Her business card says 'Made in Cleveland.'"
Rocky: 'Yeah? So?"
Bullwinkle: "Well, haven't you ever heard of the Cleveland Indians?"
Rocky: "And look at her feet. Something is awfully funny about them."
Fauxcahonas: "Don't worry. I'm wearing white socks because I was just traded from that team in Chicago."
Bullwinkle: "Come to think of it, her skin is so white, I couldn't make out the socks before."
Announcer: Tune in for our next episode, "Who you callin' paleface, paleface? Or The Me Sioux Movement." more...
Big Facebook investors call for ouster of Zuckerberg as chair
Yesterday I went to my doctor's office for a checkup. There weren't any surpises except one in the waiting room.
My doctor has a some health network show playing on a television for patients to watch as they wait their turn with her. One of the video pieces of health advise was given by a young, thin healthy looking woman who was surprised a few years ago while working in a doctor's office and having a physical after an unusual weight loss of ten pounds. She then found out she had type 1 diabetes. She optimistally spoke about what she does to manage her condition and how she now advocates for younger diabetes patients to do active exercise as she herself does. Her apparent, on the screen, normal glowing health and slim build appearance are remarkable.
This next day, while reading a political story that mentioned Nancy Pelosi, I recalled seeing her speak in person when she came to New York's 92nd Street YMHA a few years ago. I wrote in the Aviary at that time that Pelosi mentioned the USDA's approved diet for the general population was a cure all. She specifically held up a hard copy of this diet - and I quote her accompanying words verbatum - "Diet, not diabetes." The thinly veiled implications of her remark were obvious. Pelosi was saying a few powerful things. First is that the government has a prevention stage cure all for diabetes with its USDA food pyramid chart. She was also subtly impling that any Americians who have this affliction must be fat slobs who eat a gallon of ice cream for breakfast and drink a gallon of beer with lunch or dinner, and thus anyone who has diabetes has brought it upon themselves. Lastly, if this is a simple problem that can be solved by merely following the USDA food chart then why should the government do diabetes related medical research when government tax money are needed by people on welfare and government largess is also needed for college women to pay for their birth control pills and to help fund their abortions? You think the money to buy Democrat votes grows on trees?
No matter what the political preferences are of that thin young woman I saw on my doctor's waiting room television screen, I would have loved to see her in the audience at the 92nd Street YMHA that day years ago to challenge, if not confront, Pelosi on her simplistic solution to a major disease that plagues millions of Americans.
When Senator Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND), who is running in an uphill battle for reelection, tried to show how much more she cares about women's rights than the Republicans who support Justice Kavanaugh, she just dramatically proved the OPPOSITE. And she might well be dragged into court for her incompetencies.
Here's the article:
And here's the Money Quote:
"This is what teed up the Heitkamp debacle:
Responding to the sexual assault allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh and the "Me Too" movement at large, Cramer spoke out against the current "movement toward victimization" and added that the women in his family were "tough."
Heitkamp responded to Cramer by sharing that her own mom was a sexual assault survivor. Then, in a new open letter to Cramer which serves as a new ad, she writes that she and several other North Dakotan women are determined to show Cramer what "prairie tough" looks like.
"We are here to let you know that you are wrong" this is not ˜a movement toward victimization™ it"s about being a survivor" the ad reads. "We are here to let you know that we have all suffered from domestic violence, sexual assault, or rape â€" and that yes, we expect somebody to believe us when we say it. Because it happened."
At the bottom of the letter is a long list of North Dakotan women who are identified as sexual assault survivors. However, some of the women named in the ad say the campaign did not seek their permission.
Of course, the Heitkamp campaign issued an apology, but the damage has been done. Now, some of the women are seeking a lawyer and could slap Heitkamp with a lawsuit. Rob Port of Say Anything, a North Dakota-based blog, said there are 22 women in the group that's considering taking legal action [emphasis mine]:
What you mean, paleface?
Pocahontas Descendant Calls on Warren to Apologize
"A descendant of Pocahontas, the 17th-century Powhatan princess, said Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) needs to apologize for claiming to be Native American for political gain."
Read it all at Townhall.
Even before its enactment, the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act was one of the biggest incentives for US business growth in at least a decade. This year, all across America, small and mid-sized business owners, entrepreneurs and start-ups are investing in and expanding their businesses. As my colleague Mark Murphy notes in this article, dentists and other business owners are finding that incentives created by this statute can make reinvestment and expansion a smart move.
As his article and examples also point out, strong gains posted by banks and other corporations are being reflected in countless other sectors and companies, contributing to a generally upbeat economic mood, which in turn is inspiring consumers to spend more on their personal lives. Much of that spending has gone to small and medium-sized companies.more...
October 17, 2018
Does she just not get it? Can she not connect the dots? Oh, sorry, I forgot. Socialists rarely know there ARE dots.
New York Socialist Democrat Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has continued to use Uber and other ride-hailing apps – but not New York taxi cabs – despite blaming them for a suicide.
Between July and the end of September, Ocasio-Cortez’s campaign spent nearly $4,500 on rides with Uber, Lyft, and Juno, according to the receipts submitted to the Federal Election Commission (FEC).
The latest figures still indicate that she remains unashamed of using the services she criticizes for exploitation and leading people to suicide, despite increasing pressure and accusations of hypocrisy.
Ocasio-Cortez has frequently attacked ride-hailing apps for what she sees as underpaying its drivers, decrying their pay as "exploitation” if they don’t get at least $15 an hour, the so-called living wage.
She directly blamed Uber for the suicide death of Doug Schifter, a driver in his 60s, who killed himself with a shotgun amid financial difficulties caused by flooding the streets of New York with alternative and cheaper options of taxis, as detailed in a lengthy Facebook post.
"NYC's fourth driver suicide. Yellow cab drivers are in financial ruin due to the unregulated expansion of Uber. What was a living wage job now pays under minimum,” Ocasio-Cortez wrote in a tweet.
The new data from the campaign follows previous Fox News’ report that revealed the campaign spent nearly $4,000 on Uber and $2,500 on Juno between April and late June when she won against top Democrat Joe Crowley in a New York Democratic primary
Ocasio-Cortez’ campaign did cut its excessive spending on Uber rides amid scrutiny, spending merely $500 in the last quarter, with fares ranging from $2 to nearly $60.
But the cut was offset by the use of Lyft, another ride-hailing app facing nearly identical criticisms as Uber. The campaign spent over $2,700 on rides with Lyft.
'People Just Can't Know That': McCaskill, Staff Exposed In Undercover Sting Video
James O'Keefe's Project Veritas released a new undercover video Monday night showing Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO) and her staffers expressing support for radical gun control measures that they admit she can't state publicly.
The video shows McCaskill and her staff admitting that she supports banning semi-automatic weapons, bump stocks, high-capacity magazines, along with supporting other far-left policies.
Rob Mills, who works on McCaskill’s campaign, says in the video that McCaskill can't be open about her policies because "she has a bunch of Republican voters" and "that could hurt her ability to get elected."
Nicolas Starost, who also works McCaskill’s campaign, says in the video that former President Barack Obama isn't campaigning for McCaskill because she doesn't want to be cast as too far-left, even though she believes in the same policies that Obama does [emphasis mine].
"Because of how like, cause he’s a very liberal candidate," Starost says. "And like… Claire distancing herself from the party is gonna help her win more votes than it will saying like: 'Oh here’s Obama, the former President of the United States, to now speak on my behalf.' Which is unfortunate because I love Obama to pieces, and I’d love to see him come here."
People who are phonies on gun control usually get unmasked sooner or later, and these days it's often sooner. Daily Wire is widely distributed, so let's hope this blows up in Claire's face. We at The Aviary are doing our part!
October 16, 2018
Ohhhhh KAY! For one thing, I doubt CNN's polling is that accurate except among hard-core Democrats. For another, I don't see Hillary's name in there anywhere, with any percentage numbers after her name or none. Does that mean anything? And please read on about the "cringeworthy" interviews that Hillary recently gave. Might they affect her "loveability quotient?"
Top Democrats close to Hillary Clinton are reportedly telling her to keep her 2020 options open in case former Vice President Joe Biden passes on challenging President Donald Trump.
On Monday’s Hardball on MSNBC, Steve McMahon, a top Democratic strategist, said that "some people close to the Clintons and close to Hillary Clinton who look at the field and think if Joe Biden doesn’t run, it’s an awfully weak field and someone like Hillary Clinton could get back in.”
He added that some of these confidants are "whispering in her ear” that she might be able to win the nomination if Biden decides not to run.
CNN’s most recent national poll of potential 2020 Democratic contenders had Biden with a 20-point lead over Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT). Biden got 33% in the poll while Sanders received 13%. Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) was next with 9%, followed by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) with 8% and Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) with 5%.
Yep, I'd say that's exactly the case. Which may be the reason that the donkeys are so annoyed that Lizzie has brought up the subject at this particular time. Yes, it is taking focus off the midterm elections, but it may well do more than that. If it strips their one and only weapon -- identify politics -- from their arsenal, Lizzie may well get launched on her very own Trail of Tears.
Paul and Scott have joined in the general hilarity over Elizabeth Warren’s disclosure that she might be something like 1/1,000 Native American. (Then again, she might not be. There is so little Native American DNA in the database that several Latin American countries, including Mexico, are used as proxies. Warren may have a better claim to being Hispanic than Indian.) It turns out that Warren likely has less Native American blood than the average white American. Not to mention the wag who noted that she has more bourbon in her blood than Warren has Indian. But Warren doggedly sticks to the one-drop rule that her Democratic forbears promulgated in the antebellum South. Good for her!
Here’s the point: Warren’s defense of her claim to being Native American is good for America. Because if Warren is an Indian, then so are most of the rest of us. And most of us are also African-American or Hispanic. If everyone is an Indian, then no one is an Indian. This logic is fatal to the whole corrupt affirmative action enterprise.
Harvard Law School billed Elizabeth Warren as the first "woman of color” on its faculty. On the contrary, if Warren’s 1/1,000 Native American ancestry counts, the law school has probably had any number of "women of color,” both before and after her. Most of us qualify.
Affirmative action is teetering on the brink. Trial of the Asian students’ race discrimination lawsuit against Harvard University commenced today, I believe. Harvard’s denial that it discriminates against Asian applicants is transparently false, yet the academic world has rallied around the university in what likely will prove to be a vain effort to uphold the discriminatory regime in which nearly all are complicit.
Why does the edifice of racial categorization and discrimination persist in spite of its obvious irrationality and unfairness? Because many billions of dollars turn on it. And, perhaps equally important, it provides endless opportunities for virtue signaling. After all, if the Democrats didn’t have race, what would they have? That question is, no doubt, frightening to them.
Nothing comes out of a vacuum. Ideas, like germs, infect and grow and move from place to place, body to body. Sometimes these ideas are good, like the concept of Inalienable Rights, or free markets, or that slavery is an evil thing (most people in history would have strongly disagreed with that last.) As with viruses there are many that are neither good nor bad, simply that exist. And then there are very bad ones, which cause untold damage to society. Those last are usually embraced by the Progressives and the radical Left.
And they don't just go away. like viruses, they mutate into new forms and assert themselves in ways we cannot imagine at the time.
Take the concept of subjective reality. Western philosophy (and Eastern as well) began embracing this notion a long time ago based on a number of key observations about the imprecision of human senses. more...
From the Federalist:
One plausible answer might be that her family had lied to her, or were also misled about their heritage, and that Warren truly believed she was Cherokee. This happens relatively often, I suppose. Then again, few people exhibit as much certitude, and gain as many benefits, over a claim that's so obscure and unverifiable.
The second is that Warren herself lied or exaggerated her heritage, knowing full well that her contention to Cherokee ancestry was likely nothing more than lore. She then latched on to this negligible history to gain traction in an academic field that was searching for more diversity in their candidates.
We now know that the second option is more probable after the prospective presidential candidate decided to make a huge deal out of taking a DNA test, that, in reality, only proves she is as white as I am. A ludicrously unskeptical Boston Globe story about Warren's dramatic decision to take the test begins by contending that there's "strong evidence" of Warren's Native American's ancestry dating back 6 to 10 generations”which creates the impression that she has Native American family littered over the past 100 years.
Read the entire article; it's well worth your time.
October 15, 2018
PA Dem Forced to Resign After Facebook Posts Deemed Offensive
There's more. My question is, why is this Salvas, who obviously is a thoroughly decent, patriotic man, affiliated in any way with the Democrat Party?
A top Democrat in Pennsylvania said that he was forced to resign due to past Facebook posts that were deemed controversial.
Mark Salvas told CBS 2 Pittsburgh that he was asked by the chair of the Allegheny County Democratic Party to resign, largely because of a photo from last year that showed him and his wife with the words "I stand for the flag, I kneel at the cross."
Democrats in Allegheny County were reportedly offended by his patriotic post, as well as another by his wife that asked to support an officer charged in the fatal shooting of an African-American teen in June.
"I’m not ashamed of my patriotism, not one bit," said Salvas, a Gulf War veteran. "I fought for this country. I think I have a right to have a voice and be patriotic."
Now they're coming for your lawn.
A pair of urban ecologists, one from Australia, the other Sweden, suggests in a Perspective piece published in the journal Science that it might be time to rethink the idea of the modern lawn. In their paper, Maria Ignatieva and Marcus Hedblom note that the natural benefits of green lawns are far outweighed by negative environmental consequences, and because of that, new forms of groundcover need to be explored.
The expanse of cut green grass that surrounds many houses and serves as a draw to parks and other outdoor places is not as green as it might look. The modern lawn requires not only a lot of water, but fertilizer. It also requires mowing, in most cases using gas-powered machines that spew carbon monoxide and other toxins into the air. Ignatieva and Hedblom note that it is true that lawns offer some positive benefits such as pulling carbon dioxide out of the air, but the negative aspects of lawn care far outweigh their benefits. They note that globally, lawns currently occupy land space equivalent to England and Spain combined. Lawns also currently require an enormous amount of water—in arid regions, lawns account for 75 percent of water consumption. They also note that weed killers and fertilizers wind up in the water table. And artificial turf, they note, is not a likely solution. It doesn't contribute to carbon sequestering, causes problems with water runoff, and might be poisoning local water tables.
Because of the obvious drawbacks, the researchers suggest that it is time for the world to rethink the idea of a lawn
Of course, grass acts to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, but that doesn't matter.
Well, the final solution to this is to ban yards entirely and force everyone into housing projects like Pruitt-Igo, the St. Louis house of horrors. (Yes it really was that bad; I grew up in St. Louis and remember that hell-hole well.)
High rise housing with open green spaces is an integral concept in U.N. Agenda 21/30. Crabbing about the grass is a way of backdooring the idea.
Go to the webpage link to see accompanying online videos.
Police Department Confirms What Gun Owners Already Know: Suppressors Limit Hearing Damage
Kowabunga, Sen. Elizabeth Warren now only talks with forked tongue about where the money will come for all her giveaway programs. She really is a small part Indian.\
But this "champion of the people" benefited greatly at the expensive of the poor when she exploited their situation, using forced into bankruptcy situations to flip their homes for a quick markup profit of up to seventy percent. This was reported in 2012 at the UK Daily Mail website
To quote the Daily Mail, more...
Dr. Ileana Johnson gives us the lowdown on U.N. Agenda 21/30. It's nothing new to Aviary readers, but it certainly bears repeating.
Here is a taste:
Each year U.N. Agenda 21 which has morphed into 2030 Agenda is imposed on the participating countries, including U.S., at the local, state, and federal level under the infamous Sustainable Development (SD).
Wealth redistribution is not the entire U.N. Agenda 2030. They want to control population size, to engineer where we live through high-rise mixed-use urban settlements and forced mass migration (Europeans are already experiencing a dose of this forced migration and so are Americans), eliminating borders, and nudging governments to seize control of the means of production, directly or through fascistic decrees. U.N. is telling us clearly, "We commit to making fundamental changes in the way that our societies produce and consume goods and services.”
Who is going to decide what is "sustainable patterns of consumption and production” and what will the consequences of non-compliance be?
Alex Newman described Agenda 2030 as a "the UN plot …aimed at ‘transforming’ the world. The program is a follow-up to the last 15-year UN plan, the defunct "Millennium Development Goals,” or MDGs. It also dovetails nicely with the deeply controversial UN Agenda 21, even including much of the same rhetoric and agenda. But the combined Agenda 2030 goals for achieving what is euphemistically called "sustainable development” represent previous UN plans on steroids — deeper, more radical, more draconian, and more expensive.”
Do read the whole thing; it shows what a deceptive, devious plot this whole "sustainability" movement really is.
Read the U.N. Sustainable Development Knowledge Platform for the information on what they are demanding.
Here is the preamble:
This Agenda is a plan of action for people, planet and prosperity. It also seeks to strengthen universal peace in larger freedom. We recognise that eradicating poverty in all its forms and dimensions, including extreme poverty, is the greatest global challenge and an indispensable requirement for sustainable development. All countries and all stakeholders, acting in collaborative partnership, will implement this plan. We are resolved to free the human race from the tyranny of poverty and want and to heal and secure our planet. We are determined to take the bold and transformative steps which are urgently needed to shift the world onto a sustainable and resilient path. As we embark on this collective journey, we pledge that no one will be left behind. The 17 Sustainable Development Goals and 169 targets which we are announcing today demonstrate the scale and ambition of this new universal Agenda. They seek to build on the Millennium Development Goals and complete what these did not achieve. They seek to realize the human rights of all and to achieve gender equality and the empowerment of all women and girls. They are integrated and indivisible and balance the three dimensions of sustainable development: the economic, social and environmental.
And the document calls for unrestrained international migration, welfare programs for all, heavy regulation of private property ownership, you name it.
35 queries taking 1.34 seconds, 127 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.