Wednesday, November 4, 2015

Progressive Lunacy-The stupid party unmasked

Frontpagemagazine ^ | 11-4-15 | Bruce Thornton 

In the past week we were treated to some spectacular examples of progressive lunacy. Perhaps the manifest badness of the Democrats’ presidential hopeful, coming on top of the disastrous Obama reign, is inducing panic as the progressive claim to superior intelligence and righteousness is rapidly evaporating.
The despicable bias and journalistic incompetence of the Republican debate moderators embarrassed even other progressives, who usually make at least a half-hearted effort to tart up their prejudices in the alluring rhetoric of neutral objectivity. Nor could the moderators practice even basic journalism. Becky Quick brought up the hoary “women earn 77% of what men do,” a phony statistic debunked numerous times. And the New York Times’ John Harwood flat-out lied about the Tax Foundation’s analysis of Marco Rubio’s tax reform plan. Worse, Harwood already had to retract an earlier version of the same lie, but then lied about the retraction. Meanwhile, an hour before the debate,
Harwood’s boss the New York Times was asking people online “who made the most ridiculous comment in the Republican debate.” The Times apparently didn’t anticipate that the answer would be the moderators.
Particularly obvious of media bias and incompetence were the rank meanness of many of the questions, and the sneering air of unearned intellectual superiority one typically expects from a bus-stop autodidact. The great irony, of course, is that that all the moderators put together don’t have the intellectual heft or real-world savvy of most of the Republican candidates. In a one-on-one debate between one of them and any random mainstream media reporter or anchor, I’d put my money on the Republican. The debate showed yet again that the left is now the stupid party, its adherents’ minds stuffed with faded and worn bumper-sticker ideas that were already passé when Nehru jackets were popular.
And let’s not forget that the same week the progressives of CNBC were not even pretending to moderate fairly the Republican debate, the progressive media totally ignored one of the biggest gaffes of the campaign, Hillary Clinton’s assertion that the wait-times at VA hospitals, which have led to 50 veterans dying in Phoenix alone, have “not been as widespread as it has been made out to be.” Crickets and tumbleweeds were the media’s response to this outrageous blunder and Hillary’s subsequent refusal to apologize.
But what do we expect of “journalists” who yawned when the Secretary of State responded to questions about why four Americans in Benghazi were murdered on her watch by screeching, “What difference does it make?” Or when she continued to claim she didn’t lie when she repeatedly said three years ago that the attack resulted from a protest against an obscure video, even though she told her daughter and the Egyptians on the night of the killings that it was a terrorist attack? And how come after Hurricane Katrina George W. Bush was held responsible and viciously pilloried for the ineptness of FEMA, the Democratic mayor of New Orleans, and the Democratic governor of Louisiana, but Hillary Clinton is not responsible for the “security contractors” who, while working for the State Department she was supposedly the head of, ignored 600 emails from Ambassador Chris Stevens begging for increased protection?
Petty meanness, rank stupidity, and glaring hypocrisy were on display elsewhere among the leftist media last week. On The View, a show featuring progressive women celebrities snarking on matters about which they have no competence, Carly Fiorina was said to have looked “demented,” her face a “Halloween mask” that could cause “nightmares.” So the same gang that attacked Donald Trump’s sexist mocking of Fiorina’s looks does the same thing to a woman with more combat tours in the sexist trenches than all five of the View cast put together. And a few of the View need to check their mirrors before they start making fun of other women’s looks.
. But more important, where’s the loyalty to the great feminist sisterhood upon whose behalf the progressives are fighting back against the “war on women”? Those horses of hypocrisy left the barn way back when the feminist establishment and mainstream media savaged with gusto the victims of Bill Clinton’s sexual attacks. Today’s feminists still don’t care about real-life women as much as they care about protecting their lucrative ideology. As Carly Fiorina pointed out, it is women who have been hit hardest by Obama’s no-growth economic policies, but that doesn’t matter to the progressive feminists. They just keep peddling lies about an epidemic of well-off college girls getting “sexually assaulted,” and think that protecting the right of a woman to have a late-term abortion, and Planned Parenthood to sell the organs, is the direst challenge facing American women today.
Finally there was CNBC’s preposterous Melissa Harris-Perry, the college-educated half-white child of a college dean and a non-profit functionary. In other words, like our president, someone who is “black” only by dint of the racist one-drop rule, and who has more social capital and privilege not just than the 19 million white people officially living in poverty, but the millions of more who are barely scraping by in Obama’s crony-socialist economy. Her social advantages haven’t stopped Harris-Perry from pontificating about the injustices inflicted on black people with whom she has little in common. Like many other well-off blacks who serially play the race card, she apparently views the dysfunctional lives of poor blacks as some sort of bank account of misery on which she can draw at will to buy compensation for her own privilege.
In other words, a member in good standing of the racial grievance industry, one of the scolds who patrol our public discourse to unmask the “microagressions” and “dog whistles” of inveterate white racism. Her latest discovery of hidden racism, however, surely must set a record for rank stupidity. Last week on her show, she chided a Latino guest and advised him to be “super careful” using “hard worker” to describe Republican Paul Ryan. Can’t figure out the microagression? Let Harris-Perry, a Presidential Chair Professor of Politics and International affairs at Wake Forest University, explain: “I actually keep an image of folks working in cotton fields on my office wall because it is a reminder about what hard work looks like.” A Republican can be a hard worker only in the “context of relative privilege,” whatever that means. She threw in “moms who don’t have health care who are working” to score a microagression double.
So the only genuine hard work in all of American history has been done by slaves picking cotton and women without health care? Only someone embalmed in the ideological amber of the identity-politics university could say something so out of touch with the reality of most Americans’ lives. Kentucky coal miners engaged in the most deadly job in America, family farmers, long-haul truck-drivers, or small businessmen working 10-12 hours a day aren’t genuine “hard workers” because presumably they’ve been “relatively privileged” somehow.
This ridiculous statement is the reductio ad absurdum one would expect from a dishonest and empirically false notion like “white privilege.” But for truly privileged “blacks” like Harris-Perry, this racist idea is necessary for camouflaging the fact that they are some of the richest, healthiest, freest human beings of any color in the whole history of the planet. But with “white privilege,” they can masquerade as victims of racism, and thus leverage institutions run by stupid white people into bestowing on them lucrative careers as contributors to “diversity.”
Meanwhile, the whole history of people like my grandfather, who in 1906 came from southern Italy––an illiterate peasant, as some official at Ellis Island designated him–– with 8 bucks in his pocket; or my old man, who left West Texas at 15, rode freight trains, did hard physical work in the CCC until the war, and then stood on his feet for 30 years cutting hair for a few bucks a head and raising cattle on his time off­­––the history of all those white people whose parents weren’t affluent like Harris-Perry’s or credentialed with college degrees, who had no capital other than their wit and character and strong backs, doesn’t exist in the warped moral world of race-hacks like Harris-Perry.
This week of progressive lunacy may not be surprising, but it does raise the question of how long the mass of sensible, fair-minded Americans of all colors finally get sick of the arrogance, self-righteousness, and rank hypocrisy of privileged elites pontificating to everybody else. Let’s hope November 8, 2016 gives us the answer.

Tarantino refuses to apologize for anti-cop comments!

NY POST ^ | November 3, 2015 | Chris Perez and Jamie Schram 

Quentin Tarantino offered nothing even close to an apology on Tuesday for calling cops “murderers” — and instead pathetically claimed he has been victimized by police unions.

Speaking publicly for the first time since his inflammatory comments at a Washington Square Park rally on Oct. 24, the Pulp Fiction ­director insisted his words were all taken out of context. All cops are not murderers,” Tar­antino told the Los Angeles Times. I never said that. I never even implied that.

What they’re doing is pretty obvious. Instead of dealing with the incidents of police brutality that those people were bringing up, instead of examining the problem of police brutality in this country, better they single me out.

And their message is very clear. It’s to shut me down. It’s to discredit me. It is to intimidate me. It is to shut my mouth and, even more important than that, it is to send a message out to any other prominent person that might feel the need to join that side of the argument

At the rally against “police terror,” Tarantino said, “When I see murders, I do not stand by . I have to call a murder a murder and I have to call the murderers the murderers.” The 52-year-old filmmaker also told the LA Times that he won’t back down in the face of a threatened boycott of his new movie “The Hateful Eight,” to be released Christmas Day.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Obamacare Is Dead: It Does Not Work Because It Could Not Work

National Review ^ | 11/04/2015 | Kevin D. Williamson 

Keep Guantanamo Open — the Arguments for Closing It Don’t Add Up

National Review ^ | 11/04/2015 | Senator Tim Scott 

Trump Could Win Over the Hispanics Who Matter

PJ Media ^ | 11/04/2015 | Roger L. Simon 

Conventional wisdom suggests that Donald Trump’s candidacy was dead on arrival with Hispanics. His strong stand against illegal immigration has been viewed as an instant turnoff.
However, one consultant suggests that Trump may actually do well with those Hispanics who matter in an electoral context. From the Washington Times:
"This stuff you read about how Hispanics are going to run away from Trump in droves is a Northeastern myth," said longtime presidential campaign adviser Mark Sanders.
"Most Hispanics here in East Texas are here legally, they vote, and they are hard-line opponents of illegal immigration," said Mr. Sanders, a top adviser in Democrat Tony Sanchez's 2002 campaign to unseat then-Gov. Rick Perry. "The only one they want is Trump -- not Hillary, not Bernie. That's the conundrum for Democrats."
Mr. Sanders says Hispanics in East Texas "come here from rural backgrounds, from the lower end of the social and economic ladder. Most of their kids go to community colleges because it's all their families can afford, and then go directly into the military. They have hard-core patriotism -- just what Trump plays into," Mr. Sanders added.
Perhaps that clip of from a Las Vegas rally of a Colombian woman singing Trump’s praises wasn’t a fluke after all.

Global Warming Activists Don’t Like When Someone Follows The Money

 The Daily Caller News ^ | 11/03/2015 | Andrew Follett

Al Gore .. has levied his global warming activism from a net worth of $700,000 in 2000 into an estimated net worth of $172.5 million by 2015. He is not alone in his financial endeavor.
Funding of science, in this particular case, climate change science, is dominated by the federal government. We assert that this will cause recipients of [government] grants to publish findings that are in-line with government policy preferences (i.e., do not bite the hand that feeds you
Studies that receive financial support from the public sector do not have to disclose it as a conflict of interest, even when that support is in the millions of dollars. Recent studies that the Environmental Protection Agency is using to support the scientific case for its Clean Power Plan saw the EPA itself give $31.2 million, $9.5 million, and $3.65 million in public funds to lead authors according to EPA public disclosures.
The author who received $3.65 million, Charles Driscoll, even admitted to the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette that the result of his study was predetermined, saying "in doing this study we wanted to bring attention to the additional benefits from carbon controls."
Universities typically received about 50 percent of the money that their researchers get in public funds if their research finds positive results, making them deeply dependent upon federal funding and likely to encourage studies which will come to conclusions that the government wants.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

It’s True! A toilet was used as an aerial bomb during the Vietnam War!

War History Online ^ | 10/31/15 

As American involvement in the Vietnam War began, the A-1 Skyraider was still the medium attack aircraft in many carrier air wings, although it was planned to be replaced by the A-6A Intruder as part of the general switch to jet aircraft. Skyraiders from Constellation andTiconderoga participated in the first U.S.
Navy strikes against North Vietnam on 5 August 1964 as part of Operation Pierce Arrow in response to the Gulf of Tonkin Incident, striking against fuel depots at Vinh, with one Skyraider from Ticonderoga damaged by anti-aircraft fire, and a second from Constellation shot down, killing its pilot.
In contrast to the Korean War, fought a decade earlier, the U.S. Air Force used the naval A-1 Skyraider for the first time in Vietnam. As the Vietnam War progressed, USAF A-1s were painted in camouflage, while USN A-1 Skyraiders were gray/white in color; again, in contrast to the Korean War, when A-1s were painted dark blue.
In October 1965, to highlight the dropping of the six millionth pound of ordnance, Commander Clarence J. Stoddard of Attack Squadron 25 (VA-25), flying an A-1H, dropped a special, one-time-only object in addition to his other munitions – a toilet.
Once again history is stranger then fiction, and a lot funnier: USS Midway VA-25’s Toilet Bomb.
In October 1965, CDR Clarence J. Stoddard, Executive Officer of VA-25 “Fist of the Fleet”, flying an A-1H Skyraider, NE/572 “Paper Tiger II” from Carrier Air Wing Two aboard USS Midway carried a special bomb to the North Vietnamese in commemoration of the 6-millionth pound of ordnance dropped.
The following is an account of this event, courtesy of Clint Johnson, Captain, USNR Ret. Captain Johnson was one of the two VA-25 A-1 Skyraider pilots credited with shooting down a MiG-17 on June 20, 1965.
The following is an account of this event, courtesy of Clint Johnson, Captain, USNR Ret. Captain Johnson was one of the two VA-25 A-1 Skyraider pilots credited with shooting down a MiG-17 on June 20, 1965
“I was a pilot in VA-25 on the 1965 Vietnam cruise. 572 was flown by CDR C. W. “Bill” Stoddard. His wingman in 577 (which was my assigned airplane) was LCDR Robin Bacon, who had a wing station mounted movie camera (the only one remaining in the fleet from WWII).
The flight was a Dixie Station strike (South Vietnam) going to the Delta. When they arrived in the target area and CDR Stoddard was reading the ordnance list to the FAC, he ended with “and one code name Sani-flush”. The FAC couldn’t believe it and joined up to see it. It was dropped in a dive with LCDR Bacon flying tight wing position to film the drop.
When it came off, it turned hole to the wind and almost struck his airplane. It made a great ready room movie. The FAC said that it whistled all the way down. The toilet was a damaged toilet, which was going to be thrown overboard. One of our plane captains rescued it and the ordnance crew made a rack, tailfins and nose fuse for it. Our checkers maintained a position to block the view of the air boss and the Captain while the aircraft was taxiing forward.
Just as it was being shot off we got a 1MC message from the bridge, “What the hell was on 572’s right wing?” There were a lot of jokes with air intelligence about germ warfare. I wish that we had saved the movie film.

She Botched It - What we’ve learned about Hillary Clinton’s performance at the State Department

The Weekly Standard ^ | November 9, 2015 issue | Jay Cost 

.....By then Libya's temporary government, the National Transitional Council, had moved from Benghazi to Tripoli, where the American embassy had been reopened. At the time, other governments were moving their missions out of Benghazi, and there had been talk of winding down the American mission. Yet Stevens-who had served as U.S. representative to the National Transitional Council from March to November 2011 and would be sworn in as ambassador to Libya in May 2012-did not know what was planned for the Benghazi mission. [Susan] Brooks [R-IN] asked:
[Stevens] was in Washington, D.C., or back in the States during that time, and in December Ambassador Stevens, your soon-to-be ambassador, didn't know what was going to happen with the compound in Benghazi. How is that possible?....
Clinton offered a jarring response:
Well, Congresswoman, one of the great attributes that Chris Stevens had was a really good sense of humor. And I just see him smiling as he's typing this. Because it is clearly in response to the email down below talking about picking up a few, quote, "fire-sale items" from the Brits.
This comment comes out of nowhere. Why mention Stevens's sense of humor in response to a serious question about the future of the mission?....... Seemingly taken aback, Brooks noted that the fire sale actually referred to barricades the British were selling at cut-rate prices because they and "other countries [were] pulling out" of Benghazi, and American diplomats were looking to buy "because we weren't providing enough physical security for the compound."
Clinton responded: "Well, I thought it showed their entrepreneurial spirit, Congresswoman.....I applaud them for doing so." Given that over the next year Clinton's State Department would fail to provide sufficient security for the compound, this was a cold-blooded statement........
(Excerpt) Read more at ...


Stop Islam


What do you think now?


For all the morons...

Hillary Express!

Screw Hope!

Trust me!

Best Costume Ever!

It's a clock!

Putin's Bitch

Colored People

This country...

Beat the Elite ^ | November 4, 2015 | John Stossel 

We love to complain about elites, people who seem to have a special advantage, privileges in life.
I get annoyed by the Kardashians and other spoiled rich kids. They didn't work for their wealth. They don't contribute.
Still, those elites are mostly harmless.
But there's one group of truly dangerous elites: politicians. Spoiled party kids may have stupid ideas, but they can't impose them on the rest of us. Politicians can, and do. It's an important distinction to remember.
In Thomas Sowell's book "The Vision of the Anointed" (which should have been titled "(Conceit of the Self- Anointed", Sowell points out that politicians use "the word 'ask' -- as in 'We are just asking everyone to pay their fair share.' But of course governments do not ask, they tell. The IRS does not 'ask' for contributions."
A rare presidential candidate who understands the importance of that difference is Sen. Rand Paul, who will appear on my TV show Friday. Paul points out that free markets get people to create things without force, and markets are much more efficient than governments.
"The Soviet Union was brought down because they couldn't determine one simple thing -- the price of bread," says Paul. "They had all these planners, but nobody can determine the price of bread. Only the market can."
Sadly, Paul hasn't inspired voters with that message, while his fellow senator, self-proclaimed socialist Bernie Sanders, draws huge, cheering crowds. Front-runner Hillary Clinton doesn't call herself a socialist -- but she often acts like one.
"There's an irony here," says Paul, "because many of these people say, I'm pro-choice. No -- they're very anti-choice when it comes to market decisions. Producing stuff, buying stuff, selling stuff -- you're not allowed to do it. They're the anti- choice party. That's what socialism is."
People defend government spending out of concern for the poor, but what we get from government often has little to do with helping those at the bottom. "We just discovered," says Paul, "that they spent $800,000 developing a televised cricket league for Afghanistan ... and they spent $150,000 for yoga classes for federal employees."
This habit of taking money and power from citizens all over America and letting Washington elites decide how to use it doesn't exist just among Democrats. Paul sees it among Republican supporters of Donald Trump, too. Their attitude, says Paul, is "nobody quite knows exactly what economic system that celebrity is for, but trust him because he's smart and all-powerful -- give him more power and he'll fix everything."
By contrast, Paul says, "I'm not running to run the economy or the country."
I worry that, to most people, that sounds like a politician not "doing his job." People do seem eager to vote for a politician who will "lead," and "take charge."
But I don't want to be led. I'm not a child. I don't need elites in Washington, D.C., to boss me around and then tax me for it.
I wish voters would read Matt Ridley's new book, "The Evolution of Everything." He points out that when it comes to the innovations that make the most difference in our lives -- medicine, smartphones, search engines, even language -- it's not the elite planners who bring progress.
"It comes from the bottom up," says Ridley. "What happens in technology or morality or culture or any other aspect of human life is that ordinary people interacting with each other is the source of most innovation, most change in the world."
These good things happen in a decentralized, unplanned way all around us -- and it's been that way since humans first evolved.
Ridley says, "We give far too much credit to the people who are in charge, the people who seem to be on top of things and running things. They're just taking the credit."
Politicians should admit that more often. But that would require them to be humble. Loudly pretending to be in charge is their specialty.

Taking Over!


Judgment Day


Won't be long now!


This is what happens






Debate Rules