Wednesday, November 30, 2016

Trump Considering Palin For VA Secretary: Will This Make Liberals Crazy? YOU BETCHA!

GP ^ | November 30,2016 | Aleister 

ABC News has the story:

Sarah Palin Under Consideration for VA Secretary
Sarah Palin is under consideration for secretary of veterans affairs, a close Palin aide and a top Donald Trump transition official tell ABC News.
The Palin aide tells ABC News that in “recent days,” Palin told Trump transition officials: “I feel as though the megaphone I have been provided can be used in a productive and positive way to help those desperately in need.”

The VA is the largest government agency with over 300,000 federal employees and a budget of $182 billion for 2017.

Palin’s son-in-law, Medal of Honor recipient Dakota Meyer, posted a SarahPAC video to his Facebook page earlier this week that heavily focuses on her work with veterans and her specific connection to the community. Her eldest son, Track, is a veteran who served in Iraq in 2008. The video, which is not new, seems to clearly show her interest in the position, and in the speech, she hits the VA “bureaucracy,” saying it is “killing our vets.”
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Fear the Voting Dead

American Thinker ^ | November 30, 2016 | Daniel J. Sobieski 

President-elect Donald J. Trump has been mocked for his tweeted claim that if it were not for illegal aliens voting, he might very well have won the popular as well as the electoral vote. Is his claim less credible than the one put forth by some of Trump’s opponents that Russian hackers got into voting machines that aren’t even connected to the Internet to switch votes around?
Trump puts the number at several million. Certainly the number is higher than one, considering the loosening of voting restrictions in recent years, from motor voter laws to same-day registration to handing out drivers licenses to illegal aliens. It is in no way implausible to picture an illegal alien getting his driver’s license and then marching to the polls to vote against a candidate who opposes such actions by government,
I would argue that in this context the efforts by Democrats to fight voting integrity efforts such as Voter ID requirements and purging the rolls of dead voters is designed to rig the system, as Trump might say, in their favor. As Investors Business Daily noted in 2014, dead voters casting votes, illegal aliens voting, and people being registered to vote in multiple states is a common and documented occurrence:

The fact that many people will do anything to get out of jury duty has exposed massive fraudulent voting in Frederick County, Md., that may have been going on for years…The Virginia Voters Alliance (VVA) cross-checked jury duty forms with individual voting records and found that hundreds of voters in that one Maryland county cast votes after reporting they were noncitizens. One in seven Maryland residents are noncitizens, so extrapolating the number of possibly illegal votes cast in recent elections over the entire state hints at possible election-changing fraud.

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

The Green Party has disowned Dr. Jill Stein ^ | 11/30/2016 | Ethel C. Fenig 

Chaos reigns in the liberal/left alt universe following its defeat in the presidential elections with members turning on each other. While Green Party presidential candidate Dr. Jill Stein is pushing forward with her online begging to fund her presidential recount campaign, encouraged by losing Democratic candidate Hillary R. Clinton, rank and file Green Party members are voicing their opposition.

Dr. Margaret Flowers, Green Party candidate for Senate from Maryland, released a letter on her campaign site complaining about the misuse of time and funds in the Green Party's name, suggesting their efforts be redirected to more important party causes.The letter was signed by over 200 Green Party members, candidates and party officials.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

The delusional melodrama of Jill Stein

The Week ^ | 11/30/2016 | Edward Morrissey 

Most people couldn't wait for the grueling, nasty, seemingly interminable 2016 election to end. Jill Stein wants to keep it going. And she's willing to waste a lot of money, time, and attention to do so. Like a bad actor that insists on one last curtain call after the audience has headed for the exits, the Green Party nominee seems to stubbornly believe in her relevance even after the election demonstrated its non-existence beyond any doubt.

Stein's demand for recounts in Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania demonstrates arrogance bordering on parody. Stein didn't lose the election so much as she disappeared in it. More than 134 million ballots have been counted so far. Stein received fewer than 1.5 million of them. That's barely a percentage point of the overall popular vote. Libertarian Party nominee Gary Johnson garnered more than 4 million votes, while the two major-party nominees scored between 62 and 65 million votes each.

Legally, any candidate has standing to request a recount — as long as they pay the costs. Politically and morally, however, Stein utterly lacks any standing to claim she has been harmed by ballot irregularities and counting errors. Proper standing — at least in political and commonsense contexts — would go to the person who might have otherwise won an election without such alleged irregularities.

That means the one candidate who might have a decent argument for recounts in places like Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan is Hillary Clinton. (And indeed, Stein's recount demands are surely intended to help Clinton.) So why hasn't the Democrat who sustained a shocking loss in the party's famed "Blue Wall" states pushed for recounts herself? For one thing, Clinton has already conceded the race to Donald Trump, reportedly urged by President Barack Obama to do so.

The optics would also be terrible. Clinton spent the last weeks of the election hyperventilating, along with the media, about Trump's refusal to commit to accepting Election Night results. She called it "horrifying" and repeatedly hit Trump's lack of respect for the electoral system. To suddenly demand recounts after those attacks would be a hypocrisy that might be beyond the reach of any politician.

Beyond that, though, there are many thousands of reasons not to demand a recount. Specifically, there are 10,700 reasons in Michigan, 22,000 in Wisconsin, and 68,000 in Pennsylvania. Those are the votes that Clinton would have to make up in a recount to change the outcome in each state, and she'd need to succeed in all three of those states to change the Electoral College outcome. No recount has ever produced a vote change of that magnitude; no recount has even come close to it. FiveThirtyEight's Carl Bialik, working off of data from FairVote, noted that only three of 27 statewide recounts since 2000 have succeeded in changing the outcome of an election — and only when the original totals were much closer than any of those seen in the 2016 race.

"The mean swing between the top two candidates in the 27 recounts was 282 votes, with a median of 219," Bialik explains. "The biggest swing came in Florida's 2000 presidential election recount, when Al Gore cut 1,247 votes off George W. Bush's lead, ultimately not enough to flip the state to his column."

What about the recounts that have succeeded? Well, I had a ringside seat for one in Minnesota, when Al Franken turned an Election Night defeat into a U.S. Senate seat seven months later. The recount turned into the most bruising, partisan, and contentious political fight the state had ever seen. After several months of recounting, ballot challenges, and numerous court appearances, the change in the gap between Franken and incumbent Norm Coleman was 527 votes — a miniscule amount of the 2.6 million votes cast. It was just enough to erase Coleman's 215-vote lead after the state-certified canvassing a week after the election and give Franken a 312-vote win in its place.

Stein continues to insist that she wants to pursue the recounts to demand change in voting infrastructure. But her recounts, like those 27 that have preceded them since 2000, would likely make the opposite point — that our vote-counting infrastructure actually gets accurate and reliable results. Even the Florida debacle in 2000 changed the results by 0.022 percent, just about the same percentage as in 2008's Minnesota recount. It would take 10 times that kind of scale to flip Michigan, and 30 times that scale to flip Wisconsin. Stein's recount demands envision vote swings on a patently ridiculous scale.

Small wonder that even Democrats like Joe Trippi have openly scorned Stein's effort. "It's a waste of time and effort," the Democratic strategist said. "I think it probably was the Stein people looking for a way to stay relevant, raise some money, and take the stink off of them" — a reference to accusations that Stein played a spoiler role in diverting enough Clinton votes in these states to give Trump the victory. Bob Shrum, another Democratic eminence grise, put it more bluntly — that there was "no chance" for these recounts to succeed.

Ballot integrity and voting infrastructure aren't the reason for Stein's stunts. Neither is the election outcome. Stein just wants to keep imposing herself on the national stage, eating up time and resources from state governments in order to raise money from suckers unhappy with Trump's victory and feed her own delusions of relevance. Shame on her, and shame on those egging her on.

Hillary's recount scheme exposes media double standard

Fox News ^ | 11/29/16 | Sean Hannity (opinion) 

Hillary Clinton's campaign is supporting recount efforts in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania that are led by Green Party candidate Jill Stein.
This is insanity. It's all about trying to undermine a democratic election, and of course, Donald Trump's decisive victory. The idea for challenging election results appears to come from a conspiracy theory that the alt-radical left is now pushing. They're claiming that voting machines in those states were hacked, and maybe by the Russians!
It wasn't that long ago that Hillary Clinton was slamming Donald Trump for saying at the third debate that he would wait until after the election to decide if he accepted the results. Remember how angry she was?
“That is not the way our democracy works,” she said on Oct. 19. “We've been around for 240 years. We've had free and fair elections. We've accepted the outcomes when we may not have liked them, and that is what must be expected of anyone standing on a debate stage during a general election.”
A few days later, Clinton said it was “really painful to see” Trump refusing to pledge ahead of time to accept results. Then, she said Trump “had said something truly horrifying,” and that the statement was aimed at his “final target, our democracy itself.”
During her concession speech, Hillary Clinton said that the country should accept the results and support President-elect Trump. Let's take a look.
“We must accept this result and then look to the future,” she said a day after losing. “Donald Trump is going to be our president. We owe him an open mind and the chance to lead. Our constitutional democracy enshrines the peaceful transfer of power, and we don't just respect that, we cherish it.”
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Loretta uncovered!

Go Fuck Yourself, Whitey!

Soros, Democracy Alliance, Dark Money, and Violence

The New American ^ | 29 November 2016 | William F. Jasper 

In the days and weeks since Donald Trump’s historic upset victory over Hillary Rodham Clinton, the Big Money establishment globalists have been in hyper-drive, colluding and scheming to launch a multi-pronged effort to undo the election. Their plan involves multiple operations providing simultaneous “pressure from above and below,” utilizing legal challenges, petitions, media campaigns, and “direct action” street violence.
On November 22, two weeks after Donald Trump was declared to have been elected the 45th president of the United States, the Open Society Foundations (OSF) revealed one of its new political initiatives: funding a $10 million program to “confront hate” in the new Trump era. The OSF, of course, is one of the main conduits through which hedge fund billionaire George Soros, for decades, has been funneling his rivers of dark money to rent-a-mob rioters in dozens of countries.
In announcing its new effort to condemn “hateful words and deeds,” the Soros “philanthropy” did not direct any of its condemnation toward the #NotMyPresident rioters, who had just wound up a prolonged campaign of violence and mayhem that included attacking police, burning buildings, smashing cars and windows, defacing public property and monuments, beating opponents and bystanders, threatening to kill the president-elect, and urging rape of First Lady-elect Melania Trump.
No, those actual, documented “hateful words and deeds,” carried out by anti-Trump/pro-Clinton partisans, are not the concern of Soros and his huge funding network. Instead, the santimonious philanthropists are targeting the alleged hateful words and deeds of Trump supporters compiled by the thoroughly discredited Southern Poverty Law Center, a vicious smear bund that poses as an impartial defender of American values while promoting a radical anti-American, anti-Christian agenda.
“In response to the national wave of hate incidents, the threat of forcible removal of undocumented immigrants, and the fear pervading communities across the country, the Open Society Foundations today announced a $10 million initiative to support and protect those targeted by hateful acts,” the OSF press releasestated. The OSF statement continues:

Harsh rhetoric and policy proposals during the 2016 presidential campaign that drew on racist, sexist, anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim, anti-Semitic, anti-LGBTI, and other forms of hate have encouraged a wave of physical and verbal attacks nationwide. The Southern Poverty Law Center has received over 700 reports of “hateful harassment and intimidation” since November 8.

The Open Society Foundations initiative is an effort to move swiftly to address this urgent problem, providing support designed to encourage and empower communities to resist the spread of hate and strengthen services and protections for their most vulnerable neighbors.

“We stand in solidarity with the tens of millions of Americans of all political preferences who condemn these hateful words and deeds and embrace inclusion, tolerance, and hope,” the Soros operation declares. “We applaud the many communities, organizations, advocates, and concerned families who are rising to meet this challenge, and invite others in the philanthropic community to join this fight to reaffirm core American values.”
“Top-down and Bottom-up” — Pressure from Above and Below
“Through this initiative, a combination of top-down and bottom-up approaches, we join with the millions of Americans around the country who disavow hateful rhetoric and acts,” Christopher Stone, president of the Open Society Foundations, stated in the OSF press release.
Stone’s endorsement of a “combination of top-down and bottom-up approaches” is an important restatement of the long-used strategy of the funding elites (think Rockefeller, Ford, Carnegie, and Gates foundations) for coordinated action between the suites and the streets, between the corporatist one-worlders and their faux “grassroots” controlled opposition. And that coordinated action has ever been utilized by these globalist forces with the object of undermining our constitutional system of checks and balances, eroding our national sovereignty, and (eventually) submerging the United States under an all-powerful world government.
The Stone/Soros/OSF statement should be viewed as a bow to one of the seminal essays outlining the globalist agenda, entitled “The Hard Road to World Order,” which appeared in the April 1974 issue of Foreign Affairs, the official house organ of the organized one-worlders at the Council on Foreign Relations, or CFR. Time magazine once called Foreign Affairs “the most influential periodical in print.” It can be viewed as the vehicle by which the intellectual upper tier of the globalist elite deliver the Party Line to the Party faithful.
Written by CFR member Richard Gardner, “The Hard Road to World Order” recognized that, despite the massive efforts of the organized internationalists (Gardner included) since World War II, “instant world government” had still eluded them. He acknowledged the hard truth that popular resistance to the goal of a global superstate — the globalists’ vaunted New World Order — necessitated a long-term, gradualist approach. He wrote:

In short, the “house of world order” will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down. It will look like a great “booming, buzzing confusion,” to use William James’ famous description of reality, but an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault.

Much of the social chaos we see happening around us does indeed “look like a great ‘booming, buzzing confusion,’” as Gardner said, but there are globalist hands behind the activist bands agitating in the streets. The Astroturf “bottom up” efforts of the Left invariably are  directed from the top down. And the top-down directions invariably flow through CFR Central, which some critics have aptly dubbed the “Imperial Brain Trust.”
The street mobilizers from and #BlackLivesMatter are some of the most notable Soros-funded chaos agents. George Soros is a leading member and funder of the Council on Foreign Relations. His son, Jonathan Soros, is also a member, as are key individuals who are (or have been) operatives in OSF and other Soros-funded activist organizations. Aryeh Neier, who served as president of the Open Society Foundations for nearly a decade, from its founding in 1993 to 2012, is also a CFR member. (Incidentally, and worthy of note, Neier was one of the ‘60s radicals who founded the violent Students for a Democratic Society, SDS. He subsequently went on to lead the ACLU, which, like the SDS, invokes “democracy” while doing everything possible to undermine our constitutional republic.) Which brings us to the Democracy Alliance, another major Soros operation, run by CFR member Gara LeMarche. Like Aryeh Neier, LeMarche was also a professional rabble rouser/revolutionary for the ACLU before being promoted to director of U.S. programs for the Open Society Foundations. He then got bumped up to CEO of the Atlantic Philanthropies, where he oversaw the foundation’s grantmaking avalanche of funds to “social justice” activists.
Democracy Alliance Billionaires Huddle Against Trump
George Soros and his fellow deep-pocket funders of the Democratic Party and left-wing causes wasted no time after the election to plan their counteroffensives. The millionaires and billionaires of the Democracy Alliance gathered with a lineup of party activists and luminaries from Hollywood and Wall Street for a three-day “investment conference” (November 15-17) at the luxurious Mandarin Oriental Hotel in Washington, D.C., which ran under the headline, “2016-2018-2020: Seizing Opportunity & Building Power.”
The agenda for the closed meeting described President-elect Trump’s 100-Day Plan as “a terrifying assault on President Obama’s achievements — and our progressive vision for an equitable and just nation.” Speakers, presenters, and panelists at the Democracy Alliance (DA) soiree included such standard fixtures of the establishment Left as Gara LaMarche, Van Jones, Rep. Nancy Pelosi, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, and Rep. Keith Ellison, as well as leaders of the AFL-CIO, SEIU, AFSME, and other labor unions. But the A-List of attendees, around 100 DA “Partners,” are those that can write the big checks, and have been known for giving millions to fund radical “progressive” causes. Although a complete list of this year’s attendees has not been made available, the DA Partners includes such financial heavyweights as Donald Sussman, Herb and Marian Sandler, Tom Steyer, Norman Lear, Rob McKay, Amy Goldman, Philip Munger, Adam Abram — and, of course, the Soros family (George and sons Jonathan and Alex). Not surprisingly, a number of the activist foundations were also listed on the DA agenda as “hosts”: Rockefeller Family Fund, Surdna Foundation, Solidago Foundation, Tides Foundation, JK Irwin Foundation, Arca Foundation, and Wyss Foundation.
Between the time of its founding in 2005 and the 2014 election cycle, Democracy Alliance reportedly had funneled $500 million into “progressive” Left-wing organizations. (The Capital Research Center and have produced extensive reports on the DA’s donors and the group’s funding activities.) The highly secretive Democracy Alliance serves as a “pass through” conduit that allows high-end donors to contribute anonymously to a variety of leftist causes — in addition to what these same donors give directly to political campaigns. In the latest election cycle, the DA Partners comprise not only an important subset of Hillary Clinton’s prominent donors, but also key funders of virtually every port-side political activist contingent concerning hot-button issues from abortion, gun control, and global warming to LBGTQ rights, Muslim refugee resettlement, and amnesty for illegal aliens. The DA’s intertwining relationships with the Surdna Foundation, Tides Foundation, EMILY’s List, and other “pass through” groups allows the DA funders additional opportunities to double-launder their dark money contributions.
A spokesman for Soros has denied that the magnate’s Open Society Foundations have funded the #NotMyPresident protests and riots. “George Soros is not funding these (anti Trump) protests,” Soros spokesperson Michael Vachon said in an interview with Value Walk. “This is a fiction promoted by the alt-right.” Of course, Soros also denied funding the Occupy Wall Street (OWS) movement. But, financial records showed that he had provided millions of dollar to the Tides Foundation, which had then passed through funding to the OWS activists. He has also been a major funder of and #BlackLivesMatter, two of the organizations fielding cadres for #NotMyPresident mayhem.
The $10 million initiative mentioned above that the OSF claims is going to “confront hate” is not a large amount compared to the billions of dollars that Soros and his DA Partners have lavished on the perpetual protesters and malcontents of the Left, but it is serious seed money that is, undoubtedly being matched many times over through ther ubiquitous funding founts that oil the activist machine. And it is likely safe to assume that much of it will work its way into coffers that will be bankrolling the organizing and transporting of the rent-a-mob rioters who will be materializing in Washington, D.C., and in cities nationwide, to disrupt the Trump inauguration.
“We will begin soliciting applications via our website next week, and plan to make funding decisions on an expedited basis, directing grants to organizations that are well positioned to provide support, services, technical assistance, outreach, and public education in the face of acts of hate,” declares the November 22 OSF press release.
The acts of hate carried out in recent post-election riots may have been only a foretaste of what is to come. The same forces responsible for that havoc are calling for even larger “protests” on Inauguration Day. The funders of this chaos must be held accountable. Only a few days before the Democracy Alliance convention, the Internal Revenue Service denied non-profit status to Tea Party groups, after stringing them along, tying them up in expensive court fights, and delaying a decision for nearly seven years. Meanwhile, the IRS looks the other way as non-profits such as Democracy Alliance and tax-exempt foundations such as Soros’ fraudulent Open Society network sluice their dark money to armies of Marxist misfits. Putting an end to this tax-exempt tide of corruption and subversion should be a top priority of President-elect Trump — if the "top-down and bottom-up" co-conspirators do not prevent him from taking office.

Related articles:
Trump "Protests" Manufactured by Leftist Elites and Manned by Professional Protesters
Hacked Documents: Soros Funded Black Lives Matter
IRS Denies Tea Party Groups Tax Exempt Status After Lengthy Wait
Soros Spends Millions to Unseat Sheriff Joe Arpaio
Globalists Admit Trump Election Is Serious Challenge
Vote Fraud Monitoring Group Says Three Million Noncitizens Voted in Presidential Election
Trump vs. the Establishment
Bilderberg Elites: Stop Trump, Boost Hillary; Stop Brexit, Boost Migration

CNN host suggests Americans wear hijabs to show solidarity with fearful Muslims (PUKE)

Washington Times ^ | 11/29/16 | Douglas Ernst 

A CNN host used a segment on Islamophobia on Monday to suggest American non-Muslims may want to start wearing hijabs.

“New Day” with Chris Cuomo and Alisyn Camerota featured a piece titled “The Trump transition: Fearful Muslim women take steps to be safe” just hours before Abdul Razak Ali Artan, 20, attempted to use a vehicle and a butcher knife to kill Ohio State University students. The ill-timed story ended with Ms. Camerota discussing ways to ease the fears of Muslim Americans.

“Maybe there will be a movement where people wear the head scarf in solidarity. You know, even if you’re not Muslim,” Ms. Camerota said, The Daily Caller reported Tuesday. “Maybe it’s the way people shave their heads, you know, sometimes in solidarity with somebody who is going through something.”

Mr. Cuomo took a breath and responded, “I think self-defense training is good for everyone.”
“Yes, I know you’re a big proponent of that,” Ms. Camerota replied.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Justin Trudeau: Baby-Faced Commie Apologist Unmasked ^ | November 30, 2016 | Michelle Malkin 

Wasn't one vapid pretty boy named Justin from Canada enough?
At least Justin Bieber is eye candy without the heartburn. Justin Trudeau, on the other hand, is the twinkly-eyed boy toy who makes informed adults wanna hurl.
For more than a year, the liberal Canadian prime minister enjoyed drool-stained global press coverage as the "hot hipster" and "dreamy sex symbol" with great hair and a tribal Haida tattoo. He basked in Ryan Gosling-esque memes about his commitment to feminism and touched off "Trudeau-mania" with a series of shirtless selfies and photobombs.
But this weekend, the sane world saw the baby-faced Commie apologist for the naked twit he truly is.
Mourning the death of repressive dictator Fidel Castro, Trudeau hailed his longtime family friend as a "larger than life leader" who "served his people for almost half a century." Actually, El Comandante ruled with an iron fist and firing squads -- serving himself to all of the island's land, private businesses and media, along with his own private yacht, private island, 20 homes, fleet of Mercedes limos and bevy of mistresses.
Trudeau's ridiculous mash note to the "legendary revolutionary and orator" caused the social media backlash of the year. The hashtag #TrudeauEulogies erupted to mock Trudeau's soft-soaping of tyranny.
"As we mourn Emperor Caligula, let us always remember his steadfast devotion to Senate reform," one Twitter user jibed in Trudeau-speak. "Although flawed Hitler was a vegetarian who loved animals, was a contributor to the arts & proud advocate for Germany," another joked. "Kim Jong Il will always be remembered fondly for his leadership and contributions on climate change," another chimed in.
Stung, the Canadian tundra hunk's office announced Monday that he will not attend services for his beloved Uncle Fidel, who had served as a pallbearer at his former Canadian PM father's funeral. But if Trudeau thinks the damage to his celebrity brand is temporary, he has another think coming.
Our neighbors to the north are now discovering what disillusioned Barack Obama worshipers realized too late: Beneath the shiny packaging of supermodel progressivism lies the same old decrepit culture of corruption.
Political watchdogs have been buzzing about Trudeau's shady fundraising ties to Chinese communist moguls. Like Obama, Trudeau promised unprecedented transparency in government -- "sunny ways" that would shed open light on how the Liberal Party was conducting the people's business. Dudley Do-Right's party declared there would be "no preferential access, or appearance of preferential access" in exchange for campaign cash and purported to ban favor-seekers with direct business before the government from attending political fundraisers.
Behind closed doors, however, Trudeau was selling out to wealthy Chinese-Canadians and Chinese nationals seeking government green lights for their business deals. According to his conservative critics, Trudeau and the Liberal Party have held 80 such cash-for-access fundraisers crawling with lobbyists and access traders over the past year.
The Globe and Mail newspaper revealed last week that Trudeau and his Liberal Party fundraisers had secretly organized one tony $1,500-per-head private residential gala in May attended by Chinese billionaires and bankers gunning for federal approval of projects. Echoing the operations of the Clinton Foundation pay-for-play money machine, the nonprofit Trudeau Foundation and the University of Montreal raked in $1 million from a wealthy Chinese businessman a few weeks after the fundraiser. The donation includes funding for a statue of Pierre Trudeau, who once wrote a book hailing Chairman Mao.
The self-aggrandizing Commie fanboy apple doesn't fall far from his cultural Marxist tree.

Why the Democrats Can't Stop Calling the GOP Racists

American Thinker ^ | November 30, 2016 | Karin McQuillan 

President Obama, Democrat politicians and the mainstream media are still calling Trump KKK.  They’re tarring his team as anti-Semites and racists.  The electoral map would stop any normal politicians in their tracks, but Democrat hate speech is only getting louder and more hysterical.  A major course correction is not going to happen for three reasons:

1. Democrat leadership;

2. Democrat donors;

3.  Democrat voting blocks.

There is no force in the party that wants to change.

Democrats don’t debate Trump on the issues, because their agenda is a turn-off.  Under the leadership of Alinskyite Barack Obama, the Democratic Party has degenerated from liberalism to progressivism.  It has not been pretty.   A focus on preferential treatment for blacks has given way to a war on cops.  Caring about Hispanic Americans suddenly means America shouldn’t have borders and should have sanctuary for rapists and killers -- as long as they are here illegally.

Browbeating college kids by empowerring feminists and black activists with Title IX money has turned college campuses against freedom of thought and speech.  Women’s issues have bizarrely turned into a war on masculinity.  Gay rights has morphed into men in women’s bathrooms.  Pro-choice turned into third-trimester infanticide and lawsuits against the Little Sisters of the Poor.  Physical violence against Republicans is encouraged by President Obama and Clinton under the euphemism ‘protest.’

Democrat progressive politics is weird and ugly and dangerous, and people across the country have recoiled from it.  As Marc Thiessen says with his usual eloquence, “You can drive some 3,000 miles across the entire continental United States — from sea to shining sea — without driving through a single county that voted for Hillary Clinton.”
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Mr. Trump: Put New Media in the White House Press Room!

American Thinker ^ | November 30, 2016 | Henry Percy 

While approximately 750 reporters hold White House credentials, the briefing room holds 49 seats, and they are occupied overwhelmingly by mainstream media reporters, with barely any assigned to the new dot-com world.”

The TV networks are in front, behind them roost NYT, WaPo, NPR, and so on. “The White House press secretary used to decide who got what seats, but this authority was given to the White House Correspondents Association in the middle of the George W. Bush administration.”

It is always astonishing to discover a new instance of the fecklessness of Bush 43. By granting that power to the White House Correspondents Association, he must have been requited with their undying gratitude, yes? One is reminded of something erroneously attributed to Albert Einstein: “The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits.” Oops, that is way harsh. Consider it deleted.

President-elect Trump, if your’re reading this, here’s an idea to help with your swamp reclamation project: Decertify a number of the fossil organizations ensconced in their named chairs and replace with dot-coms. I would nominate American ThinkerMark Steyn, and Fred on Everything for starters. Then assign seats once a month through a lottery. The weeping and gnashing of teeth would be audible here in flyover country—how sweet the sound.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Even in Death, Castro Still has 'Useful Idiots' ^ | November 30, 2016 | Jonah Goldberg 

Fidel Castro died as he lived: to the sound of useful idiots making allowances for his crimes. (That's not my term: It was Lenin who called liberal apologists for Communism "useful idiots.")

The gold medal in the Useful Idiot Olympics should probably go to Justin Trudeau, the prime minister of Canada. In a statement, he expressed his "deep sorrow" upon learning that "Cuba's longest serving president" had died.
One can only imagine what George Orwell could do with that one word, "serving." Castro did not serve; he ruled a nation of servants, often cruelly, while making obscene profits for himself and his family.
"Fidel Castro was a larger than life leader who served his people for almost half a century," Trudeau continued, repeating that word. "While a controversial figure, both Mr. Castro's supporters and detractors recognized his tremendous dedication and love for the Cuban people who had a deep and lasting affection for 'el Comandante.'"
Again, where is Orwell's red pen?
"El Comandante": The term drips with affection, doesn't it? Castro's "detractors"? Would those be the families of the thousands he had executed? The survivors of Castro's Caribbean gulag? Those who didn't drown trying to escape?
Trudeau's expression of "deep sorrow" was typical of a whole genre of Castro eulogies. His apologists have tended to romanticize the "revolution" and parrot dubious Cuban state propaganda -- Literacy rates! Free health care! -- while dispensing antiseptic euphemisms for the brutal reality of what the revolution wrought.
At least when people note that Hitler built the autobahn and Mussolini made the trains run on time, they're usually being ironic. To listen to some Castro defenders, you'd think the scales of justice can balance out any load of horrors, so long as the substandard health care is free and the schools (allegedly) teach everyone to read.
As much of the American left is openly mooting whether or not the American president-elect is a dictator-in-waiting, one has to wonder whether they would take that bargain: No more elections, no more free speech, no more civil liberties of any kind, but socialized medicine and literacy for everyone! American political dissidents, homosexuals, journalists and the clergy, just like in Cuba, can languish in prison or internal exile, but at least they'll be able to read the charges against them.
Such un-nuanced arguments always make leftist eyes roll. In a blog post titled "Castro: It's Complicated!" University of Rhode Island professor Eric Loomis cautioned against thinking "in terms of simplistic moral judgments." It seems to me that when people want to ban simplistic moral judgments, it's usually because simple morality is not on their side.
Here's my Fox News colleague Geraldo Rivera on Twitter: "Conservatives mocking nuanced view of #FidelCastro make me gag-What do they say about @realDonaldTrump? #RonaldReagan? RichardNixon? #Elvis?"
Orwell's red pen is too good for such asininity. Lest there is something I don't know about Elvis, none of these figures were brutal unelected despots responsible for the murder of their own people (10 times as many deaths as those credited to Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet).
One hint as to why Rivera and so many others were smitten with Castro: He was an international celebrity. Rivera even tweeted a picture of himself grinning broadly in "el Comandante's" presence along with his condolences. "RIP #FidelCastro Yes, a despot who ruthlessly suppressed dissidents. But he defeated a dictator & was the premier revolutionary of his time."
"Premier revolutionary of his time." It's as if Rivera thinks this title provides moral cover. This is the thinking that allows vacuous hipsters to unselfconsciously shrug when you tell them that the Che Guevara on their T-shirt was a sadistic murderer. "Yeah, but he was cool."
But among serious leftists, Castro's radical chic is secondary. For them, Fidel's revolution provided the slender hope that America was on the wrong side of history. It was a symbol of resistance -- intellectual, political and spiritual -- to Western yanqui hegemony. They loved Cuba for many of the reasons they hate Israel (despite its exemplary literacy rate and universal health care system). They think -- wrongly -- that Israel is an extension of Western colonialism while Cuba was a rejection of it.
Castro understood this better than anyone, which is why he was able to "serve" his people for so long.



The Party






Never too big!




Voter Fraud




The Electorial College


You're Fired


Lingering Smell


Tuesday, November 29, 2016

Mayors of Sanctuary Cities Who Disregard Federal Law Should Be Arrested!

Canada Free Press ^ | 11/29/16 | Katy Grimes 

This illegal stance on Sanctuary Cities, Chicago Mayor Rahm Emmanuel, Sacramento Mayor-elect Darrell Steinberg are favoring criminal illegal aliens over the safety of law-abiding citizens. Should pay the ultimate price for not upholding the of law

The United States is either a nation of people ruled by laws and Constitution, or we are a nation ruled by ideological tyrants. One example of this is the illegal protecting by “Sanctuary cities” of convicted criminals.
“It is time to start locking up local officials like Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel for interfering with the enforcement of federal immigration law,” Matthew Vadum of Canada Free Press recently wrote.

10 Reasons Left-Wingers Cut Trump Voters From Their Lives ^ | November 29, 2016 | Dennis Prager 

Many Hillary Clinton voters have ceased communicating with friends, and even family members, who voted for Donald Trump. It is so common that The New York Times published a front-page article on the subject headlined, "Political Divide Splits Relationships -- and Thanksgiving, Too."
The article begins with three stories:
"Matthew Horn, a software engineer from Boulder, Colo., canceled Christmas plans with his family in Texas. Nancy Sundin, a social worker in Spokane, Wash., has called off Thanksgiving with her mother and brother. Ruth Dorancy, a software designer in Chicago, decided to move her wedding so that her fiancé's grandmother and aunt, strong Trump supporters from Florida, could not attend."
The Times acknowledges that this phenomenon is one-sided, saying, "Democrats have dug in their heels, and in some cases are refusing to sit across the table from relatives who voted for President-elect Donald J. Trump."
A number of people who voted for Trump called my show to tell me that their daughters had informed them that they would no longer allow their parents to see their grandchildren. And one man sent me an email reporting that his brother-in-law's mother told him that she "no longer had a son."
All of this raises an obvious question: Why is this phenomenon of cutting off contact with friends and relatives so one-sided? Why don't we hear about conservatives shunning friends and relatives who supported Hillary Clinton? After all, almost every conservative considered Clinton to be ethically and morally challenged. And most believed that another four years of left-wing rule would complete what Barack Obama promised he would do in 2008 if he were elected president -- "fundamentally (transform) the United States of America."
In other words, conservatives were not one whit less fearful of Clinton and the Democrats than Democrats were of Trump and Republicans.
Yet virtually no conservatives cut off contact with friends, let alone parents, who supported Clinton.
Here are 10 reasons left-wingers cut Trump voters from their lives.
1. Just like our universities shut out conservative ideas and speakers, more and more individuals on the left now shut out conservative friends and relatives as well as conservative ideas.
2. Many, if not most, leftists have been indoctrinated with leftism their entire lives.
This is easily shown.
There are far more conservatives who read articles, listen to and watch broadcasts of the left and have studied under left-wing teachers than there are people on the left who have read, listened to or watched anything of the right or taken classes with conservative instructors.
As a result, those on the left really believe that those on the right are all SIXHIRB: sexist, intolerant, xenophobic, homophobic, Islamophobic, racist and bigoted. Not to mention misogynistic and transphobic.
3. Most left-wing positions are emotion-based. That's a major reason people who hold leftist views will sever relations with people they previously cared for or even loved. Their emotions (in this case, irrational fear and hatred) simply overwhelm them.
4. Since Karl Marx, leftists have loved ideas more than people. All Trump voters who have been cut off by children, in-laws and lifelong friends now know how true that is.
5. People on the right think that most people on the left are wrong; people on the left think that most people on the right are evil. Decades of labeling conservative positions as "hateful" and labeling conservative individuals as "sexist," "intolerant," "xenophobic," "homophobic," "racist" and "bigoted" have had their desired effect.
6. The left associates human decency not so much with personal integrity as with having correct -- i.e. progressive -- political positions. Therefore, if you don't hold progressive positions, you lack decency. Ask your left-wing friends if they'd rather their high school son or daughter cheat on tests or support Trump.
7. Most individuals on the left are irreligious, so the commandment "Honor your father and your mother" means nothing to those who have cut off relations with parents because they voted for Trump.
8. Unlike conservatives, politics gives most leftists' lives meaning. Climate change is a good example. For leftists, fighting carbon emissions means saving human existence on Earth. Now, how often does anyone get a chance to literally save the world? Therefore, to most leftists, if you voted for Trump, you have both negated their reason for living and are literally destroying planet Earth. Why would they have Thanksgiving or Christmas with such a person?
9. The left tends toward the totalitarian. And every totalitarian ideology seeks to weaken the bonds between children and parents. The left seeks to dilute parental authority and replace it with school authority and government authority. So when your children sever their bond with you because you voted for Trump, they are acting like the good totalitarians the left has molded.
10. While there are kind and mean individuals on both sides of the political spectrum, as a result of all of the above, there are more mean people on the left than on the right. What other word than "mean" would anyone use to describe a daughter who banished her parents from their grandchildren's lives because of their vote?
I wish none of this were true. But there is a way to prove me wrong: Re-friend your friends and relatives who voted for Trump, and tell everyone who has ended relations with family members -- especially with parents -- to reach out to them and welcome them back into their lives.


Fidel Castro was a monster who tortured and murdered his people for over half-a-century. He was Stalin with a beard, Hitler with a stogie. His passing will be celebrated by freedom-loving people everywhere and mourned only by the evil and the credulous.
I was in Cuba in 1997, not on a Beyonce/Jay-Z celebrity tour, but as a journalist who met ordinary Cubans.
I've never been to a sadder place, or one more beautiful in a decaying way. Like North Korea, Cuba is a family business. In the former, the scepter was passed from Kim Il-sung (Glorious Leader) to Kim Jong-il (Dear Leader) to Kim Jong-un (Outstanding Leader). Since Fidel's retirement in 2008, his baby brother Raul – age 86 (Decrepit Leader) – has ruled.
Castro entered Havana on January 8, 1959, after overthrowing the comic-opera regime of Fulgenico Batista. Cubans are still waiting for the free elections the Comandante promised – a fact his legion of Western admirers conveniently overlooks.
Thor Halvorssen, president of the Human Rights Foundation, notes: "Fidel Castro leaves behind a nation awash with tears and blood from thousands of executions, tens of thousands of political prisoners, concentration camps for gay men, labor camps for those who thought differently, listened to jazz or even have long hair." On its human rights index, Freedom House gives Cuba a rating of 6.5 – with 1 being the most free and 7 the most repressive.
The oppression I witnessed was far more prosaic.
The doorman at my hotel told me he was a civil engineer. "Aren't you wasting your talent?" I asked. His answer: "I can earn $20 a month as an engineer or $20 a day as a doorman." Such is the genius of socialism; it takes engineers and turns them into doormen.
My first day in Havana, I met a man on the Malecon. We were deep in conversation, when I invited him back to my hotel for lunch. "I can't go in your hotel," he told me. Only tourists, officials of the regime and hotel employees are permitted on the premises. Sixty years after the Cuban revolution, and the proletariat are barred from tourist hotels, built on their backs.
The liberal Brookings Institution notes: "The Cuban economy has been mired in stagnation for more than two decades." Churchill said it best: "The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings. The inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of misery."
In Cuba, I saw people so miserably poor that existence was a daily struggle. I saw a man sitting at a card table on a street refilling disposable BIC lighters. A country with a gentle climate and fertile soil imports 80% of its food. While its people starve, it exports 95% of its citrus crop. It also exports repression. Under Hugo Chavez, Venezuela sent oil to Cuba and Havana sent security agents (skilled in the art of interrogation) to Caracas, to show the Chavez regime how to deal with dissent.
After one of Fidel's famous 6-hour harangues (talk about a captive audience), I met a school teacher on the veranda of a hotel. "What did El Presidente say last night?" I teased. She leaned close to me and uttered a four-letter word. Then she whispered in my ear: "I would like to kill him."
The night before I left Havana, I met a young man selling post cards on the street. Fluent in several languages, including English, he was an unofficial guide when there was work and sold post cards when there wasn't. He asked me if I could introduce him to an American woman he could marry to get out. "Why not," I replied, "You're young, intelligent and good looking. I bet there are a lot of young women who'd marry you."
"I wouldn't care if she was 90," he replied. "I'd do anything to get out of here." With his chin, he pointed to middle-aged people shuffling along the street, looking dejected. "If I stay here any longer, I'll end up like them – a zombie."
Everywhere I went, ordinary Cubans urged me to "tell the American people what it's like here." For the American left, that would be a waste of breath. Castro is part of its pantheon. From the Fair Play for Cuba Committee (Lee Harvey Oswald was a member) to the latest saccharine pronouncements of the mainstream media on Cuba's alleged achievements in education and medicine, the left has had a long-running love affair with the house that Fidel built.
Those rioting against democracy in our streets secretly envy the Cuban regime. On the island gulag, rulers are self-selected, not elected. The official media is the only media. The masses don't have to be persuaded, just told what to do. Socialism has been realized with a vengeance. Counterrevolutionary elements are rehabilitated by long prison terms.
Of course, if that happened here, most of today's agitators would be tomorrow's political prisoners, along with college professors, artists, entertainers and journalists who gaze longingly at Cuba. The cast of "Hamilton" could try to lecture their guards on diversity and respect for civil liberties.
Reaction to Castro's death is a litmus test for political correctness. President-elect Donald Trump commented, "Today, the world marked the passing of a brutal dictator." While President Barack Obama noted, "History will recall and judge the enormous impact of this singular figure on the people and world around him."
But he wasn't a singular figure. His counterparts have existed throughout the ages – from the pagan priests who made human sacrifices to the brown-shirted goons who goose-stepped through Weimar Germany. His impact on Cuba has been the same as Ebola's on West Africa. History will judge him the worst 20th century dictator in the Western hemisphere, far surpassing all of the caudillos and juntas combined.
It's estimated that 58% of Cuban-Americans voted for Trump – two points higher that his share of the white vote. It figures.

Presidential vote

Presidential vote by religious affiliation and race

Sheila Jackson Lee beclowns herself on the Ohio State terror attack (thinks he used a gun)

Am Thinker ^ | Nov 29, 2016 | Thomas Lifson 

Texas Democrat Representative Sheila Jackson Lee has a lot of fixed ideas, and manages to fit news events into a framework that reinforces her politics. As a left wing Democrat and member of the Congressional Black Caucus, there are certain givens that must not be contradicted.
Thus, when a Somali “refugee” decided to maim or kill as many Americans as he could by driving his car into a crowd, following the instructions ISIS recently gave to Muslims seeking vengeance, Representative Lee followed the ready – fire - aim protocol of the stupid, issuing this tweet:

Taken literally, the hero of the incident, Ohio State University Police Officer Alan Horujko is guilty of a “senseless shooting.”
It is possible that Representative Lee thinks that any use of firearms by a police officer is “senseless.” And Officer Horjujko is really, really white, isn't he? He shot a Muslim, so in some circles that could be regarded as "senseless."
My guess is that Representative of Texas’s 18th District was just sloppy, and assumed that any attack involves a shooter. After all, guns are the root of violence in the Democrats’ worldview.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Trump is right about the flag. Do NOT disrespect it in public!

News and Twitter | 29 November 2016 | Mene Mene Tekel Upharsin 

Seem Mr. Trump correctly pointed out that folks in this country who feel the need to disrespect our flag in any form or fashion need to refrain from doing so, at least publicly. He is correct.
Countries garner respect for defending their territory, their culture and their language, all of which make a country a country. We seem to be failing on all counts. In Mexico, if you trash their flag in public, you will be beaten and/or killed by the public who sees you doing so BEFORE the police can even get there. Or, in Thailand, do something to publicly defame or embarrass the king (it is a constitutional monarchy, but a democracy as a base) and see what happens to you. Go to France and start insisting that people speak English. Better yet, go to the Middle East and stomp on a symbol of islam.
If a nation allows people to disrespect icons of the culture or the culture itself, then in the very next action, the one doing the disrespecting will turn on the people of the nation itself. That is what is happening in the United States. We have foolishly allowed ourselves on the pretense of "Freedom of Expression" to become the victims of a complete and total assault on our entire national identity and subsequently our rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Someone has to turn this all around. Either become loyal to the United States or face severe consequences, or better yet, get out. The KLBJ radio station in Austin had a talk show this morning discussing disrespect toward the American flag. When a caller tried to mention how Mexico deals with people who disrespect their flag, the caller was cut off. The media is becoming part of the PROBLEM. The men and women who run the media need to get the message that the people are NOT going to allow our nation and culture to be disrespected in their drive for more advertising dollars.

Why does Hillary really want to participate in the Stein recount?

The Coach's Team ^ | 11/29/16 | Doug Book 

The following article was published by the Washington Post on November 26th.
“Clinton campaign will participate in Wisconsin recount, with an eye on ‘outside interference,’ lawyer says”
By Matt Zapotosky

The first two paragraphs below are excerpts from the Zapotosky article.
“In a Medium post, Clinton campaign lawyer Marc Elias said that the campaign had received ‘hundreds of messages, emails, and calls urging us to do something, anything, to investigate claims that the election results were hacked and altered in a way to disadvantage Secretary Clinton,’ especially in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, where the ‘combined margin of victory for Donald Trump was merely 107,000 votes.’”
“Elias said the campaign had ‘not uncovered any actionable evidence of hacking or outside attempts to alter the voting technology.’ But because of the margin of victory — and because of the degree of apparent foreign interference during the campaign — Elias said that Clinton officials had “quietly taken a number of steps in the last two weeks to rule in or out any possibility of outside interference in the vote tally in these critical battleground states.”
So there is no evidence that anything is amiss with the November 8th vote. BUT, because a whole lot of people want Hillary to “do something, anything” to end their suffering...
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Stein: We want recounts because the polls said Hillary would win (WTF?)

Hot Air ^ | 29 Nov 2016 | Larry O'Connor 

In a revealing interview on The Alan Colmes Show Monday afternoon, failed Green Party candidate Jill Stein conceded (perhaps inadvertently) that the reason she’s calling for a recount in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania is, in part, because Hillary Clinton was expected to win those states.
Listen to the whole interview here, but I have pulled out the key statement:
The three states that we chose including Michigan that only just now declared its winner. This was not a partisan choice, this was zooming in on the states that have the markings of being most vulnerable to hacking because they had thin margins. They went the opposite way of what was expected and they had some kind of voting system vulnerability.
Hidden inside the baseless suggestion that the voting systems had been hacked (“some kind of voting system vulnerability”) was that key phrase “they went the opposite way of what was expected.”
Hidden inside the baseless suggestion that the voting systems had been hacked (“some kind of voting system vulnerability”) was that key phrase “they went the opposite way of what was expected.”
Sadly, Mr. Colmes did not follow up on that revealing statement and pull on the thread a bit. Is Dr. Stein suggesting that because polls and pundits had predicted that Secretary Clinton would win those three states something suspicious must be going on? Is she suggesting that a telephone poll conducted by a media outlet should be considered more predictive of an outcome than the actual, physical votes and the final tally?
If late polls had predicted a slim win by Trump in these states, would Stein still be asking for this useless recount?
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Walking Away


Just Pretend!




A beautiful sight!


His Legacy!




I can't get a job!


The faces!


What do we want?


Here's what I think...


For Hillary?


Monday, November 28, 2016

Gitmo prisoner reveals that Saudi ‘terrorist rehab’ center is a scam ^ | 11/28/2016 | Paul Sperry 

Government has been encouraging previously released prisoners to rejoin the jihad at its terrorist reform school, officially known as the Prince Mohammed bin Naif Counseling and Care Center.
The Obama administration has praised the effectiveness of the Saudi rehab program — which uses “art therapy,” swimming, ping-pong, PlayStation and soccer to de-radicalize terrorists — and conditioned the release of dozens of Gitmo prisoners, including former Osama bin Laden bodyguards, on their entry in the controversial program.
To date, 134 Saudi detainees have been transferred to the Saudi reform camps in Riyadh and Jeddah. Last year, nine Yemeni detainees were sent there, as well, and more are expected to follow over the next two months, as Obama strives to meet his campaign goal of closing Gitmo.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

'Diamond-age' of power generation as nuclear batteries developed ^ | 11/27/2016 

New technology has been developed that uses nuclear waste to generate electricity in a nuclear-powered battery. A team of physicists and chemists from the University of Bristol have grown a man-made diamond that, when placed in a radioactive field, is able to generate a small electrical current.
The team have demonstrated a prototype 'diamond battery' using Nickel-63 as the radiation source. However, they are now working to significantly improve efficiency by utilising carbon-14, a radioactive version of carbon, which is generated in graphite blocks used to moderate the reaction in nuclear power plants. Research by academics at Bristol has shown that the radioactive carbon-14 is concentrated at the surface of these blocks, making it possible to process it to remove the majority of the radioactive material. The extracted carbon-14 is then incorporated into a diamond to produce a nuclear-powered battery.
The UK currently holds almost 95,000 tonnes of graphite blocks and by extracting carbon-14 from them, their radioactivity decreases, reducing the cost and challenge of safely storing this nuclear waste.
Dr Neil Fox from the School of Chemistry explained: "Carbon-14 was chosen as a source material because it emits a short-range radiation, which is quickly absorbed by any solid material. This would make it dangerous to ingest or touch with your naked skin, but safely held within diamond, no short-range radiation can escape. In fact, diamond is the hardest substance known to man, there is literally nothing we could use that could offer more protection."
Despite their low-power, relative to current battery technologies, the life-time of these diamond batteries could revolutionise the powering of devices over long timescales. Using carbon-14 the battery would take 5,730 years to reach 50 per cent power, which is about as long as human civilization has existed.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Why The Left Loves Totalitarians Like Fidel Castro

The Federalist ^ | 28 Nov, 2016 | Paul Bonicelli 

Progressives’ and leftists’ outpouring of praise for Fidel Castro at his death was to be expected, although it has been more fulsome, tone-deaf, and cloying than I expected. For just a few examples see President Obama, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, and United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki Moon.
Rational and moral people, however, will rightly ask, “How would anyone aware of Castro’s more than 50 years of human rights abuses mourn the death of a tyrant who was both an intellectual and moral idiot, much less praise his legacy?”
The Left Loves Collectivism I have a few possible answers. First, many people on the Left sold their intellects to socialism and statism long ago. Great numbers of academics, politicians, and entertainers embraced Castro as he rose to power then ruled for decades as a socialist dictator, because he represented the practical application of their ideas.
Also, he clearly irritated the same people who irritated them: conservatives, Republicans, Cold Warriors, etc. Every human rights violation, every social and economic disaster that resulted from his foolish socialist policies, and every military adventure he launched with his oversized Soviet-backed military, was forgiven if not outright praised.
As a graduate student in the early 1990s I marveled at highly educated, decent, and kind men and women in academia forgiving Castro every sin and justifying everything he did because, I suppose, “He’s our guy.” It seemed so childish to me. After all, I thought Gen. Augusto Pinochet was better for Chile than a Soviet-allied Marxist politician would have been, but I hardly excused Pinochet’s human rights crimes or pretended he was perfect. I also wasn’t confused about who was better for U.S. national security interests.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Symbols of a Snowflake Generation

The Winchester Star ^ | 11/17/2016 | Michelle Malkin 

News flash, kids: Things aren’t free. Things cost money. And “free” things provided to you by the government cost other people’s money.

Donald Trump gets it — somewhat. He vows to repeal ObamaCare’s most burdensome federal mandates that are jacking up the price of private health insurance. But he also plans to preserve the most politically popular provisions of the Orwellian-titled Affordable Care Act, including the so-called “slacker mandate.” It’s the requirement that employer-based health plans cover employees’ children until they turn 26 years old.
That’s right: Twenty-freaking-six.
Is it any wonder why we have a nation of dependent drool-stained crybabies on college campuses who are still bawling about the election results one week later?
Trump briefly mentioned during a “60 Minutes” interview on CBS this weekend that the slacker mandate “adds cost, but it’s very much something we’re going to try and keep.” That’s because most establishment Republicans in Washington, D.C., are resigned to keeping it. Once the feds hand out a sugary piece of cradle-to-grave entitlement candy, it’s almost impossible to snatch it back.
Who pays for this unfunded government mandate? As usual, it’s responsible working people who bear the burden.
Earlier this year, the National Bureau of Economic Research found the No Slacker Left Behind provision resulted in wage reductions of about $1,200 a year for workers with employer-based insurance coverage — whether or not they had adult children on their plans. In effect, childless working people are subsidizing workers with adult children who would rather stay on their parents than get their own.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Repeal Congress’ special exemption from Obamacare, kill two birds with one stone!

The Washington Times ^ | November 23, 2016 | Jenny Beth Martin 

Repealing Congress’ special exemption from Obamacare regularly polls at the 90+ percent level, and for good reason — the illegal ruling by OPM once again allowed Members of Congress (and their staffs) to live by a different set of rules than those they imposed on the rest of America.
Worse, by exempting the legislative branch from the pernicious effects of this particular law, it allows Members and their staffs to avoid the personal pain (financial and health) imposed by the monstrosity they imposed on the rest of us, and, by doing so, delays its inevitable repeal.
The good news is, President Trump won’t have to wait for congressional action on this — he can undo the illegal ruling by simply signing his name to a Presidential Memorandum directing the OPM to reverse its 2013 rule considering Congress a small business, which directed that, consequently, “the DC Health Link Small Business Market administered by the DC Health Benefit Exchange Authority, is the appropriate SHOP from which Members of Congress and designated congressional staff will purchase health insurance in order to receive a Government contribution.”
Note — “Government contribution,” in the language of those who live outside the Washington Beltway, should be read as “illegal taxpayer-funded subsidies.”
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Only You Can Stop Californication

Michelle Obama's Mirror ^ | 11-28-2016 | MOTUS 

Seriously, it is approaching a month and leftists are still foaming at the mouthcoloring outside the lines, and diaper pinning their lapels. Frankly I think it would be more helpful if they used them to pin their yaps shut. Or maybe their noses.
“I said, ‘stick a fork in it’ honey, but I guess that works too.”
And while the despair is felt everywhere you find a liberal, it’s perhaps worst in California.  Here’s a first-person account of what it’s like to be a conservative in America’s theme park for liberal hipsters these days:
The day was full of whining and bewilderment from the lawyers I work with, with much vulgar contempt for Trump voters…I kept my head down and did not say much.
I went out for lunch, and was astonished to see high schoolers marching under Mexican Flags, and “Pride” Flags on Market Street. In the actual street! My first thought was that this is no place for children, as Market Street has many bums urinating and young ladies openly injecting drugs into their arms. Who let them out of school?…
At the end of the day, I took the elevator down with silent strangers. There were hipsters, young people lucky enough to be employed in the new information (advertising?) economy, the new “masters of the universe”, able to afford San Francisco and things. At the last moment, a guy looking like Pajama Boy, but dressed for work in skin tight pants, cool shoes, untucked shirt and full brimmed hat,

announced, “dark times ahead”. Such is the wisdom of children…

Nose-crayola“No, hon, take the Crayola out of your nose and color in the pretty book, okay?”
My colleagues, lawyers all, informed and smart and good people almost all (I know, cue the guffaws) are reporting “massive voter suppression” in 33 states. Massive vote tampering, etc. (Fake news might actually be a real problem). A very handsome, elegant, black man with an impeccable British accent is reporting hostile glares and Uber discrimination on the streets of San Francisco! An Indian women is afraid of internment camps and trying to come up with an escape plan. The worst was a lawyer reporting to our boss that he had purchased a gun “to protect his minority friends”…  - Richochet
Actually San Francisco is different from the rest of the country only in respect to the homogeneity (as in milk, not gender preference) of their liberalism. All across America wherever Progressives gather the reaction has been the same. And as they always think they comprise the majority, who could possibly object to their spouting off over their deep despair, hatred for Trump and sense of loss?
I don’t know about the rest of the country butt this old joke (h/t Rodin) about France might explain California:
The Brits, Germans, Spanish and Italians all complained to God about His Creation: France. “Why,” they asked,”did He put so many wonderful things in France, while only putting a few good things in their own countries?” God responded that, “Yes, it is true that I put many wonderful things in France, but then I balanced it out by populating it with the French people.”
Californication 6 billboard
Remember, only you can stop Californication #trumpwon.
Posted from: Michelle Obama’s Mirror

Texas governor says he will ban sanctuary cities

The Hill ^ | 11/28/2016 

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) is pledging to ban sanctuary cities in his state as other governors and mayors promise to continue sheltering illegal immigrants.
"I'm going to sign a law that bans sanctuary cities," Abbott tweeted on Sunday.
"Also I've already issued an order cutting funding to sanctuary cities."
Abbott was responding to a Twitter user who questioned whether the Texas governor could do anything to reverse Austin's pledge to remain a sanctuary city. During his presidential campaign, President-elect Donald Trump pledged to deport millions of immigrants.
He said during an interview shortly after his victory he would prioritize deporting or jailing any undocumented immigrants who were members of gangs or had criminal records.
He also vowed during the campaign to block federal dollars from cities that give sanctuary to undocumented immigrants.
Democratic governors and mayors signaled earlier this month that they aren't prepared to go along with the Trump administration's plans.

THERE WILL BE NO RECOUNT IN PENNSYLVANIA: Jill Stein Perpetrating Election Fraud.

Jander Research ^ | 11/28/2016 | Written and Researched by Ren Jander, J.D. 

Everything you've been reading about a possible recount of the 2016 Presidential Election in Pennsylvania is wrong. There will be no "recount" in Pennsylvania. Book that. It is not speculation. It is legal fact. The broad spectrum of analysis from the blogosphere, Facebook and Twitter is pathetic. Seeing non-lawyer journalists mangle complicated election statutes so brazenly is not only sad but dangerous. It's giving an emotionally triggered part of the electorate false hope. And it simultaneously creates conditions for the destabilization of the nation when hyper-emotional election expectations are thwarted, as they most certainly will be.
As for Jill Stein's successful public cry for millions, she claims at her website that "fundraising for Pennsylvania's voter-initiated recount" has already been complete. The statement is fraudulent on it's face, in that she has been raising a ton of money when, in fact, there will be no "voter-initiated recount". According to Pennsylvania law, no "recount" or "recanvassing" is possible. Trump won by more than .5% of the vote. Had he won by less - according to Section 1404(g) of Pennsylvania Election Code - there could have been an automatic recount ordered.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Democrats, Not Trump, Racialize Our Politics

City Journal ^ | November 27, 2016 | By Heather McDonald 

Democratic pundits are calling on their party to court working-class and non-coastal whites in the wake of this month’s electoral rout. But the Democratic Party is now dominated by identity politics, which defines whites, particularly heterosexual males, as oppressors of every other population in the U.S. Why should the targets of such thinking embrace an ideology that scorns them?
The most absurd Democratic meme to emerge from the party’s ballot-box defeat is the claim that it is Donald Trump, rather than Democrats, who engages in “aggressive, racialized discourse,” in the words of a Los Angeles Times op-ed. By contrast, President Barack Obama sought a “post-racial, bridge-building society,” according to New York Times reporter Peter Baker. Obama’s post-racial efforts have now “given way to an angry, jeering, us-against-them nation,” writes Baker, in a front-page “news” story.
Tell that valedictory for “post-racial bridge-building” to police officers, who have been living through two years of racialized hatred directed at them in the streets, to the applause of many Democratic politicians. Black Lives Matter rhetoric consists of slogans like: “CPD [Chicago Police Department] KKK, how many children did you kill today?” “F___ the police,” and “Racist, killer cops.” Officers have been assassinated by Black Lives Matter-inspired killers who set out to kill whites in general and white police officers in particular. Gun murders of law enforcement officers are up 67 percent this year through November 23, following five ambushes and attacks over the November 18 weekend that left a San Antonio police officer and a U.S. marshall dead. A few days before those weekend shootings, anarchist wannabes in Austin led a counting chant based on the template: “What’s better than X dead cops? X + 1 Dead Cops.”
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Losers Who Won't Lose: What Are The Odds Of A Successful Hillary Recount?

Zero Hedge ^ | 11/27/2016 | Submitted by Salil Mehta via Statistical Ideas blog 

Submitted by Salil Mehta via Statistical Ideas blog,

President-elect Trump won 306 electoral votes versus Hillary Clinton's 232 (24% less electoral votes).  Similar to 2000, the surrendering party then reversed course and put the nation through a recount, just for the sake of it.  What are the odds that such an exercise here would yield successful for Ms. Clinton?  Based on statistical randomness of re-assessing voter intent, the chance of Hillary emerging as the victor is far less than 10%.
Anything can happen, but these lean odds do not rise to the level of putting our peaceful democracy into the hands of a temptuous recount scheme every time a stung party loses (let alone misleadingly blame it on something else from Russia's Putin, to sexism, to "in hindsight the popular vote would be reasonable", to FBI Director Comey).  All Americans should instead focus on how the 6 states that flipped this election, were all economically ignored and all flipped to Donald Trump
The only viable path for a Hillary Clinton victory at this stage is to astoundingly uncover a wide-spread (across three states) fraud.  And that's equally unlikely, since the basis for the voting aberrations occurred in less populated counties and anyway the three states employ three different voting mechanisms, so the fraud would have had to somehow occur through different transmission vehicles (paper voting, and electronic voting) and we would require a speedy judicial resolution for states such as Pennsylvania that sidestepped back-up recordings from their direct voting equipment.
We should note the following statistical facts about the electoral vote in the three recount states:
  • 10 votes, Wisconsin (Trump leads by 0.9 percentage points)
  • 20 votes, Pennsylvania (Trump leads by 1.1 percentage points)
  • 16 votes, Michigan (Trump leads by 0.2 percentage points)
Given that Mr. Trump won by 74 electoral votes, Ms. Clinton would need to flip all three states noted above, in order to liquidate this deficit (i.e., >74/2 = >37 votes).  The leads described above however, among 4.4 million voters from these three states, is highly statistically significant on a state-level (and certainly when all three states are combined).  It would be remarkably unlikely (>5event) that we would arbitrarily second-guess every one of these millions of voters' intents and, convert any (certainly let alone all) of these three states.
Hillary must be cognizant of this improbability, and so is piggy-backing off of the second most reasonable recount rationale: not that errors in intent occurred, but rather straight-fraud on such a scale that would flip most of these states.  While tempting for true Democrat supporters, this fraud scenario is of course dubious.  Because for it to work, we would need to suppose that such fraud occurred in three different ways at once:
  • Michigan is a paper-ballot state (no electronic voter equipment hacking) so fraud is virtually unlikely to show at all
  • Wisconsin does have paper back-ups recorded though the counties that are most heterogeneous, are lesser-populated and not so wildly-off probabilistically
  • Pennsylvania has similar issues to Wisconsin, except they haven't recorded all of their votes in an auditable back-up so judicial hurdles must be overcome
The bottom line is everything must go right here, in all three state recounts (between proving fraud and getting mathematical help from wide-spread voter intent errors), in order to better align towards a Donald Trump downfall.  And even if this all occurred, accounting for all of these statistical adjustments, the probability of a Hillary Clinton triumph is still quite low.
Lower than the odds that comic Nate Silver and all of the other "pollsters" gave to Mr. Trump throughout this election season.  It is these same pollsters and juvenile campaign "scientists" who completely mis-forecasted Ms. Clinton's path, who are now gasping for a recount phenomenon.  This was nicely articulated in a recent Bloomberg article here:

Shock Report: George Soros Behind Hillary Election Steal

The Gateway Pundit ^ | 11/27/16 | Jim Hoft 

George Soros is connected to Hillary’s election steal per information from a new report. 
As reported earlier the election steal was put into motion when a group of  ‘experts’ reviewed the election results and then reported that there appeared to be election fraud.  However,  a member from the group of ‘experts’ happens to be voting-rights attorney John Bonifaz.  Bonifaz also happens to be connected with George Soros when he launched the National Voting Rights Institute In 1994.  Bonifaz was the Institute’s  President.
This is all certainly shocking but no surprise.  Hillary and Soros are in this for the steal.

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Colleges delay classes and exams, offer stress-healing therapies after Trump victory! ^ | Nov. 12, 2016 | not stated 

As Americans comes to terms with the election results, students seem to need extra time and care to cope with Donald Trump’s victory. Colleges across the US have canceled classes and exams, offered disaster counseling and dog and coloring book therapies. '
Since Wednesday, schools have been trying to help students recover from election day, which for some ended in a shocking outcome.
Classes were canceled or postponed the morning after the elections at some colleges due to understanding that students had stayed up late to wait for the results. Some professors even decided that holding exams would be counterproductive because students complained about “serious stress.”
One University of Michigan psychology professor postponed an exam until November 16. “However one feels about the results of this important election, it’s clear that it (and the period leading up to it) is/has been very distracting and upsetting to many students,” professor John Snodgrass wrote in an email, cited by the College Fix. “I’ve been receiving many emails in recent hours from students requesting to delay the exam due to associated serious stress.”
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

We Majored in...