Wednesday, December 16, 2015

Our Timid Military Leaders ^ | December 16, 2015 | Walter E. Williams 

This month, President Barack Obama's defense secretary, Ashton Carter, decreed that there will be 220,000 combat military jobs offered to women -- including in Army special operations forces and the Navy SEALs. He said, "They'll be allowed to drive tanks, fire mortars and lead infantry soldiers into combat ... and everything else that was previously open only to men."
Technological changes since the time of the M60 Patton, embodied in the M1 Abrams tank, mean that a woman can probably drive a tank. But what if track pads or a tank track has to be repaired in the field and under enemy fire? Such repairs pose a significant physical challenge to men, who generally have far greater strength than women. Will our military leaders relieve women from such a task, claiming that demanding equal performance creates a "disparate," sexually discriminatory impact?
Then there's hand-to-hand combat training, which comes near the end of the Army's basic training. Recruits spend a few hours facing off against each other in pugil stick bouts. Pugil sticks are padded training weapons used since World War II by each branch of the military to train service members for hand-to-hand rifle and bayonet combat. The object of the training is to subdue your opponent. Women are at a severe disadvantage because upper-body strength really counts. Given the timidity and character of today's military leaders, I predict several possibilities: Training with pugil sticks will be banned, or servicewomen will train only against other servicewomen, or, if the training is integrated, servicemen will be court-martialed if they knock out or knock down a servicewoman. Even if our military leaders fudge this aspect of training, what happens in actual combat when hand-to-hand skills are called upon? I wouldn't be surprised if today's military leaders call for an amendment protocol to the Geneva Conventions to make the hand-to-hand killing of a female fighter a war crime.
What about other training standards? The Army's physical fitness test in basic training is a three-event physical performance test used to assess endurance. The minimum requirement for 17- to 21-year-old males is 35 pushups, 47 situps and a 2-mile run in 16 minutes, 36 seconds or less. For females of the same age, the minimum requirement is 13 pushups, 47 situps and a 19:42 2-mile run. Equal fitness standards would wash most women out. "USMC Women in the Service Restrictions Review" found that the average woman has 20 percent lower aerobic power, 40 percent lower muscle strength, 47 percent less lifting strength and 26 percent slower marching speed than the average man. Women are less likely to be able to march under load -- 12.4 miles in five hours with a 71-pound assault load -- and to be able to crawl, sprint and negotiate obstacles with that load and move a casualty weighing 165 pounds or more while carrying that load.
There are other differences between male and female troops. Women are twice as likely to suffer injuries and are three times more undeployable than men. Servicewomen are four times likelier to report being ill than servicemen. The percentage of servicewomen being medically unavailable at any time is twice that of servicemen. Then there's pregnancy. Each year, between 10 and 17 percent of servicewomen become pregnant.
Perhaps the most dangerous aspect of military social engineering is the cover-up of failure. Officers who criticize double standards or expose official lies and deception about servicewomen's performance risk their careers. Those official lies and deception will eventually reveal themselves with unnecessary loss of lives on the battlefield.
Finally, the Selective Service System's website ( reads: "While there has been talk recently about women in combat, there has been NO decision to require females to register with Selective Service, or be subject to a future military draft. Selective Service continues to register only men, ages 18 through 25." How can that, coupled with reduced performance standards, possibly be consistent with the Defense Department's stated agenda "to provide a level, gender-neutral playing field"?

68% of Americans Want Planned Parenthood’s Sale of Aborted Baby Body Parts Investigated ^ | December 14, 2015 | Steven Ertelt 

There’s not much that united Republican, independents and Democrats. But when it comes to what should be done about the Planned Parenthood abortion business selling the body parts of aborted babies, 68 percent of Americans are in agreement — the abortion company ought to be investigated.
A new poll commissioned by the Polling Company found Americans united on both investigating Planned Parenthood and cutting or stopping its taxpayer funding as a result of the expose’ showing it selling aborted babies and their body parts.
“We just finished brand new research confirming the findings of previous focus groups that those that have seen or heard the details of the Center for Medical Progress (CMP) investigation shift in their opinion of Planned Parenthood. In earlier focus groups we learned that even Planned Parenthood supporters, when made aware of the facts in the CMP video, switch their opinion on the abortion provider. We expanded the research in a new nationwide poll. When the basic, undeniable facts about Planned Parenthood are revealed, the dynamic changes completely,” pollster Kellyanne Conway said.
Here’s more about what the December 2015 nationwide poll found. The poll was of just over 1,000 adults – 44 percent self-identified as Democrats and 39 percent as Republicans:
After answering a series of questions on the baby body parts expose and hearing that Planned Parenthood is “the nation’s largest abortion provider, receives a half billion dollars from the government each year, spends millions of dollars in partisan political activities and was recently exposed on video as bartering the cost of baby body parts and fetal tissue, a 54% – majority say they are “mostly negative” toward Planned Parenthood.
Public opinion toward Planned Parenthood shifts dramatically after respondents learn basic truths about the group. On a separate question, a 68% -majority of Americans, including majorities of self -identified Republicans (76%), Independents (72 %), and Democrats (64%) back continued investigations based on the video allegations. This marks rare tri- partisan agreement in Washington. We also asked Americans how they would response to those saying that the government should tempo rarily freeze taxpayer funding of Planned Parenthood until the baby body parts investigations are completed. A combined 56% favor some sort of adjustment to Planned Parenthood’s taxpayer funding: 27% say it should be frozen, while a separate 19% say it should be eliminated, and another 10% would reduce its funding. Additionally, our survey shows that 28% of Americans say they have already seen some of the undercover Planned Parenthood videos. Among those that have not seen any portions of the CMP videos, their reasons are varied: 38% (and 45% of men) say they are “not interested” in the videos, while 26% (and 33% of women) are afraid of what they might see. Another 20% say that they are curious about what was said and done in the videos and would like to see them. Only 10% of this group that have not viewed said it was due to a distrust of their veracity or authenticity.
David Daleiden of Center for Medical Progress told LifeNews the results of the poll confirm that the videos his group orchestrated have helped shift public opinion against Planned Parenthood and abortion.
“The public mandate is clear for Planned Parenthood to be investigated and held accountable under the law for their illicit abortion and baby parts business, and for taxpayer funding to be reassigned to real healthcare providers instead of Planned Parenthood’s scandal-plagued abortion boutiques,” he said. “The memo and new data released today confirm what previous polling has shown—when Americans see the evidence for themselves about Planned Parenthood’s fetal organ trafficking, they reject Planned Parenthood’s false and fraudulent advertising as a mainstream healthcare provider.”
The poll comes on the heels of a Senate vote to de-fund Planned Parenthood. That legislation is expected to be approved by the House next month and then go to President Obama.
The expose’ videos catching Planned Parenthood officials selling the body parts of aborted babies have shocked the nation. Here is a list of all eleven:
In the first video: Dr. Deborah Nucatola of Planned Parenthood commented on baby-crushing: “We’ve been very good at getting heart, lung, liver, because we know that, so I’m not gonna crush that part, I’m gonna basically crush below, I’m gonna crush above, and I’m gonna see if I can get it all intact.” In the second video: Planned Parenthood’s Dr. Mary Gatter joked, “I want a Lamborghini” as she negotiated the best price for baby parts. In the third video: Holly O’Donnell, a former Stem Express employee who worked inside a Planned Parenthood clinic, detailed first-hand the unspeakable atrocities and how she fainted in horror over handling baby legs. In the fourth video: Planned Parenthood’s Dr. Savita Ginde stated, “We don’t want to do just a flat-fee (per baby) of like, $200. A per-item thing works a little better, just because we can see how much we can get out of it.” She also laughed while looking at a plate of fetal kidneys that were “good to go.” In the fifth video: Melissa Farrell of Planned Parenthood-Gulf Coast in Houston boasted of Planned Parenthood’s skill in obtaining “intact fetal cadavers” and how her “research” department “contributes so much to the bottom line of our organization here, you know we’re one of the largest affiliates, our Research Department is the largest in the United States.” In the sixth video: Holly O’Donnell described technicians taking fetal parts without patient consent: “There were times when they would just take what they wanted. And these mothers don’t know. And there’s no way they would know.” In the seventh and perhaps most disturbing video: Holly O’Donnell described the harvesting, or “procurement,” of organs from a nearly intact late-term fetus aborted at Planned Parenthood Mar Monte’s Alameda clinic in San Jose, CA. “‘You want to see something kind of cool,’” O’Donnell says her supervisor asked her. “And she just taps the heart, and it starts beating. And I’m sitting here and I’m looking at this fetus, and its heart is beating, and I don’t know what to think.” In the eighth video: StemExpress CEO Cate Dyer admits Planned Parenthood sells “a lot of” fully intact aborted babies. The ninth video: catches a Planned Parenthood medical director discussing how the abortion company sells fully intact aborted babies — including one who “just fell out” of the womb. The 10th video: catches the nation’s biggest abortion business selling specific body parts — including the heart, eyes and “gonads” of unborn babies.The video also shows the shocking ways in which Planned Parenthood officials admit that they are breaking federal law by selling aborted baby body parts for profit. Unreleased Videos: Unreleased videos from CMP show Deb Vanderhei of Planned Parenthood caught on tape talking about how Planned Parenthood abortion business affiliates may “want to increase revenue [from selling baby parts] but we can’t stop them…” Another video has a woman talking about the “financial incentives” of selling aborted baby body parts. The 11th video: catches a texas Planned Parenthood abortionist planning to sell the intact heads of aborted babies for research. Amna Dermish is caught on tape describing an illegal partial-birth abortion procedure to terminate living, late-term unborn babies which she hopes will yield intact fetal heads for brain harvesting.
The full, unedited videos have confirmed that revelations that some aborted baby remains sold by Planned Parenthood go to biotech companies for the purpose of creating “humanized” mice. Meanwhile, Planned Parenthood has been exposed as having sold body parts from aborted babies for as much as 15 years.
The federal law that technically prohibits the sale of aborted babies and their body parts was written by a pro-abortion Congressman decades ago and essentially spells out a process by which sellers of aborted baby body parts can meet certain criteria that allows the sales to be legal. That’s why a Colorado congressman has introduced legislation to totally ban the sales of aborted baby body parts.

DHS Monitors Americans' Social Media Accounts, But Not Visa Applicants'

The Daily Caller ^ | 14 Dec 2015 | Chuck Ross 

The Department of Homeland Security has operated a program to monitor ordinary Americans' social media discussions about the agency's policy directives, even though it had in place another policy prohibiting agents from checking visa applicants' social media accounts for possible signs of terrorist leanings.
The agency's policy against vetting visa applicants was revealed on Monday by John Cohen, a former DHS under-secretary for intelligence and analysis.
Now an intelligence analyst at ABC News, Cohen says that last year, DHS Sec. Jeh Johnson resisted changing the agency's policy against viewing visa applicants' social media accounts as part of the screening process to let them into the U.S.
Having such a policy in place may have prevented San Bernardino terrorist Tashfeen Malik from entering the country on a fiancee visa last year, Cohen asserted.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Yes, Ted Cruz Is A Reaganite

Conservative Review ^ | December 15, 2015 | Jeffrey Lord 

Here it comes.
Thinking for a nano-second that maybe, just maybe, they have finally done in Donald Trump—a recent Iowa poll has Trump running second to Senator Ted Cruz—in a blink the Establishment’s guns swivel to attack… Cruz.
Trump is not only not dispatched. New polls since that Iowa Des Moines Register poll have Trump breaking into the forties, leaving everybody, including Ted Cruz, in the dust. But let’s focus here on Cruz, and the revealing attack on him that was penned by Max Boot over there in Commentary.
The title? Ted Cruz: The Anti-Reagan.
Boot begins thusly:
“Like many of his rivals for the Republican nomination, Ted Cruz has embraced the mantle of Ronald Reagan. He regularly cites the Gipper as an inspiration, and last week gave a foreign policy address at the Heritage Foundation that was laced with tributes to him: “As Reagan knew well, the best way to project America’s leadership is by protecting and promoting America’s strength and this principle should always guide our actions.” I didn’t know Ronald Reagan (neither did Cruz), but I do know a lot about him. And from what I know, it’s fair to say that Ted Cruz is no Ronald Reagan. In many ways, he is actually an anti-Reagan.”
As the late president used to say? Well…
I actually did know Ronald Reagan. He was the boss for all of us who toiled in the Reagan White House, including me when I was a young White House political director. And as it happens, I also know Ted Cruz. And suffice it to say Ted Cruz is the real thing, a genuine Reaganite. - See more at:
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Yuuuuuuuge! Donald Trump's Best GOP Debate Yet

Breitbart ^ | 15 Dec 2015 | Joel B. Pollak 

Trump made few mistakes, despite efforts by the moderators and the other candidates to knock him out of the pole position. While Sens. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) sparred over past Senate votes, and other candidates repeated lines familiar from the campaign trail, Trump looked comfortable-and solid.
He may not always have had the "right" answer, but he sounded more fluent with his own positions.
At one stage, he even felt confident enough to tangle with members of the audience–supporters, it seemed, of Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY)- who booed his idea to "infiltrate" Islamic State on the Internet.
"I just can't imagine somebody booing. These are people that want to kill us, folks, and you’re objecting to us infiltrating their conversations? I don’t think so."
Perhaps Trump simply knows he is sitting on a big lead.
Regardless, Trump won on Tuesday night=at times by fighting hard, at times by letting the stragglers squabble.
There were few personal attacks, no misstatements of his own policies. He faced repeated (and repetitive) attacks from Jeb Bush-often instigated by the moderators, as Trump pointed out–and simply pointed to his poll numbers.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Scalia Was Right About Race Preferences [affirmative action hurts black college students]

Wall St. Journal ^ | December 13, 2015 | Jason L. Riley 

We live in a political environment where the intent of a policy aimed at helping minorities is all that matters; questioning the policy’s actual effectiveness is tantamount to racism.
For decades, diversity-obsessed college administrators have tried to conceal information on admissions and student outcomes broken down by race, but the data that have become public is devastating. An analysis of black students at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in the mid-1980s found that they had scored in the top 10% nationally on the math portion of the SAT but in the bottom 10% among their classmates at MIT. As a result, black students were dropping out at much higher rates, and those who didn’t leave typically received lower grades than their white and Asian classmates. Affirmative action had turned some of the smartest kids in the country into failures, in a misguided effort to obtain some predetermined racial mix...
After racial preferences were banned in the University of California system in 1996, black enrollment at higher-ranked UCLA and Berkeley fell, but black academic outcomes improved. Mr. Sander and Mr. Taylor have demonstrated empirically that as more minority students attended schools where they weren’t at a preparation disadvantage relative to their classmates, grades rose along with graduation rates. That isn’t surprising. Historically black colleges and universities, which are less selective than the top-tier schools, produce about 40% of blacks with undergraduate degrees in math and science, despite accounting for only around 20% of black enrollment.
Racial preferences almost certainly result in fewer black professionals than likely would exist in the absence of such policies, which is bad enough. But they also have a long track record of poisoning the academic environment. The racial unrest on campus today is a byproduct of college admissions schemes that place race above ability.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Speed Traps!

Not America


Tear down this wall


Amazon Drones

Watering my ISIS


Obama's Future


Cruz Sworn in!

Hand over your weapons!

Clinton plans to use executive orders as president to go around GOP Congress

Washington Times ^ | December 15, 2015 | Kelly Riddell 

Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton is pledging to use executive orders to increase her clout in the White House to work around Congress and force Republicans to respond to her agenda, a tactic frequently employed by President Obama that has angered his GOP critics.
On the campaign trail, Mrs. Clinton has said on three occasions so far that she would use executive actions to help execute her domestic policy agenda on issues such as gun control, ending corporate "inversion" deals and immigration, where she promises to unilaterally shield more people from deportation.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

... because Congress refuses to do their duty and impeach the Royal Idiot ... we now get a more corrupt piece of work who promises to rip the Constitution into even smaller shreds. 

The Death Of The American Middle Class Has Been Greatly Exaggerated

Forbes ^ | Dec 15, 2015 | Jeffrey Dorfman 

To borrow from Mark Twain, a whole lot of people seem intent on reporting if not the death of the American middle class, then at least its demise. Thanks to a Pew Research Report, reported here by the Chicago Tribune as one example, casual readers assume the reports on the death of the American middle class are true. Luckily for Americans, depending on how you look at it, the reports are either false, or true in a positive way.
First, and most importantly, everyone must understand that there is no official or even consensus definition of the middle class.
...researchers and journalists are pretty much free to make up any definition they want in order to reach their preconceived notion.
That is basically what Pew did, defining the middle class as every household earning between two-thirds and twice the median income...
First, is the middle class shrinking? The answer depends completely on how you define the middle class. Economists generally study income distributions with quintiles...
If instead, we define the middle class, as Pew did, by some multiples of the median income (the one right in the middle of the whole population), then the middle class is shrinking.
It also must be noted that even the poor are getting richer.
Personally, I side with those who care more that everyone is getting richer and also with those who think people escaping the middle class to become rich is a good thing. The fact that the very rich have been making larger income gains than the rest of us doesn’t make us poorer.
...the big picture and at the actual economic experience of people at all points of the income distribution, it is clear—the death of the American middle class has been greatly exaggerated.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

'The Obamas treat Air Force One like an Uber ride': Chief of spending watchdog says

Daily Mail (U.K.) ^ | 12/15/2015 | Kieren Corcoran 

Barack Obama has been savaged by a top spending campaigner for taking the First Family on an eighth consecutive Christmas vacation to Hawaii, at huge expense to the American taxpayer.
The President was accused of treating Air Force One, which costs $206,000/hour to run, 'like an Uber ride' ahead of his next jaunt to his home state.
Fly-time alone will set taxpayers back somewhere in the region of $3.5million as Obama, the First Lady, Sasha and Malia and their two dogs jet off for around two weeks.
They have traditionally rented a luxury villa in the upscale Kailua area on Oahu, the main island, and head out for hikes, rounds of golf and restaurant meals with their friends.
Tom Fitton, the head of the Judicial Watch pressure group, said Obama's holiday habit proves that he is out of touch - and has to stop.
He told 'The Obamas' travel is out of control. They are treating the Air Force One like an Uber ride.
'And President Obama seems oblivious to the burden he is placing on Americans with his continuous vacations, getaways, and political junkets at taxpayer expense.'
During the trips, the Obamas are accompanied by a substantial Secret Service detail, who costs thousands of dollars a day to accommodate in the idyllic vacation spot.
Local police also work overtime and an ambulance trails the Presidential party at all times in case of disaster - all of which will push the total further into the millions.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

The nasty truth


Common Sense


WTF, over?


Indict the BITCH!


Heads Off!




Our President


Crap Shoot!


No surprise!


Gun control!






Think about it!


Half black!




The First!