July 01, 2025
Boys Will Be Boys
Timothy Birdnow
I mean, who doesn't rape or sexually abuse little girls when the thermometer is above ninety degrees and you are in a swimming pool?
9 Underage Girls Sexually Abused By Syrians At Swimming Pool, Mayor Points To 'Hot Weather'
Strange; "boys will be boys" was supposedly so bad when white feminists were upset with guys oogling them (not like THAT happened much with those hairy-legged shrews). Yet this is the excuse being made now, and only because these are Middle Easternern Muslims.
If we are going to excuse bad behavior because of culture, why do we not excuse Klansmen, or Nazis, or meth cookers? Isn't THAT part of THEIR culture?
I mean, who doesn't rape or sexually abuse little girls when the thermometer is above ninety degrees and you are in a swimming pool?
9 Underage Girls Sexually Abused By Syrians At Swimming Pool, Mayor Points To 'Hot Weather'
Strange; "boys will be boys" was supposedly so bad when white feminists were upset with guys oogling them (not like THAT happened much with those hairy-legged shrews). Yet this is the excuse being made now, and only because these are Middle Easternern Muslims.
If we are going to excuse bad behavior because of culture, why do we not excuse Klansmen, or Nazis, or meth cookers? Isn't THAT part of THEIR culture?
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
09:33 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 116 words, total size 1 kb.
Russian Mass Invasion
Timothy Birdnow
Russia has deployed 50,000 troops near the town of Sumy, just a few dozen miles from Donetsk.
The Russian strategy of war by attrition has seen a sytematic nibbling away at the Ukrainians position since the beginning of the year, having expelled the Ukrainians who invaded Russian territory.
Tthe Russians outnumber the Ukrainians 3 to 1 in most battles, plus have more weapons on any given field.
One Ukrainian commander said this:
We know what happens when you outnumber the enemy and can absorb casualties; the enemy loses. Stalin used this same tactic during WWII. During the American Civil War the Union used this tactic, with Lincoln demanding long casualty lists. He kept firing generals who weren't willing to see a bloodbath. Eventually he got Grant and Sherman. Grant at least demanded daily casualty lists. He understood attrition. The Japanese lost in WWII to Americans because, while better fighters than the American G.I.'s, there just weren't enough of them.
So the Russian strategy is sound. Russia has the manpower. Russia also has the raw resources - oil, gas, food, etc. Tthe Ukrainians just can't replace what they lose; their only hope is for outside intervention, an intervention that isn't going to come because despite their sabre rattling the Europeans won't dare muss a hair on the heads of their own. They want the U.S. to do it but we have no national interest and if we did we dare not risk nuclear war.
Eventually Ukraine will fall. Eventually her people will become so exhausted they beg for peace. Eventually this bloodbath will end.
It's too bad; it could have been ended diplomatically long ago. Now everyone is hardened and they refuse to negotiate peace. If Biden had been any sort of leader he would have prevented this from happening.
Now it's going to have to grind it's way to a final, unhappy conclusion.
Russia has deployed 50,000 troops near the town of Sumy, just a few dozen miles from Donetsk.
The Russian strategy of war by attrition has seen a sytematic nibbling away at the Ukrainians position since the beginning of the year, having expelled the Ukrainians who invaded Russian territory.
Tthe Russians outnumber the Ukrainians 3 to 1 in most battles, plus have more weapons on any given field.
One Ukrainian commander said this:
"The enemy is losing 300 to 400 people per day across the region, but they can deal with that level of casualties…They keep bringing in reserves.
We know what happens when you outnumber the enemy and can absorb casualties; the enemy loses. Stalin used this same tactic during WWII. During the American Civil War the Union used this tactic, with Lincoln demanding long casualty lists. He kept firing generals who weren't willing to see a bloodbath. Eventually he got Grant and Sherman. Grant at least demanded daily casualty lists. He understood attrition. The Japanese lost in WWII to Americans because, while better fighters than the American G.I.'s, there just weren't enough of them.
So the Russian strategy is sound. Russia has the manpower. Russia also has the raw resources - oil, gas, food, etc. Tthe Ukrainians just can't replace what they lose; their only hope is for outside intervention, an intervention that isn't going to come because despite their sabre rattling the Europeans won't dare muss a hair on the heads of their own. They want the U.S. to do it but we have no national interest and if we did we dare not risk nuclear war.
Eventually Ukraine will fall. Eventually her people will become so exhausted they beg for peace. Eventually this bloodbath will end.
It's too bad; it could have been ended diplomatically long ago. Now everyone is hardened and they refuse to negotiate peace. If Biden had been any sort of leader he would have prevented this from happening.
Now it's going to have to grind it's way to a final, unhappy conclusion.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
09:16 AM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 344 words, total size 2 kb.
How to Circumvent the SCOTUS Ruling
Timothy Birdnow
They are already plotting ways around the Supreme Court's ruling against nationwide injunctions.
3 Ways Judicial Insurrection May Circumvent the Supreme Court Ruoing Againstt Nationwide Injunctions
Here's one way; they are going to bring class action suits by all the illegal aliens (in compliance with SCOTUS' decision) which would keep them in the country as the legal battle plays out (over years, no doubt).
Amy Conehead Barrett, who wrote the majority opinion on the Court ruling left wiggle room; a thirty day moratorium on deportations of illegal aliens who are pregnant. so naturally they are going to run with Barrett's stupidity. (How can Barrett legally justify this? She can't; she just decided it was a good thing to do.)
At any rate here is how they plot to circumvent the ruling in Trump v. CASA.
First, there is the matter of class actions. Sam Alito argued this overturns the whole ruling:
Don't think they won't find a judge to rule in their favor either.
Second there is this:
Again, Barrett has screwed us.
Then finally:
This judge should be impeached as this is a willful breaking of the law by this court. But of course the Senate will never muster the sixty votes needed to remove this clown from the bench. congress could simply dissolve this court - something never been tried before - but I suspect that would require cloture of a filibuster. So we are yet again at the tender mercies of the Democrats.
The best thing to do is simply tell these judges disobeying the Supreme Court to go to hell. How can anyone complain about the Administration not obeying a rogue judge when that judge isn't obeying his own superiors? But of course the Democrats will sure try to gin up outrage.
Any way you look at it they aren't going to let this tactic slip quietly into that good night.
Ano0ther thing we can do is go to a favorable court, challenge our own actions, and let a competing ruling be implemented. Of course they have stacked most of teh Federal judiciary. We have far fewer judges than do they.
At any rate this isn't over and we can largely thanks that silly Amy Coney Barrett.
They are already plotting ways around the Supreme Court's ruling against nationwide injunctions.
3 Ways Judicial Insurrection May Circumvent the Supreme Court Ruoing Againstt Nationwide Injunctions
Here's one way; they are going to bring class action suits by all the illegal aliens (in compliance with SCOTUS' decision) which would keep them in the country as the legal battle plays out (over years, no doubt).
Amy Conehead Barrett, who wrote the majority opinion on the Court ruling left wiggle room; a thirty day moratorium on deportations of illegal aliens who are pregnant. so naturally they are going to run with Barrett's stupidity. (How can Barrett legally justify this? She can't; she just decided it was a good thing to do.)
At any rate here is how they plot to circumvent the ruling in Trump v. CASA.
First, there is the matter of class actions. Sam Alito argued this overturns the whole ruling:
"Putting the kibosh on universal injunctions does nothing to disrupt Rule 23’s requirements,” Justice Samuel Alito wrote in a concurring opinion.
He warned, however, that "district courts should not view today’s decision as an invitation to certify nationwide classes without scrupulous adherence to the rigors of Rule 23.”
If judges do so, Alito warned, "the universal injunction will return from the grave under the guise of ‘nationwide class relief,’ and today’s decision will be of little more than minor academic interest.
He warned, however, that "district courts should not view today’s decision as an invitation to certify nationwide classes without scrupulous adherence to the rigors of Rule 23.”
If judges do so, Alito warned, "the universal injunction will return from the grave under the guise of ‘nationwide class relief,’ and today’s decision will be of little more than minor academic interest.
Don't think they won't find a judge to rule in their favor either.
Second there is this:
The Administrative Procedure Act of 1946 also provides a way for district court judges to block administration policies.
A footnote in Barrett’s ruling notes that "nothing we say today resolves the distinct question whether the Administrative Procedure Act authorizes federal courts to vacate federal agency action.”
Under 5 U.S. Code Section 706, a court reviewing federal agency action "shall … compel agency action unlawfully withheld or unreasonably delayed; and hold unlawful and set aside agency action, findings, and conclusions to be” in one way or another "not in accordance with law.”
The Supreme Court has not laid out clear precedent about the limits of courts’ ability to vacate agency action under the Administrative Procedure Act. If left-wing groups bring such lawsuits against the Trump administration, these cases may end up before the nation’s highest court.
A footnote in Barrett’s ruling notes that "nothing we say today resolves the distinct question whether the Administrative Procedure Act authorizes federal courts to vacate federal agency action.”
Under 5 U.S. Code Section 706, a court reviewing federal agency action "shall … compel agency action unlawfully withheld or unreasonably delayed; and hold unlawful and set aside agency action, findings, and conclusions to be” in one way or another "not in accordance with law.”
The Supreme Court has not laid out clear precedent about the limits of courts’ ability to vacate agency action under the Administrative Procedure Act. If left-wing groups bring such lawsuits against the Trump administration, these cases may end up before the nation’s highest court.
Again, Barrett has screwed us.
Then finally:
District court judges may also flatly defy the Supreme Court’s clear ruling against nationwide injunctions. It sounds insane, but I frankly can’t rule it out because it has already happened.
Last week, Massachusetts-based District Judge Brian Murphy openly defied the court. He had issued a temporary injunction on April 18, blocking the Trump administration from deporting illegal aliens to South Sudan. He issued a follow-up order on May 21, clarifying and enforcing the injunction.
The Supreme Court struck down his April 18 order on June 23, but he issued another order that same day, stating that the May 21 order remained in effect.
Last week, Massachusetts-based District Judge Brian Murphy openly defied the court. He had issued a temporary injunction on April 18, blocking the Trump administration from deporting illegal aliens to South Sudan. He issued a follow-up order on May 21, clarifying and enforcing the injunction.
The Supreme Court struck down his April 18 order on June 23, but he issued another order that same day, stating that the May 21 order remained in effect.
This judge should be impeached as this is a willful breaking of the law by this court. But of course the Senate will never muster the sixty votes needed to remove this clown from the bench. congress could simply dissolve this court - something never been tried before - but I suspect that would require cloture of a filibuster. So we are yet again at the tender mercies of the Democrats.
The best thing to do is simply tell these judges disobeying the Supreme Court to go to hell. How can anyone complain about the Administration not obeying a rogue judge when that judge isn't obeying his own superiors? But of course the Democrats will sure try to gin up outrage.
Any way you look at it they aren't going to let this tactic slip quietly into that good night.
Ano0ther thing we can do is go to a favorable court, challenge our own actions, and let a competing ruling be implemented. Of course they have stacked most of teh Federal judiciary. We have far fewer judges than do they.
At any rate this isn't over and we can largely thanks that silly Amy Coney Barrett.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
09:02 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 698 words, total size 5 kb.
June 30, 2025
Christmas All Year 'Round
Timothy Birdnow
.The important work our government does.
Male prostitutes and pastries: Your tax dollars at work
Did you get that about the U.S. funding voter i.d. in Haiti? We aren't allowed to have voter i.d. in the U.S. but it's fine for us to spend money to make sure Haiti's elections aren't stolen. And this has been going on since the Obama Administration. And Govtech had this to say about voter i.d.:
But I guess they only play a role in fostering democracy overseas - here in America they cause voter suppression. That's what the Democrats tell us anyway.
I guess we hate Haiti and want her to fail then?
.The important work our government does.
Male prostitutes and pastries: Your tax dollars at work
Under the guise of so-called preventative care within PEPFAR program [The President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief], Americans have been funding the following: $5.5 million to LGBTQ advocacy in Uganda, $800,000 for transgender people, sex workers, and their clients in Nepal; $3.6 [million] for LGBTQ activism, free training in pastry cooking, psychosocial counseling, a cyber cafe, and dance focus groups for male prostitutes in Haiti; $1.1 million to produce gender transformation in diverse social and behavior change report, which advocates against ‘gender blindness.’”
[...]
"Other examples of the type of spending proposed for rescissions are almost comically wasteful,” he continued. "For example, complex crisis funding money went to voter ID in Haiti; development assistance funding has been used for net zero cities in Mexico, electric buses in Rwanda, and cricket powder in Madagascar.”
"Global health money went to the International Planned Parenthood Foundation and UNFPA,” other funds "went to social media mentorship in Serbia and Belarus,” and "the Clean Technology Fund was used for wind farms in Ukraine,” he continued.
[...]
"Other examples of the type of spending proposed for rescissions are almost comically wasteful,” he continued. "For example, complex crisis funding money went to voter ID in Haiti; development assistance funding has been used for net zero cities in Mexico, electric buses in Rwanda, and cricket powder in Madagascar.”
"Global health money went to the International Planned Parenthood Foundation and UNFPA,” other funds "went to social media mentorship in Serbia and Belarus,” and "the Clean Technology Fund was used for wind farms in Ukraine,” he continued.
Did you get that about the U.S. funding voter i.d. in Haiti? We aren't allowed to have voter i.d. in the U.S. but it's fine for us to spend money to make sure Haiti's elections aren't stolen. And this has been going on since the Obama Administration. And Govtech had this to say about voter i.d.:
Secure, photo-based voter IDs play a critical role in countries around the world in fostering democratic elections.
But I guess they only play a role in fostering democracy overseas - here in America they cause voter suppression. That's what the Democrats tell us anyway.
I guess we hate Haiti and want her to fail then?
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
10:02 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 294 words, total size 2 kb.
Carney Caves
Timothy Birdnow
After promising to fight to the death Canada's boss hog has folded like an accordian and rescinded his Digital Services Tax after Trump went to the matttresses.
Maybe the dimwit is finally learning; you can't threaten someone bigger and badder than yourself, not if you want to walk away with all your teeth.
BTW What kind of Canadian is Carney anyway? He is impolite and argumentative. Sets a terrible example for the country that prides itself on being mild and bland.
After promising to fight to the death Canada's boss hog has folded like an accordian and rescinded his Digital Services Tax after Trump went to the matttresses.
Maybe the dimwit is finally learning; you can't threaten someone bigger and badder than yourself, not if you want to walk away with all your teeth.
BTW What kind of Canadian is Carney anyway? He is impolite and argumentative. Sets a terrible example for the country that prides itself on being mild and bland.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
09:23 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 85 words, total size 1 kb.
Ford Working with Chinese
Timothy Birdnow
So now China is in charge of hiring at Ford's battery plant.
The company - Contemporary Amperex Technology Limited, known as CATL - is a Chinese corporation with close ties to the Chicom's military. The State Department issued a warning about doing business with this firm because of their close ties to the Chinese military.
Yet Ford inexplicably hired them to handle personnell for their battery division in Marshall Michigan.
FTA:
Doing business with China is like going swimming with alligators. That Ford would do this suggests the American motor company is being run by complete fools
So now China is in charge of hiring at Ford's battery plant.
The company - Contemporary Amperex Technology Limited, known as CATL - is a Chinese corporation with close ties to the Chicom's military. The State Department issued a warning about doing business with this firm because of their close ties to the Chinese military.
Yet Ford inexplicably hired them to handle personnell for their battery division in Marshall Michigan.
FTA:
At the same time, online job listings on multiple recruiting platforms show that CATL’s American subsidiary—Contemporary Amperex Technology Kentucky (CATK)—has posted job listings for roles at the factory, seemingly contradicting Ford’s assurances and revealing a far more active role in management by the Chinese company.
The concerns about the plant follow previous public backlash in Michigan regarding another battery plant, this one set to be operated by China-based manufacturer Gotion, which has signed a development agreement with a local township for its own facility. Gotion’s ties to the Chinese Communist Party pushed newly elected board members to rescind the deal and allege the Chinese firm had provided inducements to encourage the original approval.
The concerns about the plant follow previous public backlash in Michigan regarding another battery plant, this one set to be operated by China-based manufacturer Gotion, which has signed a development agreement with a local township for its own facility. Gotion’s ties to the Chinese Communist Party pushed newly elected board members to rescind the deal and allege the Chinese firm had provided inducements to encourage the original approval.
Doing business with China is like going swimming with alligators. That Ford would do this suggests the American motor company is being run by complete fools
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
09:16 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 216 words, total size 2 kb.
Ayatollah Issues Fatwah Against Trump
Timothy Birdnow
A high-order Iranian cleric just issued a fatwah against Donald Trump, calling him an "enemy of God" and calling for his assassination.
Grand Ayatollah Makarem Shirazi of the Iranian holy city of Qom issued this edict in the wake of President Trump's bombing of Iranians nuclear weapons facilities and his threats against Ayatollah Khamenei and other Shiite leaders. Being classed an "enemy of God" means said person is subject to the death penalty.
The assassination attempt on President Trump in Pennsylvania may well have been plotted by the Iranians, I might add, so it's not like this is anything new.
Grand Ayatollah Makarem Shirazi issued his fatwah ostensibly in response to requests by "believers".
You know, Shirazi doesn't quite realize that Mr. Trump can issue his own fatwah, and he's got a much longer reach than does the 6th century rag-headed cleric. It's not wise to pick a fight when you will lose.
I guess this guy thinks that dude who fell down the well will climb back up just to kill President Trump. (The 12th Imam). Good luck with that!
A high-order Iranian cleric just issued a fatwah against Donald Trump, calling him an "enemy of God" and calling for his assassination.
Grand Ayatollah Makarem Shirazi of the Iranian holy city of Qom issued this edict in the wake of President Trump's bombing of Iranians nuclear weapons facilities and his threats against Ayatollah Khamenei and other Shiite leaders. Being classed an "enemy of God" means said person is subject to the death penalty.
The assassination attempt on President Trump in Pennsylvania may well have been plotted by the Iranians, I might add, so it's not like this is anything new.
Grand Ayatollah Makarem Shirazi issued his fatwah ostensibly in response to requests by "believers".
You know, Shirazi doesn't quite realize that Mr. Trump can issue his own fatwah, and he's got a much longer reach than does the 6th century rag-headed cleric. It's not wise to pick a fight when you will lose.
I guess this guy thinks that dude who fell down the well will climb back up just to kill President Trump. (The 12th Imam). Good luck with that!
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
09:03 AM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 188 words, total size 1 kb.
Zohran Wants to Tax White People
Timothy Birdnow
And this guy says he's not a Communist!
Zohran Mamdani calls for tax hikes on ‘Whiter neighborhoods,’ asserts billionaires shouldn’t exist
Since non-white neighborhoods suck up more of the tax dolars than do white neighborhoods, through crime, larger numbers of fires, etc. maybe we should do the opposite and raise taxes on non-white areas? I mean, why shouldn't they pay more when they use more government services?
And the Ugandan immigrant Bolshevik Muslim has called for other, even more radical things - like a $30/hr minimum wage, defunding the police, government run grocery stores, etc.
As for the billionaires, I say we shouldn't have poor people either. What right do they have to be poor and use up so many resources paid for by the middle and upper classes! If billionaires are bad why aren't vagrants and welfare queens? There are more of the latter than the former, I would add. And unlike the billionaires they don't pay any taxes.
See how that works? When you start making yourself the judge of who owns what you get into a very sticky situation. Monty Python's Flying Circus had a great sketch about that. Dennis Moore was a Robin Hood character who robbed from the rich and gave to the poor - until the rich were completelyimpoverished and the poor were living in splendor in their hovels, with fine carpets, tapestries, paintings, crystal glasses and silver spoons. The rich sat in their bare mansions in their underwear with nothing. The song (quite catchy really) said "Dennis Moore, Dennis Moore, riding through the land, Dennis Moore, Dennis Moore without a merry band, he steals from the poor and gives to the rich, stupied bitch!" At that Moore says "this redistribution of wealth is trickier than I thought" and he then robs a stagecoach, making everyone show their possessions, then divvies everything up "you take one of these, you take this".
So I say of Mamdani "stupid bitch".
Foot drop.
And this guy says he's not a Communist!
Zohran Mamdani calls for tax hikes on ‘Whiter neighborhoods,’ asserts billionaires shouldn’t exist
Since non-white neighborhoods suck up more of the tax dolars than do white neighborhoods, through crime, larger numbers of fires, etc. maybe we should do the opposite and raise taxes on non-white areas? I mean, why shouldn't they pay more when they use more government services?
And the Ugandan immigrant Bolshevik Muslim has called for other, even more radical things - like a $30/hr minimum wage, defunding the police, government run grocery stores, etc.
As for the billionaires, I say we shouldn't have poor people either. What right do they have to be poor and use up so many resources paid for by the middle and upper classes! If billionaires are bad why aren't vagrants and welfare queens? There are more of the latter than the former, I would add. And unlike the billionaires they don't pay any taxes.
See how that works? When you start making yourself the judge of who owns what you get into a very sticky situation. Monty Python's Flying Circus had a great sketch about that. Dennis Moore was a Robin Hood character who robbed from the rich and gave to the poor - until the rich were completelyimpoverished and the poor were living in splendor in their hovels, with fine carpets, tapestries, paintings, crystal glasses and silver spoons. The rich sat in their bare mansions in their underwear with nothing. The song (quite catchy really) said "Dennis Moore, Dennis Moore, riding through the land, Dennis Moore, Dennis Moore without a merry band, he steals from the poor and gives to the rich, stupied bitch!" At that Moore says "this redistribution of wealth is trickier than I thought" and he then robs a stagecoach, making everyone show their possessions, then divvies everything up "you take one of these, you take this".
So I say of Mamdani "stupid bitch".
Foot drop.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
08:41 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 334 words, total size 2 kb.
Plot Fails to "Keel Moose and Squirrel"
Timothy Birdnow
The CNN correspondant who received the leaked DIA report claiming the airstrikes on Iran failed is one of the worst people for pushing lies - such as the "Russian collusion" hoax, or the claim the Biden laptop was "Russian disinformation".
Revolver has the story.
The story was leaked (because it wouldn't stand up to scrutiny) to CNN's Natasha Fatale' Bertrand, one of the worst Deep State protectors. There was a reason for that.
But the narrative is falling apart.
As I pointed out, if the first wave of bombing didn't work Trump would have sent in a second wave; nobody would stop him and Iran couldn't prevent it. There would be no logical reason to hit Iran and then just quit.
Of course this was a huge success, and it makes Americans thankful to have a competent guy in office. Biden would have just sent a pallet of cash.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is launching an investigation to ascertain who leaked it. These people don't realize that this isn't even the Trump they knew but a man and an administration that will not tolerate this. Someone may go to jail over it.
Good. You don't play politics with national security.
The CNN correspondant who received the leaked DIA report claiming the airstrikes on Iran failed is one of the worst people for pushing lies - such as the "Russian collusion" hoax, or the claim the Biden laptop was "Russian disinformation".
Revolver has the story.
The story was leaked (because it wouldn't stand up to scrutiny) to CNN's Natasha Fatale' Bertrand, one of the worst Deep State protectors. There was a reason for that.
But the narrative is falling apart.
As I pointed out, if the first wave of bombing didn't work Trump would have sent in a second wave; nobody would stop him and Iran couldn't prevent it. There would be no logical reason to hit Iran and then just quit.
Of course this was a huge success, and it makes Americans thankful to have a competent guy in office. Biden would have just sent a pallet of cash.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is launching an investigation to ascertain who leaked it. These people don't realize that this isn't even the Trump they knew but a man and an administration that will not tolerate this. Someone may go to jail over it.
Good. You don't play politics with national security.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
08:18 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 209 words, total size 2 kb.
Tillis Retiring
Timothy Birdnow
Just a threat by Trump sends the GOP cockroaches scurrying.
GOP Sen. Tillis to retire as Trump vows support for primary challengers
Good riddance; Tillis has always been the worst sort of RINO and the party will be better without him.
Just a threat by Trump sends the GOP cockroaches scurrying.
GOP Sen. Tillis to retire as Trump vows support for primary challengers
Good riddance; Tillis has always been the worst sort of RINO and the party will be better without him.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
07:47 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 45 words, total size 1 kb.
June 29, 2025
France Banning Smoking in Parks, around Schools, etc.
Timothy Birdnow
In FRANCE! The French smoke like chimneys!
France to Ban Public Smoking in Parks, Beaches and Near Schools
31% of Frenchmen smoke, compared to just 16% of Americans. And over 40% of French teenagers smoke.
Amd uet the French have significantly lower health problems from smoking than do Americans.
France has some 75,000 deaths from smoking per year, while the U.S. has 490,000 deaths per year. France has 68.29 million people compared to the U.S. population of 340.1 million, so adjusted for population and rounding France has about 1/5th the U.S. population, so it's clear they have a much lower death rate from smoking than do we. (Sadly my calculator kicked the bucket just now and I'm too tired to work out the exact number).
Another point to ponder; France claims to be a demcoracy and is all about the will of the People and all that, yet here we have the rationale for this ban.
From an article in Breitbart:
So a democratic republic thinks it's government's job to "promote denormalization" in the minds of people. During the Cold War when the Soviets did stuff like this we called it brainwashing.
This is what is meant by the "Overton Window"; push things that have always been accepted into the shadows and make things that have been in the shadows acceptable. We saw this in America where smoking used to be accepted in public - particularly in bars and restaurants - and smoking pot was something only jazz musicians did. Now you have to hang out in the back alley with jazz musicians to smoke a cigarette, and cigars? Fuggetaboutit! But you can puff away on your bong all day long in the park or whatnot.
For the Left the goal is to change times and laws. Like the witches in McBeth "fair is foul and foul is fair' they seek to roil and disrupt society so they can make radical changes to it. Smoking is bad for you, and everyone always knew it (they called cigaretttes "coffin nails" long before the Surgeon General report) but it was part of our culture (thank you Native Americans!). The Left went after it because it was vulnerable and they wanted to test their approach. It worked and now few smoke, and nobody publicly.
We've seen this with alcohol too; the young hardly touch the stuff. Beeer and whiskey and whatnot were sytematically pushed into the shadows (especially whiskey and other hard liquor, which couldn't be advertised on television by law). Now fewer than 4 out of ten young adults (under 30) consume aclohol, way down from prior generations.
I remember when I was in college in the '80's; liberals on campus wanted America to stop growing tobacco and plant food to "feed the poor" as if that would accomplish anything (most of that food would wind up rotting long before it reached the poor, and who was going to pay for it? It costs money to grow stuff, and time and labor.) They also hated meat, particularly beef. One liberal said to me once "who are we to eat beef while people are starving". I wrote an essay about it.
By changing our culture, our food, or drink, our clothes, our music and sports and houses, they hope to change how we think and what we believe and in the end come to embrace Big Brother.
So here we have them busily doing that in France. They've already accomplished much in that country.
Does it strike anyone as odd that the same program is a hot topic in every nation in the Western World simultaneously? Everyone seems to be following the same script, be it in America, Europe, Australia, etc. These campaigns appear out of nowhere and suddenly a huge, and they are always aiming at the same policies. It's like someone actually got together and discussed it.
Well, they did - at the WEF and other international organizations. And Academia and the media give their full backing to all this.
We are slowly losing our individual cultures, melding into a uberculture that will eventually morph into a world government. They are creating the Brave New World one cigarette and one shotglass at a time.
I know; smoking is bad for you. My own father has COPD and my brother emphysema. I won't miss smoking overmuch. But it's OUR decision to make, not some bureaucrats, not Congres, not some health nazis with access to the media. A free society demands that.
But to the Left freedom is doing things their way.
In FRANCE! The French smoke like chimneys!
France to Ban Public Smoking in Parks, Beaches and Near Schools
31% of Frenchmen smoke, compared to just 16% of Americans. And over 40% of French teenagers smoke.
Amd uet the French have significantly lower health problems from smoking than do Americans.
France has some 75,000 deaths from smoking per year, while the U.S. has 490,000 deaths per year. France has 68.29 million people compared to the U.S. population of 340.1 million, so adjusted for population and rounding France has about 1/5th the U.S. population, so it's clear they have a much lower death rate from smoking than do we. (Sadly my calculator kicked the bucket just now and I'm too tired to work out the exact number).
Another point to ponder; France claims to be a demcoracy and is all about the will of the People and all that, yet here we have the rationale for this ban.
From an article in Breitbart:
"In France, we still have this mindset of saying, this is a law that restricts freedom,” Philippe Bergerot, president of the French League Against Cancer, told the Associated Press.
The ban aims "to promote what we call denormalization. In people’s minds, smoking is normal,” he said. "We aren’t banning smoking; we are banning smoking in certain places where it could potentially affect people’s health and … young people.”
fin
The ban aims "to promote what we call denormalization. In people’s minds, smoking is normal,” he said. "We aren’t banning smoking; we are banning smoking in certain places where it could potentially affect people’s health and … young people.”
fin
So a democratic republic thinks it's government's job to "promote denormalization" in the minds of people. During the Cold War when the Soviets did stuff like this we called it brainwashing.
This is what is meant by the "Overton Window"; push things that have always been accepted into the shadows and make things that have been in the shadows acceptable. We saw this in America where smoking used to be accepted in public - particularly in bars and restaurants - and smoking pot was something only jazz musicians did. Now you have to hang out in the back alley with jazz musicians to smoke a cigarette, and cigars? Fuggetaboutit! But you can puff away on your bong all day long in the park or whatnot.
For the Left the goal is to change times and laws. Like the witches in McBeth "fair is foul and foul is fair' they seek to roil and disrupt society so they can make radical changes to it. Smoking is bad for you, and everyone always knew it (they called cigaretttes "coffin nails" long before the Surgeon General report) but it was part of our culture (thank you Native Americans!). The Left went after it because it was vulnerable and they wanted to test their approach. It worked and now few smoke, and nobody publicly.
We've seen this with alcohol too; the young hardly touch the stuff. Beeer and whiskey and whatnot were sytematically pushed into the shadows (especially whiskey and other hard liquor, which couldn't be advertised on television by law). Now fewer than 4 out of ten young adults (under 30) consume aclohol, way down from prior generations.
I remember when I was in college in the '80's; liberals on campus wanted America to stop growing tobacco and plant food to "feed the poor" as if that would accomplish anything (most of that food would wind up rotting long before it reached the poor, and who was going to pay for it? It costs money to grow stuff, and time and labor.) They also hated meat, particularly beef. One liberal said to me once "who are we to eat beef while people are starving". I wrote an essay about it.
By changing our culture, our food, or drink, our clothes, our music and sports and houses, they hope to change how we think and what we believe and in the end come to embrace Big Brother.
So here we have them busily doing that in France. They've already accomplished much in that country.
Does it strike anyone as odd that the same program is a hot topic in every nation in the Western World simultaneously? Everyone seems to be following the same script, be it in America, Europe, Australia, etc. These campaigns appear out of nowhere and suddenly a huge, and they are always aiming at the same policies. It's like someone actually got together and discussed it.
Well, they did - at the WEF and other international organizations. And Academia and the media give their full backing to all this.
We are slowly losing our individual cultures, melding into a uberculture that will eventually morph into a world government. They are creating the Brave New World one cigarette and one shotglass at a time.
I know; smoking is bad for you. My own father has COPD and my brother emphysema. I won't miss smoking overmuch. But it's OUR decision to make, not some bureaucrats, not Congres, not some health nazis with access to the media. A free society demands that.
But to the Left freedom is doing things their way.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
11:45 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 838 words, total size 5 kb.
War Powers Act Whacked
Timothy Birdnow
Suck on this all you people who say Trump violated the Constitution by bombing Iran!
Senate Rejects War Powers Resolution That Sought to Limit Trump’s Authority Over Iran Strikes
Even if they passed this they would be hard-pressed for it to pass a court challenge. The War Powers Act has dubnious Constitutional status as it is and has never faced judicial review largely because Presidents pretty much just ignore it.
As Commander-in-Chief the President has the authority to committ troops, or ships, or aircraft as he deems necessary. Congress has the authority to declare war, but they have no authority over the use of the military. There is a reason for that. Congress CAN end a war by cutting off funding; the President can order troops around all he likes but he's not going to accomplish anything without money. The Founders purposely made this division of power so neither Congress nor the President could simply impose a war, or stop a war, without the consent of the other branch.
But that's a moot point now.
Suck on this all you people who say Trump violated the Constitution by bombing Iran!
Senate Rejects War Powers Resolution That Sought to Limit Trump’s Authority Over Iran Strikes
Even if they passed this they would be hard-pressed for it to pass a court challenge. The War Powers Act has dubnious Constitutional status as it is and has never faced judicial review largely because Presidents pretty much just ignore it.
As Commander-in-Chief the President has the authority to committ troops, or ships, or aircraft as he deems necessary. Congress has the authority to declare war, but they have no authority over the use of the military. There is a reason for that. Congress CAN end a war by cutting off funding; the President can order troops around all he likes but he's not going to accomplish anything without money. The Founders purposely made this division of power so neither Congress nor the President could simply impose a war, or stop a war, without the consent of the other branch.
But that's a moot point now.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
09:53 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 181 words, total size 1 kb.
Attorney the Other Cheek (So We Can Slap You Again)!
Timothy Birdnow
Pam Bondi has sacked three career federal prosecutors over their handling of prosecutions of J6 self-guided tourists thanks to the recent SCOTUS ruling that restricted Federal judges from imposing nationwise injunctions. This meant Trump couldn't be stopped from firing these people by a long judge operating beyond his authority or jurisdiction.
Naturally the radicals who embedded themselves at DOj are horrified.
FTA:
These firings are hardly whims or impulses and only occurred after a review of their files. And they knew damned good and well why they were fired, or they wouldn't be "the best and brightest" as this unnamed DOJ stooge says.
This is what we mean by the Deep State; long serving radicals embedded in their citadels of power deep inside government agencies, protected by laws that were passed ostensibly to end corruption by making the bureaucracy outside of the patronage system but really as a tool to promote the Democrats, who not only buy votes this way but use such types to works their will and subvert any Republican administration.
Hopefully these three are just the first; we need every scumbag who abused their authority (and decent Americans) out of power permanently.
As to the SCOTUS ruling, it's a double edged sword and will undoubtedly come back to bite us at some point. We've benefitted from district judges staying Democrat policies in times gone by. Now that tool is as lost to us as it is to Democrats. Of course WE didn't abuse it because we believe in the rule of law. They only believe in the exercise of power.
But it is welcome as these courts were operating outside of the parameters of what they were intended to do and of their authority under the Constitution. And remember, judges have lifetime tenure and can't be removed easily. They can be impeached for criminal behavior, or Congress can simply dissolve their districts and reconfigure, but they cannot be kicked out for being partisan or just plain a-holes.
Well, many of them need to be kicked out and if the GOP would win big in Congress maybe thatt could happen. Maybe, but probably not; there are still too many RINO's in office and John Thune is essentially Mitch "the bitch" McConnoll.
But the DOJ is under the Executive branch and Trump shold be able to fire them at his pleasure. Why wouldn't he fire them, if they actively worked against him?
I remember when George W. Bush fired a bunch of U.S. attorneys there was a big stink about it and the media, happily amnesiatic, forgot that Bill Clinton fired ALL U.S. attorneys when he came into office. This isn't any different. These people serve at the pleasure of the President. Donald Trump is President and has the authority. But the courts have continually overstepped their authority to stop him.
Now they can't.
Pam Bondi has sacked three career federal prosecutors over their handling of prosecutions of J6 self-guided tourists thanks to the recent SCOTUS ruling that restricted Federal judges from imposing nationwise injunctions. This meant Trump couldn't be stopped from firing these people by a long judge operating beyond his authority or jurisdiction.
Naturally the radicals who embedded themselves at DOj are horrified.
FTA:
According to NBC News, multiple DOJ officials expressed concern about the direction of the department.
One federal law enforcement official described the move as "horrifying” and said it could have a chilling effect on prosecutors who may be asked to conduct politically sensitive investigations in the future.
"To fire them, without explanation, is a slap in the face not only to them, but to all career DOJ prosecutors,” one DOJ official said.
"No one is safe from this administration’s whims and impulses. And the public certainly is not served by the continued brain drain of DOJ — we are losing the best among us every day.”
One federal law enforcement official described the move as "horrifying” and said it could have a chilling effect on prosecutors who may be asked to conduct politically sensitive investigations in the future.
"To fire them, without explanation, is a slap in the face not only to them, but to all career DOJ prosecutors,” one DOJ official said.
"No one is safe from this administration’s whims and impulses. And the public certainly is not served by the continued brain drain of DOJ — we are losing the best among us every day.”
These firings are hardly whims or impulses and only occurred after a review of their files. And they knew damned good and well why they were fired, or they wouldn't be "the best and brightest" as this unnamed DOJ stooge says.
This is what we mean by the Deep State; long serving radicals embedded in their citadels of power deep inside government agencies, protected by laws that were passed ostensibly to end corruption by making the bureaucracy outside of the patronage system but really as a tool to promote the Democrats, who not only buy votes this way but use such types to works their will and subvert any Republican administration.
Hopefully these three are just the first; we need every scumbag who abused their authority (and decent Americans) out of power permanently.
As to the SCOTUS ruling, it's a double edged sword and will undoubtedly come back to bite us at some point. We've benefitted from district judges staying Democrat policies in times gone by. Now that tool is as lost to us as it is to Democrats. Of course WE didn't abuse it because we believe in the rule of law. They only believe in the exercise of power.
But it is welcome as these courts were operating outside of the parameters of what they were intended to do and of their authority under the Constitution. And remember, judges have lifetime tenure and can't be removed easily. They can be impeached for criminal behavior, or Congress can simply dissolve their districts and reconfigure, but they cannot be kicked out for being partisan or just plain a-holes.
Well, many of them need to be kicked out and if the GOP would win big in Congress maybe thatt could happen. Maybe, but probably not; there are still too many RINO's in office and John Thune is essentially Mitch "the bitch" McConnoll.
But the DOJ is under the Executive branch and Trump shold be able to fire them at his pleasure. Why wouldn't he fire them, if they actively worked against him?
I remember when George W. Bush fired a bunch of U.S. attorneys there was a big stink about it and the media, happily amnesiatic, forgot that Bill Clinton fired ALL U.S. attorneys when he came into office. This isn't any different. These people serve at the pleasure of the President. Donald Trump is President and has the authority. But the courts have continually overstepped their authority to stop him.
Now they can't.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
09:43 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 593 words, total size 4 kb.
Trump Targets Tillis
Timothy Birdnow
Good; Tillis needs to go! He is the worst sort of RINO Republican imaginable.
Trump Vows to Find Primary Challenger Against Sen. Thom Tillis
Good; Tillis needs to go! He is the worst sort of RINO Republican imaginable.
Trump Vows to Find Primary Challenger Against Sen. Thom Tillis
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
09:17 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 29 words, total size 1 kb.
Reading B cubed Aloud
Timothy Birdnow
so chuck-a-Burger Schumer has the entire Big Beautiful Bill being read on the floor of the Senate. Now why do you suppose that is?
It means it's going to pass and he needs time to work on people who might vote for it.
This is unusal but not outside of the rules. In fact ALL bills ought to be read aloud (and all Senators should be forced to be present or not allowed to vote on them) so everyone is clear what is in it. We should never have to pass a bill to see what's in it, as Pelosi said of Obamacare in the House.
That would also cut the size of these bills way down.
But the point is this is a measure of desperation by Chuckles and it shows the B cubed will pass.
so chuck-a-Burger Schumer has the entire Big Beautiful Bill being read on the floor of the Senate. Now why do you suppose that is?
It means it's going to pass and he needs time to work on people who might vote for it.
This is unusal but not outside of the rules. In fact ALL bills ought to be read aloud (and all Senators should be forced to be present or not allowed to vote on them) so everyone is clear what is in it. We should never have to pass a bill to see what's in it, as Pelosi said of Obamacare in the House.
That would also cut the size of these bills way down.
But the point is this is a measure of desperation by Chuckles and it shows the B cubed will pass.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
09:15 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 143 words, total size 1 kb.
Don't Mess with Zorhan
Timothy Birdnow
I heard Zohan, er, Zohran Momdani on Meet the Press saying he isn't a Communist but a Democratic Socialist. What does that even mean?
Well, there is this:
So according to Radosh this is a distinction without a difference.
Here is a rundown on the platform and beliefs of the CPUSA:
Where is there any difference at all between what they advocate and what Mamdani advocates?
"Democratic socialism" is a lie and always has been. Inevitably socialists chuck the "have a nice day" smiley mask and show their fangs; it's just a matter of when. Socialism MUST use force to make it happen, as people aren't going to give up what they have so those who don't earn it can have it and that is the cornerstone of all socialism. Socialism goes against human nature. ALL socialism. And it always fails, every time, in the end.
Momdani wants free child care, free buses, a rent and mortgage freeze. He wants government to own grocery stores. He wants to arrest Israeli P.M. Benjamin Netenyahu.
He wants to make New York a no go zone for ICE. He said in his interview that New York has not been hit by a major terrorist attack since 911 BECAUSE OF THEIR SANCTUARY CITY POLICIES! That is perhaps the scariest stupid comment yet.
He said he believed in dignity and safety for all but refused to condemn the abuse of Jews in particular, meaning he sympathizes with the abusers. But then he's a Ugandan Muslim.
So this guy is a Marxist Muslim anti-semite who will utterly destroy New York, as all communists eventually destroy everything they touch. Sadly New Yorkers voted for this clown.
BTW there are almost no Democratic Socialist countries. There are countries that have been governed by socialists in times past - Sweden, France, etc. But they all moved away from socialism; Sweden chucked it back in the seventies, for example, and can be seen as even more capitalistic than the U.S. as it has a much more business-friendly economy, with lower corporate taxes and fewer regulations. Ditto the rest of Scandanavia, which never even played with socialism. France chucked it. Greece chucked it (and went bankrupt from it first). Even China, which is still a COMMUNIST COUNTRY chucked it (much as Russia did in the '20's with the New Economic Program NEP for a time). Democratic socialism is just a new name for a tired, failed policy. It inevitably leads to what we saw in Venezuela, and are seeing now in Nicaragua where the Sandanistas, after retaking power, systematically purged all opposition.
Zohran will morph into Stalhan if given half a chance. He's a dangerous alien who probably should be stripped of his citizenship and deported.
I heard Zohan, er, Zohran Momdani on Meet the Press saying he isn't a Communist but a Democratic Socialist. What does that even mean?
Well, there is this:
"The positions they (the Communist Party CSA)take are really indistinguishable from the left-wing social democratic groups,” said historian Ron Radosh to the BBC in 2014. "I don’t even know why anyone belongs to it.”
So according to Radosh this is a distinction without a difference.
Here is a rundown on the platform and beliefs of the CPUSA:
CPUSA purports to be a "political party for the working class” and advocates for the implementation of socialism. According to the party’s program, the survival of the United States depends on its transformation to socialism. CPUSA blames the capitalist system, and the U.S. government specifically, for the exploitation of workers, widespread oppression, the destruction of the environment, and imperialism. CPUSA advocates socialism as the only system that can ensure human rights and peace in the United States and around the world.
[...]
CPUSA refers to itself as a Marxist organization, indicating that communism is its end goal. CPUSA’s platform posits that communism will result in "a society without exploitation, without social classes, without war, without constant attacks on our shared environment, and without any coercive apparatus,” while guaranteeing full democratic freedom and the "humane development of society and the individual—for human happiness.”* "CPUSA Program,” Communist Party USA, April 13, 2020, https://www.cpusa.org/party_info/party-program/#Capitalism.x Nonetheless, CPUSA claims to fully support democracy and the guarantee of personal liberties, including voting rights and full democratic representation. According to CPUSA, capitalism presents the greatest danger to democratic freedom.
[...]
According to CPUSA’s platform, the extreme right has influenced the Republican Party and injected Islamophobia, ultra-nationalism, and authoritarianism into the U.S. government. CPUSA accuses the Trump Administration of being authoritarian while the extreme right seeks to use capitalism to extend its control over the entire country. Further, CPUSA alleges the U.S. government uses the threat of terrorism to curtail individual freedoms, including free speech and assembly.* "CPUSA Program,” Communist Party USA, April 13, 2020, https://www.cpusa.org/party_info/party-program/#Capitalism.x CPUSA obligates all party members to fight against racist ideologies and for full political and social rights for all. CPUSA opposes anti-Semitism and discrimination based on race, religion, nationality, or color.
[...]
CPUSA refers to itself as a Marxist organization, indicating that communism is its end goal. CPUSA’s platform posits that communism will result in "a society without exploitation, without social classes, without war, without constant attacks on our shared environment, and without any coercive apparatus,” while guaranteeing full democratic freedom and the "humane development of society and the individual—for human happiness.”* "CPUSA Program,” Communist Party USA, April 13, 2020, https://www.cpusa.org/party_info/party-program/#Capitalism.x Nonetheless, CPUSA claims to fully support democracy and the guarantee of personal liberties, including voting rights and full democratic representation. According to CPUSA, capitalism presents the greatest danger to democratic freedom.
[...]
According to CPUSA’s platform, the extreme right has influenced the Republican Party and injected Islamophobia, ultra-nationalism, and authoritarianism into the U.S. government. CPUSA accuses the Trump Administration of being authoritarian while the extreme right seeks to use capitalism to extend its control over the entire country. Further, CPUSA alleges the U.S. government uses the threat of terrorism to curtail individual freedoms, including free speech and assembly.* "CPUSA Program,” Communist Party USA, April 13, 2020, https://www.cpusa.org/party_info/party-program/#Capitalism.x CPUSA obligates all party members to fight against racist ideologies and for full political and social rights for all. CPUSA opposes anti-Semitism and discrimination based on race, religion, nationality, or color.
Where is there any difference at all between what they advocate and what Mamdani advocates?
"Democratic socialism" is a lie and always has been. Inevitably socialists chuck the "have a nice day" smiley mask and show their fangs; it's just a matter of when. Socialism MUST use force to make it happen, as people aren't going to give up what they have so those who don't earn it can have it and that is the cornerstone of all socialism. Socialism goes against human nature. ALL socialism. And it always fails, every time, in the end.
Momdani wants free child care, free buses, a rent and mortgage freeze. He wants government to own grocery stores. He wants to arrest Israeli P.M. Benjamin Netenyahu.
He wants to make New York a no go zone for ICE. He said in his interview that New York has not been hit by a major terrorist attack since 911 BECAUSE OF THEIR SANCTUARY CITY POLICIES! That is perhaps the scariest stupid comment yet.
He said he believed in dignity and safety for all but refused to condemn the abuse of Jews in particular, meaning he sympathizes with the abusers. But then he's a Ugandan Muslim.
So this guy is a Marxist Muslim anti-semite who will utterly destroy New York, as all communists eventually destroy everything they touch. Sadly New Yorkers voted for this clown.
BTW there are almost no Democratic Socialist countries. There are countries that have been governed by socialists in times past - Sweden, France, etc. But they all moved away from socialism; Sweden chucked it back in the seventies, for example, and can be seen as even more capitalistic than the U.S. as it has a much more business-friendly economy, with lower corporate taxes and fewer regulations. Ditto the rest of Scandanavia, which never even played with socialism. France chucked it. Greece chucked it (and went bankrupt from it first). Even China, which is still a COMMUNIST COUNTRY chucked it (much as Russia did in the '20's with the New Economic Program NEP for a time). Democratic socialism is just a new name for a tired, failed policy. It inevitably leads to what we saw in Venezuela, and are seeing now in Nicaragua where the Sandanistas, after retaking power, systematically purged all opposition.
Zohran will morph into Stalhan if given half a chance. He's a dangerous alien who probably should be stripped of his citizenship and deported.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
08:47 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 782 words, total size 5 kb.
June 28, 2025
Perverted WaPo
Timothy Birdnow
This is the American media:
Washington Post journalist busted by DC US Attorney Jeanine Pirro for allegedly possessing child porn
While there are ouliers in any field and the media is large, I rather suspect a LOT of them are indeed perverts who became "journalists" to promote their own deviancy.
A predator is a predator, sexual or written.
This is the American media:
Washington Post journalist busted by DC US Attorney Jeanine Pirro for allegedly possessing child porn
While there are ouliers in any field and the media is large, I rather suspect a LOT of them are indeed perverts who became "journalists" to promote their own deviancy.
A predator is a predator, sexual or written.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
10:26 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 62 words, total size 1 kb.
Doh! Canada
Timothy Birdnow
Trump is breaking off trade talks with Canada as the Canucks refuse to negotiate in good faith and imposing a crazy new tax on America.
The silly fellow running things in the Canadian parliament doesn't grasp that he's not going to win this; Trump won't cave and doesn't have to. Canada needs the U.S. market far more than we need Canada's.
Our economy is ten times the size of our northern neighbor's.
From the Epoch Times:
Canada seems determined to embrace poverty and stupidity.
Trump is breaking off trade talks with Canada as the Canucks refuse to negotiate in good faith and imposing a crazy new tax on America.
The silly fellow running things in the Canadian parliament doesn't grasp that he's not going to win this; Trump won't cave and doesn't have to. Canada needs the U.S. market far more than we need Canada's.
Our economy is ten times the size of our northern neighbor's.
From the Epoch Times:
In a June 27 Truth Social post, Trump said the termination was made because of Canada’s plan to impose a digital services tax (DST), which would affect U.S. tech companies. The tax is set to take effect on Monday. The president called the tax a "direct and blatant attack” on the United States.
Canada seems determined to embrace poverty and stupidity.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
10:19 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 141 words, total size 1 kb.
No Fear!
Timothy Birdnow
Easy; just stop reading cheesy scary disaster sci-fi...
AP Gives Advice on How to Manage Anxiety from "Emotional Toll" of Climate Panic
In Michael Crichton's novel State of Fear he postulates a societal control mechanism employed by the Ruling Class which uses fear to contain and manipulate the public. Crichton rightly understood that there was a machine in place designed to create new forms of fear to implement societal change. It started in the big universities, moved to the media who promoted it, and wound up as leglislation in Congress. But it was all bogus stuff, simple scare-mongering to frighten low information people.
In the case of climate change the goal is international socialism and world government and it is intended to force us all together to "fight climate disaster".
This was a theory that went back a while. While Roger Revelle is credited with actually formulating the theory that increaseed atmospheric carbon dioxide would raise planetary temperatures (Revelle argued it would stop at 2* F. and saw it as a curiosity, not a crisis) But it got it's big push at the Endangered Atmospheres Conference in 1975. This conference featured a bunch of big names in the climate change alarmism industry, guys like John Holdren (Obama's science czar), or William kellogg, or Stephen Schneider, or George Woodwell. Margaret Mead, the discredited anthropologist, chaired the meeting. The goal of the meeting was to push climate catastrophism as a result of the atmosphere because it is the one thing we all truly share on Earth. It was a prime tool to promote world government.
The plan was to promote Global Cooling as a result of aerosols put into the atmosphere. They began implementing this, but the climate wouldn't cooperate as the cooling trend of the sixties and seventies was crapping out. So they switched gears and went to their backup - global warming. Most of the people who promoted global cooling didn't skip a beat, switching to warming instantly, in a manner reminiscent of Orwell's 1984 "we have always been at war with East Asia". After a lengthy campaign in the liberal media the U.N. established the IPCC, which supposedly recruited the best minds in the (brand new) climate change community (Climate science was a branch of meteorology before being spun off and it was starving for funding - few to no meteorologists were involved with the IPCC). The report was a foregone conclusion, as I said at the time. There was a lot of money and pwoer at stake.
So the radicals have ridden this pony for decades now, a kind of forty five year long War of the World hoax. But it's never had much scientific credibility. At most they can point to specific points on Earth that are marginally warmer than the historical record, most of which go back to the satellite era and to 1979.
Nobody disputes the Earth is warmer, nor that Man might have something to do with it. Dr. Roy Spencer of the University of Alabama Huntsville and formerly NaSA rcsently calculated (using satellite data rather than corrupted land data) that land use changes account for all the warming we've seen. All of it. You can't pave over a forest and expect not to have it warmer there. Dr. Roger Pielke Sr. of U.C. Boulder argued this was the case for years, I might add. And as carbon dioxide has a logarithmic absorbtion of heat (meaning a doubling of it will lead to half as much energy retention) we have already pretty much reached the peak temperature increase.
Now the argument made by the Gang Green is that this will evaporate water from lakes and oceans and this will lead to more warming, leading to more evaporation, etc. in a runaway greenhouse effect. But we don't see that. You cannot square the idea of hotter and dryer with that. It should be hotter and wetter. Also, the Earth's albedo is declining, which is the exact opposite of what should happen; increased cloud cover from evaporation of water should make the albedo rise, not fall. Declining albedo also explains the modest warming seen, btw.
The fact is the Earth has largely negative feedback loops - the so-called climate sensitivity. Raise planetary temperatures and cloud cover reduces the amount of insolation (sunlight received) which cools it back down. We do not see positive feedback loops, by and large.
This is similar to Mars, which remains in a terrible ice age because every time the planet warms the atmosphere (which is largely frozen out as dry ice) increases in pressure, leading to huge dust storms which darken the skies and cool the planet back down. The atmosphere refreezes and Mars returns to her frozen tranquility.
Of course the media won't report any of this because they want to establish in everyone's minds the crisis which can only be solves by a massive reduction in industrial emissions - meaning we all must live poorer. And since this will starve the poor in the Third World it means we must establish relief funds and reorder society - The Great Reset. It means free enterprise must die in favor of fascist economics.
Well I suggest everyone simply decide not to participate in Ragnarok. The panic is all in our minds. But to get past it we must first realize the media lies to us night and day. Remember Covid. Remember Russian Collusion. Remember the Hunter Laptop story. If the media says good morning I have to stick my head outside to check.
Life is too short to live in fear. That is the way of children.
Easy; just stop reading cheesy scary disaster sci-fi...
AP Gives Advice on How to Manage Anxiety from "Emotional Toll" of Climate Panic
In Michael Crichton's novel State of Fear he postulates a societal control mechanism employed by the Ruling Class which uses fear to contain and manipulate the public. Crichton rightly understood that there was a machine in place designed to create new forms of fear to implement societal change. It started in the big universities, moved to the media who promoted it, and wound up as leglislation in Congress. But it was all bogus stuff, simple scare-mongering to frighten low information people.
In the case of climate change the goal is international socialism and world government and it is intended to force us all together to "fight climate disaster".
This was a theory that went back a while. While Roger Revelle is credited with actually formulating the theory that increaseed atmospheric carbon dioxide would raise planetary temperatures (Revelle argued it would stop at 2* F. and saw it as a curiosity, not a crisis) But it got it's big push at the Endangered Atmospheres Conference in 1975. This conference featured a bunch of big names in the climate change alarmism industry, guys like John Holdren (Obama's science czar), or William kellogg, or Stephen Schneider, or George Woodwell. Margaret Mead, the discredited anthropologist, chaired the meeting. The goal of the meeting was to push climate catastrophism as a result of the atmosphere because it is the one thing we all truly share on Earth. It was a prime tool to promote world government.
The plan was to promote Global Cooling as a result of aerosols put into the atmosphere. They began implementing this, but the climate wouldn't cooperate as the cooling trend of the sixties and seventies was crapping out. So they switched gears and went to their backup - global warming. Most of the people who promoted global cooling didn't skip a beat, switching to warming instantly, in a manner reminiscent of Orwell's 1984 "we have always been at war with East Asia". After a lengthy campaign in the liberal media the U.N. established the IPCC, which supposedly recruited the best minds in the (brand new) climate change community (Climate science was a branch of meteorology before being spun off and it was starving for funding - few to no meteorologists were involved with the IPCC). The report was a foregone conclusion, as I said at the time. There was a lot of money and pwoer at stake.
So the radicals have ridden this pony for decades now, a kind of forty five year long War of the World hoax. But it's never had much scientific credibility. At most they can point to specific points on Earth that are marginally warmer than the historical record, most of which go back to the satellite era and to 1979.
Nobody disputes the Earth is warmer, nor that Man might have something to do with it. Dr. Roy Spencer of the University of Alabama Huntsville and formerly NaSA rcsently calculated (using satellite data rather than corrupted land data) that land use changes account for all the warming we've seen. All of it. You can't pave over a forest and expect not to have it warmer there. Dr. Roger Pielke Sr. of U.C. Boulder argued this was the case for years, I might add. And as carbon dioxide has a logarithmic absorbtion of heat (meaning a doubling of it will lead to half as much energy retention) we have already pretty much reached the peak temperature increase.
Now the argument made by the Gang Green is that this will evaporate water from lakes and oceans and this will lead to more warming, leading to more evaporation, etc. in a runaway greenhouse effect. But we don't see that. You cannot square the idea of hotter and dryer with that. It should be hotter and wetter. Also, the Earth's albedo is declining, which is the exact opposite of what should happen; increased cloud cover from evaporation of water should make the albedo rise, not fall. Declining albedo also explains the modest warming seen, btw.
The fact is the Earth has largely negative feedback loops - the so-called climate sensitivity. Raise planetary temperatures and cloud cover reduces the amount of insolation (sunlight received) which cools it back down. We do not see positive feedback loops, by and large.
This is similar to Mars, which remains in a terrible ice age because every time the planet warms the atmosphere (which is largely frozen out as dry ice) increases in pressure, leading to huge dust storms which darken the skies and cool the planet back down. The atmosphere refreezes and Mars returns to her frozen tranquility.
Of course the media won't report any of this because they want to establish in everyone's minds the crisis which can only be solves by a massive reduction in industrial emissions - meaning we all must live poorer. And since this will starve the poor in the Third World it means we must establish relief funds and reorder society - The Great Reset. It means free enterprise must die in favor of fascist economics.
Well I suggest everyone simply decide not to participate in Ragnarok. The panic is all in our minds. But to get past it we must first realize the media lies to us night and day. Remember Covid. Remember Russian Collusion. Remember the Hunter Laptop story. If the media says good morning I have to stick my head outside to check.
Life is too short to live in fear. That is the way of children.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
10:01 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 940 words, total size 6 kb.
Discrimination is Discrimination
Timothy Birdnow
How is it either moral or practical to discriminate against a race of people?
Minnesota: "Whites Need Not Apply”
It's not; it violates the most basic legal protections, protections that have been in place at least since the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
To toot my own horn I will say I predicted this long ago; as the tide turns the whites will not be afforded the protections they voluntarily handed to minorities. Payback will be a bitch, and all the high-minded rhetoric will simply vanish as the increasingly powerful minority community seeks payback for the bad old days. I knew this was coming.
That is in no way a defense of how white people treated blacks, Hispanics, Asians, etc. But it is an indictment of the way the process of making a colorblind society was implemented.
First, everyone is racist to a degree. Every race thinks it's own is best. That is just human nature. We come from the paleolithic where tribes were isolated and we put our allegiance first with our tribe. No doubt this problem will continue until the end of Mankind as it is hard-wired into our DNA. But that doesn't mean everyone ACTS or even thinks in a racist manner; it just means some try harder than others to push the demon down, just as we have to push other demons down - like our sexual lust or our appetites. Yes, there are degenerates who have sex with underage girls or with young boys or who cheat on their spouses or whatnot. Yes, there are obese people who eat way too much, But most of us control it, and the controlling process is usually unpleasant but we do it because we know it's a bad holdover from the Paleolithic. Racism is no exception.
(I hate the term, by the way; oftentimes what is called "racism" is simple dislike of the CULTURE of another race, not the race itself. Back in the '70's we called the "prejudice" but that phrase is passe'. Racism used to be reserved for those who HATE people from other races. George Washington held slaves - as did many rich planters - and he wouldn't allow blacks to serve in his army. He bore black folks no ill-will, just thought they weren't acceptable folks for serious work. He was not racist. Nathan Bedford Forrest, on the other hand, WAS racist and would have no problem finding a "final solution" to the slavery issue.)
At any rate America has not been racist, not for a long time at least. It is still prejudiced to a degree, but often for minorities. The real racism in America is against the whites by the minorities. And by white liberals, who have been taught for decades to hate America and the evil white old patriarchs who founded her.
DEI is an attempt to institutionalize that hatred of the white majority, and despite it being clearly anti-constitutional it found a home in many places, notably the Democratic (sic) Party which has labored to implement structural racism against white folks.
(BTW "white racism" was inevitable given the way colonization happened; you had small settlements of whites amid a then-much-larger aboriginal population. Also, the Spaniards were pushing into North America and the British colonists faced the difficult decision of whether to remain British or be absorbed by the larger masses, as did the Spanish. (There are few white people in Latin America; mostly they are mestizo, a mix of Indian and Spanish.) The British colonists chose to remain British, even after independence, and they justified it because they looked at the Indians or the black slaves or the Mexicans and saw them as something they did not want to be. Had the original settlers not separated themselves they would have disappeared. They had read their Bible and knew the same held true for the Israelites. American racial attitudes may not have been kind but they had a rationality to them that made sense at the time.)
At any rate DEI is being implemented even now, when the Democrats got spanked and are getting spanked, because it comports with their view that "demographics is destiny" and the white people will wind up minorities. So they promote what they think will be the winning side, and they try to help that victory along.
And it MAY happen, unless white people start having children again. White people stopped because for decades now there has been a constant drumbeat of acrimony against them and they have been despairing. White men are the only demographic in America that has it's life expectancy declining, and that is because white men see themselves as being completely abused by the system (and they are right). Couple that with the massive immigration and the prospects are dim for white folks. The massive immigration was intended to accelerate this process, I might add. The "replacement theory" is entirely correct; the plan is to replace white people in America and re-found her as a socialist part of Latin America, or near enough. White people formed the kernal of the old United States. They have to go to create the new nation.
DEI is little different from the Black Codes or Jim Crow, it's just aimed in a different direction. It's a way of abusing and suppressing the white majority in favor of minorities. Sadly too many Americans allowed it to happen, voting for the party that promotes this.
They still do. The election of 2024 should have been a far bigger blowout than it was.
At any rate in a sane world Minnesota would be punished severely, with businesses leaving, with civil rights violation charges, etc. But we are so used to this stuff that the reaction is "oh, that again" and that's pretty much the end of it.
If it is illegal to discriminate against anyone, how can it be legal to discriminate for them? Two wrongs don't make a right. Discrimination is discrimination.
How is it either moral or practical to discriminate against a race of people?
Minnesota: "Whites Need Not Apply”
Minnesota offers a scholarship for "aspiring teachers of color.” One of the qualifications is you can’t be White.
Taxpayer funded and State sanctioned racism against White people.
How is this legal?
pic.twitter.com/FKrhwd5R6g
Taxpayer funded and State sanctioned racism against White people.
How is this legal?
pic.twitter.com/FKrhwd5R6g
It's not; it violates the most basic legal protections, protections that have been in place at least since the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
To toot my own horn I will say I predicted this long ago; as the tide turns the whites will not be afforded the protections they voluntarily handed to minorities. Payback will be a bitch, and all the high-minded rhetoric will simply vanish as the increasingly powerful minority community seeks payback for the bad old days. I knew this was coming.
That is in no way a defense of how white people treated blacks, Hispanics, Asians, etc. But it is an indictment of the way the process of making a colorblind society was implemented.
First, everyone is racist to a degree. Every race thinks it's own is best. That is just human nature. We come from the paleolithic where tribes were isolated and we put our allegiance first with our tribe. No doubt this problem will continue until the end of Mankind as it is hard-wired into our DNA. But that doesn't mean everyone ACTS or even thinks in a racist manner; it just means some try harder than others to push the demon down, just as we have to push other demons down - like our sexual lust or our appetites. Yes, there are degenerates who have sex with underage girls or with young boys or who cheat on their spouses or whatnot. Yes, there are obese people who eat way too much, But most of us control it, and the controlling process is usually unpleasant but we do it because we know it's a bad holdover from the Paleolithic. Racism is no exception.
(I hate the term, by the way; oftentimes what is called "racism" is simple dislike of the CULTURE of another race, not the race itself. Back in the '70's we called the "prejudice" but that phrase is passe'. Racism used to be reserved for those who HATE people from other races. George Washington held slaves - as did many rich planters - and he wouldn't allow blacks to serve in his army. He bore black folks no ill-will, just thought they weren't acceptable folks for serious work. He was not racist. Nathan Bedford Forrest, on the other hand, WAS racist and would have no problem finding a "final solution" to the slavery issue.)
At any rate America has not been racist, not for a long time at least. It is still prejudiced to a degree, but often for minorities. The real racism in America is against the whites by the minorities. And by white liberals, who have been taught for decades to hate America and the evil white old patriarchs who founded her.
DEI is an attempt to institutionalize that hatred of the white majority, and despite it being clearly anti-constitutional it found a home in many places, notably the Democratic (sic) Party which has labored to implement structural racism against white folks.
(BTW "white racism" was inevitable given the way colonization happened; you had small settlements of whites amid a then-much-larger aboriginal population. Also, the Spaniards were pushing into North America and the British colonists faced the difficult decision of whether to remain British or be absorbed by the larger masses, as did the Spanish. (There are few white people in Latin America; mostly they are mestizo, a mix of Indian and Spanish.) The British colonists chose to remain British, even after independence, and they justified it because they looked at the Indians or the black slaves or the Mexicans and saw them as something they did not want to be. Had the original settlers not separated themselves they would have disappeared. They had read their Bible and knew the same held true for the Israelites. American racial attitudes may not have been kind but they had a rationality to them that made sense at the time.)
At any rate DEI is being implemented even now, when the Democrats got spanked and are getting spanked, because it comports with their view that "demographics is destiny" and the white people will wind up minorities. So they promote what they think will be the winning side, and they try to help that victory along.
And it MAY happen, unless white people start having children again. White people stopped because for decades now there has been a constant drumbeat of acrimony against them and they have been despairing. White men are the only demographic in America that has it's life expectancy declining, and that is because white men see themselves as being completely abused by the system (and they are right). Couple that with the massive immigration and the prospects are dim for white folks. The massive immigration was intended to accelerate this process, I might add. The "replacement theory" is entirely correct; the plan is to replace white people in America and re-found her as a socialist part of Latin America, or near enough. White people formed the kernal of the old United States. They have to go to create the new nation.
DEI is little different from the Black Codes or Jim Crow, it's just aimed in a different direction. It's a way of abusing and suppressing the white majority in favor of minorities. Sadly too many Americans allowed it to happen, voting for the party that promotes this.
They still do. The election of 2024 should have been a far bigger blowout than it was.
At any rate in a sane world Minnesota would be punished severely, with businesses leaving, with civil rights violation charges, etc. But we are so used to this stuff that the reaction is "oh, that again" and that's pretty much the end of it.
If it is illegal to discriminate against anyone, how can it be legal to discriminate for them? Two wrongs don't make a right. Discrimination is discrimination.
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
09:12 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 1031 words, total size 6 kb.
99kb generated in CPU 0.063, elapsed 0.5106 seconds.
44 queries taking 0.4976 seconds, 232 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
44 queries taking 0.4976 seconds, 232 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
