AOC says prisons evolved from Jim Crow, apartheid and slavery. Leftist college students echo her

Last month Democratic strategist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez condemned imprisonment, instead pushing "decarceration:"

“Mass incarceration is our American reality. It is a system whose logic evolved from the same lineage as Jim Crow, American apartheid, & slavery. To end it, we have to change. That means we need to have a real conversation about decarceration & prison abolition in this country.” --Ocasio-Cortez 

And right on cue--as if by magic--a group of students at ultra-liberal Brown University took up the call to abolish all prisons “in the name of justice” because they are “racist” and “punishment at any stage doesn’t guarantee any kind of growth.”

“The end goal is to not have...any form of incarceration,” said one student.  The students didn't respond when asked if they'd be willing to have rapists, murderers, thieves and child molesters live on their own streets instead of in prisons.

Student Aida Sherif insisted the prison system is about punishment instead of justice.  “Prisons were founded in the ideas of punishing the poor, punishing people of color,” Sherif said. “I don’t see it as an institution that can ever fully break away from those foundations.”

The student insisted prisons aren't needed.  “Our society is constructed [to make] us believe prisons are absolutely necessary,” Sherif said. “People perceive [abolition] as crazy, unreasonable, dangerous, too radical.  Abolition is not anarchy.”

The student group wants the college to hire former prison inmates.

Couple of observations:  First, I think we can expect to see this idea echoed by students at other leftist universities, cuz it sounds SOoo virtuous.  And second:  I think reporters and audience members will begin asking Democrat.presidential candidates whether they support this idea.  It'll give the candidates a chance to demonstrate more leftist credentials.

https://www.eutimes.net/2019/11/brown-university-students-want-to-abolish-all-prisons-because-they-are-racist/

"Therapy session" with an SJW shrink sounds *way* too plausible!

H/T Moonbattery

And thanks to Streamable.com for their fast, free video-editing service!

Unbelievable: NY killer admits dismembering girlfriend's body but his attorney claims it doesn't prove he killed her

Crazy people killing other people has become such a commonplace as to hardly bear mentioning.  But in this case a JURY seems to have pulled an OJ:  The defendant, pictured below, admitted to hacking up his girlfriend's body, but the jury inexplicably refused to convict him of...murder.

Instead, the jury only returned a verdict of "criminally negligent homicide" after the killer's lawyer argued that despite admitting dismembering the victim, it didn’t prove he murdered her.

The killer, Somorie Moses, had sent the victim text messages saying he would “make her eyes close forever,” and threatening her, “'I will get you."  Yet wasn't convicted of murder and was sentenced to just "up to" 4 years.

The Brooklyn DA’s office wouldn't comment.  My guess is they didn't prosecute very vigorously or competently-- but then again juries can be incredibly dumb.

In most big, Democrat-ruled U.S. cities the "justice system" has become a joke.

Killer Somorie Moses

Source:
https://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nyc-crime/ny-somorie-moses-brooklyn-murder-dismemberment-trial-20191126-yrpknzwjpzhobhu5xjzo2kv54m-story.html

What's wrong with this picture?

The pic below is our sun.  Anybody know what's unusual about the pic?



There arent any sunspots on the disk. 

While it's true that we're at a minimum in the normal 11-year sunspot cycle, there's a longer-term cycle that seems to be dropping, so that the current 11-year minimum will likely last longer than usual.

Why should that concern you, eh?

Turns out there seems to be a tiny correlation between sunspot activity and the sun's output.  For decades scientists thought the sun's output was constant, but more recent measurements show it actually varies by one percent or so. 

While that doesn't seem like much, over time it could account for a lot of temperature difference on Earth.  And since the trend is down, that suggests not global warming, but global cooling.

Oh wait...I forgot:  Democrat congresscreeps and Dem presidential candidates and the NY Times all tell us that "the science is SETTLED!!!," and Global Warming is inevitable.  Doom in just ten years!

Yeah.

Things I'm extremely thankful for this Thanksgiving

As far as I know, the United States is the only country that has a holiday specifically dedicated to giving thanks.  And frankly, we don't thank the Lord for what we have nearly often enough.  Here are some of the things I'm thankful for:

• Being fortunate enough to live in the a country where free speech is still allowed (though not in all parts, unfortunately); 
• Living in a country founded on the principle of unalienable rights "endowed by the Creator;"
• Being fortunate enough to know wonderful people who have forgiven my numerous mistakes;
• Being lucky enough to have two parents who loved all their kids, and were totally fabulous;
• Having at least some political leaders and judges who aren't corrupt, and believe in the principles of the Constitution (though unfortunately, far too many don't support those principles);
• Being lucky enough to live in an un-corrupt city, with very low crime and reliable services;
• Being able to heat and light my home, and have hot water, at the push of a lever or switch, without having to chop wood or haul water--at least before the Dems succeed in banning fossil fuels! ("Green New Deal");
• Getting a wonderful education, thanks to some really dedicated teachers and a sane school board;
• Not having to worry about car bombs at the local market, or religious warfare;

Actually the whole list would be really long, so probably best to stop now.  Wishing everyone out there a very Happy Thanksgiving!

100 years ago American high school students learned Latin and Greek. Today? Um...

100 years ago U.S. high school students were taught Latin and Greek.  Today many universities teach remedial English.  You might ask yourself why our society has deteriorated so much in such a short time.
 
(H/T Joseph Sobran)

More Dems are openly praising the "Deep State" sabotaging the president

For most of the last three years Democrats have sneered at the notion that a "deep state" of bureaucrats was thwarting any Trump policy it didn't like.

Yet oddly, many people brag that they are proud members of a deep state resistance.  Some even boast about the idea of a blocking presidential policies.

Recently a former acting CIA chief proclaimed in a public forum, "Thank God for the deep state." Former CIA director John Brennan agreed and praised "deep state people" for their opposition to Trump.

Mark Zaid, the attorney representing the Ukraine whistleblower, boasted in two recently discovered tweets of ongoing efforts to stage a coup to remove Trump.

"#Coup has started. First of many steps. #rebellion. #impeachment will follow," Zaid tweeted in January 2017. Later the same month, he tweeted: "#coup has started. As one falls, two more will take their place."

Retired Admiral William H. McRaven recently wrote an op-ed for The New York Times all but calling for Trump's ouster -- "the sooner the better." 

No sooner had Trump been elected than Rosa Brooks, a former Defense Department official during the Obama administration, wrote an essay for Foreign Policy magazine discussing theoretical ways to remove Trump before the 2020 election, among them a scenario involving a military coup.

In September 2018, The New York Times published an op-ed from an anonymous source it claimed was a White House official, who boasted of supposedly massive efforts inside the administration to nullify presidential policies and subvert presidential directives.

In the past you might think liberals, socialists and Democrats would oppose such tactics, on the simple pragmatic principle that using them legitimized their use by conservatives under a Democrat administration.  But Democrats know--from endless experience--that conservatives don't fight fire with fire.  Thus Dems see not even a tiny drawback to this type of rebellion.

One wonders how this can end well.

(H/T Victor Davis Hanson)

Dem candidate Kamala Harris: If drug companies don't sell drugs for the price I demand, I'll seize their patents!

Kamala Harris is an authoritarian.  If you're a young American unfamiliar with that term, it means she thinks the president should be able to dictate policy via executive orders, regardless of the law.

Oh wait...she doesn't believe every president should have that power, just her.

Now:  Harris knows that every voter thinks drug prices are outrageously high.  Solution?  Seize the patent rights from the company that researched and developed a drug, and license the rights to make the drug to other companies that didn't spend money on research and lengthy, costly testing, so can make a profit at a fraction of the current cost.

Harris tells her audience about using presidential powers to to make drugs cheaper.

If they resist: “I will snatch their patent so we can take over.”

Someone in the audience asks “can we do that?”

“Yes, we can do that! We just need the will to do that.”

Of course you can't believe she really said that, right?  I mean, it's so totally against the rule of law for the gruberment to take property from anyone without compensation, right?  Well...here's the quote from a f'n communist "journalist" from the WaPo.  Read 'em and weep, libs:

Harris, like Warren, tells her audience about using presidential powers to to make drugs cheaper.

If they resist: “I will snatch their patent so we can take over.”

Someone in the audience asks “can we do that?”

“Yes, we can do that! We just need the will to do that.” pic.twitter.com/DXT84eTKjQ

— Dave Weigel (@daveweigel) November 23, 2019

So is WaPo "journalist" (propagandist) Dave Weigel lying?  He's totally in the tank for Democrats, so unless he's trying to sabotage Harris to boost his favorite candidate, why would he invent this?  Plus, Harris is polling something like 3 percent favorability, so it would be a waste of time to do a hit-piece on her.

She said it, Weigel approves it, and the WaPo approves him tweeting it.  Why?  To push Dem voters into accepting the idea that the government not only has the power to do as it wants, but should do whatever a Democrat president wants to do, regardless of law.

But only a Dem.  Weigel demands that any Republican president do as the law demands.

Here's how another Dem-loving website, Politico, described the Harris plan:

[On July 19th, 2019], Kamala Harris announced a plan to reduce prescription drug costs and rein in pharmaceutical companies, including linking the price of drugs to their prices in other countries.

What would the plan do?

If elected president, Harris said she would have the Department of Health and Human Services set a “fair price” for any prescription drug whose price increases annually by more than the cost of inflation — or which is sold for less money in any comparable country in the 36-member Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

Any profits pharmaceutical companies make from selling a drug above that set price in the United States would be taxed at a rate of 100 percent, with proceeds going directly to consumers as rebates.

In other words, if the company that developed a wildly popular new drug sells it at a price higher than Kamala thinks is "fair," she'd seize all profits above the so-called "fair price."  So where's the incentive to develop new drugs?

Hey, who cares, eh citizen?  The supposedly-great socialist economist John Maynard Keynes claimed businessmen would continue to produce and innovate no matter how much the government penalized that activity (!).

This idiotic viewpoint has been embraced by every totalitarian since.  And it's amazingly stupid:  Do they really think that more than a tiny percentage of business people will invest their time and their families' assets for no profit?  Certainly a tiny few will, but most...won't.  But of course Kamala (and other pols who have never held a private-sector job in their lives) don't believe this.

They're terminally stupid.  Which is okay, except that they're now demanding that you live with the results of their stupidity.

Harris said she would also work to close a tax loophole for pharmaceutical companies’ direct-to-consumer advertising expenses.

"...would also work to close a tax loophole..."  You probably hate ads as much as I do, but the tax code considers advertising as a legitimate business expense, thus deductible from income.  Harris wants to close this "loophole."  Uh-huh.  And of course if congress [spit!] won't do it, she will...by executive order:

Harris said that if Congress does not act on her proposal within 100 days of taking office, she would take executive action to investigate price gouging and would appoint an attorney general who will prioritize investigations of abusive drug pricing.

Remember, the source of this report is a 100%-Democrat -supporting outfit.

In egregious cases and if other efforts to control prices fail, Harris said she would use the government’s “march-in rights" to license a drug company’s patent to a lower-cost competitor.

"...to license a drug company's patent..."  This is nothing less than seizing property rights.

The comments to the Post's propagandist were...interesting.  Here are a few:

Every violation of law and rights starts with an act of will.

This is not a case where price controls work. Price controls do the same thing here as in every other case: they lower supply. In this case, that means fewer life-saving drugs are developed.

The Dems won't stop at drugs. They'll seize EVERY PATENT on anything they want!

ie: "We will dictate the price a company can charge for any product. If they don't like our price, we will take their product from them."  This sounds familiar somehow.  Oh yeah: "Atlas Shrugged."

But lest you think Americans aren't impressed with Kamala's dictatorial side, there are always a shitload of communists who are--like this jerk:

Abolishing intellectual property rights, combined with "Medicare for all," combined with breaking up hospital/provider monopolies, and abolishing medical guilds, would lead to a reduction in healthcare costs by at least 66%. If Harris ran on all that, she'd win the nomination and all 50 states in the general.

I'm curious:  What the hell is a "hospital/provider monopoly"?  Every city larger than 100K people has more than one hospital.  Where's the monopoly?  Oh wait...I get it: The monopoly is that companies run 'em, not the generous, altruistic, all-powerful gruberment.  [Look it up.]  So yeah, we see where ya got that, commie.

There are some lessons to be learned from Atlas Shrugged.

Harris also stated several times that Trump should be banned from Twitter.  If you can "snatch" property rights, snatching someone’s First Amendment rights is no big deal to her either. 

"Triumph of the Will."

If you're a college-age American you almost certainly don't understand the reference here, so let me help:  In 1935 Nazi dictator Adolf Hitler was surrounded by adoring supporters, among whom were many brilliant propagandists.  One was a female film-maker named Leni Riefenstahl--who directed perhaps THE classic Nazi propaganda film, "Triumph of the Will." Look it up.  It'll chill you.  And this is what Harris (and other Dem presidential candidates) admire, and want to emulate.

Ahh seizing the means of production. Just like Stalin......

Harris: 'Hey, if the communist Chinese can do it, why not us?'

If she does this, where's the incentive to research and develop new drugs?  But of course no Dem will ever connect the seizing of intellectual property rights to the drastic drop in the discovery of new drugs.

You know who else seized patents and factories?  Adolf Hitler.

A lawyer and former attorney-general of f'n California proposing to seize intellectual property rights.

She read "Atlas Shrugged" and thought it was an instruction manual.

Here's Harris, appearing in Muscatine, Iowa, yesterday:

Harris said that companies charge Americans more for drugs than the charge for the same drugs in Canada.

Harris said she has “a career of working on things and getting things done” and took the companies on while the top prosecutor in California.

“My plan as a candidate for president on these drug prices is as follows:  We are gonna set drug prices based on fair market.  Essentially what we’re gonna do is set drug prices so American consumers are going to be charged for drugs that’s the average price of drugs around the globe,” she said.

If people don’t want to cooperate with that, I’m also going to do the next thing, which is this:  A lot of drugs, prescription medication, was born out of federal funding for the research and development of that drug. Your taxpayer dollars.”

“So, for any drug where they fail to play by our rules, and if that drug came about because of federal funding...I will snatch their patent. So that we will take over.  And yes we can do that,” she continued, repeating that it could be done several times.

“The question is, do you have the will to do it?  I have the will to do it.”

"Adolf Hitler, call your office."

Of course that's not legal--at least not now.  Harris and most of the other Dem candidates want to change that, cuz hey, any means are fine if you have "good intentions," eh?

These are the people who want to run this country.  If you have an IQ above room temperature you won't let them.

Sunspots show Earth is entering a period of increasing cold. NOT global warming.

Democrat pols and their allies in the Lying Mainstream Media have been telling you for 15 years that a) Earth's climate is warming, dangerously; b) this is being caused by carbon dioxide; c) specifically, CO2 emitted by burning carbon-based fuels; and d) that the main offender is the United States.

Recently Democrat politicians have upped the scare factor, and are now screaming that if we don't ban all carbon fuels in the United States, all life on Earth will be wiped out in JUST TEN YEARS !!!

All these things are brazen lies, as I've shown many times in previous posts.  Today I want to show you something that will show that instead of global warming, we're actually in for a huge cold spell.

If you're a fan of science you may recognize the graph below:

It's a plot of sunspot activity from 1610 to 2009 or so.  We've known for centuries that the number of sunspots is cyclic, with a period of about 11 years.  As the graph shows, the sun almost always has sunspots, even in the minima of the 11-year cycle.

But sunspot activity also seems to follow another, far longer oscillation.  In particular, note the almost total absence of sunspots in the years around 1666.  That "big low"--the Maunder Minimum-- seems to be due to the long-term cycle just noted.

Now take a look at this:

It's a plot of the last 11 years of sunspot activity.  As you can see, we're in a period of almost no sunspots.

Global warming bullshit artists claim this means nothing.  "Nothing, citizen!  Pay no attention to these sneaky, tricky, probably-fake graphs, citizen!  Listen to your betters:  What's killing the planet is the dread gas CARBON DIOXIDE, caused by you selfish Americans driving your SUV's!"

Uh, no.  We're about to enter a cold period, and it looks like it's gonna last for about 20 years.

This has happened before.  Astronomer Gustav Spörer noted that between 1672 and 1699--the Maunder Minimum--fewer than 50 sunspots were observed, compared to 40,000–50,000 sunspots normally seen over 25 years.^[8]


Sunspot count plunged to zero in mid-2018 and has remained substantially lower than forecast.  The data could indicate onset of a super-cycle "Maunder Minimum."  The last Maunder Minimum period from 1645 to 1715 was a period with 7 percent less sunspots and global cooling, referred to as the "Little Ice Age," which caused widespread crop failures, famine, disease, and increased child mortality.  London's Thames River froze over most years during the period.

"But...but...but we just HAVE to redistribute your wealth to the rest of the world, to atone for your carbon sins!"

Yeah, y'all run on that platform.  I'm sure voters will reward you.

https://principia-scientific.org/drop-sunspot-activity-warning-global-cooling/?sfw=pass1574288832

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/11/17/yeah-its-officially-the-tenth-anniversary-of-climategate/

This could be the real reason Dems don't want to deport illegals

Watch Dems' star witness today refuse to answer a question about Hunter Biden

At the "impeachment inquiry" hearing today, the minority counsel asked ambassador Taylor--the Dems' star witness--a simple question which, if answered honestly, would have revealed the dishonest core of the Dems compulsion to impeach Trump.  The question was whether Joe Biden's son Hunter, who landed a $50,000 per MONTH job with a Ukrainian energy company, had any qualifications other than the fact that his father was then the vice-president of the U.S: 

"Do you know if Hunter Biden had any qualifications other than the fact that his father was vice-president?"

The ambassador either couldn't or wouldn't answer.

The fact is that Joe Biden's son was hired--at a princely salary--despite having no qualifications at all for the position.  It was a way for the Ukrainian company to buy influence with the Obama administration.  If you're not clear on the topic, that's a textbook example of corruption.

The Dems claim the president should be impeached for asking the president of another country to investigate whether the previous vice-president was corrupted.  No one claims this would be a problem if the target of the investigation was a nobody.  So the implication of the Dem impeachment push is that prior administration officers can't be investigated if they run for office after a new president is elected.

Seems a stretch.

Grab-and-run store thefts skyrocketing in California after stealing is changed to a mere misdemeanor

Five years ago California's Democrat-majority voters had yet another GREAT idea to improve life in what was once a delightful state:  Pass a ballot proposition de-criminalizing theft under $1000 or so.

Skeptics warned that the inevitable, unavoidable, totally predictable result of such a law would be an explosion in theft, when thugs realized there was no meaningful penalty for stealing less than $1000 of loot.

But Cali's Dem rulers were all for the proposition, and enthusiastically supported it.  After all, it would reduce prison overcrowding, allowing the pols to avoid spending tax dollars to build more prisons.  Also, they knew the number of *reported* crimes would drop, which would make them look good to voters, eh?  And it passed, and is now state law.

Well...to the surprise of no one, skeptics were right:  California has been experiencing a huge wave of broad-daylight grab-and-run thefts from stores.  Groups of thugs walk in, scoop up whatever they want and just walk out, knowing that in the hugely unlikely event they're caught, they won't go to jail.

In fact, since district attorneys won't prosecute these crimes anymore, cops are reportedly being told not to even bother reporting such crimes.  So the Dem pols were right about one thing: the number of *reported* crimes have dropped--since many are no longer being reported.

In Redlands, California, two days ago, five thugs strolled into a Nike store, grabbed as many boxes of high-dollar shoes as they could carry, and ran out.  Video below.

https://www.foxnews.com/us/california-nike-store-theft-merch

Of course liberals will claim "Why get upset?  After all, this is a victimless crime, like smoking dope or using heroin or urinating in public.  Insurance will pay for it.  So chill, dude!"

How do you even begin to reason with people who think like that?

"Epstein didn't kill himself" goes viral

If you've been off-planet for the last month you may have missed the explosion of repetitions of the meme "Jeffrey Epstein didn't kill himself." 

The popularity of the phrase suggests that LOTS of Americans don't believe the official Narrative that Epstein killed himself--at a time when all the surveillance cameras had mysteriously stopped working and the guards who were assigned to regularly walk the halls were supposedly asleep.

See, echoing the meme is an inside joke, that people enjoy repeating because everyone knows the official Narrative is total bullshit.

The fact that lots of "normal" Americans don't buy the bullshit cover story is actually very encouraging.  It suggests they're getting tired of a system in which the "elites" can easily get away with crimes that would quickly land us "deplorables" in jail for decades.

Kinda like objecting to two sets of laws.

I mean, "Two Sets of Laws" is right there in the Constitution, right?  The Founding Transgenders knew that some people were intrinsically wiser than others, so it was only right to cut the smaht ones more slack in what they were allowed to do, eh?

I mean, isn't that the entire legal basis for "Sanctuary States," in which illegal aliens are quietly released at 3 a.m. to avoid being caught by the feds and deported for murder.  It's only fair, right?

Even the Simpsons were in on the joke.

Progressives seem to believe they're so smart they should tell us how to run our lives

Progressive "elites" seem to assume the rest of us are too dumb to run our own lives without them telling us what to do.

Not sure where they got this idea.  Part of the reason seems to be that many of 'em went to "prestige" universities.  Another seems to be that since virtually all of 'em live in big cities, with subways and Uber and all-night cafes, they see this as an indicator of their own sophistication.

But it also may be as simple as this:  we don't make the same choices they do. Since they see themselves as smart and enlightened, they think anyone who has a different worldview must be inferior.

From that conclusion it's an easy jump to feeling free to tell the rest of us how to behave.  In fact, many seem to see that as the natural order of things.  They have assumed the role of our betters.

It's SO amusing.  Cuz when I walk around my unsophisticated small town, I've never had to worry about stepping in a pile of human waste, or on a discarded syringe.

Tell me again about how sophisticated you folks are, eh?

Why "feedback loops" are important, and why destroying them destroys society

What do you know about "feedback loops"?

Broadly, they're a kind of "course correction:"  A system or organism does something, evaluates the results and usually takes the next step based on its evaluation of how well or poorly the first act accomplished the desired result.

Learning to walk, ski, land a jet fighter on a carrier, play an instrument--all are totally dependent on getting feedback.  Without it, the chances of getting the desired result are virtually zero. 

The same is true of personal behavior:  Everyone knows that if a kid learns that pitching a screaming fit produces the desired parental result, that behavior is reinforced.  Should be obvious.  By contrast, in normal kids swift punishment for bad behavior normally reduces that behavior.
 
Premise: Virtually every problem in our society can be traced to the elimination of feedback loops.

Think about it:  Big Dem-ruled cities, liberal prosecutors have announced that they will no longer prosecute theft under $1000 or so.  Result?  An explosion of such crimes.

Junkies inject drugs in the warm corridors of BART stations, and no one bats an eye.  With no disincentive--no negative feedback--the walkways have quickly become packed with junkies on both sides.

In feces-rich San Francisco the new District Attorney--son of two unrepentant revolutionary bomb-detonators--announced his office would no longer prosecute public urination.  Another feedback loop gone.  Any guesses as to the result?

In Portland, Oregon, Antifa thugs beat people up while the cops stand around watching.  No feedback, no disincentive.  Thugs immediately notice.

The same problem afflicts government at all levels.  Pols are rarely prosecuted even for heinous corruption, eliminating a disincentive for such behavior.  In the ultimate con, they push through policies that push the costs onto future generations.  Because those beings can't vote, there's no feedback, no disincentive.

California's Dem rulers (Democrats have ruled the Assembly for at least four decades) flushed $60 billion down the tubes on a "high-speed train" that was ill-planned.  But not one pol was voted out of office.  The public simply shrugged.  No feedback.

Out society used to have feedback loops, that reduced bad behavior.  In most of the above cases those feedback mechanisms have been deliberately destroyed--by liberals, like the new San Fran DA.

Unless you're actively working to destroy this nation you should be mad as hell about that.

Democrats and the left are far, far better at motivating their voters. Here's how...

In watching American elections for many years it seems to me that Democrats and Leftists are not only way more determined to win elections (power) than conservatives, they're also much better at motivating people to vote for them. 

I think this is probably due to two factors:  First, virtually the entire Mainstream Media supports the Left, so will eagerly, instantly echo any meme Dem strategists want to publicize.

Second, seems to me that Dems and leftists play to several way more powerful emotions in their base:  they tell their voters--with the huge help of the mainstream media--that certain doom will happen if...fill in the blank.  If we don't ban carbon fuels the whole planet will DIE !!.  If we don't let everyone on Earth enter the U.S. at will, innocent children will DIE!!!

Unless we give free medical care to everyone--including illegal aliens undocumented residents, innocent people will DIE!!!

If we don't give every drug addict person exercising personal choice of chemical pathways a free home or apartment, the homeless will DIE !!!

Putting thieves entrepreneurial redistributionists in jail will ruin their chances of getting a scholarship to Harvard, so we simply MUST make it legal to steal, as long as it doesn't exceed $1000.  Or peoples' lives will be RUINED!!!

You get it.

The common link with all these claims is that each one plays on the listener's compassion and desire to help others.  No one bothers trying to answer the broader question of "Is this a good, workable idea?"  So for example, when the Left and Democrats demanded that biological males really REALLY TRULY become authentic females simply by declaring themselves women, did any of the Dems think ahead to the inevitable conclusion that these "women" would demand to compete in womens' sports?

If any Democrat did anticipate this, does anyone think they'd have mentioned this as a caution?

Hearing these claims, it seems clear that the Left takes winning far more seriously than conservatives do. 

Long before Trump even announced his candidacy, the Left and their allies in the Mainstream Media have been depicting even mild-mannered GOP candidates as inhuman monsters. By contrast, the Media portray radical socialist Dem candidates as simply "compassionate, "moderate."  Thus when Democrat heart-throb and media darling Beto snarled "You bet we're gonna take away your guns" not a single media outlet printed a critical or cautionary word. 

As the Mainstream Media tells it, every Dem candidate is a reasonable moderate.  By contrast, Republican candidates are portrayed as paranoid extremists for thinking that we need to limit immigration to legal avenues.

Each election, Democrat voters march to the polls convinced that their very lives and souls are on the line if the Republicans win.  Liberal pundits repeatedly tell black voters the return of SLAVERY might be only one election away.  Even "moderate" Joe Biden told an NAACP audience that Republicans “gonna put y’all back in CHAINS!”

The media constantly sow doubt about Republican candidates.  They constantly tell GOP voters "The Republicans constantly sell you out.  Why not show the GOP leadership your anger by voting for a 3rd party candidate?  Or why even bother voting if you don’t like the GOP candidate?"

Why indeed.

California pols have figured out how to game the system

Someone noted that the Democrat pols who have ruled California without interruption for decades have figured out how to game the system so they can make dumb rules with little consequence:

• Ban construction of new oil refineries.  Then to satisfy the demand of the state's drivers for gasoline, demand that other states ship you as much gasoline as you need. 
• Rule that utilities and volunteer crews can't clear brush in forests and around power lines.  Then when high winds (which have always existed in Cali) cause power lines to spark and ignite huge, destructive fires, claim the fires were due to "global warming."
• Decree that no state or local law enforcement official can honor ICE detainers, as part of "sanctuary"policies for illegal aliens.  Then when illegals commit more violent crimes, blame inequality. 
• Pass laws making theft of anything under $1000 a simple misdemeanor.  When such thefts go exponential, but aren't reported--because why bother?--use the smaller number of reported crimes to claim that crime is down because of your brilliant policy.
• Force utilities to shut down perfectly good nuclear and coal-fired generating facilities, and dismantle perfectly good hydroelectric dams.  Then import electric power from surrounding states to meet demand.

Amazing.  And from the standpoint of pols wanting to stay in office forever, very effective.

Who's running your kids' schools?

One of the stated goals of communism, decades ago, was to try to gain control of school boards.  Control of school boards would allow selection of superintendents, textbook approval and curricula.

While schools in much of flyover country are still decently run, many public schools in the U.S. are now cesspools of socialist teaching.  For decades a huge swath of America's public K-12 schools in liberal states have been controlled by socialists.  And one of the goals of the socialists has been to turn American students against our heritage, our nation and our history.

A side "benefit" (from their standpoint) is dumbing down the education your kids get.  I've been teaching at a large state university for 35 years, and have seen numerous students who can't divide 24 by 8 without a calculator.  Students who have no idea what the Bill of Rights is, or the meaning of the Tenth Amendment.  Students who believe a Democrat president can (and should) ban guns by executive order, the Second Amendment notwithstanding.

For young Americans who've never been taught even the basics of our Constitution and the American system and don't know how things work or are paid for, ghastly proposals by socialist politicians sound attractive.  Healthcare woes?  Declare that health care is a "basic human right," regardless of cost.  Solution must be "Medicare for All," no matter that it would cost more than the entire current federal budget.

Homelessness?  Simply declare that affordable housing is a "basic human right."  College graduates struggling to pay off $150,000 loans to get that degree in "gender studies"?  Declare that they don't have to repay such loans, because...wait for it..."going to college is a basic human right.

Too many minority high school grads who can't read or do basic math?  Teach students that math is a tool used by whites to oppress minorities.

There are lots of smart, dedicated teachers in public schools.  Unfortunately in far too many cities they're forced to teach a socialist-controlled, anti-American curriculum.

Media: "Children of candidates are off-limits!!!!" Um...except...

Warren and Booker speak at a rally in SC

Here's Dem presidential candidate Cory Booker, appearing at an "environmental justice" rally in South Carolina. Elizabeth Warren also appeared. The other Dem candidates passed.

How many people do you think are in the audience?  Of course South Carolina isn't a hotbed of liberals like New York, so this isn't representative of the country.  So pay no attention, citizen.

Now imagine:  If Trump had a rally with this many empty seats, do ya think the Lying Mainstream Media would have the pics on every "news" show?  Think it'd make the front page of the NYT and WaPo?


Of course it would.  But they're not biased or anything.  No sir.  Not a bit.

Video from Death Valley. Wait, maybe that isn't it. Metaphor alert.

This video looks like a tourist's look at Death Valley or something similar.  But as the graphic shows, it's actually Mars. 

This is what an advanced society can do.  But if the forces now trying to destroy America get their way, fifty years from now no one in this country will be allowed to build something as simple as an automobile--let alone a rocket and vehicle able to land on Mars, then roam the surface of that planet and send videos back to Earth.

Think about that for a bit.  Obviously a video of the Martian surface has little tangible value, but the point is that history tells us that societies have an arc:  they rise from simple beginnings, and some eventually develop almost unimaginable sophistication.  But then...something happens. 

What the "something" is--what makes a society collapse--is still a mystery. There's still no concensus on why the Roman Empire collapsed.  One theory is that most non-elites got addicted to "free stuff", and eventually there weren't enough producers to make the equation balance.

Of course liberals don't want to believe that, so they've advanced another theory:  That lead seals on wine jars leached lead into the wine, essentially dumbing down the population.

Yeah.  Seriously?

Point is, you've got a choice to make:  You can either vote for the party that demands open borders, demands that you pay for medical care for anyone who sneaks into this country illegally; demands that you give people who smoke and eat junk food and shoot up meth free medical care for life ("Medicare for All"), and the whole panoply of liberal "free shit."

Is there some middle ground, some compromise?  Beats me.  But history is pretty clear that any government determined to give the masses "bread and circuses" (for college-age Americans, that's an old Roman cliche) is doomed.

Gripping video of pilot with an emergency

Private pilot with engine failure does a great job telling his wife he loves her.  Sadly...

Okay, that was maybe a bit over the top.

(Thanks to Streamable.com for their great free vid editing site.)

Another mainstream media outlet quashes a story showing a Dem candidate lied

As many of you know by now, for 30 years or so Democrat candidate Elizabeth Warren claimed to be Native American.  She wrote this on her application for a faculty position at Harvard, and on a form for the Texas Bar Association.

Her claim was later proven to be false.

Now on the campaign trail, Warren has frequently told audiences that she was fired as a public-school teacher because she got pregnant.

To check this claim, a reporter who now works for the New York Times filed an open-records request with that school board seeking public records relevant to her time there.  Last April he got records from the school board showing that Warren's claim that she was fired from a teaching position in 1971 due to pregnancy discrimination was false.

Reid Epstein, who moved to the Times on April 19, never broke the story. Reached for comment, a Times spokeswoman said that the "records were inconclusive" and the potential story required further sourcing.

After the Free Beacon got the scoop -- which was only possible because the Times chose not to publish a story that would hurt a Democrat candidate -- the New York Times published a story claiming that Warren's false story was sort of true, despite being false, because... other women had been fired due to pregnancy.

The main goal of the Mainstream Media seems to be to never publish or broadcast a story that would hurt a Democrat politician or candidate.

Is it just me or...?

Maybe it's just me but in listening to all the Democrat presidential candidates it seems to me that they all wanna increase taxes on hard working, 2nd amendment supporting, communist hating, taxpaying citizens, to give "free" medical care and welfare to people who have entered this country illegally.

ABC reporter got Epstein story three years ago, but ABC refused to air it, instead fires alleged leaker

If you've just arrived on this planet you may have heard that the Lying Mainstream Media totally LOVES whistleblowers.  Leakers.  Employees who call out their powerful company or government agency for wrongdoing.

Ooooh, wait.  Looks like they have...wait for it...a double standard about whistleblowers:  The love the ones who can help them hurt Trump and conservatives.  But when one of the own employees rats out corporate corruption, that's...a whole different story, sparky.

For example, a top-tier reporter at ABC got the whole sordid story on the Epstein sex scandal three years ago, along with pictures and names.  But instead of running the story, ABC sat on it.  Never has aired it.

The reporter spilled the entire story on-camera.  She wasn't being broadcast to civilians, but the vid was being transmitted to all the affiliate stations.

Last week an un-named source at ABC leaked a tape of that incident.

ABC immediately began trying to find the leaker.  But the person they suspected of leaking the tape--a 26-year-old female--had quit ABC and been hired by rival CBS.

Now you'd think ABC would have let it go at that point.  After all, if a leaky staffer was working for CBS, why would ABC care, right?

Ah.  Well.

ABC refused to let it go.  Instead an ABC exec phoned CBS and told 'em about the suspected leaker.  CBS promptly fired her, without telling her why or giving her a chance to defend herself against the bogus charge.

Cuz, see, she wasn't the person who leaked the tape.

Naturally the rest of the Democrat-loving Mainstream Media immediately rallied to defend the brave whistleblower against this grave wrong.

Except they didn't.  No Mainstream outlet has said a critical word.  Cuz...reasons.

So let's review:

1 ABC sits on the Epstein story for three whole years
2 ABC goes apeshit when video leaks of their reporter griping about ABC refusing to air the story
3 ABC hunts down suspected video leaker, now at CBS
4 CBS fires "leaker"
5 ...who wasn't the leaker
6  Entire mainstream media: *crickets*

But you really do need to trust the Mainstream Media, right?

H/T Iowahawk.

New talking point from Mainstream Media: climate change could make mortgages vanish

One of the advantages Trump has in 2020 is that the economy has been booming.  So it's predictable that the Dems and their media allies are looking for ways to scare voters into believing ECONOMIC COLLAPSE is right around the corner.

So...if the Lying Mainstream Media could invent a crisis that both scared voters into voting Democrat AND into supporting the screams of Dem presidential candidates that the U.S. needs to abolish fossil fuels, commercial jets, cows and gas-powered cars, that would be a natural win-win!  Yay!

And right on cue, here comes CBS with the Greatest New Prediction:  Climate change could kill the U.S. economy by making it impossible to get 30-year mortgages.  Here's CBS:

Climate change could punch a hole through the financial system by making 30-year home mortgages — the lifeblood of the American housing market — effectively unobtainable in entire regions across parts of the U.S.

That's what the future could look like without policy to address climate change, according to the latest research from the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.

The article goes on to warn readers that 

The housing market doesn't yet factor in the risk of climate change, which is already affecting many areas of the U.S., including flood-prone coastal communities, agricultural regions and parts of the country vulnerable to wildfires. In California, for instance, 50,000 homeowners can't get property or casualty insurance because of the increased risk to their homes. 

Of course the "increased risk" in Cali is due to fires caused by the state's Democrat rulers prohibiting electric utilities from clearing trees and brush from under and over high-voltage power lines.  Those lines are bare aluminum, so if high winds make them touch, they make a huge spark.

This has been widely known for decades and is a risk in every state.  But other states--with politicians willing to govern rationally--didn't ban utilities from clearing overhanging branches and brush.

Result: No fires.  But CBS ignores the real cause in favor of..."climate change."  Hmmm....

Source.

German artist puts up statue in a park, honoring migrant drug dealers. Really.

To put a thumb in the eye of German conservatives a Berlin artist has created a statue honoring African migrant drug dealers.  The statue was erected in a Berlin park where many actual migrant drug dealers operate.

Yes, really.

Artist Scott Holmquist was angered by a demonstration by members of Germany's conservative party against drug dealers in the park.  He responded by creating the statue, with the motto, “Solidarity and human rights for all – even for dealers!”

Leftists are working in all western nations to de-stabilize and break down western culture. It's what they do.

Source.

Cuomo tells cable TV host "We didn't have hurricanes or tornadoes before global warming"

Andrew Cuomo is a total moron--which makes him ideally suited to be a Democrat governor of a place like New York.  And like all Dem pols, Andrew is totally on-board with "catastrophic global warming climate change."

In fact, in the clip below he tells a goofball on MSNBC that "We never had hurricanes or tornadoes" before global waming.  Really, he says that.

Can't decide which is more depressing: that a governor believes this crap, or that 95% of his followers believe he's being truthful.

Adam Schiff raises new concern about "collusion"

Someone posts flyers saying "It's okay to be ____." University prez screams that it's "hate speech"

Suppose someone posted a flyer saying, oh, "It's okay to be Canadian."  Or "It's okay to be latino."  Or "It's okay to be black."

Does any rational person think any of those could possibly be construed as hateful, or "hate speech"?  No.

So would any rational person think a university president would consider such flyers hateful, or "hate speech," or threatening in ANY way, shape or form?

No.  In fact university presidents would gush with praise for such a wunnerful display of pride.

So when some flyers appeared at Western Connecticut State University saying "It's okay to be...white," you'd guess the adminishits would react about the same way, eh?  I mean, we just established that they'd have been perfectly happy with flyers that substituted "Canadian," "latino" or "black" for white, eh?

But of course liberal college admin types--awash with their guilt about "white privilege"--went nuts.  University president John Clark characterized the flyers as a "hateful attack."

“Have no doubt that we are treating this as an attack on our university community and making every effort to see that those responsible are caught and properly punished,” Clark wrote. “I am fully committed to the absolutely necessary goal this does not happen again. We must be ever vigilant to protect our university against these hateful attacks.”

Clark added that if any student was found to be responsible for posting the flyers, they would be expelled, as well as being charged with "possible criminal actions.”

Again, to get a handle on how utterly insane this is, imagine how the same f'n moron would have reacted to the same flyer saying "It's okay to be black," eh?  Not a peep.  But in the view of this idiot the exact same sentiment about "white" merits expulsion and criminal charges. 

Double standards.  Two sets of rules.  Eventually someone will get tired of this crap.

And by the way: the FBI says they're now "investigating the flyers."

Source

YouTube deletes video of a doc saying "When a person wants to cut off a good body part, we say they're mentally ill"

Ah, "social media."  Is there anything they can't do, no matter how insane?

In the latest example YouTube removed a video by a conservative group, claiming the video violated YouTube's policy on "hate speech."  In other words, they claimed the vid was "hate speech."

The vid shows a doctor saying essentially 'If a person wants to cut off a perfectly-functioning arm or leg, we say they're mentally ill.  But if someone wants to cut off healthy breasts or a penis, we praise their bravery as transgenders.'

Sources say YouTube execs generously offered to let the conservative group re-post the video, but only if but only if they removed the transgender reference.

Is this censorship?  Of course it is.  Leftists can threaten to kill the president and his family, or post a pic of themselves holding Trump's severed head, or call the First Lady a c**t on cable TV, or post videos praising ISIS, and YouTube's execs smile approvingly.  But if a conservative group posts a vid saying that people who cut off perfect body parts are mentally ill....why, that's "hate speech," citizen.

Mandatory Google warning:  The claims made in the above post have not been verified by either Google or any of our Trusted Partners (NY Times, Washington Post, NBC, MSNBC and CNN), so readers are warned that the claims may not be accurate.  
   For example, our staff searched YouTube for a video from the conservative organization noted in the article but didn't find one.  So it's likely it never existed.
   You should only trust news if you get it from one of our Trusted Sources.  Cuz we're, like, totally unbiased and truthful!  Even-handed.  Objective.  Honest.
   Trust us and our Trusted Sources.  We're the only sources you can trust.  Really.

Source: https://www.axios.com/youtubes-standoff-with-conservative-heritage-foundation-c2e2a5d4-7b82-40d6-9466-5822f8ece3a4.html

Wow: lib TV host tells Dems they should NOT promise to confiscate guns, then DO IT after you're elected

Communists, socialists, Democrats and other assorted leftists want to disarm Americans.  If you don't believe that, listen to any of the dozens of vids of Beto or Kamala or Elizabeth "Lie-a-watha" Warren saying exactly that.  And note the screams of approval from their audiences.

But for some bizarre reason a lot of Americans aren't enthusiastic about that idea.  Something about not wanting to give up the ability--and the RIGHT--to defend ourselves and our families from thugs and tyrants.  But of course the Left doesn't want you to have that ability--because it's easier for them to run things if you're disarmed and helpless.

In any case...Beto was the most aggressive in saying he'd confiscate semi-automatic weapons, adding the chilling twist that if anyone refused to surrender their weapon, he'd send cops to your door and take it.

Well isn't that special?

To the surprise of few, Beto's campaign promptly crashed.  And now leftist waste-of-air Joy Behar has some advice for other Democrat candidates:  If you want to confiscate guns, don't tell voters you plan to do that.  Instead, win the election first and THEN confiscate.

Wow, that makes SO much sense!  And I expect future candidates will do just that.

Of course you think this is fake news--that someone just made that up to make Democrats or Behar look bad.  Nope, she really said it.  On live national television.  See for yourself.  I've spared you a ton of idiotic whining by cutting to the chase: The blonde is talking about Beto wanting to seize AR-15's when Behar makes her comment.

This is the future of the Democrat party.  The radical base will demand that candidates pledge to seize 'assault weapons," so it will be almost impossible for anyone to win the Dem nomination without pledging to do that.  But if the Dems use their usual cunning, a candidate favored by the Mainstream Media could

Florida woman fights off two armed home invaders by shooting one with a weapon Dems want to confiscate

Here's a story you will NEVER see on any Lying Mainstream Media outlets:  In Florida two armed home invaders broke into a home, demanded valuables and began beating the husband--severely.

When his wife heard the fight from the bedroom and peeked out to see what was happening, one of the invaders shot at her but missed.  She jumped back into the bedroom.

Normally this attack would have ended with the couple murdered.  But by the grace of God the couple had a semiautomatic rifle in the bedroom.  The wife grabbed it and came out shooting, hitting one of the invaders.  At that point both men--apparently deciding home invasion wasn't as great an idea as they'd thought--ran away.

The guy who'd been shot made it about 200 yards before dying face-down in a ditch.

So, a win for good people over invading thugs.  Now for the kicker:  The rifle was an AR-15.

If you've been off-planet for the past year, you need to know that Democrats and liberals consider the AR-15 a "weapon of war."  (It isn't--it's not a fully-automatic weapon, unlike its military cousin the M-16.)  So they want to confiscate every one of 'em. 

And if you own one and don't surrender it, they'll throw you in jail.

Is that cool or what?

Dear Democrat presidential candidates:  Eat s**t and die.  You're morons, idiots playing on emotions of other idiots.  You stupidly think that if you confiscate all guns, thugs won't be able to thug.

Lord, you people are stupid!

What's equally distressing is that half the country will vote for ya.  But I'm betting the couple who saved their lives with their AR won't be voting Democrat.


Source here:
https://www.baynews9.com/fl/tampa/news/2019/11/01/victim-of-violent-home-invasion-speaks--credits-wife-with-saving-his-life#

America-hating NY Times whines that some TV stations are starting to play the national anthem again

In the early days of television TV stations quit broadcasting around midnight.  When they did, they signed off by playing our national anthem.

About 40 years ago stations started to broadcast around the clock, filling the air with infomercials and related junk.  As a result, no more sign-off, so no more national anthem.

Now a couple of broadcast groups are playing the anthem at least once, sometime after midnight.  Shouldn't have been controversial, eh?

Hahahahahahaha!  I see you've been off-planet for the past couple of decades.

Yesterday the America-hating NY Slimes ran a piece wailing about this scary new practice.  Calling it "one of popular culture’s generational divides," the Times whined that this might "trigger" some goofy snowflakes, saying "Some viewers might hear political overtones."

Heaven forbid!  Hearing the national anthem in the U.S.?  Why, we socialist/marxist Dems just CANNOT have that!!

The Times found an associate professor of musicology at the University of Michigan who said the national anthem "has been a politically charged song throughout American history," and warned

“It is somewhat provocative to bring the anthem to the fore in a new way at a moment of tension in this country.”

"Somewhat provocative" to play the Star-spangled Banner in the United States?  Really, comrade?  Whining about some TV stations playing the national anthem?

Got a message for ya, sparky: Get the hell out of my country.  Not one of you deserves to live here.

Not. One.

And take your ghastly, lying, America-hating newspaper with you.