January 20, 2019
Daren Jonescu, my good friend in South Korea, discusses the recent Washington Post/ABC News poll showing the public blames Trump and the Republicans for the government shutdown.
Daren makes the following points:
Q: As you may know, the federal government has been partially shut down because Donald Trump and Republicans in Congress and Democrats in Congress cannot agree on laws about border security. Who do you think is mainly responsible for this situation?
The results of the poll, unsurprisingly, showed Trump and the Republicans as 53% responsible, the congressional Democrats as 29% responsible, both equally responsible at 13%, "neither” at 2%, and "no opinion” at 4%.
First of all, if you asked this exact question in a vacuum, without the respondents having been primed in any way, or provided any context, I guarantee the result would show "Donald Trump and the Republicans” as mainly responsible. Why? Because Donald Trump is the only individual person named in the question, and of course he is an extraordinarily famous person.
Furthermore, by lumping Trump together with "Republicans in Congress” as a single option, Trump’s name recognition, as well as his being the only actual person named, forces respondents to provide the optically convenient and obviously desired poll result: Trump and Republicans to blame; Democrats not to blame.
Notice, further, that the accompanying story from the Washington Post, along with the piggybacking stories all over the internet, phrase the result as I have just done, namely that Trump and the GOP are "to blame” for the shutdown. But that is not what the poll asked. The poll question asks, "Who is mainly responsible?” Responsibility and blame are two entirely different things. I am responsible for the dinner I just cooked. I can only said to be "to blame” for it if you have judged it to be a bad dinner. By framing the question as a matter of "responsibility,” the poll invites respondents who are supportive of the GOP’s position to accept their party’s responsibility, without equating this with blame, which therefore pads the results on the side of "Republicans to blame,” for the purposes of reportage, when that is not what the result actually shows.
Chancy Nancy tried to fly
an airline ticket she wouldn't buy
but money for a wall not found
so Chancy Nancy stayed a-ground
The Press Manipulated the Bernie Sanders
When the story broke that there was mistreatment of women during the 2016 Bernie Sanders campaign, I initially had a moment of schadenfreude and then moved on to other matters. Then the complexion of the story changed for me and should for you.
Virginia Jeffries wrote her compelling story entitled "I Was Sexually Harassed on Bernie Sanders' Campaign. And No One Cared" in the Forward, a Jewish national publication. Her story brought up many questions that led to finding out how the press seems to be using this story for their own interests.
On April 19, 2016, the day of the New York Democrat primary, Ms. Jeffries was volunteering for the Sanders campaign at the South Bronx office. A voter came into the office and after requesting some t-shirts "he stepped toward me, grabbed me by the back of the neck and began stroking me up then down from the back of my head to just under my shirt collar" Jeffries decided this was a clear case of sexual harassment and decided to report it to the staff who she thought would want to prevent anyone else from experiencing the same thing.
Jeffries goes on to describe how she first reported it to a young staffer and identified the person who accosted her by name. The staffer replied "it was a voter who harassed you, then there's really nothing we can do"
Jeffries tells the tale of how she worked her way up the campaign chain, with equal disregard. Level after level of personnel ignored her as she rightfully persisted in a quest to get someone to focus on the fact that the man had sexually attacked her. She finally approached the campaign manager, Jeff Weaver. He had John Robinson, the campaign chief operating officer, contact her.
Read the rest
January 19, 2019
Bandleader Glenn Miller's doomed plane possibly uncovered decades after disappearing during WWII.
BREAKING: First Media Outlet to Report on Ruth Bader Ginsburg's Cancer NOW SAYS She Contracted Pneumonia - Is Fighting for Her Life
Private property rights are under assault by increasingly powerful and unaccountable politicians, bureaucrats and activists, writes Colorado miner Craig Liukko. One aspect of that assault involves our mineral heritage. Far too many government agencies have become corrupt because they have been largely taken over by radical environmentalists, who know little about mining or society’s crucial need for minerals, who are ideologically opposed to mining, and whose ideologies too often make them think they are above the law, he says. They don’t want mining or drilling done properly and by the book. They don’t want it done at all.
They fail to recognize that miners find and develop major deposits of minerals that are essential for everything we make, use and do – including medical equipment, cell phones, computers, aircraft, aerospace, automobiles, wind turbines, solar panels, batteries, and modern high-tech weapon and communication systems.
Part 1 of Craig’s passionate and informative article is appended below.
In a stinging and curt letter, Trump said her trip has been "postponed."
"Due to the Shutdown, I am sorry to inform you that your trip to Brussels, Egypt, and Afghanistan has been postponed. We will reschedule this seven-day excursion when the Shutdown is over. In light of the 800,000 great American workers not receiving pay, I am sure you would agree that postponing this public relations event is totally appropriate. I also feel that, during this period, it would be better if you were in Washington negotiating with me and joining the Strong Border Security movement to end the Shutdown. Obviously, if you would like to make your journey by flying commercial, that would certainly be your prerogative."
January 18, 2019
‘Forrest Gump’ star Gary Sinise says he’s dedicated to honoring wounded veterans: ‘We can never do enough’
Gary Sinise was prepared to play Lieutenant Dan Taylor on "Forrest Gump” long before he was offered the role.
The now 63-year-old appeared in the 1994 film, which depicts the presidencies of Kennedy and Johnson, as well as the Vietnam War, Watergate and other crucial moments in U.S. history through the perspective of an Alabama man (Tom Hanks). Sinise plays Taylor, an Army officer who loses both of his legs in Vietnam.
Sinise told Fox News he didn’t hesitate to take on the iconic role. Prior to the audition that would forever change his life, Sinise was already working closely with Vietnam veterans and had created Vets Night, a program offering free dinners and performances at the Steppenwolf Theater in Chicago.
"A full 10, 12 years [before filming], I’d been working with Vietnam veterans in Chicago,” he explained. "I had supported them in various ways, so when the opportunity came up to play a Vietnam veteran, a wounded Vietnam veteran, with a positive ending to his story, I very much wanted to do that. And I was blessed to be able to get that part and be in such a popular film, a good film. Lieutenant Dan has meant a lot to me.”
Since the making of "Forrest Gump,” Sinise has continued to dedicate his life to supporting the American troops. Throughout the ‘90s, Sinise worked on behalf of the Disabled American Veterans organizations. He also embarked on several USO handshake tours in 2003 and then formed the Lt. Dan Band in early 2004.
Sinise and his group then began entertaining the troops serving at home and abroad. Lt. Dan Band now performs close to 30 shows a year at military bases, charities and fundraisers supporting wounded heroes.
Then in 2011, the star established the Gary Sinise Foundation. According to its website, its mission is "to serve and honor our nation’s defenders, veterans, first responders, their families, and those in need by creating and supporting unique programs that entertain, educate, inspire strengthen and build communities.”Not only does the foundation build custom Smart Homes for wounded veterans, but it also serves meals to deploying troops and hosts events at military hospitals.
Sinise said America’s real-life heroes still recognize him as Taylor — and he wouldn’t have it any other way.
"I found out that when I started visiting our wounded in the hospitals and walking into those hospitals, they would look at me and they would recognize me as Lt. Dan,” he explained. "They wouldn’t know what my real name as, but they’d call me Lt. Dan.”
Sinise added the countless wounded veterans he’s encountered over the years found inspiration in Taylor.
Sinise’s love for the American troops run in his veins. Sinise has veterans in his family going back to World War I. His grandfather, who served during the Battle of the Argonne in France, transported the wounded from the battlefield. His grandfather later had three sons and two of them served in World War II. Sinise's father served during the Korean War in the Navy. And Sinise’s wife of 38 years, Moira Harris, also has veterans in her family that she cherishes.
January 17, 2019
If Oregon Governor Kate Brown has her way, the Beaver State will become the first to require universal home visits for newborn children in the care of their own parents.
Senate Bill 526, introduced this month in the Oregon Legislative Assembly as part of Brown's budget, orders the Oregon Health Authority to "study home visiting by licensed health care providers." Lawmakers went so far as to declare that SB 526 is an "emergency" measure — one that requires a resolution by the end of the year. The intro to the bill, the language of which has not yet been crafted, reads:The Oregon Health Authority shall study home visiting by licensed health care providers in this state. The authority shall submit findings and recommendations for legislation to an interim committee of the Legislative Assembly related to health care not later than December 31, 2019.
Moreover, the 18 sponsors of the bill claim that its passage is "necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health and safety," and therefore "an emergency is declared to exist."
What's the big emergency? Apparently, the state of Oregon is concerned that some parents are raising their children without the watchful eye of Big Brother monitoring their every move — a big no-no in the view of the progressive left.
And Oregon is not alone in the push for "universal" home visits. Washington Governor Jay Inslee tweeted earlier this month, "My budget would also offer universal home visits. This gives every new parent the opportunity to get a visit from a nurse during the first few weeks back home with their newborn to share important information and build confidence."
My budget would also offer universal home visits. This gives every new parent the opportunity to get a visit from a nurse during the first few weeks back home with their newborn to share important information and build confidence. #waleg
— Governor Jay Inslee (@GovInslee) January 15, 2019
While it's not clear whether either of these programs would be mandatory, the use of the term "universal" suggests that they would. It's frightening to think about what would happen to parents who refuse such visits.
As someone who has been involved in the homeschooling movement for more than 20 years, I have seen many attempts to increase the oversight of children taught at home by requiring home visits by a teacher or social worker. The basic premise behind these attempted power grabs is that parents cannot be trusted with the care of their own children — that an agent of the state is the only one qualified to ensure that children are being properly cared for. Without such surveillance, proponents argue, children are at risk for abuse and neglect, something they believe government agents can prevent, despite volumes of evidence to the contrary. In Oregon, in fact, children in the foster care system are abused at twice the national rate. One wonders how a state that can't handle the children currently in its care could possibly manage to surveil an additional 40,000 children per year, let alone pay for such a program (answer: it can't).
Anytime a state or locality has tried to draft legislation requiring home visits for home schooled children, the immediate response has always been, "What are they going to do next, require inspections for children from birth until they enter school?" The answer to that, of course, is yes. That has been the plan all along. Universal preschool, universal health care, universal free lunches — the lot of it — is just a surreptitious way for the state to monitor its citizens and control their behavior by handing out freebies.
Well! Two states not to live in, wouldn't you say? At least if you are of childbearing age. The article is here: https://pjmedia.com/trending/oregon-could-be-the-first-state-to-require-in-home-surveillance-of-newborn-babies/
Here's the link to the Power Line article, which of course has the link to the Reynolds article: https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2019/01/gillette-follow-up-why-did-they-do-it.php
The Gillette anti-men ad that I wrote about here continues to spark controversy. Most in the advertising industry seem to think it was marvelous. This raises interesting questions: Why, exactly, do companies wade into the culture wars? Especially when they join a side that is either a minority or, at best, a bare majority? How does this make sense? Glenn Reynolds notes:
Adweek pronounced Gehrig’s group libel the "Ad of the Week.” Gehrig’s efforts were also recognized by Best Ads on TV.
Glenn’s comment is spot on, and explains much of what we see from our debilitated institutions:
This is another example of how the people running American institutions now tend to perform for an audience of their peers rather than focus on doing their jobs.
Doing their jobs, and serving their alleged constituencies. Like men who need to shave.
The Eagle Forum, Phyllis Schlafly's organization, has an interesting essay against the National Popular Vote. I recommend everyone read it.
Here are a few excerpts:
NPV would make Nevada and other small population states meaningless flyover states for presidential elections. Only the big population states would matter…California, New York, etc.
National Popular Vote allows Vote-Stealing and the compiling of Fake majorities. If a state signs onto the NPV Compact, and a majority of their voters do not vote for the nationally declared "popular vote majority” candidate, their Electoral Votes are stolen, and added to the declared "popular vote majority” candidate. In 2016 that would have meant Hillary Clinton. Consider that NPV would increase the stakes for Vote Fraud leading to more political corruption.
The National Popular Vote Compact Violates the Compact Clause of the U.S. Constitution in Article I Section 10 Clause 3, "No State shall, without the Consent of Congress…enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State…” because Congress has never agreed to a National Popular Vote Compact. However, they are moving ahead ignoring Congress’ Constitutional role.
The NPV Compact states, that once States with electoral votes equaling 270 enact the Compact, it will become the law without ever passing Congress and without being sent to the states for ratification as required to amend the U.S. Constitution. The National Popular Vote Compact is an end run around the Constitution.
NPV eliminates the geographic balance provided by the Electoral College which makes all regions of the country, states both small and large, liberal or conservative important in the Presidential election.
As author Janine Hansen points out, Hillary would now be President solely on the basis of the popular vote, a vote that may well have been stolen via illegal voting.
The framers of the Constitution did not want the United States to be a centralized imperium but rather a federated, diffused system with checks and balances. The Electoral College system was designed precisely with that in mind. The large states cannot dominate the small states, and the states control their own electors and how they are chosen as opposed to a national system run from Washington. In point of fact, South Carolina did not even have a popular vote as late as 1860; the state legislature chose the presidential electors. That was as it was intended; America was not supposed to be a democracy - rule of mob - but a representative republic.
We never would have HAD an United States if we had popular vote; states like Rhode Island would never have joined.
Another matter; how do you guarantee one man one legal vote? We never really do know the exact tally on the popular vote, because it is too chaotic to get an accurate count. Generally once the numbers are high enough to call a state the vote tally either stops or is largely done as a formality, without much effort put into it. If anyone thinks the NPV will improve things on election night they are sadly mistaken; all of our elections will become chaotic, and every vote will be thrown into the courts.
It's a terrible idea whose time should never come.
It's easy to say that the Left takes this attitude out of a feeling of "sour grapes" because they were denied the White House in 2016, but that's not the case. They looked at the people who voted for Trump that way even before they voted for Trump. Indeed, it's probable that Trump is President because Hillary didn't bother to campaign for their votes. "Who needs 'em?" And it's sobering to think that if we didn't have the Electoral College. . .
Recently on CNN, former Republican politico and now Never Trump cable new analyst Rick Wilson characterized Donald Trump’s supporters as his "credulous rube ten-toothed base.”
Wilson was not original in his smear of the 63 million Americans who voted for Trump. He was likely resonating an earlier slander of Politico reporter Marco Caputo. The latter had tweeted of the crowd he saw at a Trump rally: "If you put everyone’s mouths together in this video, you’d get a full set of teeth.”
Was the point of these stereotypes that poor white working-class people who supposedly voted for the controversial Trump understandably ate improperly, did not practice proper dental hygiene, or did not visit dentists—or all three combined?
When challenged, Caputo doubled down on his invective. He snarled, "Oh no! I made fun of garbage people jeering at another person as they falsely accused him of lying and flipped him off. Someone fetch a fainting couch.”
Dr. Hanson doesn't point it out, but the Left looks at the Right with the attitude that conservatives are stupid, evil, subhuman troglodytes; not that they are perhaps merely mistaken in their political choices, as was once the case. It's gone far beyond that. How can conversations exist anymore?
Recently actor Jim Carey tweeted a picture of Trump supporters as apes, as if evolution is now operating in reverse as Trumpians descend into primate status.
Rep. Hank Johnson (who on prior occasions had referred to Jewish residents on the West Bank as "termites,” and believed that too many American troops based on the shoreline of Guam might "tip” the island over and capsize it) recently compared Trump to Hitler, and characterized Trump’s supporters—which included 90 percent of the Republican Party—as "older, less educated, less prosperous, and they are dying early. Their lifespans are decreasing, and many are dying from alcoholism, drug overdoses, liver disease, or simply a broken heart caused by economic despair." For former Vice President Joe Biden, Trump supporters are "virulent people” and "the dregs of society”.
Note the force of such dehumanizing invective that transcends political differences. Trump voters were not just mistaken in their political allegiances. Instead they looked like toothless zombies and stunk up stores, and are not quite human, and are destined to die off. And all this from supposedly progressive humanists, quick to demonize others who would mimic their venom.
I love it! Women wake up to realize Gillette has been price gouging them for female razors that are essentially the same cost to make as the male versions. You Go, Girl! Tell those chauvanist pigs at Gillette that The Sisterhood isn't taking this insult in 2019!
Gee, it didn't take long to find out what jerks the Gillette people are. Rise up, my Sisters and tell them this injustice will not stand! I ask all my Sisters to join the Boycott of Gillette, a company that discriminates against both men and women!
'Woke' Gillette's 'pink tax' on women: Razor firm slammed for hypocrisy for charging women more for the same products as men - while bashing sexism in controversial ad
A brief snippet:
One woman tweeted screengrabs from Target's website to show that a refill pack of blades for one of Gillette's popular women's razors costs $2.50 more than its male counterpart.
Despite both products having five blades, four Gillette Venus Extra Smooth Swirl Razor blades cost $17.49 while four Gillette Fusion5 Razor blades retail for only €$14.99.
Read it all at the Daily Mail.
A pair of lesbians lost their suit against a retirement community when a U.S. District Judge dismissed their lawsuit on the because sexual orientation is not covered by the Fair Housing Act.
Mary Walsh and Bev Nance, a retired lesbian couple from Sunset Hills (a suburb of St. Louis) who say they are married, were denied admission to Friendship Village, a retirement community, as a married couple. They filed suit for discrimination against Friendship Village claiming discrimination.
Friendship Village denied their request on religious grounds.
Their website does mention "spiritual" as one of their "lifestyle dimensions" but does not specifically say religious or Christian.
This will not be the end of it; look for the couple to appeal on the basis of the SCOTUS ruling declaring gay marriage a legal right.
A Kansas City couple are suing the state of Missouri over restrictions on their Second Amendment rights. The couple act as foster parents and Missouri imposes strict regulations on how they may keep, store, and use their firearms.
According to the Belleville News Democrat:
The Kansas City Star reports Missouri doesn't prohibit foster parents from possessing firearms if they are legally allowed to do so.
But foster parents must follow several restrictions, such as keeping firearms locked in areas inaccessible to children and storing firearms and ammunition separately.
The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Kansas City, says those restrictions prevent the couple from carrying loaded, functioning firearms.
See, you can defacto eliminate the Second Amendment by making it impossible to actually exercise your rights. The Left knows this, and is always trying to nibble away with "common-sense gun laws". It's the old nose of the camel routine.
Frankly, these people need access to their weapons more than an average couple; they have these children to protect. There is little value in owning a gun that is inaccessible when it is needed.
Gillette is a division of Proctor and Gamble, which makes just about every product on the shelf.
From plastic bags to plastic straws, forks, spoons and knives, to Styrofoam cups and take out boxes – city, county and state governments have jumped on one faulty environmental bandwagon after another. In many cases, they cause more fuel use and ecological damage than if they had done nothing. It’s social engineering and make-believe environmental protection by decree.
For example, plastic shopping bags manufactured in the United States are made from natural gas – and America has at least another century of gas right under our feet. Moreover, plastic grocery bags require 70% less energy to manufacture than paper bags, and it takes far more raw materials and fossil fuel energy to grow and harvest trees, make pulp and turn it into paper bags, than to make plastic bags.
Hal Shurtlef makes a strong case for less impassioned, and more fact-based, analysis and law-making on plastic and other environmental issues.more...
35 queries taking 0.5009 seconds, 130 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.