Archive for science

Climate fraud, Educator hubris, Politics as usual

Democratic governors outsource climate campaigns to activist groups, emails reveal By Valerie Richardson –

“It turns out that the governors who descended this week on the Bonn climate summit had plenty of help — not just from state aides, but also from a kind of shadow staff supplied by climate change advocacy groups and funded by liberal foundations in support of the ambitious foreign policy effort.

The relationship raises questions about whether the governors have crossed an ethical line by bringing in privately funded advocacy groups to help staff a multistate operation — apparently at no charge — and whether their time and resources constituted a gift that would need to be disclosed to the public.

Special Interest Groups get condemned for interference in government but, apparently, that is only the other guy’s SIG’s. Here’s a case of the Left’s SIG’s and what may be a massive case of corruption intended to overturn the lawful expression of U.S. foreign policy. You’d think that’d be a concern?

Scientists Say Earth Is Doomed Without ‘Urgent’ Action — Just Like They Did 25 Years Ago, an IBD Editorial – “This week, thousands of scientists issued a bleak and terrifying “second notice” to mankind about how we will destroy the planet unless we take “urgent” action”. There is a nice list provided that illustrates just how far off the doomsayers have been in reality. Just who is in denial of reality is quite clear.

“In an article published in the journal Bioscience, 15,364 scientists warned that we are “jeopardizing our future” and that “immediate action” is needed to “safeguard our imperiled biosphere.”

“Soon it will be too late to shift course away from our failing trajectory, and time is running out,” the scientists say.

The article is meant to be an update on a 1992 notice — ominously titled “World Scientists’ Warning to Humanity” and signed by 1,700 leading scientists — that predicted environmental catastrophes to come if humans remained on the current course.

But the 1992 statement was wildly off the mark in its dire predictions.

What’s also interesting about the scientists’ 1992 warning is that it barely mentions global warming, which is the cause for all the current end-of-the-world predictions.

But today’s doomsday scientists are making the same fundamental mistake they made 25 years ago.

They are blind, apparently, to the fact that when people are emboldened by free-market capitalism they are amazingly innovative and will ceaselessly devise new technologies and new ways of doing things that are cheaper, less energy-intensive and less polluting. There’s no need for the massive central planning or worldwide austerity these scientists keep demanding.

Climate Change Alarmism Is Founded On Dishonesty by John Hinderaker – “I’ve said many times that I believe global warming alarmism to be the worst fraud in the history of science. What follows is just one of many illustrations of that point.”

Climate Litigation Needs to Become a Mass Movement by Ketan Jha – “Things are not going well for the Earth.” If the facts and measurements don’t sell the point; if propaganda and corruption don’t sell the point; try lawsuits. There has to be some way to force a fantasy on the public.

Democrat desperation to defeat recalls leads to lies, lawsuits By Victor Joecks – “We knew Nevada Democrats were desperate to defeat recall campaigns against three sitting state senators.”

Congressional talks on sex harassment boil with hypocrisy By Cheryl K. Chumley – it’s a part of that Matthew 7:5 problem. But then nearly all the teachings in the Bible and especially those of Jesus Christ are getting short shrift in the swamp these days.

Politics of Denunciation Will Soon Have To Stop Even If Moore Is Doomed By Conrad Black – here’s why Moore is getting the ‘treatment’ and why that treatment is more of significant issue than Moore’s behavior.

I don’t like Judge Moore as a candidate; I think it is outrageous for any candidate for a serious office to flourish about a firearm at an election meeting, and some of his comments, especially about gays, have been completely unacceptable for a candidate for the U.S. Senate. I have no problem with his putting a large and unauthorized monument to the Ten Commandments in the court-house rotunda as chief justice of Alabama, and the removal of him from that office for doing so is reprehensible.

Their application in this case is mitigated by the absence of authoritative corroboration, any seriously alleged pattern of repeated misconduct (as in the Weinstein allegations), and the fact that the alleged incident is violently denied by the former chief justice of the state, occurred 38 years ago, did not involve any direct physical grope or probe, was not reported to law authorities (and was not necessarily illegal if it happened at all and certainly is not actionable now) and was given instead to the trusty first battery of reliable Democratic artillery in the press.

As I wrote above, I don’t like Roy Moore as a candidate, but I don’t like premeditated political character assassinations either, and in a parallel of the fact that impositions on underage girls by grown men should be punished, if there is proof that they occurred, electioneering by severe partisan defamation unleashed at critically timed pre-electoral moments should not be rewarded with success. They have not been with the Steele dossier, which Kimberley Strassel correctly described in the Wall Street Journal on November 10 as the greatest political dirty trick in American history.

At some point, this practice of denunciation being insuperable and due process just an irritant and a useless antiquity, like an appendix — as it has been in the Weinstein and Moore cases — will have to stop, if the United States wishes to retain any credibility as a society of laws.

On unverifiable sexual allegations about political figures by neo-neocon – “It has become extremely common for people running for election (or newly-appointed to a political post) to be accused at the eleventh hour of sexual offenses.” This post provides a good summary of the situation and its implications.

John Podhoretz: If Roy Moore Squeaks By, It Will Be Because Of Democrats. via Instapundit – a bit of history and a bit of reality may sink in. Maybe.

Why Alabama voters must spite the experts again By Steve Flesher – “Up until one week ago, the worst thing one could claim about Judge Roy Moore was that he stood for the Ten Commandments as a judge and ticked off the ACLU.

While arguments exist constitutionally around that particular matter, Moore’s actions in doing so were certainly not indicative of a man with a weak character who would exploit young ladies. In fact, he stood for something and risked losing a political position.

This is why Alabama voters trust Moore, who has proven himself when he promises to stand on important issues: religious liberty, securing our borders (which includes building a wall), the Second Amendment, protecting the unborn, etc.

This is unlike a lot of the so-called holier-than-thou “Republicans” in Washington who had no problem working with Ted Kennedy, who left a woman to die in his car, and other liberals in Congress.

As such, we should understand why we find ourselves unfairly subjected to a brutal Catch-22 scenario concocted by the media and political establishment. Thus, we either accept the idea of a pro-abortion, open-borders liberal candidate being the better choice or resist the narrative based on our own thinking and risk being labeled as sympathizers to child-molesters.

We’ve been called lots of things that were untrue before. This, too, shall pass.

Yes, Virginia, there is vote fraud By Robert Knight – “If ever there were an election that proved the importance of accurate voter rolls, it was Virginia’s on Nov. 7.

Nobody knows how many fraudulent votes are cast in any election, but we do know that literally thousands of ineligible voters are on Virginia’s voter rolls, including illegal aliens and convicted felons.

All this to say Virginia’s voter rolls are not being maintained accurately as required by the National Voter Registration Act (Motor Voter Law).

If they are as dirty as indicated by PILF’s study, then it’s a good bet that some of these contested races were decided by fraudulent votes.

The citizens of Virginia deserve to have their votes count, not to have them canceled out because election officials refuse to obey the law.

Let Down at the Top by Victor Davis Hanson –

“The problem with a dying media is not just new social media, the Internet, or 24-hour cable news. Those are just accelerants. The culprit is mostly politically driven ignorance. Today’s journalists graduate with majors that confer thinly disguised degrees in different sorts of activism.

The unspoken fuel that drives so many protests on campus is the self-awareness that so many students simply cannot do traditional college work and desire weaker courses, personal exemptions, and time off.

Our generation also, inevitably, became divorced from both nature and the muscularity of the physical, desperate ordeal of surviving.

It is hard to destroy the NFL or to discredit a liberal-arts degree from Yale, or to turn NBC or CNN into a bastard of Pravda or to make the Hollywood of John Ford, Frank Capra, and Alfred Hitchcock into that of George Clooney. But we managed it — and more still to come before we are through.

The Shame of America’s Public High Schools by John Hinderaker – “I grew up in South Dakota in the 1950s and 1960s, when such conduct would have been unthinkable. Today, it is not only thinkable, it is considered commendable in liberal school districts like Edina’s.” Read and weep, but so many don’t and seem rather proud of behavior that destroys civilization and humanity. That is distressing.

The ivory tower contemplates the world by neo-neocon – “how on earth could a person or persons “point the way to the world as it should be” without deeply studying and “grappling”with the world as it is?

So, “higher education”–and educators–ought to tell us how the world should be (and by implication, how to get it to that point) without “grappling with the world as it is” first (or simultaneously)? That would be like repairing a refrigerator without knowing how the refrigerator works.

That’s the same hubris that Communist true believers (the idealists among them, that is—and there were and are quite a few of those) have long operated under: that they could “fix” a complex system that they don’t understand. This is a common dream on the left. Hey, it’s a common dream of humans in general, which probably explains the continual and enduring appeal of leftism.

Well, yeah … the planet may not be doomed but there seem to be an awful lot of people trying to doom civilization.

Leave a Comment

False gods and so-called science

Here are a few more stories for a Monday overload. These look at the ideologies and fantasies behind the behavior.

The Media Doesn’t Want to Talk about the 26th Victim of the Texas Church Massacre By Paula Bolyard – “Media outlets across the country are apparently having difficulty counting. They can’t seem to get the number of victims right in last week’s horrific Texas church massacre.”

While many correctly reported that 26 people were killed during Devin Patrick Kelley’s maniacal rampage, many others went to great pains to avoid reporting that an unborn child died at First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, Texas, last Sunday. Or, if they did report the baby’s death, they reported it as a footnote, careful to separate the unborn child from other victims.

Why can’t these media outlets simply say that 26 people — human beings — were killed in the attack? The answer should be obvious to anyone who’s been paying attention to the culture wars for the last 40 years. They can’t say it because they’re so firmly tethered to their lie — that the unborn child in his mother’s womb has no personhood and no rights.

The tragedy in Texas exposes their deception — and their desperation — as more an more Americans understand that abortion is the intentional killing of a human being made in the image of God.

The Wages of Social Justice Is Death By Michael Walsh – “In the aftermath of the Ferguson riots in Missouri and the Freddie Gray fiasco in Baltimore, the decriminalization of crime in the name of “social justice” — long a goal of the cultural-Marxist Left — got fully underway. The result was exactly what anyone not fully invested in Critical Theory would have expected.”

Baltimore, a city whose best years ended more than a century ago, is a prime example of what happens when citizens are categorized by skin color or cultural background, and then have differing standards of behavior applied to them by what should be an impartial justice system. Instead of “social justice,” the outcome is social disruption, mistrust, resentment, lawlessness and, if left unchecked, anarchy and civil war. The Marxists not only know this, they desire it, which is why they press so hard for it.

the “social justice” and “political correctness” mentality gripping so many elected or appointed officials– not to mention the entire American media — prevents them from taking the kind of direct action that’s needed to solve the problem. Until Real Americans cast off the foreign-import dictates of the cultural Marxist Left, cities like Baltimore will continue to suffer. And so will we all.

Trump Shines in Foreign Policy By James Lewis – “The U.S. media just rolled its eyes and yawned, but the Muslim world got the message loud and clear.”

Obama would never even name the enemy, and most importantly, under Obama the United States lost the moral high ground against child-murdering sadists; we started to support Sunni killer cults in Syria.

If ISIS is just a minor nuisance, as Obama tried to tell us, that would make the genocides of history meaningless.

Obama never, ever seemed to get that basic point of morality, nor did Hillary, nor did any other Democrat. Trump and Mattis obviously understand it,

Obama seemed to take the side of the enemy, and Bush just called the whole thing “the War on Terror,” totally ignoring the monstrous doctrine that runs Al Qaida and ISIS and other jihad killer cults. American military who were on the ground in Syria and Afghanistan were tremendously demoralized by U.S. failure to cast this war in the proper moral terms. Mattis in particular emphasizes morality in war, a concept liberals can’t even imagine. You kill people because they are beyond evil. You don’t kill innocents. Somehow the Democrats can’t seem to remember that.

Trump is supposed to be an idiot, but this idiot has been a success in the international hotel business for years, and people like that have to know about currencies and commodities.

The Wap-NYTs have always whipped up fear about strong U.S. presidents, never about foreign throwbacks like Kim III threatening us with nuclear weapons. They don’t care if it’s the Soviet Union, or the Nazis way back then, or Stalin, or the 9/11/01 Wahhabi killers. Our enemies are all victims of U.S. Imperialism, and if they’re mad at us we gotta just take the punishment we deserve.

This is a form of liberal insanity, of course, but the one positive is that the voters understand it all. The Trump voters include tens of millions of Americans who love their country, and wanted Obama and Hillary out of their lives.

The Democrats will lose as long as the current inner cult stays in charge. All we can do is encourage them to get as infantile as possible, and hope they’ll never bring in any adults.

Trump might just achieve that all on his own.

The Dark Side of Science By Robert Arvay – “Science has bestowed enormous benefits on mankind. But it has a dark side as well.”

What is most remarkable about science is not its gadgetry, but rather, what it tells us about ourselves, who we are, what is our purpose and destiny. Do we have inherent value? Or are we just another species of animal?

In other words, there is a powerful philosophy that underpins science. It affects us all.

Science is based on the premise that the universe has rules, unbreakable laws that do not depend on our opinion, but which are revealed to us by observation and reason. As far as we can tell, the universe is orderly; it has structure and hierarchy. Is that all just meaningless coincidence?

Until recent times, nature was correctly seen to be the work of a divine designer whose purpose, plan and meaning are revealed to us in the wonders of Creation.

Science is only as valuable as its foundation. If that foundation is not faith, then science is a house built upon shifting sand, and must collapse. Let’s stop worshipping the false gods of so-called science, before they demand the sacrifice of all that is truly sacred.

Science and God are on the same page and Arvay isn’t. That page is the matter of the ninth commandment (wikipedia). Arvay is not engaging in true witness in his conclusions about what science tells us. There are no “false gods of so-called science” by definition. Science is about true witness to what God lays in front of us whether that be a geological record or the structure of living beings. It is not about “purpose and destiny.”

Many current issues from vaccinations to anthropogenic climate catastrophe to alternative energy have people chasing false gods and trying to use science as their excuse. What they are doing is “so-called science” and not true witness to what science actually is. The problem Arvay highlights is about the nature of humanity that God gave us, not the nature of human inquiry into the Word of God that He placed in front of us and that we often call nature. Much as the commandments God gave Moses are understandable rules, true science accepts the concept that God is not irrational, perverse, or unreasonable as would be the case without rules. Science is about exploring what he gave us to better understand his Word.

Where Arvay should focus is on how he and many others have lost focus on the first of the commandments where they have enshrined a graven image of their favored ideology to place before the “Lord your God.”

Leave a Comment

whither they go?

NeverTrump Makes a Left Turn By Julie Kelly – “Several of the writers, grown-ups who love their country more than they love proving they were right, managed to move on in life, staying true to their conservative principles while praising and criticizing the president as the occasion warranted.” But others did not and revealed their true colors.

“So, where do these NeverTrumpers go from here? There seems to be a gradual split in the ranks and a recognition that the most fervent among them have lost their senses. There is also no compelling strategy to “take back” the GOP with any policy platform or candidate development effort. With a history of poor political prognostication, Kristol is hell-bent on making sure the Republican Party pays the price for nominating and electing Trump, even if it means the other side, with its destructive agenda of progressive policies, wins. Kristol, Rubin, Stephens, are now de facto, if not actual, liberals. We should stop allowing them to get away with calling themselves anything but that; the media will rub them in our faces until we do.

Soon, however, the Virginia election will be a memory, these NeverTrumpers’ social-media fist-bumping will end, and they will still be left with a president they detest, an electorate they ridicule, and lost integrity they won’t be able to recover.

Primal Scream By Richard Fernandez – “An earlier generation could probably quote 1 John 1:8 “if we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us” to remind themselves of this. Alternatively they might cite James Madison.”

“Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help” was the usual warning. But somewhere along the line conventional wisdom discarded this injunction and media began to create the myth that there were special people to rule over us.

Not only does human frailty make the dictatorship of the party untenable, it makes even lesser forms of coercion such as virtue signalling and nudging ineffective.

Whatever happens now the progressives have lost decades of “gains” not to the alt-right, which is nothing special, but to the realization of their own human frailty. They will find equality intolerable.

Bill Clinton’s looming reckoning as a sexual predator By Thomas Lifson – “So far, there has not been much holding of Bill Clinton to account by progressives, despite the change in zeitgeist for sexual predation by the powerful.”

“But the inevitable is happening. At first a few progressives start mentally applying the post-Weinstein ethic to Bill Clinton. In the process, they eventually have to reflect on their own past and regret their support for him throughout Kenneth Starr’s revelations, impeachment, and beyond. But that will take a long time.

Rep. Charlie Dent: Taking the ‘fun’ out of ‘dysfunction‘ By Jerry Shenk – “In one of the whiniest, most amusing yet revealing accidental admissions ever, Rep. Charlie Dent (R-Pa.) told Yahoo News, “You’ve got this administration that’s taken the fun out of dysfunction.”

“Rather than in Trump’s White House, dysfunction originated primarily from the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue. It was the dysfunction, passivity, and arrogance of Dent and his congressional colleagues – their willingness to go along with, even enable eight years of Barack Obama’s dysfunctional, often extra-constitutional presidency – that created a political environment in which someone like Donald Trump could prevail.

Accusing the president of introducing dysfunction to Washington is a classic case of psychological projection. … To “psychological projection,” add “deflection” and “passive aggression.” By blaming the president rather than his own contributions to congressional dysfunction, Dent is attempting to distract Americans from the fact that Republican majorities in both chambers of Congress haven’t honored a single campaign promise made in 2010, 2014, and 2016 to voters who gave them majorities.

What Will Mitch McConnell Do About the Democrats’ Disgraceful Senate Blockade? By John Hinderaker – “In one agency after another, they are carrying obstructionism to unprecedented lengths.”

“Elections have consequences, right?

Not anymore they don’t. The Democrats take the position that President Trump is not entitled to exercise the powers of his office. Here, as in many other instances, the Senate minority is holding nominees hostage to its demand that Obama administration policies not be changed. Barack Obama gets to be president forever, apparently.

This obstructionism is unprecedented in American history. The question is, what are Mitch McConnell and the other alleged leaders of the Republican majority going to do about it?

Like many others, I have just about come to the conclusion that Congressional Republicans are worthless. Time is running out for McConnell and his colleagues to show us that our votes and our financial support for Republicans haven’t been wasted. And please: don’t lecture us on the hallowed traditions of the Senate. Those traditions have been blasted to smithereens by the Democrats. This is a war, Senator McConnell, and if you are not interested in fighting it, then we need to find someone who is.

The presumption of guilt by Paul Mirengoff – “Boot, it seems, wants the Republican Party to die for the “sin” of nominating Donald Trump. Only that wish provides a rational explanation for his call that the GOP “die” because of its response to allegations against Roy Moore.” See Mirengoff also on The allegations against Roy Moore – “The Washington Post’s story about Roy Moore persuades me that, when he was in his early 30s, he liked to date teenage girls. It does not persuade me that he engaged in inappropriate sexual touchings with the 14 year-old girl who claims he did.”

There is a significant imbalance between the allegations and the rhetoric assuming guilt. Aslo see neo-neocon on The Roy Moore sex allegations. But Reynolds and Driscoll says Roy Moore didn’t help himself in an interview with Sean Hannity – “This Roy Moore interview is an example of why defense attorneys tell our clients to STFU.” That’s for law but this is politics and silence enhances presumed guilt. So what is a candidate to do?

Roy Moore Gets the Herman Cain Treatment by Daniel John Sobieski – “It was déjà vu all over again.”

It doesn’t matter if the charges are false. Accusations make page one while the truth later winds up at the bottom of the classifieds. Cain’s candidacy was derailed after repeated and unproven sexual harassment allegations by former employees. But like Harry Reid’s tax lies about Mitt Romney, it worked. That is the goal of Judge Roy Moore’s accusers. Why raise the charges now after being silent for decades?

Trump accuser Jessica Leeds’ accusation was accepted as credible immediately. Smear first, prove later. Guilty until proven innocent. It worked with Romney and Cain, why not Judge Roy Moore? But the rush to believe the claims of Moore’s groping stand in contrast to the blind eye given to the claims of Juanita Broaddrick, Kathleen Willey, Paula Jones, and others, claims backed up by contemporaneous witness testimony and a victorious lawsuit by and with a cash settlement to Jones.

As Investor’s Business Daily editorialized in 2011, righteous indignation and claims of victimhood are a one-way street for the liberal grievance industry

Tell a Big Lie and Keep Repeating It by Norman Rogers – “Mother Nature is not cooperating with fake global warming science because the Earth has failed to warm for the last two decades.”

When a lie is backed by millions of government dollars, it is difficult for the truth to compete. The truth comes from scientists not corrupted by money, and from small organizations dependent on private donations. The truth is outgunned by government financed propaganda mills. The promoters of fake catastrophe depict themselves as disinterested idealists. The promoters of the truth are depicted as servants of evil industries, or as mentally disturbed crackpots.

If obvious, stupid lies, like the competitiveness of solar power, can gain popularity, how can more complicated lies be refuted?

It is much easier to make wild claims than it is to explain why these claims are fantasies or even to point out reasons for skepticism.

As the Italian philosopher Wilfredo Pareto pointed out, people form their opinions based on passion. Resort to logic and data is basically window dressing to support their previously adopted opinions. That’s why it is so difficult to make ideological conversions by means of logical argument.

Who Pays For “Green” Energy? By John Hinderaker – “These days, there is considerable obfuscation about the true costs of “green” energy–basically, wind and solar.”

“Politicians, regulators and sometimes utilities assert that wind and solar are efficient–that they actually are price-competitive with reliable energy sources like coal and natural gas. If you know anything about energy, you know this is an absurd claim. If it were true, we could do away with all subsidies for wind and solar, but no “green” energy advocate would dream of allowing that.

“Green” energy is, in my opinion, a scandal. Steve Hayward authored a great report on the subject for Center of the American Experiment (“Energy Policy in Minnesota: the High Cost of Failure”), which you can read here.

Heart of darkness: the baby killers by neo-neocon – “What state of mind allows a person to purposely target babies for killing, up close and personal?”

“What to do with a person like the Texas shooter before he goes on his rampage? There are two problems, of course. The first is that we cannot predict who will do this; we can only say who is more likely than others to do it. And the second is that until someone actually acts, we cannot detain that person preventively because that would be depriving them of liberty without cause.

But there is something so “other” about psychopaths’ makeup, so Bad-Seedish, that it remains hard to see them as people like other people with the same choices as other people.

I suppose that’s the nature of evil.

it’s in the nature of us all

Leave a Comment

The fall from grace: so many once so proud

Left can have Bushitler by Don Surber –

Reagan put America first. Trump puts America first. The Bushes? Well, they were better than Dukakis, Gore, or Kerry.

The two President Bushes now seek approval from people who not just disdain them, but who will dance on their graves when they die.

The Bush men can forgive those who call them Bushitler, but not Trump whose sin is he won the presidency as a Republican. No, they wanted to be “The Last Republicans” — honorably sinking with the party while the band played “Nearer My God To Thee.”

Instead, we have President Trump, a man who fights back when called Hitler.

Make America Great Again is as vulgar today as it was in 1980 when Reagan’s slogan was “Let’s Make America Great Again.”

In Latin, vulgar means of the people.

Considering the way the elitists have governed the past 30 years or so, it is time for the people to lead the way.

Another from Don Surber: 20 who feuded with Trump — and lost. “Feuding with Donald Trump is a bad idea. Too many people have wound up worse for the feud, the latest being Alec Baldwin.” A full score of cases is provided for example.

It’s not what President Trump does to them. It’s just that karma kneecaps so many of them.

Oh, not everyone winds up worse, I suppose. But enough do that a wise man would ask, why risk it?

Notice the pattern is hating Trump in public, and being a cretin in private.

Instapundit cites Camille Paglia – “In an abject failure of leadership that may be one of the most disgraceful episodes in the history of the modern Democratic party, Chuck Schumer, who had risen to become the Senate Democratic leader after the retirement of Harry Reid, asserted absolutely no moral authority as the party spun out of control in a nationwide orgy of rage and spite.” – and Matthew Continetti – “it is actually the Democratic Party that has been most disrupted by the realignment of American politics along class lines.”

Reynolds also notes Shelby Steele On The Exhaustion Of American Liberalism – “Today’s liberalism is an anachronism” and Dereliction Of Duty about another Trump victim – “We’re left to conclude, then, that the Colonel did, in fact, want to send the president a message. If that’s so, it’s a disgrace. It’s unlikely to be the last display of disgraceful conduct from those who have the misfortune of finding themselves in proximity to Bowe Bergdahl.”

New York Times’ coverage of Mueller is peak liberal bias by Michael Goodwin – “It sees its liberal politics not as a point of view, but as received wisdom that cannot be legitimately disputed.”

In the Times’ view, there are only two reasons to question Mueller’s credibility: insanity or treason.

The animating impulse for the assault is obvious — the Times is locked into its mission of destroying President Trump, and, like Hillary Clinton, still cannot accept Trump’s election as legitimate.

the paper, following a bad habit it developed during Barack Obama’s presidency, is not content with advocating its positions. Behaving like a party propaganda outlet, it takes a coercive approach to anyone with a different view. Objections are demonized as heretical.

His straw man is a diversion and his logic turns the concept of evidence on its head, making it required before an investigation can start.

The editorial page was even more venomous, calling criticism of the special counsel “crazy talk.”

The zeal to protect Mueller from any criticism raises the question of why the Times cares so much. With the mainstream media in lockstep with its jihad against Trump, why bother to smear a handful of skeptics?

Robert Frost on progressive education 100 years ago by neo-neocon –

Two things in progressive education provoked Frost’s particular rage—their abandonment of the ancient Greek and Roman classics and their attempts to apply the scientific method to teaching. The latter separated form or technique from genuine content…

Frost experienced a sort of fractal of what was to develop into our current university woes, and recognized at once what the dangers were and what the denouement was likely to be.

The “Climate Science Special Report” is Highly Deceptive by Leslie Eastman – “Yes, the report really is “special”!”

The following muck from The Washington Post is a great example of the elite media spinning a narrative that is demonstrably false in scientific terms but that fits their politically-motivated agenda:

I will simply point out that the Climate Science Special Report, released by 13 federal agencies on Friday, is the product of Obama-era eco-activists who remain entrenched at those various agencies. No swamp has been harder to drain since Julius Caesar tried to get rid of the Pontine Marshes.

Furthermore, this news was released on Friday. Not only was it a Friday, but it was the day that President Trump was beginning a historic, 10-day trip to Asia.

In The Wall Street Journal, Koonin says the report “misleads by omission.”

Science, too, suffers a fall from grace.

Leave a Comment

Very difficult to understand.

Marxism: The Key To Health? by John Hinderaker – “The Lancet is a once-respected medical journal that has been taken over by leftists, in a sad illustration of O’Sullivan’s Law.”

Free societies produce prosperous, healthy citizens. Socialist societies produce a huge underclass of impoverished, undernourished and maltreated subjects, living under the boots of a small overclass of well-fed sociopaths. Horton’s suggestion that Marxism is positively associated with human health is, to put it as politely as possible, a lie.

Among U.S. millennials, socialism beats capitalism by Luboš Motl – “YouGov and Victim-of-Communism-Memorial-Foundation have surveyed over 2,000 millennials. 45% would prefer a “socialist country” while only 42% would prefer a capitalist country.”

The poll shows lots of other troubling things, ignorance about most things – over 60% have never heard of Maduro, for example – but it’s far from the first one of its kind (see similar results from February 2016, for example) and the U.S. is far from the only country spoiled by this mental disease selectively targeting the youth.

There are lots of things that should be said and questions that should be asked. First, where does it come from? Is it a spontaneous trend that this young generation has invented by itself?

I only know an extremely tiny number of intelligent youth that have realized that all this stuff is a pile of lies, propaganda for their stupid contemporaries. And I know no millennials who have broken the mouth of outrageous liars such as the global warming alarmists so that the latter wouldn’t talk again – and that’s exactly what should be happening everywhere if at least some of the millennials had the intelligence, decency, as well as the balls.

So no, it’s not their own conclusion. They have been indoctrinated. They have become a herd of stupid sheep.

will this trend really lead to the end of capitalism, democracy, and individual freedoms, as America’s electorate will be drifting in the direction with this pro-socialist, anti-freedom majority? I still hope it won’t. 

LEAK: Google Employees Defend Discrimination Against Conservatives by Allum Bokhari – “conservative Googlers who voice concerns about political bias are often belittled and ignored by fellow employees.”

Glen Reynolds cites Michael Barone: Keep Calm And Carry On – “Trump’s insult-laden style and constant tweeting strikes many people (including me) as repugnant” but “Trump’s actions, in contrast to many of his words, strike me as comparable to other presidents.” There is dissonance here, the kind that needs deep introspection.

The nonstop freakoutrage about Trump was intended to “denormalize” him, but it’s had the effect of denormalizing his opposition, which would be a lot more effective if it behaved normally.

Instead, they wear the badge of ‘he is repugnant’ with honor and show an utter contempt that they even acknowledge is out of place and irresponsible.

When scientists sue scientists by Jonathan H. Adler – “What is unusual, however, is for a scientific researcher to file a lawsuit against another researcher.”

The idea that academic researchers should turn to court when their work is criticized or contradicted by other researchers is a pernicious one, challenging the sort of robust inquiry upon which scientific research and the discovery of knowledge require. It is absolutely essential that researchers are free to posit hypotheses and subject others’ hypotheses to critique. This inevitably entails not just questioning other researchers’ confusions, but also pointing out potential errors and mistakes. Of course it’s true that strong critiques of one’s academic work may have an effect on one’s academic reputation but that does with the territory. The same goes for making erroneous allegations against other researchers. If the fear of such reputational harms is compounded by the threat of litigation, academic inquiry will be chilled as researchers become more reluctant to point out the problems in each others’ work.

It’s all argument. No debate allowed.

Leave a Comment

Prosecutor tactics, explaining economic systems, and confirmation bias

Mueller’s Indictment Of Manafort: Desperate Prosecutorial Hail Mary, Or Trap For Trump? IBD –

The point is, there appears to be two laws in effect here: One for Trump and Republicans, the other for the Clintons and Democrats. Because of this, we first made our call for the Russian investigation to be disbanded last summer. Mueller’s investigation was an obvious political fishing expedition. That’s still true today.

A branch of SJWs: deniers of Bitcoin miners’ power by Luboš Motl – it’s a lesson on capitalism vs communism and the meaning of accountabily and vested interests.

This far left loon says that a coder in some self-anointed Bitcoin organization is automatically smarter than the average miner, so the coder must decide. But that’s just completely missing the logic that makes capitalism work – and that makes communism fail. Everyone can claim he is smart but there must be mechanisms that actually choose who is right. And they only work if one’s well-being is affected by his results. And that only works if the owners are those who are actually making the ultimate big decisions (e.g. at the stockholders’ meeting).

How Google and MSM Use “Fact Checkers” to Flood Us with Fake Claims by Leo Goldstein –

The Left implemented a novel technique of the Big Lie that I will call a Flooding Fake here. This technique was especially widely used by climate alarmism. This is what it looks like:

The first Google search result says that Donald Trump is behind the hoax, created by the Time magazine four years ago, and links to a fresh Time article (6), repeating and amplifying the hoax. A Wikipedia entry (7) is the second result, and Snopes comes third. Snopes result is “fact-checked” by Snopes itself. Thus, Google simply cons a user with its “fact check.” This is a recurrent occurrence, not an exception.

The Flooding Fake is different from a strawman fallacy. The Flooding Fake is a political operation, rather than a fallacy. Accordingly, in a strawman fallacy, the strawman is not disseminated outside of the original debate, and does not convince the opponent. The Flooding Fake is disseminated very broadly and eventually takes over some opponents.

The Flooding Fake is related to two other PR techniques of the left: fake opponents (like “fossil fuels interests”), and fake debate subject.

This is just a matter of social confirmation bias. The search engine users have an interest in finding what they want to find. The search engines note this and put the most commonly used of its findings at the top of the list in related searches. This can provide a ‘Flooding Fake’ about what most searchers are searching for. It’s the phenomena behind the adage that a lie will travel the world before the truth even gets its pants on. 

Leave a Comment

Discrimination and equality

Byron York: In Trump media coverage, audiences left and right get what they want – that’s one way to rationalize it: pandering to their audience. The problem is that issues of Fake News™ and misperception are glossed over. The predominance of various outlets in the discussion is glossed over. One item did get note:

Pew discovered that one recipe for bias, in both directions, is focusing news stories not on policy but on the single person of Donald Trump. All the outlets, no matter their orientation, did that, Pew discovered.

Pew discovered that one recipe for bias, in both directions, is focusing news stories not on policy but on the single person of Donald Trump. All the outlets, no matter their orientation, did that, Pew discovered.

York provides an example of a destructive bias in his essay in that he is rationalizing to try to get to a ‘both sides do it’ equality rather than expose the differences and contrasts.

IBD: Do The Media Hate Trump? Yes, And From The Very Start Of His Presidency, New Survey Shows – “The mainstream media don’t like Trump, but it’s not really anything he did as president, a new survey by the Pew Research Center shows.”

Some 62% of the media coverage of Trump was negative, Pew found. For Obama it, was just 20%; for Bush, 28%; for Clinton, also 28%. In other words, the media from the get-go had decided Trump was a bad president — before any of his policies had a chance to take hold.

“And it’s not a case of overwhelmingly negative coverage on one subject drowning out some moderately positive coverage on other matters,” noted the political blog Hot Air. “It was resoundingly negative across the board.”

Or, as Pew put it, “Compared with past administrations, coverage of Trump’s early days focused less on policy and was more negative overall.”

Same report, different takes. That’s how bias works. Whether it is constructive or destructive depends upon whether you can learn anything or not about the underlying reality.

Sadly, there’s no solution for this. In the digital age, we can all self-segregate on the web by tuning out discordant voices. Increasingly, that’s happening across the country, leading to a kind of ideological Balkanization. There’s more shouting, and less conversation. And we’re all poorer for it.

For all this, the media deserve much of the blame. They have abandoned all pretense of fairness or objectivity in their reporting, in favor of rank politicization of the news and even basic facts. The Pew report on their biased coverage of Trump’s initial months in office, unfortunately, confirms this.

Peter J. Boyer: How Donald Trump Has Disrupted the Media – “Pew study shows not just expected biases but also that publications have become strikingly self-referential.” Yet a third take to consider.

The Pew researchers found that only 11 percent of the content about Trump and his presidency could be considered positive. Four times that number of stories, 44 percent, offered a negative assessment.

That will not surprise anyone who has paid any attention to the news since inauguration day. What might be surprising is the way Trump—to whom the news media constitute “the opposition party”—has disrupted the media’s rule book.

One of traditional journalism’s basic tenets was the need to maintain a distanced objectivity (or, at the very least, the appearance of it). Dan Rather’s 1974 confrontation with President Richard Nixon made a lasting impression precisely because it was a stark departure from the norm. But the Pew study found that, in the age of Trump, journalists increasingly consider themselves at liberty to directly refute the president or representatives of his administration. This happened in 10 percent of the stories studied.

“One of the things that was interesting to see was that, while the topic of the news media was not a huge percentage of overall coverage, journalists were both the second most common source type as well as the second most common ‘trigger’ of the stories,” says Amy Mitchell, director of the Pew Research Center.*

Betsy Newmark got away from her Trump hate problem in today’s Cruising the Web – for some clarification of the gerrymandering court case, the gun control arguments, California’s attempt to legislate nirvana, and Michelle Obama’s tribalism.

Jazz Shaw: Some possible gun legislation to consider – he had not been aware of the devices that enabled rapid fire from semi-automatic rifles. Allahpundit has the other half: Statistician: After researching gun violence, I no longer believe in gun control – “Alternate headline: “Statistician obviously never wants a job in media again.”

Her name is Leah Libresco, formerly of Nate Silver’s FiveThirtyEight site, where she crunched the numbers in a study of all 33,000 gun homicides in the United States annually. She went in thinking that the usual liberal menu of anti-gun policies would reduce that number dramatically. She came out concluding that “the only selling point [of those policies] is that gun owners hate them.” That’s an interesting way to phrase leftist conventional wisdom in an era when the right’s tribalism draws so much scrutiny. Often in the age of Trump it really does feel as though conservatism is defined as “whatever makes liberals cry.” Libresco’s takeaway on the efficacy of mainstream gun-control policies is that they’re appealing to the people who support them mainly to the extent they make gun aficionados cry.

Many of Libresco’s arguments will be familiar to right-wingers, but it’s one thing to endorse them as a matter of ideology and another to endorse them as a matter of hard data.

Her advice? Instead of focusing on feelgood policies that won’t do much of anything to reduce gun violence or on massively heavy-handed policies like confiscation, which have zero chance of passing, instead consider policies that will address the social pathologies that drive the three most common forms of gun homicides

Knee jerk gun control has a sister example: Houston Chronicle: Preaching Climate Alarmism Post Harvey – “What is physically possible can beat the odds, from time to time. It does not have to be God’s hand, the Devil’s paw, or fossil-fueled climate change.” But reality doesn’t make much difference for those who want to ‘feel good’ by passing a law or engaging in moral preening or whatnot.

In the days and weeks after, the Houston Chronicle inundated Houstonians with biased–even angry–news reports, unsigned editorials, guest editorials, (chosen) letters-to-the-editor, and cartoons blaming man-made climate change for the severity of this event. Even the headline editors have gotten into the spew.

Houstonian Charles Battig, a diligent student of the climate debate, documented the bias in the hometown paper in a September 6 post at MasterResource: “Politicizing Harvey in the Houston Chronicle.”

The Houston Chronicle can be surnamed The New York Times of Houston. The editors (Progressive all; there are no known conservative or libertarian members of the editorial board) had such arrogant editorials as this one (lead editorial, September 14): “Climate Change: Let’s Talk Openly and Honestly,” subtitled A warmer planet threatens wetter storms, higher surges and more Harveys. The verbiage miscited climate facts and got preachy:

Dr. Joy Bliss at Maggies Farm noticed an interesting poll result that suggested Conflicted: Women in medicine – “At the obvious risk of being assaulted for stereotyping and demeaning females in my profession, I will share some of my observations.”

When I was sent this article, Majority of U.S. Physicians Now Support Single-Payer, I thought “That’s the women!” Then I felt conflicted.

For better or worse, the coming dominance of American medicine by women will be changing the culture of the profession. Other influences, like the emergence of large group practices, and of hospital-owned practices, are changing the character of American medicine too.

Elise Cooper: ‘You Have Gone Too Far’: Vets Respond to the NFL – “The players are making a sham of the National Anthem by insulting the flag, the nation, those serving, and those who have served, as well as the police, who run into a crisis instead of away from one.

“We have tolerated your drug use and DUIs, your domestic violence, and your vulgar displays of wealth. We should be ashamed for putting our admiration of your physical skills before what is morally right. But now you have gone too far. You have insulted our flag, our country, our soldiers, our police officers, and our veterans. You are living the American dream, yet you disparage our great country.”

Taya Kyle, the widow of legendary Navy SEAL sniper Chris Kyle, issued a bold challenge to the NFL via Facebook on Tuesday in response to the national anthem protests sweeping the league. Like many other NFL fans, she is tired of seeing the sport focus on “division and anger” instead of the message of unity that it once represented. “If you ever want to get off your knees and get to work on building bridges, let me know.

Another tragedy out of the Las Vegas massacre is that is illustrates so vividly just how corrupt and cowardly the NFL player protests really are.

Mike Konrad: Confusing the Evolution Debate – “Most Americans would not object to all sides of the evolution debate being taught to their children, and that is what should be allowed.” This is another example of the equality fallacy. There is also the binary positions fallacy. Konrad also engages in other disingenuous arguments.

Confusing the debate is what exactly is meant by evolution. To scientists, what is usually meant is the process of change, directed by natural selection and natural law, apart from any non-natural input. At the other side, are literal six-day creationists who feel the earth is only a few thousand years old, and everything was created by the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, through the second Person of the Trinity,

To the academy, Evolution must be defined as 100% naturalistic. There must be no appeal to any divine input. To six-day creationists, one must accept the literal understanding of a Biblical six-day creation, roughly six thousand years ago, with a world-wide flood, et al. There is no room for compromise.

The fact is that evolution is a critical part of biology while creationism and its relations are a part of religion and philosophy. Evolution is an interpretation of the record that God has laid out in front of us in the real world and that puts it in the realm of science. Creationism is the word of God as expressed by prophets in the Bible and interpreted by believers. To conflate the two as Konrad does is false witness.

Leave a Comment

Going after the heretics – ackamarackus bordering on flimflam

Here’s what happens when you try to replicate climate contrarian papers – “A new paper finds common errors among the 3% of climate papers that reject the global warming consensus.” The “consensus” is a major flag. The hidden one is that the basic thesis is incorrect. The “contrarians” are more properly called skeptics. It is the alarmists who are positing a thesis and whose efforts at supporting their thesis are flawed. Those asking questions, such as just where that 97% consensus comes from, cannot express the flaws cited because they are not doing what the study tries to paste on them.

a new paper published in the journal of Theoretical and Applied Climatology examines a selection of contrarian climate science research and attempts to replicate their results. The idea is that accurate scientific research should be replicable, and through replication we can also identify any methodological flaws in that research. The study also seeks to answer the question, why do these contrarian papers come to a different conclusion than 97% of the climate science literature?

You may have noticed another characteristic of contrarian climate research – there is no cohesive, consistent alternative theory to human-caused global warming.

Human-caused global warming is the only exception. It’s based on overwhelming, consistent scientific evidence and has therefore convinced over 97% of scientific experts that it’s correct.

That 97% has been inspected and it is a consensus more in line with the “contrarians” than it is with the climate alarmism. It is a consensus that climate change is not fully understood and that there are very many factors involved only one set which is human related. Rather than go after heretics, the climate alarmists should answer questions about why their models don’t fit observations, why observation data sets are often manipulated and ‘adjusted’ in ways showing bias, about relative risks and benefits of their suggested actions, and other matters.

Jonah Goldberg: Oh Scientia! Oh Mores! – “The whole ‘science denier’ canard is a weapon wielded by people who often harbor their own doubts about the scientific consensus.”

I don’t want to debate global warming because a) it’s boring to me, b) you get screamed at by people who act like we have seconds to act before the world ends, and c) you — or at least I — also get screamed at by people who insist it’s all a complete hoax. For those interested, I’m basically in the Matt Ridley “lukewarmer”camp.

Now, back to my point. This whole “don’t believe in science” canard amounts to ackamarackus bordering on flimflam.

John Stossel: The Climate Alarmists Are Wrong – “Two big storms don’t mean much.”

So the real unanswered questions are:

1. Will climate change become a crisis? (We face immediate crises now: poverty, terrorism, a $20 trillion debt, rebuilding after the hurricanes)

2. Is there anything we can do about it? (No. Not now; the science isn’t there yet.)

3. Did man’s burning fossil fuels increase the warming? (Probably. But we don’t know how much.)

I resent how the alarmists mix these questions, pretending all the science is settled. Notice how Trevor Noah, above, tossed out the words “man-made,” as if all climate change is man-made?

Tom Randall: The Way We Get Electricity Is About to Change Forever – “Superior batteries are on the way, and they could disrupt power markets within the next decade—Sooner Than You Think.” This provides an example of wishful thinking that drives much of the irrational thinking. First is the gospel of human caused climate catastrophe. That means humans much change. That leads to prognostications that a miracle will break out Real Soon Now. Maybe. But it’s been a bit over 100 years for batteries and even longer on the chemistry behind them to get to where we are. There have been some refinements in materials and productions but the physical nature of a battery has its limits. Remember cold fusion, the last big miracle for politically correct energy?

The key to much of this is the ‘in your face’ approach. Consider stories in the Washington Times this morning. Joseph Curl: Even the Miss America pageant is political now – “ABC could have made the annual Miss America pageant on Sunday night an escape from reality, if just for a moment. Instead, the network went hard core into politics.” Bradford Richardson: ESPN gives anchor who called Trump a ‘white supremacist’ slap on the wrist – “ESPN issued a meek statement on Tuesday in response to Jemele Hill, one of the network’s anchors, calling President Trump and his supporters “white supremacists.”” Victor Morton: Black Lives Matter protesters deface Jefferson’s statue at UVa. in Charlottesville – “According to local media in Charlottesville, about 100 students, faculty and local residents shrouded the statue in black and hung a banner on it saying “Black Lives Matter” and that “White Supremacy” should commit a sexual act.” Cheryl K. Chumley: Quack attack: 27 psychiatrists pen anti-Trump book – “Real psychiatrists are probably squirming in their office chairs at this.” Valerie Richardson: Calls to punish skeptics rise with links to climate change, hurricanes – “Calls to punish global warming skepticism as a criminal offense have surged in the aftermath of Hurricanes Harvey and Irma.”

Note that all of these actions are based on frauds, are in your face, and, usually, are personal attacks. When that fraud is called, then you have Tammy Bruce: Why Democrats fear voter fraud investigations – “Trump’s Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity leaves the left in a panic.”

Then there’s Eric Althoff: Ken Burns goes back to war: Vietnam documentary tells uneasy story from all sides – “Novick helps ‘unpack’ repressed memories from defining, divisive conflict.” Burns has a history of black privilege racism and this topic is ripe for other left leaning anti-American tropes. Consider: “What we call fake news now are things that we don’t agree with but which happen to be true,” he said. Not a matter of fact that results in many mea culpa episodes but rather just opinion? Cronkite preceded Rather and neither accepted their role in fake news. There’s good fake news and right fake news and note which gets the soft treatment and excusing?

Sundance: Irma Recovery: Day #2 – Life as a Starfish Kid… The fuel situation is a refutation of the price gouging accusations.

Scott Johnson: The Franken Factor – “With his his descent to crude and dishonest attacks on judicial nominees in the Judiciary Committee, or in his capacity as a member of the committee, Minnesota Senator Al Franken degrades the Senate and the high office he holds.” This is the sort of irresponsible behavior that destroys civility and respect customs in the Senate. The Democrats should keep in mind the adage “abuse it and you lose it.”

Newmark takes note:

Democratic senators’ questioning of professor Amy Coney Barnett’s religious beliefs and how they would influence her potential decisions if she is approved to be on the 7th Circuit has raised questions about whether or not those senators were imposing a religious test on her. As Kevin Daley points out, this episode also has exposed the influence of interest groups on the confirmation process. As Daley explains, neither the senators nor their staff have the time to read all a candidate’s writings or speeches. So they depend on groups that summarize the candidate’s words. However, it becomes a problem if that group lies about a candidate. And that is exactly what has happened as the senators based their questions on a report by the Alliance for Justice. Since the report is public, it’s possible to match up the senators’ questions with the report.

She panders to the ‘both sides do it’ fallacy with a caveat: “Republicans do the same thing, of course, though I haven’t heard of their following a report that was so demonstrably dishonest. It shows what a joke that confirmation battles have become – they’re basically a battle between outside groups with U.S. senators used as mouthpieces.” The inability, or unwillingness, to accept important distinctions in behavior is an inappropriate bias.

Eric Worrall: Extreme Poverty USA: The True Cost of Climate Madness – “While various US governments continue to waste unimaginable sums of public money on pointless climate schemes, real problems ranging from third world poverty in Alabama to an explosion of the skid row population of Los Angeles are being allowed to fester.”

California’s push for 100% renewables is a major factor driving up the cost of living. Poor people spend around 40% of their income on energy. Anything which drives up the cost of energy is a big deal. A high energy bill can make the difference between being able to pay the rent, or being evicted onto the street.

another story noted that 1 in 5 Californians were below poverty level. Yet another reported on San Diego problems with its homeless population and its efforts to fight fecal born disease with street cleaning efforts.

Leave a Comment

Arpaio, Climate Change, Free Speech, Voting, IRS … the pot is near boil

The limit was hit after only a review of the first tier in the news. So much. Texas is drowning and needs your prayers and support but that is a different sort of too much, a more immediate and pressing too much. Here’s what else is going on. “I could swear that I saw Vladimir Putin in a Confederate uniform the other night sneaking into my yard to plant poison ivy.”

Consider this whopper in a story about freedom of speech:

Meanwhile, supporters of a president who routinely rails against the free press have enthusiastically donned the mantle of first amendment freedom fighters.”

The President rails against fake news but plauds a free press. See What Trump gets about the media. “As is often the case with Trump, the rhetoric is so insulting and extreme that it’s hard to take the underlying point seriously. But, as also is often the case with Trump, he’s onto something real.” Lies, deceit, and distortion, especially in the Press, should be a concern of everyone and the Major Media has demonstrated a low regard for such intellectual integrity.

Julia Carrie Wong does have a good essay if you can get around the bias such as shown by that whopper. The far right is losing its ability to speak freely online. Should the left defend it? – “Free speech was the left’s rally cry. But the fate of the Daily Stormer, a hate site ‘kicked off the internet’, signals the increasing irrelevance of the first amendment.”

That’s when the chief executive of website security company Cloudflare [Matthew Prince] “woke up … in a bad mood and decided to kick them off the Internet”, as he told his employees in an internal email.

Critics charge that technology platforms have enabled a disparate network of racist extremists to seek one another out, raise funds, and plan and execute such rallies. But unlike consumer facing companies such as Facebook, YouTube, PayPal and Discord, and even as liberal voices – including the Guardian editorial board – applaud it, Cloudflare won’t defend its actions.

“I am deeply uncomfortable with the decision we made,” Prince said in an interview. “It doesn’t align with our principles.”

“This is a really terrible time to be a free speech advocate,” said Jillian York, director for international freedom of expression at the Electronic Frontier Foundation. “It’s a ‘First they came for the … situation,” she said, referring to the famous Martin Niemöller poem about the classes of people targeted by Nazis, “only in reverse”.

But the fate of the Daily Stormer – as vile a publication as it is – may be a warning to Americans that the first amendment is increasingly irrelevant.

American technology companies that were once imbued with the ethos of Twitter’s famous sobriquet – “the free speech wing of the free speech party” – have changed the rules, or at least decided to start selectively enforcing rules that are technologically unfeasible to apply across the board.

If the left does abandon its free speech principles, it may come to regret it.

“I’m really surprised to see liberals talk about what speech needs to be taken down, and not take that conversation a step further and talk about who is actually doing the censoring,” York said, questioning whether we should trust either the government or “unelected white Silicon Valley dudes” to make such decisions.

Or as Keller says: “We should not expect the new speech gatekeepers to be benign forever, or to enforce rules that we agree with forever.”

Charles Hurt: There are no decent plans in Congress, just lies, intraparty squabbling – “We are witnessing some of the most spectacularly absurd political gambits in American history unfold right now before our very eyes.”

The first comes from Democrats in Congress, who want to somehow blame collapsing Obamacare on Republicans. … The Democrats who huddled in darkness with powerful lobbyists to write the Obamacare bill. The Democrats who hid the Obamacare bill from the public and even their own members in Congress.

To be sure, Republicans in Congress should be humiliated — if politicians were capable of such a thing. They had seven years to come up with an actual plan to repeal Obamacare.

Now they have the chance to do just that right this second and they flinch.

But somehow blaming Republicans for the catastrophe that President Obama, Mrs. Pelosi and the entire Democratic Kleptocratic Regime gave us? That’s insane.

The second spectacularly absurd political gambit we are watching this season is this open effort by Republicans to somehow blame all of their problems on Mr. Trump.

how it is Mr. Trump’s fault that the professional, experienced politicians in Congress failed to repeal Obamacare is beyond any rational thinking.

It is almost as if Republicans in Congress — along with Democrats — are determined to find a Republican somewhere to blame for it.

Robert Knight: The death of parody – “Because of its shrillness and excess parodying the left is nearly impossible.”

Ever since Donald Trump’s election, we’ve been awash in such cultural and political lunacy that it defies attempts at parody.

It’s not just the concerted assault on anything reminding us of the Confederacy, or the numbingly constant messaging that only bigots oppose giving boys access to girls’ locker rooms. The very idea of America as an imperfect but good and decent country is under daily assault. Plus, the president can’t even brush his teeth correctly. You can read all about it.

The real thing on CNN looks like a daily sendup from the satirical site The Onion.

The Washington Post under Amazon founder Jeff Bezos has been turned over to editors who are apparently about 12 years old, smoking dope and stoked in cultural Marxism.

How do you satirize the left’s general, ongoing hysteria? It’s starting to affect me because I could swear that I saw Vladimir Putin in a Confederate uniform the other night sneaking into my yard to plant poison ivy.

Dave Boyer and David Sherfinski: Trump’s pardon of Arpaio sends strong messages to immigrant advocates, Mueller team, loyalists – “President Trump’s pardon of former Sheriff Joe Arpaio has set off a new round of recriminations, with Republicans saying they disagreed with the decision and Democrats saying it was an unforgivable abuse of power that presages still more political mischief.”

The last administration instituted a policy of requiring pardons to be vetted by the Justice Department before President Obama would grant them. Mr. Obama set records for clemency in cutting sentences of drug dealers and users and repeat felons — including those who used guns in the commission of their crimes.

Mr. Obama also issued end-of-term decisions to commute sentences of a member of a Puerto Rican terrorist group, and of Chelsea Manning, who before undergoing sex-change surgery was Army Pvt. Bradley Manning, serving 35 years in prison for leaking government secrets to WikiLeaks.

Mr. Trump’s first pardon signals he won’t be beholden to the Justice Department process that Mr. Obama followed.

“The Arpaio pardon was an easy call on the politics,” Mr. Corallo said. “The Trump haters are going to keep hating him regardless. The president’s base approves of it wholeheartedly. The people in the middle are not concerned with it.”

He added, “The president was fully within his authority to issue this or any pardon. Regardless of whatever process exists at DOJ, the constitution grants the president plenary power to pardon anyone. The remedy for those who disagree with the pardon is at the ballot box.”

Mr. Franks said the pardon was neither unprecedented nor outrageous, as critics suggested, and he compared it favorably with Mr. Obama’s commutation of Manning’s sentence.

“While no one can dispute Manning acted to undermine our country’s national security, Joe Arpaio has spent a lifetime trying to maintain it. Comparing the two, it is easy to discern that Arpaio is a patriot while Manning is a traitor,” Mr. Franks said.

“I think the Arpaio pardon is pretty straightforward,” Mr. Bossert said on ABC’s “This Week” program. “Just about every modern president ends up with some controversial pardons, but I think the president’s been pretty clear on it and I certainly don’t think it’s fair to characterize him as not caring about the rule of law.”

Daniel John Sobieski: RINOS Wrong on Arpaio – “House Speaker Paul Ryan also headed for the tall grass, echoing McCain’s sentiments.

Arizona Sen. John McCain’s limited understanding of the law and the Constitution was on display when he falsely claimed that President Trump’s pardon of former Maricopa County Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio undermined the rule of law. McCain was joined by his Arizona colleague, Sen. Jeff Flake, who is up for reelection in 2018:

Indeed, as McCain acknowledges, the power of the President to pardon anyone for any reason is absolute.

Arpaio was found guilty by a Clinton-appointee after he was denied a trial by jury based on the relative minor nature of the charge, a misdemeanor punishable by six months in jail. The ruling reeks of politics, with the decision to prosecute Arpaio on profiling charges made by an incoming Obama administration bent on throwing open the nation’s borders to illegal aliens

As Investor’s Business Daily editorialized at the time, the decision to prosecute Joe Arpaio smacked of hypocrisy, injustice, and legal gymnastics involving one Thomas Perez, current foul-mouthed head of the Democratic National Committee and former Obama administration DOJ official

The fact is that Joe Arpaio was in fact enforcing federal law as originally written, only to have the Obama administration rewrite the law in order to prosecute Arpaio.

Perhaps if Arpaio had given away the nation’s secrets, or been an international felon like the Clinton-pardoned Marc Rich, or been a New Black Panther intimidating Philadelphia voters in 2008, McCain, Flake, and Ryan might have a case. But they don’t. Joe Arpaio was and is a patriot fighting to protect our nation’s borders from invasion and was acting in good faith in enforcing federal laws it was originally written, not as reinterpreted by a liberal judge.

Anthony J. Sadar: Why the skeptics reject ‘human-induced’ climate change – “The stark reality does not support the unsettled settled science of man-made global warming.”

Many campus scientists are dismayed at what they see as unreasonable skepticism of the scientific establishment and the denial of the edifice of scientific facts that include disastrous global warming resulting from excessive human carbon emissions. In the coming decades, such emissions will apparently doom the planet, according to some high-level sources.

Step off campus and confident predictions of climate calamity are confronted by the world of reality where there are no safe spaces. The reverberations from the college echo chamber are damped by wide-open reality.

Antics, such as marches on Washington for ostensibly protecting scientific integrity, only serve to accent the politics and juvenility involved with modern scientific practice.

Campus science elites should at least try replacing patronizing arrogance with humble confidence. After all, there is a chance that elitist knowledge of the state of global climate decades from now might be wrong.

Don Surber: Why was health agency pushing the climate change lie? – “I will flat out call it a lie.”

For 30 years now, the United Nations and other Marxists have pushed the unhinged theory that man is causing the world to burn out of control. That is what global warming (now called climate change) is all about.

No serious scientist would back this quackery if not for the billions in taxpayer money governments use to pay of scientists in the guise of funding research.

Not one prediction has come true.

After 30 years of getting it wrong, anyone who is not a skeptic is either a fool or a liar (in some cases, both).

President Trump is draining the swamp.

That’s the climate that needs changing.

Arnold Steinberg: Not the Perfect Storm – “To CNN, Schumer, et al.: Now is NOT the time for politics.”

“As millions of people in TX and LA are preparing for the hurricane,” Sen. Chuck Schumer (NY), leader of the Senate Democrats, proclaimed in a series of Friday night tweets, “The President is using the cover of the storm to pardon a man who violated a court’s order to stop discriminating against Latinos and [to] ban courageous transgender men and women from serving our nation’s Armed Forces. The only reason to do these right now is to use the cover of Hurricane Harvey to avoid scrutiny. So sad, so weak.”

And, so low-life for Schumer.

There’s more.

All this would be a sick ploy, if it were true. Our fellow Americans are in distress. … We are still one nation with a resurgent sense of community. Help our fellow citizens, even if their historical statutes are politically incorrect and presumably worthy of Orwellian revisionism.

Jenny Beth Martin: Trump, McConnell, Obamacare and the tea party – “The media just don’t understand.”

“It is with that message in mind that we are heading back to Capitol Hill on Saturday, September 23rd to rally in support of the agenda that the American people supported in last year’s election. We’re going to send a message to Washington politicians: “Keep Your Promises,” and we invite all Americans who want to see the America First policies come to fruition.”

Stephen Moore: ‘Keep it simple, Stupid’ – “The key to tax reform is avoiding bills with too many moving parts.”

Larry Kudlow, Steve Forbes and I (founders of the Committee to Unleash Prosperity) have been pleading with Congress to keep the debate focused on three simple reforms:

1) cut tax rates for large and small businesses to 15 percent to make America competitive and create jobs.

2) repatriate $2.5 trillion of money held by American companies back to the United States at a 10 percent tax rate.

3) double the standard deduction for every family and individual tax filer.

The good news for Republicans is that the three components of this tax plan are all things that Mr. Trump campaigned on and are popular with voters.

Thomas Lifson: Chicago had 14,000 more votes than voters in 2016 general election – yet “President Trump continues to receive scorn over his assertion last year that vote fraud accounted for Hillary Clinton’s raw vote majority.”

They really, really don’t want anyone looking closely at vote fraud. They claim there is none of any significance.

That must be why this report from Chicago City Wire has been so thoroughly ignored by the mainstream media:

But we can expect that Democrats will continue to dismiss the possibility that vote fraud worked for them on a significant scale. The fact that they resist investigation is telling.

Rick Moran wonders: Is the IRS Scandal About to Break Wide Open? – “Lost emails, destroyed hard drives, foot dragging, stonewalling, and a smirking, sneering IRS commissioner doing his best to obscure the truth

this has largely been the response by the Internal Revenue Service to investigations by Congress and FOIA requests from conservative groups trying to discover the truth about the IRS targeting scandal.

But one federal judge appears to be just as curious as the rest of us about what exactly the IRS was up to when it targeted conservative groups for special scrutiny in approving their tax-exempt status.

tantalizing hints emerged last week that whatever the truth is may be recoverable.

More names means more witnesses to be deposed under oath. Perhaps some promises of immunity are in order so that the truth can be wrung out of an agency that has been used to target the political opponents of a president and materially affect the ability of conservative groups to exercise their rights.

As for the flood, the Cajun Navy and many other volunteers are flooding into Texas and Louisiana to aid and assist. It’s going to be a management headache but practice is honing solutions for constructive cooperation. It’s not over yet and there is much work to be done.

Leave a Comment

What is “The Whole Truth?”

The American Council on Science and Health has two of note this morning. Ruth Kava writes that These Chickens Can’t Cross The Road – “The Organic Consumers Association avers that organic foods since they supposedly contain no pesticides, GMOs or other such “dangerous” items, are better for you.”

But an exposé recently published in the Chicago Tribune begs to differ.

Writing specifically about Herbruck’s Poultry Ranch, located in Saranac, Michigan, journalist Peter Whoriskey notes that Herbruck’s is probably responsible for around ten percent of all the eggs sold in the US. His information belies the common misconceptions about organic chicken production.

while organic proponents may feel good about the supposed lack of pesticides and GMOs in their chickens, as far as the birds go, being raised organically isn’t what it’s cracked up to be.

Alex Berezow: Call junk science by its rightful name: Fake news – “The future of our republic depends on a properly informed electorate.” He takes up a list of his ten favorite junk fads and buzzwords.

By dumping these and other buzzwords, our society will be smarter, healthier and more scientifically savvy. In a world in which alternative facts are gaining ground, it’s past time to junk junk science.

Robert Knight: Rooting out vote fraud – “Why the vote fraud panel frightens the left.” It is getting so easy to compare and contrast the hypocrisy, double standards, and bullying behavior.

Judging by the unhinged reaction this past week to the first public meeting of President Trump’s blue-ribbon voter fraud panel, progressives are terrified.

They’re fearful that these election experts are actually going to do the job they’ve been given — uncovering the extent to which the nation’s voter rolls are vulnerable to fraudulent activity. How else to explain the panic and shots fired before the commission even met?

but surely he’s heard about the Democrats’ and the media’s obsessive Russian conspiracy theories. Bet he won’t tell them to shut up and get a grip.

Falsely accusing their opponents of racism, homophobia or jingoism has become the left’s default tactic when they aren’t rioting in the streets, shutting down campus speakers or shooting Republicans at a softball practice.

The progressive left is certainly afraid. They loathe scrutiny, and honorable men and women revealing the truth. We’re still waiting for that “civility” and “tolerance” that we heard so much about before Mr. Trump was sworn in.

Meanwhile, let’s hope and pray that the vote fraud commissioners, like the man who appointed them, have thick skins.

Rowan Scarborough: Fact-checkers drawn into heated debate over number of noncitizens who vote illegally – The defense of the Left is an assault on all fronts.

A right-leaning fact-checker is fighting critics on the left who say its conclusion that a lot of noncitizens vote illegally is bunk.

The online battle of debunking and rebuttal is playing out as a much larger war has erupted between President Trump’s commission on election integrity and Democratic state leaders. They are refusing to provide the panel with public voter registration data. Left-wing groups are suing to stop the commission’s work, which could settle the noncitizen debate by collecting enough data.

One way to settle the noncitizen debate could be the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity. The co-chairmen, Vice President Mike Pence and Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, want the states to provide what is normally public voter registration data.

Democrat-led states are stonewalling the commission, and a leader of this resistance is Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe.

Bruce Fein: Recasting Trump’s election integrity commission – “Supreme Court, Constitution offer guidance for voter fraud probing.” The argument offered here brings to mind the special prosecutor investigation and just how far down the tubes an expectation of responsibility in government has gone such that excess micro-managing is needed.

The EO should be narrowed to examining whether a cluster of federal laws prohibiting non-citizens from registration or voting have been adequately enforced by U.S. Attorneys or the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice. The President, after all, is constitutionally entrusted with of taking care that the laws be faithfully executed under Article II, section 3.

Concrete evidence of non-citizen voting is not required to justify an Advisory Commission investigation.

Enforcement of our federal prohibitions on non-citizen voting is too important to be left to conjecture or speculation.

Jeffrey Folks: To Sink Trump Is to Sink Ordinary Americans – “The left is determined to sink the Trump presidency.”

Obviously, the left hates Trump with a vengeance, but what they despise even more is the average American with his dream of freedom and opportunity.

Hillary Clinton let it slip when she mocked the “basket of deplorables,” those whom she accused of racism, sexism, homophobia, xenophobia, and Islamophobia. Having at first insisted that “half” of Trump voters fall into these categories, she then retreated from that figure: it was somewhat less than half who are deplorable.

Rarely has a presidential candidate been so candid and so obtuse at the same time, for “deplorable” is exactly what the left thinks of average Americans. And for that reason, Trump’s presidency cannot be allowed to succeed, even if sinking Trump means sinking the country. The left is willing to savage our economy, trash health care, weaken our national defense, and lose the fight against terrorism just to see that the deplorables are kept in their place. That is the central motive of the anti-Trump forces.

It is important to understand the true source of the left’s disdain. It has nothing to do with policy or the good of the country. It is, in effect, closely aligned with the psychology of racism – the need of defensive groups to transfer their uncertainties to an object of scorn.

This is a dangerous state of affairs. The left’s brazenness is something new, and something that holds the potential for great danger.

In order to remain a cohesive movement, leftism, which has no positive agenda, must continue to ramp up hatred of its opponents. It has come to resemble a “pack” motivated by instincts of power rather than a source of civil debate.

Chicago Tribune: The bill for treating a gunshot wound: $21,000 for the first 35 minutes – It is about the costs of gun violence as if it is the weapon used that is the problem. Why the medical expenses are so high and the role of government sponsored payments for those expenses in the costs are only considered to emphasize the problem. Then there is the elephant in the room:

The data are further confirmation of how skewed gun violence is along racial and socio-economic lines. Nearly two-thirds of the hospital inpatients treated for injuries suffered as a result of firearm assault were black males ages 15 to 44, the data showed.

That is the second part of the problem that is being ignored. Putting up gun laws is so easy and makes one feel so good it doesn’t matter if they have any impact or not. Trying to address the underlying problems is hard and brings the pain home in the form of dashed dreams and fantasies.

The Washington Examiner is showing its bias in asking for The whole truth. It is assuming it doesn’t have it. This is what someone does when they don’t get the answers they want:

Perhaps the only way for Trump to prevent an ever-expanding investigation, to keep things focused narrowly on questions of alleged collusion with Russia, and to make sure nobody gets dragged into side matters, is for all the president’s men to tell the whole truth rather than either to invite perjury investigations or to give technically true answers that actually conceal the real story and thus invite futher probing.

The fact is that the administration has been remarkably open and transparent. The fact is that witch hunts like the Russian Collusion Conspiracy are never prevented by reality and facts or even by a complete lack of foundation – as is readily visible in this case. For example:

This was not illegal, as far as we can tell, although seeking dirt from such a source was politically boneheaded and morally compromising. Nor is it illegal, unseemly though it is, to veil the truth in one’s public statements. Trump Jr. could even argue that he said nothing clearly false.

i.e. there is nothing there so we have to cast judgments such as “boneheaded and morally compromising.” The request for “the whole truth” is revealed as a never-ending demand for a falsehood that supports preconceived judgments and desires and a denial of reality. It’s gotcha’ politics.

Leave a Comment

Behavior matters. It cannot be ignored.

Kiera Butler: A Scientist Didn’t Disclose Important Data—and Let Everyone Believe a Popular Weedkiller Causes Cancer – “A World Health Organization group called RoundUp a “probable carcinogen,” but it didn’t have all the facts.”

RoundUp has long been considered a benign alternative to harsher weedkillers. After extensive reviews, most regulatory agencies—the US Environmental Protection Agency, the European Food Safety Authority, and those of many other nations—have come to the conclusion that it does not cause cancer. So when the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a division of the UN’s World Health Organization, declared RoundUp a probable carcinogen in 2015, there was an international outcry. Shortly after, 184 plaintiffs in California filed a legal case against Monsanto, saying that the company failed to warn them about the risks of its product. Since then, in a separate suit, hundreds more plaintiffs have claimed that RoundUp caused their cancers, citing the IARC’s findings as evidence.

So why on Earth would a scientist fail to mention his own work—and blithely let a powerful agency come to a conclusion that his own data suggested was wrong?

“This is a board of people whose job it is to assess evidence, so they should be able to do that before it’s published,” he said. “The broader issue is that they seem eager to have reached the conclusion that they reached.”

“Despite the existence of fresh data about glyphosate,” reported Reuters, the agency is “sticking with its findings.”

meanwhile, worries that IARC’s handling of this case will damage public perception of the group. “This is going to end up undermining people’s confidence in this agency’s ability to do this well,” he said. “They don’t seem interested in getting to the bottom of these things. These decisions seem based in politics.”

Sound familiar? How many fields of inquiry and prestigious scientific bodies have been corrupted by Left wing politics accompanied by trying to use lawfare to impose ideological fantasies? Consider the emoluments lawsuit with hundreds of Democrats signing on as another expression of this same tactic.

Sally Persons: Bipartisan call for Trump to cool tone – “As lawmakers search for a new tone in Washington, both Republicans and Democrats eyed President Trump as a necessary part of the solution Thursday, saying he has the power — and even the duty — to lead a change in the conversation.”

Rep. Mark Sanford, South Carolina Republican, said Mr. Trump was “partially” to blame for the hostile rhetoric that has consumed politics since the 2016 election, and which many analysts said helped set the stage for this week’s horrific baseball field attack on GOP lawmakers.

Rep. Joseph Crowley, who, as chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, is one of the party’s chief message-makers, also looked to Mr. Trump for reasons the political debate has become venomous.

The balance Mr. Crowley tried to strike is emblematic of the challenge faced by members of Congress. They represent a deeply divided country with fiercely held views and a tendency to look at the other side as “what has gone wrong” in national politics.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, California Democrat, said Republicans were being “sanctimonious” about the causes of the shooting, and demanded they accept part of the blame.

One Republican acknowledged his own contribution to inflaming the political debate in the aftermath of the shooting. Rep. Chris Collins of New York apologized for his remarks Wednesday blaming Democrats for the attack.

At the first level, it is the people who commit violence, who cannot control their anger, and are uncivil who need to be called out and condemned. At the second level, it is the people who condone, accept, or even praise misbehavior that need to be called out for their contribution supporting that misbehavior. At the third level is the people who try to ignore what they see because to do otherwise is uncomfortable.

The key item to note about this call on Trump is that it isn’t specific behavior but rather subjective perception – tone – that is being used as the stimulus. If clarification for that perception is demanded, then the logical fallacies and witch hunt is put on parade. This should be enough to make it very clear to any honest person that it isn’t Trump that needs to ‘cool it’ but rather those engaged in false witness and otherwise participating in trying to pretend reality is not what is in front our faces.

But some do notice, do describe what they see, and explain their perceptions.

Peggy Ryan: Americans Learning to Live with Treason – “We are watching, in real-time, a palace revolution, an overt effort to remove the president of the United States.”

Just as James Comey proudly admitted he leaked privileged communication to the press, so these insurgents brazenly brag that they want to harm the president, to impeach him, to overthrow our government. The American people seem shockingly oblivious to the looming danger.

How did we get here? Well, let’s give credit where credit’s due: the left has its ducks in a row. Leftists are carrying out a carefully planned, well executed plot to take control of our government.

Oh, it’s not soldiers bursting through the White House gates to forcefully remove the president, or, as the left says, not yet. No, they’re using a form of behavior therapy, systematic desensitization, to numb the American people to their insurgence.

These are just a few of the unacceptable transgressions by our corrupt leaders. Each time, outraged conservatives demand that the perpetrators be brought to justice. Each time, the press gaslights the American people with a media blackout, acts as though the incident never happened. Each time, the cabal rides out the news cycle until the story fades, and everyone’s home free.

Time and again, the deception, lawlessness, violation of the Constitution, or open act of sedition is met with disbelief.

Lies and fake news are the norm these days, the once unthinkable and now the expected. This cabal is a powerful alliance. If we don’t stop them, if we continue to allow this open treason, they’ll eventually reach their goal, and there will be no way back.

Ronald Reagan warned: “You and I have the courage to say to our enemies, ‘There is a price we will not pay.’ ‘There is a point beyond which they must not advance.'”

I pray he’s right. Their price is our freedom, their next stop tyranny. And they’re moving ever closer.

Daniel Greenfield says Impeach Trump’s Impeachers – “They’re dirty and crooked as hell.”

The rush to impeach President Trump is on by an opposition party that lacks the votes, evidence or legal basis for such a move. But since when did an illegal left-wing coup need any of those things?

No Dem has been more honest about the real motive for impeachment than Congressman Ted Lieu.

“We should not give him a chance to govern,” Lieu had declared after Trump had been in office for ten days. And he predicted that, “I do believe that if we win back the House of Representatives, impeachment proceedings will be started.”

That’s not how things work in the United States. But the left is running America like a banana republic.

John Sexton: Extremism experts are just starting to worry about the left now? – “My reaction: It’s about damn time.”

Somewhere in the middle of the article, Vice points out that violence is nothing new on the far left. In the 1960s groups like the Weather Underground ran domestic terror campaigns.

Earlier today the Daily Caller published a list of left-wing attacks on conservatives which contains 35 bullet points, all of them since last July.

And there seem to be plenty of people on the left spurring others on to this kind of violence. In January I wrote about a Black Lives Matter protester who gave a speech saying “we need to stark killing people.” Seven years ago, progressive cartoonist published a book whose premise was that violent revolution (by the left) was necessary. So, yes, I think it’s past time to start taking a hard look at left-wing violence and those who encourage it.

VDH is wondering Can a Divided America Survive? – “History has not been very kind to countries that enter a state of multicultural chaos.”

Either the United States will return to a shared single language and allegiance to a common and singular culture, or it will eventually descend into clannish violence.

America barely survived the Civil War of 1861–65, the Great Depression of 1929–39, and the rioting and protests of the 1960s. But today’s growing divides are additionally supercharged by instant Internet and social-media communications, 24/7 cable news, partisan media, and the denigration of America’s past traditions.

All Americans need to take a deep breath, step back, and rein in their anger — and find more ways to connect rather than divide themselves.

Steven Hayward has The Week in Pictures: Civil War Edition – “does the left really want open warfare in America? For all their talk of “fighting in the streets,” they might want to think how that would actually turn out.” Pictures emphasize the captions. Consider a few examples. “Seriously. Conservatives own 200+ million guns, 12 trillion rounds of ammo. If we were violent, you’d know it.” or “If Conservatives trust God, why do they need so many guns? Because they don’t trust Democrats.” or “Liberals think conservatives are violent because we own guns. When was the last time a group of conservatives blocked a freeway, turned over cop cars, rioted, looted, threw Molotov cocktails, burned buildings?” Many more. Go see.

Oh, and “What do we learn from cows, buffaloes & elephants? It’s impossible to reduce weight by eating green grass and salads and walking.”

For an example of the ‘ignore it in hopes it will go away school’ (level 3) is the Coyote and his new rules. He has always had a penchant for moral preening about standing above the fray where ‘both sides do it.’ His new rules proclaim “it has been a point of pride that I read from both sides. But these folks are all crazy, all the more so because they waste so many electrons arguing their side is sane and the other is crazy.” There is a difference between arguing and describing and a good part of critical reading is being able to make distinctions in the integrity and quality of the presentation. What the Coyote is doing is analogous to these protesters who actively seek to silence any opinion they don’t like. The method here is not to go after the dissenting voice but rather to self censor and avoid.

Daniel John Sobieski: The Democrats’ Deadly Rhetoric – “Bernie Sanders … and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi have spent the time since President Trump’s election yelling fire in the political theatre we call democracy, warning endlessly that people will die because of the Trump agenda, painting apocalyptic visions of planetary doom.”

But as former Arkansas Governor and 2016 GOP presidential candidate Mike Huckabee has pointed out, in order to dial down the rhetoric, one must have a working moral thermostat. That the Democrats do not have. What they have is venomous anger stemming from Donald Trump’s theft of their inheritance, his cessation of their fundamental transformation of America. Donald Trump denied them the power to control every facet of our lives.

The day after the Scalise shooting and calling for unity on the House floor, Pelosi was back stirring the pot and, not looking in the mirror, took a shot at Fox News for inspiring the crazies

In one sense, Pelosi, Sanders and Jerry Brown are right that people will die because of GOP policies. Last Wednesday a group of Republican Congressmen almost did thanks to the hatred Democrats inspire.

Behavior matters. It cannot be ignored.

Leave a Comment

6/6/2017: Calling the charlatans’ bluff

This makes sense. James Delingpole: Revealed – The Real Reason Trump Pulled Out Of Paris… – “…Is because he has a very powerful bullshit detector.”

We know this thanks to a fascinating and unwittingly revelatory article in the German newspaper Der Spiegel.

The paper reveals how, in the days running up to President Trump’s decision to quit the UN Paris accord, he received a series of deputations from EU leaders urging him to change his mind.

“For me it’s easier to stay in than step out,” Trump told them.

This is perfectly true. Since his momentous Rose Garden speech announcing his plans to pull out of Paris, Trump has taken more flak than a thousand-bomber raid over Berlin in ’44.

Now do you see what I mean? President Trump pulled out of Paris for a lot of sensible reasons. But the one that tipped him over the edge was quite simply this: when you’ve got your fellow leaders of the free world insulting you with arguments you know to be bullshit and treating you like you’re some kind of an idiot, well suddenly it all becomes crystal clear what you’ve gotta do…

You call those charlatans’ bluff and remember why it was that people voted you to be President of the U.S.A: because they wanted someone real doing the job, for a change, and not yet another of those charlatans…

Calling the charlatans’ bluff seems to be something Trump does that the swamp pundits just don’t understand. Two recent stories may illustrate this. One is about labeling his EO on immigration a “travel ban” and the other is his rationalizing his use of twitter to bypass the media.

Allahpundit is showing his bias in White House to Comey: Go ahead and testify. We won’t stop you. – Note “A smart decision after a series of silly ones” and “Comey’s testimony Thursday is a cinch to damage Trump and the White House.” One needs to be careful when casting judgment on others and the “cinch” or ‘sure thing’ has been anticipated many times in the past with near zero realization. It may be, just perhaps, that the ‘mistakes’ are only in the eyes of someone who presumes guilt. That is a judgment that should be avoided unless there is solid evidence to support it which does not exist in this case.

VDH notes patterns in behavior: “How perfectly you conform to the now typical “angry reader” profile (ad hominem, streams of repetitive adjectives (“reductive, simplistic, polarizing, nonsense [do you ever come up for air?]), all without evidence and specificity. I congratulate you that you did not resort to capital letters and obscenity.”

Eugene Kontorovich: Trump’s travel tweets do not hurt the legal case for his executive orders – what comes out of this is that the animus isn’t from Trump. It is from those on the left and also those like Allahpundit and Newmark that have this presumption of guilt and incompetence in regard to Trump.

A fairly bizarre series of tweets by President Trump criticizing the Justice Department for its handling of his executive orders on visas has lead most observers to conclude that he has cemented the constitutional challenge to his own policies, blown up the government’s case and confirmed his own bigotry.

But reading the actual tweets reveals absolutely none of this: To the contrary, they may actually buttress the government’s defense of the travel restrictions in the Supreme Court. Certainly any reading of them as confirming a “Muslim ban” policy reads them through the same presumption of animus that informed the lower court readings of his campaign statements. However, animus is the thing to be proven — and it cannot be found in these tweets.

Sam Bray: Whose case? Whose remedy? Thoughts on the travel ban injunctions. – “the Constitution gives the federal courts “the judicial Power” — that is a power to decide “cases” for particular litigants, not a power to decide general questions and issue remedies for people not before the court.” … “The proper scope of an injunction against the national government is an important question, and increasingly hard to ignore.”

William A. Jacobson may get it: Stupid travel “ban” tricks

So no, I don’t think these tweets help Trump. I agree that Trump would be an impossible client to represent for this very reason. But perhaps he understands that this is not just a court fight, it’s a public opinion fight and he already knows how the media and punditry vote. They are not his audience.

On the legal front, the question is whether the Supreme Court Justices will take a personal view of this case, as have lower courts, or understand the enormous implications of the Courts taking on national security and immigration powers reserved for the President.

It’s a wild ride.

Leave a Comment

Shake and Bake update 6/2/2017

Ben Wolfgang reports on the big news as Trump eviscerates Obama’s Paris legacy – what is remarkable is that Trump bypassed all the science arguments and actually demonstrated actual science thinking and values. His reasoning for dumping the accord put the focus on its measurable effects rather than on speculation, modeling, and faux science constructions to bend the issue towards ideological goals.

“I was elected to represent the citizens of Pittsburgh, not Paris,” he continued. “I promised I would exit or renegotiate any deal that doesn’t serve America’s interests.”

Mr. Trump, though, delivered a detailed evisceration of the deal Mr. Obama signed, saying it crushes American businesses, unnecessarily funnels billions of dollars to other nations and allows the world’s top polluter, China, to do little to curb its own emissions for the next 13 years.

Mr. Obama had committed the U.S. to cut its greenhouse gas emissions by at least 26 percent by 2025, while China needs only to cap its pollution by 2030.

The pact also calls on America to commit billions of dollars to the U.N.’s Green Climate Fund to pay developing countries to develop cleaner energy.

Those terms, Mr. Trump said, are unacceptable.

“The bottom line is that the Paris accord is very unfair at the highest level to the United States,” he said.

But for all the criticism, Mr. Trump brought data to the Rose Garden Thursday to back up his decision. Known for speaking off the cuff and often accused of being loose with facts, the president this time used raw numbers to justify the move.

Wesley Pruden: The president keeps a solemn promise to put America first – “Uncle Sugar doesn’t live here any more, and he didn’t leave a forwarding address.”

The president thus makes good on one of his most important campaign promises, mocking the holy writ of global warming, or “climate change” as it’s called now because the globe refuses to warm as promised and all the dead polar bears are still not dead and the ocean that was supposed to have inundated the financial district of lower Manhattan by now, has still not obeyed Al Gore.

The president sounds like the reasonable one now.

Of course, the Left is channeling Kathy Griffin and Democrat mayors are already promising to sacrifice their cities on the alarmist alter.

Bjorn Lomborg provides a bit of context: A path forward after the Paris climate agreement – “Like the Kyoto Protocol before it, the drastically over-hyped Paris climate treaty has fallen victim to political and economic reality.”

Instead of scrapping over the treaty’s corpse, this is an opportunity to try a new, better and more efficient approach to solving global warming.

Right now, the chances of anything so constructive seem slim. Rhetoric is overheated to the point of absurdity. Environmental campaigners condemn Mr. Trump for dooming the entire planet to a fiery Armageddon, yet claim rashly that the treaty could survive without the United States. It will not, and it should not.

The hyperbole and outrage can’t hide the truth: even with the United States included, the treaty was not going to make much difference to global warming.

While the climate alarmism was serious business, there is also the editorial about Getting to the bottom of Covfefe – “Maybe the Donald just wanted to ‘let the good times roll’” As Limbaugh keeps point out, the Left has no sense of humor.

This is what infuriates those who didn’t, and couldn’t, get the message. Being “in the know” is why “everyone” comes to Washington in the first place. Knowing that you don’t know, because you’re not “in the circle,” is the fate worse than a slow death. And even worse, why would anybody hire a lobbyist who doesn’t know?

The capital obsession with what some out-of-the-loop drudges and drones call merely the Donald’s typo — it was dispatched at daybreak, after all — has replaced the previous obsession with what Melania Trump meant when she appeared to swat her husband’s hand out of the way when they were leaving an event at the G-7 summit. An obsession has the shelf life of a shrimp in Washington.

It’s always party time the closer you get to New Orleans, and this puzzles Washington, where party time has an altogether different meaning — and, some would say, never fun and about as festive as the mark-up of a budget bill. This makes more sense than the usual nonsense from Washington. Maybe partying is how you make America great again.

There may be a whole lot of the American Public that gets what is going on and Trump understands them better than many politicians or pundits.

Before the Paris Climate Fiasco, there were the NATO discussions with its signatories. It is worthy of note that the President illustrated yet again that the Left’s fears about Trump’s dictatorial penchants are absurd and ridiculous. In both of these major policy shifts, the President consulted with the governments involved and with others before offering carefully crafted reasoning for his decisions based on sound data and clear values. Robert W. Merry describes Jostling NATO’s status quo – “Trump’s nudges don’t match the threats from Russia and unchecked immigration.”

In politics and geopolitics, people tend to cling to the old ways of thinking like a drowning man in a stormy sea clings to a life preserver. Case in point: NATO. Consider the reaction to President Trump’s performance at last week’s summit of the venerable Atlantic alliance, where he chided the Europeans for not hitting defense spending targets and seemed to avoid — somewhat pointedly, some thought — the standard expressions of devotion to NATO’s Article 5, which commits NATO members to consider an attack on one to be an attack on all.

With so many establishment institutions and figures singing the same angry ballad, it must mean something. And it does: that they continue to cling to the old ways of thinking even as events demonstrate that those old ways no longer fit reality. The more that becomes apparent, the more tenaciously they grasp the status quo.

The New York Times gave the game away in calling NATO “an indisputably important alliance that has kept the peace for 70 years.” That’s demonstrably false.

The fact is that the Russian bear constitutes no such threat, and Mrs. Merkel knows it. A further fact is that Europe doesn’t need any U.S. umbrella in order to protect itself from external threats because it faces no such threats that require U.S. assistance. Its only serious outside threat is unchecked immigration of such magnitude, and of such cultural challenge, that any smooth assimilation will be extremely difficult, perhaps impossible. We only need to look at what’s roiling European politics these days to see that this threat agitates the European mind far more than any potential Russian hostility.

But don’t expect today’s establishment thinkers to incorporate those realities into their thinking. The status quo is too comfortable, however shattered it may be in the real world.

Cheryl K. Chumley says Judicial Watch sues for George Soros funding records – “Judicial Watch just launched a lawsuit against the U.S. Department of State and the U.S. Agency for International Development, USAID, for records related to taxpayer funding of George Soror-tied political activities.”

And Democrats are worried about Russia’s intervention in the U.S. election? Now we know why. With all eyes turned on Republicans and President Donald Trump, few eyes are left to look at the Democratic Party’s own inner doings to spread a propaganda-type progressive mantra around the world.

Let the FOIA suits proceed. It will be interesting — to understate — to see how deep the Democratic Party’s dug in with fueling Barack Obama-era State Department and USAID funding to further a Soros-Alinsky message overseas.

The Russian Collusion Conspiracy still suffers a lack of concrete evidence about its supposed results – election interference – and its supposed methods – collusion with campaign officials – and any impropriety. Now Investigations focus on ‘unwitting’ conspirators aiding Russia’s efforts to sabotage U.S. election according to Dan Boylan and Guy Taylor. The word “flailing” comes to mind when reading about the investigation.

Sundance at bat: CNN’s Gloriously, Embarrassingly, Horrible and Terribly Bad Day – Reporting on: “An Extinction Level Event”… – “CNN executives wake up in the morning knowing Trump has done something terrible, they just don’t know what it is yet. Oy, how this ideological perspective is challenging to maintain.” and then brings in history: Targeting Trump – Kathy Griffin in 2016: “my edge is that I’ll go direct for Barron.” – “it is worth noting an interview Ms. Griffin gave to Vulture Media at the Equality Now Gala in December of 2016.” The adage used to be that the President’s family was left out of the fray. This was really just a one sided thing and we have yet another example of how the standards change depending upon the target. Oh, and now Griffin is showing the Hillary Value by holding a press conference to address ‘bullying’ from the Trump family. Why don’t those on the right make this sort of offensive defensive a norm, too?

Also see John Sexton: James O’Keefe sued for $1 million over video sting – “the million dollar price tag looks like a similarly excessive attempt to punish politically embarrassing journalism.”

Ace picks up on the fact that the Left, Get This, Freaks Out Over No One Paying Any Mind to Their Silly Monster Baby Asses – “The top 15 over-the-top reactions from the left — but is there any other kind of reaction from the left? … Below, some of the ones I found.” This is rather an easy target to find.

Allahpundit: Michigan city bans farmer from selling at public market because he won’t hold gay weddings on his property – “fines are one thing. Banishment from the public square for ungood thoughts feels like a new step.” Regulation of religion continues apace, despite whatever the U.S. Constitution may say.

 

Leave a Comment

Corruption of the public and whatever happened to the law?

Cheryl K. Chumley: Does America even want freedom anymore?

Everybody cried about the hit to free speech — and rightly so. But the Coulter-Berkeley fiasco, and the ding to free speech, is not the problem, in and of itself. It’s only a symptom of a much larger problem — a symptom of a deeper, darker spirit that’s infected America, spreading far and wide as it seeks to destroy the nation’s greatest asset. The fact that in America, our individual rights come from God, not government.

A moral citizenry would not — could not — riot over rhetoric.

Storm-trooping for free speech — what have we become, America?

But it’s not just speech that’s being stifled around the nation.

The welfare of the collective is replacing the rights of the individual.

It’s not Coulter. It’s not free speech. It’s not even snowflakes and the adults who cater to their whines. It’s the loss of God from governance, opening the door to a lawless society and chaotic structure — that’s what really ails us. And that’s what must be addressed, if we really want to be a nation of free people once again.

For example, see Jazz Shaw on Baltimore warns prosecutors to “think twice” before charging illegal immigrants – “There’s a fairly clear line between “defiant resistance to Trump” and going completely around the bend.”

It’s one thing to refuse to cooperate with ICE in matters of detainers, sharing information and all the rest. It’s an entirely different ball game to decide that you can avoid attracting the attention of federal immigration officers by deciding not to prosecute criminals, no matter how “serious” the crimes may be.

Let’s think about that for a moment. In other words, for some of these comparatively low level crimes, the city wants prosecutors to go after and punish actual citizens of the country who may have run afoul of the law, but those who compound the issue by knowingly being in the country illegally to begin with are given a pass. Are the actual citizens in Baltimore who pay the taxes which fund these officials listening to this?

We’re talking about officers of the court who are charged with upholding the law. And they are seriously cautioning the staff to consider not prosecuting people who are suspected of these crimes on the basis of the fact that they are already committing a crime by being here illegally. If you are a citizen or lawful immigrant living in Baltimore you should be outraged by this. But if you keep electing these same people who pull these sorts of stunts over and over again I have zero sympathy for you at this point.

Or consider Andrew C. McCarthy’s explanation about Why the Obama Justice Department avoided the grand jury . . . until it had no choice – “On the matter of the 2016 election, why is there an investigation into Russian meddling but no investigation of Justice Department meddling? The latter effort was more extensive. And it sure looks like it would be a lot easier to prove.”

Russia’s apparent preference for one presidential candidate over the other is routinely described as a sinister scheme to “interfere with the election.” Fair enough. But how shall we describe the Department of Justice’s patent preference for one presidential candidate over the other?

Instapundit weighs in on the NYT Stephens brouhaha and reminisces about “the famous moment when the late Julian Simon debated an earlier iteration of hard left religious zealots.”

Simon, the economist who was legendarily skeptical about environmental doom, once posed a question at an environmental forum: “How many people here believe that the earth is increasingly polluted and that our natural resources are being exhausted?” Almost every hand shot up. He then said, “Is there any evidence that could dissuade you?” There was no response, so he asked again, “Is there any evidence I could give you—anything at all—that would lead you to reconsider these assumptions?” Again, no response. Simon concluded, “Well, excuse me. I’m not dressed for church.”

See neo-neocon on AGW: when a scientific theory becomes a religion… – “then those with an opposing view become apostates.”

That’s especially true if the topic is one with very high stakes, such as AGW (anthropogenic global warming). Think about it this way: if a person is—(a) convinced that AGW has been proven beyond any doubt (b) threatens life as we know it all over the globe; and (c) can be halted and/or decreased by measures we understand and can control if only we had the will to implement them—then if follow that anyone who disagrees is a person who is endangering life on earth.

Science, of course, is not a religion, and the history of science is littered with theories that have been considered proven and then are disproven. So scientists must remain skeptical and open to any evidence that would challenge their theories and their findings. That’s difficult enough to do when the topic is an abstract one with few practical applications. But when a topic is highly highly politicized (as with AGW), the difficulty increases exponentially and the public also becomes very much involved.

Which brings us to an article Bret Stephens wrote in his new venue, the NY Times. It was really a rather modest suggestion that people listen to both sides of the issue

Then consider Marc Morano with an Exclusive Video: People’s Climate March hostile to skeptics – Attempts to take down signs, deny access – “The banner, reading “The Science is NOT Settled.” was under constant assault with marchers who refused to allow the message of climate skepticism to be seen.”

James G. Wiles Machiavelli’s Advice for Mr. Trump – and Us – “have the American people been so corrupted by the welfare state that they can no longer reclaim their liberty? Is restoration of the American republic along the lines originally conceived by the Founders, impossible?” The citation is to Machiavelli’s most extended work Discourses on Livy.

Machiavelli offers us ways to think about how to answer these questions. He does it by reviewing Roman history with an eye to contemporary political problems of his own time.

In Chapter 16 of the Discourses on Livy, Machiavelli remarks that “a people that is corrupted through and through cannot live in liberty for even a short period…” When a state become free, “all those who fed off” the state become “hostile factions.” However, when the Romans overthrew the Tarquin kings in 510 B.C., they were able to establish and maintain a republic which lasted until the time of Julius Caesar.

This was possible, says Machiavelli, because, while the Tarquin kings were corrupt, the Roman people were not. “Had the Roman populace been corrupted, there would have been no effective way for them to keep their liberty.”

“This means that new laws are not enough, because the institutions that remain unchanged will corrupt them.”

It should not have been surprising, therefore, that the Democrats, the MSM, academia, and many corporate and other leaders united with the leftist street to launch the “resistance.” Or that, so far, not one Democrat in Congress has broken party ranks to support Trumpian reforms. This weekend, they will be touting their success in stalling and, sometimes, defeating specific measures taken by the president.

Then there’s David Henderson on Pope Francis’s Distorted Vision – Ideological fantasy is reaching very high levels of desctruction as the Devil plays his games.

I think the Pope and I are perceiving the world very differently. I don’t mean our values are different, although that’s probably true too. I mean that what we think is factually true is different.

Clarification of perceptions is critical to intellectual integrity.

Leave a Comment

Fake Protests based on Fake Rationales

Cheryl K. Chumley: People’s Climate March — rally of the ridiculous – “Forgive the yawns. It’s just that after 100 days of anti-President Donald Trump protesting, which came on the heels of 200 or so days of anti-Candidate Donald Trump protesting, the Hate Trump message is getting a bit stale.

Valerie Richardson: The people’s billionaire: George Soros gave $36M to groups behind People’s Climate March – “Media Research Center report finds steering committee groups benefited from Soros’ largesse.”

The People’s Climate March scheduled for Saturday has a powerful billionaire behind it: Democratic Party donor George Soros.

Mr. Soros, who heads the Open Society Foundations, contributed over $36 million between 2000 and 2014 to 18 of the 55 organizations on the march’s steering committee, according to an analysis released Friday by the conservative Media Research Center.

“The presence of many non-climate related organizations leading the march indicated that this climate march (just like the March for Science and the Women’s March) is not about a single issue, but about attacking the new administration,” MRC’s Aly Nielsen said.

She pointed to the march’s “usual checklist of liberal policy priorities,” such as labor-union rights, a minimum-wage increase, and a halt to “attacks on immigrants.”

Anthony Watts: Saturday’s “climate march” in Washington turns into another wrongheaded farce that has little to do with climate – “Even full-on warmists are panning it, and it hasn’t even started yet.” Watts provides some pretty graphics about the causes and logistics from sponsoring organizations.

David Sherfinski: Sheriff David Clarke: ‘Rat bastards’ on the left never give up – people are beginning to notice and some are rather colorful in their observations.

“No, I didn’t misspeak.

“You see, for them defeat is never final. Election defeats don’t matter,” he said. “It’s simply a time to regroup and continue their assault on our Constitution, the rule of law, liberty, and American exceptionalism.

“Now, why would I call them rat bastards?” he said. “First of all, because I can. Second, as you know I call ‘em as I see ‘em. But third and more importantly, just listen to Saul Alinsky, a socialist professor who admired Lucifer, for heaven’s sake. And Alinsky’s admired by the left.”

VDH: How the Obama Precedent Empowered Trump – “A number of the things that explain Trump’s election also point to unique opportunities to overturn the Obama legacy.”

The Left is understandably apprehensive of Trump because Obama set the modern precedent that a contemporary president can do almost anything he pleases by executive orders (and in Nixonian fashion can weaponize federal agencies, from the NSA to the IRS, in order to monitor and hound political rivals and perceived enemies). Sen. Harry Reid’s near suicidal destruction of the Senate filibuster captured the unreality of the times, as if Obama progressivism most certainly would be America’s new orthodoxy for generations to come.

A supposedly disinterested media’s ecstasy over Obama’s election ensured that its subsequent revulsion at Trump could be taken no more seriously.

A critical media is not a mere reset button that one turns on and off at one’s convenience. Instead, once it was short-circuited after 2008, its burned-out switch cannot be flipped back on in 2017. In sum, there is no longer a believable media that can offer credible critiques of the Trump presidency.

There is as yet no credible response to Trump and certainly no opposing coherent agenda. Instead, the “Resistance” is being waged by cherry-picking liberal federal judges in hopes of delaying and slowing down executive orders in the courts, along with states-rights nullifications, organized advertising boycotts of conservative media figures, media collusion, jamming town hall meetings of conservative representatives, campus antics, and waging war on social media.

David French: California Is Seceding from the Constitution – “Is there no end to the harm progressives will do our republic in the name of ‘social justice’?”

why should a state bother seceding when it can simply nullify the portions of the Constitution it doesn’t like? A troubling trend is emerging: California is imposing its own vision of free speech, freedom of association, and freedom of the press on its citizens, and it’s daring the courts to stop it.

The rot extends far beyond Berkeley.

In short, California public officials at every level of state and local government have taken it upon themselves to replace core constitutional protections with their own radical vision of social justice. This isn’t federalism; it’s lawlessness. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and every state law, ordinance, regulation, or practice that conflicts its guarantees of individual liberty must be struck down.

Social-justice warriors may demand #Resistance, but they cannot opt an entire state out of the Constitution. It’s time for the courts and Congress to protect liberty, and it’s time for California to remember that membership in our constitutional republic carries with it constitutional obligations. California, you can’t nullify the Bill of Rights.

OregonMuse says That’s the Way You Do It – A grand jury has approximately 212 people facing felony charges for rioting during the inauguration in January.

The way to stop rioting is by vigorous, aggressive police action. Of course, everybody knows this. The mayor of Baltimore knows this. The mayor of Ferguson knows this. Even that adipose porker who runs Berkeley knows this. But they chose to not make any attempt to restrain the rioting because, bottom line, they have more sympathy for the goals and aspirations of the circus freak show rioters than they do with law-abiding citizens, i.e. normal people of their communities. So the cities burned.

I only wish there was a way to tell the normal people, “hey, the authorities are not on your side. They will sit back and watch you and everything you’ve built burn if it means they can further their agenda.”

You would think Berkeley would at least be receptive, but the people there keep electing the same crew year after year. And pride themselves on how progressive they are.

CBD cites: “J.J. Sefton has been telling us that Daniel Greenfield is very good writer, and I finally listened. The Left’s Culture of Contempt: Saving America by hating everyone.” Greenfield describes what has happened to what used to be an entertainment – “Comedy is creative. Contempt isn’t comedy. Ultimately it’s just contemptible.”

Steven Hayward: NY Times Readers Lose Their Minds – “Bret Stephens recently left the Wall Street Journal editorial page to become an op-ed columnist at the New York Times.” The first column at the new gig was about climate change and, boy, did it set off the climate alarmists. Luboš Motl picks up on the fracas: Bret Stephens’ skepticism will spread from NYT to other mainstream sources – “The content of the op-ed is simple. Stephens – who looks like a classic lukewarmer to me here, not too much more skeptical than Andy Revkin – says that it’s wrong to expect that one is 100% certain. Only fanatics do so, sane people know that they’re 65% right if they’re really good, and the climate alarmists claiming certainty should be ashamed.”

Fine. People have reacted. On Twitter, Gavin Schmidt and a few other fanatics have claimed that Stephens is fighting a straw man. I don’t think it is the case. The fanatical claims about the certainty of destruction by man-made climate change are omnipresent – and you may find lots of them written by the brainwashed or activist commenters under Stephens’ article, too.

But I found many comments that agreed with Stephens in the New York Times, many reasonable comments (these two sets are overlapping but not identical), and I do believe that Stephens’ first op-ed made the New York Times more attractive.

You should have figured out that the conventional wisdom is rubbish, dear newspaper managers, many years ago. But behaving just like all the other mediocre managers elsewhere looked like a good enough and comfortable enough strategy to you. It was easier than to do your job well, wasn’t it?

Just to be sure, I am bored by the articles saying that “certainty is politically incorrect” (such as this Stephens’ op-ed), too. To make me intrigued, The New York Times would have to publish something much more original and brilliant.

For the other side of this ‘debate’ see Greg Laden: Out of the gate, Bret Stephens punches the hippies, says dumb things – “Right in the middle, between the Trump-inspired March for Science, and the Trump-inspired People’s Climate March, the New York times managed to come down firmly on the side of climate and science denial, in its editorial pages.” It’s loaded. Consider the hubris and judgment dripping from statements like “other right wing positions,” “consider this all too cute sentence with which he attempts to dazzle his readers,” “ a dynamic, rapidly changing field like climate change,” “hold them to any standard at all with respect to fact checking,” “still think the Earth is round, with hemispheres, right?,” “never mind the pesky details such as facts,” “His overall argument is utterly stupid,” “involves some very attractive conspiratorial ideation,” “perhaps heeding his masters’ voice,” … do you still wonder why these folks avoid honest debate?

Consider Armando Simon on The Left’s Vicious Intolerance in Science – “the media has deliberately downplayed, or altogether ignored, the vicious attacks on science by liberals. And these attacks have been going on for decades.” Consider the case studies: E. O. Wilson, Charles Murray, Paul Cameron and the ‘fashionable research’ intended to support ideological fantasies.

So any scientist that carries out research on this topic and comes to these conclusions is (as usual) called “racist,” “fascist,” “Nazi,” etc. …Liberals went ballistic on hearing of this theory and insisted that it be suppressed. While delivering a lecture on the subject, the International Committee Against Racism, a front group of the Marxist Progressive Labor Party, invaded the stage and attacked him.

The bottomless hatred of liberals is not confined to people. It extends to plants. Genetically modified foods are plants which have been tweaked genetically so that these plants can survive drought conditions, or render a bigger yield of crops. You know, just what farmers have been doing for centuries. Except now they are evil.

Eugene Volokh lists The Jefferson Muzzles 2017 for ‘egregious and or ridiculous affronts to free expression’ – “judged by the center to be improper or excessive reactions to people’s expression.” Note the patterns.

Leave a Comment

Can you examine your ideas?

There’s a lot on the right to free speech this morning with most centered on Berkely or Coulter. John R. Lott Jr. describes a different and more insidious facet from his personal experience in Challenging inaccurate information about guns – “A fair debate on the issue is needed, but liberal lobbying groups refuse to participate.”

Alcorn: “When there’s a credible scientist — somebody who wants to have a real constructive conversation about this, we’re going to be there. But folks who seek to minimize the issue of gun violence, the grave issue of gun violence in this country or to draw attention away from the real issues to themselves — that’s not a conversation that I think is productive to be a part of.”

I don’t minimize the issue of gun violence. I just disagree about what policies will effectively combat that violence.

But Everytown can afford to make excuses and miss opportunities for debate. After all, they have massive resources and can count on the mainstream media to push their agenda.

Note also the ‘ad hominem’ by Alcorn just like the climate alarmists using ‘denier’ that is proffered with such a heaping dose of hubris. The Democrats are doing something similar in claiming “Resistance” to obtain revenge for how Republicans treated their President. No matter that ‘revenge’ is a destructive motivation. No matter that the basis is questionable. No matter that real issues get shoved aside.

Jennifer Harper provides another example of this perfidy. Confirmed: Democratic Party sending protestors to Trump’s ‘100 Day’ speech in Pennsylvania – “There are two momentous political events to consider this weekend, and they are polar opposites.” These are the Trump rally and the Correspondents Dinner. The Dinner will likely be a gala affair of celebrities and elites. The Trump rally, on the other hand, is a target for the Left to act out in ‘resistance’ and ‘protest.’

Mr. Trump has protesters waiting, however. The Pennsylvania Democratic Party has organized “The Rally Against 100 Days of Broken Promises,” which includes Democratic National Committee Vice Chairman Michael Blake, multiple state lawmakers and officials, unions and Harrisburg Mayor Eric Papenfuse. “Bring your signs, hats and your slogans,” organizers advise.

Harper also notes that Trump’s loyal voters aren’t buying ‘shameful’ media spin: Report – “Improved economy, decisive leadership called the top Trump assets.” Note how this is in contrast to the Democrat’s claims of “Broken Promises.” Such assertions are why the voters are no buying the shameful deceits.

Sally Persons cites Sessions: Some judges are more interested in advancing an agenda rather than the law – The observation is gaining traction as the examples are getting rather hard to ignore. The question is what to do about the corruption of the justice system.

Matthew Continetti take a look from a different perspective: The Democrats’ First 100 Days – “Disunity, obstruction, incoherence, obsession, obliviousness.

Let’s reverse angle. The president’s first 100 days in office have been analyzed, dissected, evaluated. Not much left to say about them. What about the opposition? What do the Democrats have to show for these first months of the Trump era?

Little.

Chuck Schumer slow-walked Trump’s nominations as best he could. In fact his obstruction was unprecedented.

The prevalent anti-Trump sentiment obscures the party’s institutional degradation.

Democrats feel betrayed. The Electoral College betrayed them by making Trump president. Hillary Clinton betrayed them by running an uninspiring campaign. James Comey betrayed them by reopening the investigation into Clinton’s server 11 days before the election. Facebook betrayed them by circulating fake news. This sense of resentment isn’t so different than the sort Democrats attribute to Trump supporters: irritation at a loss of status, vexation at changed circumstances. The despondence of a liberal is alleviated when he sees throngs of protesters, hears Samantha Bee, scrolls through Louise Mensch’s tweets.

Makes him feel better. But his party is in tatters,

John Sexton cites another tactic that may make for ‘feel good’ but does little to advance anything. Progressives flood hotline for victims of crime by ‘criminal aliens’ with UFO sightings

The Trump administration launched a new initiative Wednesday called Victims of Immigration Crime Engagement (VOICE). The office is intended to provide support for Americans who have been victimized by illegal immigrants. Trump mentioned it during his first address to a joint session of Congress.

Progressives offended by the existence of the office noticed that the launch also corresponded with “Alien day,” a day where fans celebrate the Alien film series. So some progressives decided it would be a good idea to flood the hotline that responds to reports of “criminal aliens” with calls about UFOs.

Rabbi Yonason Goldson asks Can we believe in science if we don’t trust scientists? – He highlights the problem the Left has with its protests and riots and mobs and Resistance™ and posturing.

What can we expect next? Doctors for Hospitals? Lawyers for Jurisprudence? Mammals for Oxygen?

To be fair, there is a real issue here. Namely, the exploitation of science for political advantage. In a perfect world, scientific data would be apolitical, serving as a nonpartisan lodestone for guiding public policy. Facts are facts, and the only debate should be about what they mean, not what they are.

But our world is far from perfect, and the problem is not that we don’t have faith in science. It’s that many have found good reason to lose faith in scientists.

The Rabbi makes a good point but rather degrades his argument when he picks up on creation and evolution by creating a straw man and parroting the ignorance and illiteracy of fanatic creationists. It appears that the comments have a better grip on science than the Rabbi does. A rabbi taking on the mantle of scientist and scientists taking on the mantle of priest. Just who can you trust, anyway?

Walter Williams says Environmentalists Are Dead Wrong – “Each year, Earth Day is accompanied by predictions of doom. Let’s take a look at past predictions to determine just how much confidence we can have in today’s environmentalists’ predictions.” … “Americans have paid a steep price for buying into environmental deception and lies.”  

Ace: Leftist Fascism Reaches New Lows in Blatant Thuggery, as “Mainstream” Left Covers Up for Them and Blames the Right – “This is the post I delayed because I didn’t know how to write it. … I won’t write it. I’ll just link the stories.”

I will just repeat my urgent warning and threat: The rules you make for us are the rules you also make for yourselves. If you’re comfortable with that, then I suggest you begin making serious preparations for the hell you are determined to unleash on this once-peaceful country.

It has happened and happened and grown worse every year precisely because the alleged “responsible voices” of the left, who could be expected to chastise their misbehaving correligionists and tell them to stop, have in fact covered up for them every step of the way, thereby tacitly approving of them and encouraging them to go further.

The Tide is Rising and the Left does not seem to be paying attention or have any awareness about the implications of their behavior. Consider John Hinderaker’s post Portland is Stupid, Too – “An activist group called the “Raging Grannies” testifies in harmony before Portland’s City Council.”

Steve writes below that “Portlandia” is the city of the petty, bankrupt, vindictive left. That’s true. It is also stupid. … why worry about losing a few million a year when you are trying to overthrow free enterprise? … So Portland’s City Council wants socialism? It would serve them right if Portland followed in the footsteps of Venezuela.

The Coyote also gets into ‘newspeak’ with How The Left Is Changing the Meaning of Words to Reduce Freedom — The Phrase “Incite Violence” – “A surprising number of folks on the Left of late seem to be advocating for restrictions on free speech.”

This is a horrible newspeak redefinition of a term. It is implying that a speaker is responsible for the violence by those who oppose her. By this definition, the socialists of 1932 Germany were guilty of “inciting violence” whenever Nazi brownshirts tried to brutally shut down socialist meetings and speeches.

I am not sure why the Left is so good at this – perhaps because most of the media is sympathetic to the Left and is willing to let them define the terms of the debate. The Left has successfully performed a similar bit of verbal judo with the claim that Russians “hacked” the last election. By calling leaks of Democratic private correspondence “hacking the election”, they have successfully left the impression among many that the Russians actually manipulated vote totals, something for which there is zero evidence and really no credible story of how it might have been done.

Speech is to convey ideas and examine perceptions and values. That makes it a vital component of intellectual integrity. 

Leave a Comment

A Sundance Saturday and a Change in the Winds

A busy pundit today, Sundance has Secretary Wilbur Ross Delivers A Message – The “UniParty” Congress is Put On Notice… – “The bought-and-paid-for UniParty congress has been under the influence of the globalist-minded U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and the myriad of K-Street lobbyists, for almost two decades” AND Microsoft Transparency Report Shows Massive Increase in 2016 Obama Era FISA Orders… – that’s about the significant spike in FISA orders in 2016 AND President Trump Realigning Geo-Political Alliances, and Few Paying Attention… – “President Trump is fundamentally realigning international geo-political alliances and almost no-one is connecting the dots.”

On the Department of Commerce, the theme is familiar: “To start, we have brought a new energy to enforcement, working to ensure that all countries play fair and by the agreed-upon rules. We have been executing these trade investigations very rapidly.” i.e. there have been a lot of words, how about some action? The new administration seems to think actually enforcing the law is a good thing to do.

Number two relates to the Obama Political Opponents Problem. Secrecy laws prevent disclosing details but the summary has clues.

Microsoft tries to thread the needle of transparency by telling its consuming audience as much about governmental collection of data as possible. Toward that end Microsoft releases a biannual transparency report.

Within the latest transparency release Microsoft reports in the first half of 2016 they received a massive increase in FISA orders; primarily from U.S. governmental agencies.

The last item is about fundamental change in governance that seem to escape notice in The Swamp. “President Trump has expended nothing other than his sheer will, and yet he has leveraged gains that are jaw-droppingly consequential.” The case study is Chinese relations.

To build upon that mutually beneficial friendship – President Trump seeded the background by appointing Ambassador Terry Branstad, a 30-year personal friend of President Xi Jinping.

To enhance and amplify the friendship and personal respect – U.S. President Trump used Mar-a-Lago as the venue for their visit, not the White House. And President Trump’s beautiful granddaughter, Arabella, sweetly serenaded the Chinese First Family in Mandarin Chinese song showing the utmost respect for the honored guests.

Unfortunately most people are unfamiliar with the severity of Chinese tradition as it relates to family and respect. However, these gestures are intensely well received. Russia’s Vladimir Putin can deliver nothing even remotely comparable to the charm of the granddaughter of the U.S. President singing for President Xi and his wife in their native tongue.

Do not underestimate the value of these gestures and how it was perceived by the recipients as personal respect – far above the level of traditional political respect which would be customary during such encounters. President Trump made this visit personal, and his words after the meeting were all personal, not positional.

The panda fur has not only been stroked perfectly, it has been elevated in its own magnanimity without even so much as a bow.

Three things appear odd: #1) How no-one amid almost all media can see how effective this approach by President Trump has been; and #2) Nothing has been expended in order to achieve these remarkable results; and #3) Accepting all of the above, Donald Trump has planned this out for a long, long time.

The supporting cast today is also in full throat on similar themes. American Resurrection by David Prentice takes a look at a few other items to note. “Let’s face it — the obstruction of the “we must resist anything Trump does” leftists had taken its toll.” … “But the tide has turned in this war for the resurrection of the American spirit. Events have taken place that will overcome the obstruction of Trump’s big agenda.”

Global warming: Science or dogma? by Michael Nadler uses the ‘bury their heads in the sand’ idea to try to explain how so many miss so much.

The Science & Environmental Policy Project is an outstanding resource for those unwilling to bury their heads in the sand and blindly accept the notion that human-caused catastrophic global warming is settled science and must be the highest priority in allocating the world’s limited economic resources.

There’s been change on that front, too. Breitbart has stories on EPA Chief Scott Pruitt Calls for ‘Exit’ of Paris Climate Agreement by Ben Kew – “Since taking office, Trump has revoked a range of environmental legislation—including Barack Obama’s climate orders—with a plan to focus on energy independence and revitalize the coal industry” AND Trump’s Use of the Congressional Review Act Is a Legislative Milestone by Joel B. Pollak – “the use of the CRA is no small accomplishment. Future administrations will never be as careless in expanding the executive authority of the federal government far beyond the scope of the authority envisioned in the U.S. Constitution” AND Trump and Kelly ‘Dismantle’ Obama’s ‘Progress’ for Illegal Immigrants by Bob Price – “Jail is jail,” Butler County, Ohio, Sheriff Richard Jones told the New York newspaper. “It’s fair and it’s human, but we don’t put chocolates on the pillows” AND Trump Appoints Religious Liberty Defender Roger Severino to Head HHS Office for Civil Rights by Dr. Susan Berry – “It’s a super appointment. Roger Severino is a very balanced thinker who is also an experienced litigator,” said Family Research Council senior fellow Ken Blackwell, … LGBT rights advocates criticized Severino’s appointment.”

Writing at the Daily Signal last year on the issue of North Carolina’s bathroom privacy policy, Severino asserted, “The radical left is using government power to coerce everyone, including children, into pledging allegiance to a radical new gender ideology over and above their right to privacy, safety, and religious freedom.”

On the ‘yet there’s a long ways to go’ front is a John Hinderaker report Solar Power: An Environmental Disaster – “Solar power is expensive, unreliable and environmentally destructive. So it doesn’t come into being through consumer demand; rather, by government fiat or subsidy.” The case this time is a 60 acre solar panel install on a National Guard facility for $25 million (plus land rent) that could provide energy for 1,700 homes only under optimum conditions that never exist.

maybe it is irrelevant to point out how wrong the global warming alarmists are, and how severely their uneconomic installations damage the environment. Their doctrine is a religious faith that has nothing to do with science or history, and everything to do with government greed, so rational arguments are wasted on them.

Don’t forget the damage to the less well off for whom energy is a disproportionate part of their budget, either.

Maybe you’ve seen something about “Hold My Beer” lately and wondered where that came from? Jared Keller has the story about The Greatest ‘Hold My Beer’ Moment In American History Is Thanks To This Drunk Marine Veteran – “Have you ever risked life and limb to win a barroom bet, your veins so full of liquid courage that some harebrained feat of strength and derring-do actually seemed like a good idea? If you’re anything like those rambunctious partygoers swimming in Natty Light who sacrifice their bodies for the amusement of their fellow revelers, there’s a chance you’ve probably uttered this phrase: Hold my beer… and watch this.”

As for the body politic’s views on Trump, consider Greg P. KA-CHING! Trump, RNC have YUGE fundraising quarter – looks like a lot of money going towards Trump and colleagues.

Leave a Comment

4/4/2017: It’s the climate!

Let’s see, who is it with all the Nazi talk? Oh, yeah. Valerie Richardson notes some book burning as House Democrats urge teachers to trash book by climate scientists on global-warming dissent – “Three ranking House Democrats on Monday urged teachers to throw away copies of a book written by climate scientists challenging the catastrophic global-warming view, saying the nation’s schools are “inappropriate” forums for such a discussion.”

“My advice to Grijalva and his colleagues is that they pull their heads out of the sand long enough to read the book. Then they will understand why scientists, voters, and now the President of the United States all believe global warming is not a crisis,” said Mr. Bast. “It’s time to move on, find another fake crisis to hype to scare voters and raise campaign dollars. The global warming scare is over.”

Kelly Riddell notes another effort to squash, dismiss, and demean for even the slightest of excuses: Melania Trump’s official portrait sparks liberal outrage – “Trump Derangement Syndrome is real, folks. The latest example is the liberal reaction to first lady Melania Trump’s official portrait, which was unveiled on Monday.”

“While some commenters gushed that the first lady was ‘beyond beautiful’ and ‘gorgeous,’ others mocked the image as highly airbrushed and compared the gauzy background — a window in the White House residence — to 1990s school portrait settings,” AFP reported.

You know what I think? So what? The picture’s gorgeous, and her ring is beautiful. She and her husband made no secret of their wealth when Mr. Trump ran for office, so why are we shocked now?

There’s no reason. Unless you’re looking to nitpick. Unless you detest Mr. Trump and his presidency so much, nothing is off limits, including his criticism of his wife. It’s called Trump Derangement Syndrome. And unfortunately, I think it’s an incurable disease for many in the media.

Greed and envy driving hate all the way down.

On the other side of things, the defense is getting frantic. The perp to defend in this episode is Susan Rice (again). First up is Major media spiked scoops on Susan Rice’s role in unmasking Trump’s team by Thomas Lifson – “If Mike Cernovich is to be believed (and I think he is, since nobody is denying this), the New York Times and Bloomberg knew about Susan Rice’s unmasking of Trump officials but sat on the story.”

Then there’s the Benghazi Liar Susan Rice’s Treachery Continues by Daniel John Sobieski – “Call it the tale of two National Security Advisers, Michael Flynn and Susan Rice.”

Well, isn’t that special? While Trump’s pick for this sensitive post was under scrutiny, Obama’s adviser was doing opposition research which involved data mining classified intelligence reports. Rice requested the unmasking of names, something only three people, according to Circa, were authorized to do

Susan Rice was a key cog in both the Clinton and Obama administrations’ disinformation machines designed to keep the truth from the American people and hide what was arguably criminal negligence in the deaths of many Americans at the hands of terrorism. That she should be up to her eyeballs in this current round of corruption by Team Obama, using classified data gleaned by surveillance of Americans to sabotage an incoming president, is both unconscionable and not urprising.

The Investor’s Business Daily picks up on this and several other scandals. Is Susan Rice The Missing Piece In Obama Spy Scandal? – “While the Democrats continue to flail wildly, accusing House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes of all kinds of hypothetical misdeeds, evidence is growing that the Obama administration had an actual spying program on its domestic political opponents, namely the Donald Trump campaign. If so, it was more than just wrong — it was a crime.”

The New York Times and Washington Post have both reported on Obama administration efforts to surreptitiously keep tabs on Trump. It seems to have been an open secret in the media, largely shrugged off.

Then, As The Susan Rice Scandal Explodes, The Russia Election Hacking Story Gets Murkier – “While the momentum behind the Russia-election-meddling story chugs along, the claim that sparked the entire drama — that Russians hacked the Democratic National Committee — appears to have suffered a big blow. Does anybody care?”

The Russia connection was first made by a private cybersecurity firm whose work has been treated as unassailable — until last week, when it had to rewrite and retract statements made to support that claim.

Normally, you’d think this would be huge news, since it gets to the very heart of the entire Trump/Russia scandal.

But the VOA’s reporting, and CrowdStrike’s decision to alter that key report, have been ignored by the mainstream press. The Washington Post, for example, hasn’t bothered to tell readers that its breathless Dec. 22 story no longer holds up.

Where people go when things are not going their way is on display: Potty Mouthed DNC Chairman Perez Doesn’t Share American Values by Chip McLean – “The head of one of the two major parties uses potty mouthed language in public…and then goes on to say he doesn’t care what people think about what he said.” Put this in context of all the disgust about Trump’s Tweets, which don’t go near so far.

The Party of the Potty Mouth is also reaping its rewards for previous anti-American rhetoric. Michael A. Thiac says Cops Going Galt – “Cops are pulling back and yes, “women and minorities” will be “hardest hit.”

Effective law enforcement is, by its nature, proactive. Cops have to go out, meet people, observe the actions on the street, know the “usual suspects” who commit most of the crime, terrorizing the people of these, mainly, minority communities. They need to concentrate their efforts on the relatively few people who do commit the crime.

something has happened on the way to more murders and mayhem. The Eric Holder/Loretta Lynch Justice Departments, in coordination with radical groups like Black Lives Matter and the ACLU, have made the police the targets of lawsuits, interference, harassment and other efforts to stop enforcement of the law.

cops are not trusting by their nature, and after seeing officers being lynched for doing their jobs, will not stick their necks out immediately

And, on other ‘Fake but Persistent News’ is Gender Pay Gap? What About The Workplace Death Gap? – “This huge gap has nothing to do with discrimination, of course. It has everything to do with the type of jobs men and women voluntarily choose to take.”

“Because women earn less, on average, than men, they must work longer for the same amount of pay,” the NCPE says.

Leave aside the fact that his pay-gap claim — based on a comparison of median incomes for women and men in the Census data — has been repeatedly debunked because it fails to take into account various factors other than discrimination that explain the difference.

Economist Mark Perry has for years noted that there’s an even bigger and far more consequential gender gap in the workplace — one that literally means the difference between life and death.

He notes that official government data show that men suffer almost all of the workplace fatalities that take place in a given year.

Colin Flaherty says Crime Is the New Black Entitlement

As long as black people are permanent victims of relentless white racism, cops should not chase them, juries should not convict them, judges should not sentence them, schools should not punish them, and white victims should not complain about the black crime and violence so wildly out of proportion.

Courtroom racism is rampant and if you do not see that, well, you know what that makes you.

That is part of the greatest lie of our generation and here is why.

The over-policing thing was a hot topic on the Democrat presidential campaign trail last year. Berry and Hillary each tried to outdo the other with the sympathy for the plight of the black criminal

So any difference in discipline and academic performance can be the result of one cause only: White racism.

Like the gender pay gap, the black justice gap stimulates a constructed rationale to defend against reality.

Tim Ball has a good rundown on tactics and strategy saying We Won Climate Battles, but Are Not Winning the Climate War: Here’s Why. – “Mann took it very seriously, was well prepared and exploited it for every political opportunity – he dominated the entire proceedings. He had the advantage of not caring or having to care about the truth. His performance was designed for most of the public who have no idea about what is true. He knows this works because that assumption has driven the juggernaut from the start.”

Wallace’s charge that Tim Ball, Fred Singer, and others have challenged the AGW meme to no avail is correct. This, despite all the scientific evidence presented over the years up to and including Heartland’s 12th Conference and the recent Congressional Hearing. Little or nothing has changed. What is the solution?

Trump won in the minds of working and middle-class people, which is where the climate war must be won for lasting victory. They only need to understand enough science to know how it was corrupted, but they must know the motive. Until that happens, all the AGW proponents need to say is that Trump is acting to line the pockets of his billionaire friends. Mann demonstrated the technique in his congressional presentation.

One understanding that does seem to be gaining popularity is that the Left is playing the mind game rather than the reality game and have no compunctions in regards to honesty, morality, or ethics.

Leave a Comment

4/3/2017: Lawful Authority, Whose Consensus?

A question of lawful authority – “For liberals it’s fine to run outside the baselines when the cause is theirs” by Robert Knight provides an hypothesis for the Gorsuch opposition. The core is about something seen in Venezuela recently where its Supreme Court tried to invalidate the Parliament.

Over the years, federal courts — especially the Supreme Court — acquired an outsized role in the nation’s affairs, especially during Franklin Roosevelt’s administration. Think of the federal government as a three-bodied creature, with one of the bodies in a black robe towering over the others with a giant Nancy Pelosi gavel.

Nonetheless, given the Court’s near-omnipotence, the central question of what constitutes lawful authority will dominate public discussion in years to come, especially if there is a conservative majority. Right now, “lawful authority” is in the eye of the beholder on many levels.

To progressives and the lockstep media, legitimate authority means only advancing progressive causes. If so, it’s no big deal for liberal presidents or judges to run outside the baselines when they need to score some runs.

Democrats’ various ‘reasons’ look to Republicans like excuses to oppose Gorsuch for Supreme Court by Alex Swoyer

Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer, New York Democrat, ticks off a long list of his objections. The latest is a complaint that Mr. Trump didn’t do enough to “consult” with Democrats before making his pick.

“Democrats have been forced to talk about pretty much anything: President Trump, think tanks, you name it. Anything, but the nominee himself,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, Kentucky Republican, said Thursday on the Senate floor, mocking the growing list of complaints.

two months after Mr. Trump nominated Judge Gorsuch, Democrats still are searching for a consensus line of attack against him.

It’s a case of throwing mud and hoping something will stick. That is not a tactic breeding effective governance. Democrats are finding that a lot of what they throw is reflecting back on them.

Cheryl K. Chumley says Another Dem boards the impeachment fantasy train – in this case, Fox News token Leftist Juan Williams.

Could the left please, please, please get it in their heads that prosecution generally follows crime — not precedes it?

And that simply believing someone’s guilty of something is not, in fact, proof positive of guilt?

Perception is not — Not, with a capital “N” — proof. It’s not guilt. It’s not even allegation. In this case, in this polling case, it’s just really what the guy next door thinks.

All this current talk about impeachment of Trump, whether it’s from Rep. Maxine Waters, who’s made it a personal goal of hers to boot the president from the White House, or most recently, from Williams, fact is there are no facts, no pieces of evidence and, most importantly, no charges to impeach Trump.

And honestly, the more the left talks about it, the more irrational they seem.

The Russian Collusion Conspiracy is a big keystone for the likes of Williams. Kurt thinks The Russiagate Scam Will Blow Up In The Democrats’ Smug Faces.

If you’re stressed out about this whole Russian nonsense, relax – Donald Trump didn’t do anything wrong, and he’s not going be impeached, arrested, or ritually disemboweled. When the truth comes out and it explodes in the Democrats’ soft, girlish hands, we’ll all be laughing and toasting their humiliation with Stoli shots.

But neither absurdity of conclusions, lack of evidence, distortion of language, innuendo or anything else has made an impact. All reality does is to stimulate psychiatric defensive behaviors that get really, really, ugly and highly destructive of all in the vicinity.

John Hinderaker picks up on this saying It’s 2004 All Over Again – “Lately we’ve been hearing a lot about truth. It started with hysteria over “fake news” during the last election season. The “truth” narrative went into overdrive with President Trump’s unexpected (by most) victory.”

Actually, none of the current controversies has anything to do with the nature of truth, or whether truth is (figuratively speaking) on its deathbed. Liberal journalists are just getting the vapors because, once again, they have been found out. When Donald Trump succeeded Barack Obama as president, they went from a gaggle of slobbering groupies to a pack of baying hyenas. Some people approve of the head-snapping, 180-degree reversal, while others don’t. But everyone knows it happened.

The liberal media have a couple of problems. One is manifest bias. Another is gross incompetence. We and others have documented so many lies, and so many errors, coming from the New York Times, the Washington Post, CBS, CNN, etc., that few have any confidence in their reporting. That is as it should be.

The crisis that we face is not epistemological, it is political. There is no shortage of evidence, and the truth is rather clear: liberal governance has failed. The country is awash in debt, its influence around the world is in decline, its social programs have mostly failed, its borders are porous, its governing class is corrupt and incompetent, and in recent years its leaders have not even tried to advance the interests of the American people.

That is the truth. That is why Donald Trump was elected president, and why Republicans now dominate at every level of government. And that is why liberal journalists are in a panic.

Another such fantasy, as illustrated by the LA Times, is described by Kelly Riddell: Mainstream media: Trump’s first 100 days worst ever. Really?The LA Times editorial board decided to do a four-part series on our “dishonest president” starting on Sunday, writing, in part, “nothing prepared us for the magnitude of this train wreck.”

Of course, all of this is absurd — and predictably over the top from a press corps that has never approved of his candidacy, let alone his presidency.

Mr. Trump has withdrawn from TPP, approved the build-out of the Keystone XL and Dakota Access Pipelines, proposed a streamlined budget which includes a Reagan-era increase to national defense, started to enforce our immigration laws, which decreased illegal border crossing by 40 percent in his first month, and has nominated Judge Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court — a process that has gone incredibly smooth.

The stock market has reached its highest since the early 1990s, the Dow Jones broke through the 20,000-point threshold for the first time, and manufacturing and mining jobs have rebounded in Mr. Trump’s first jobs report.

As for the idea that Mr. Trump’s first 100 is the “worst we’ve ever seen in a president”?

Lucianne also mentions the story, Our Dishonest President, as “The most astonishing editorial ever written. Be sure to read our commentary.”

On the Falsity of Climate Consensus: Judith Curry’s March 29, 2017, Testimony – “Groupthink” … “sausage making” … “bullying” … “substantial uncertainties” … “premature consensus” … These terms were used by the scholarly Judith Curry in her important, the-future-will-note Congressional testimony last week against the neo-Malthusian, nature-is-optimal natural-science community.”

Leave a Comment

Kitty litter

You know, when a cat gets done in the litter box he tries to cover up the mess and often ends up sending the kitty litter flying everywhere?

There is the Russian Collusion thing as one example. AJStrata About That Infamous “Trump Server” – “We have a serious problem in this country with the cavalier misuse of resources that were put in place to protect us from outside attack. These resources have no business getting involved in Presidential campaigns.”

Then there’s Jamie illustrating the problem in intellectual integrity. He says EPA Head Denies Basic Climate Science Facts but then shows he doesn’t read very carefully.

Pruitt told CNBC this week that he didn’t agree with the fact that carbon dioxide is warming our planet. … Asked his views on the role of carbon dioxide, the heat-trapping gas produced by burning fossil fuels, in increasing global warming, Mr. Pruitt said on CNBC’s “Squawk Box” that “I think that measuring with precision human activity on the climate is something very challenging to do and there’s tremendous disagreement about the degree of impact, so, no, I would not agree that it’s a primary contributor to the global warming that we see.”

Jamie (and the NYT) are spouting religion. Pruitt is explaining science.

The Coyote Blog provides a takedown on another example So Skeptical Science Is “Correcting” Me – “I always start climate discussions by saying that supporters of climate action are frequently sloppy with the way they frame the debate.” Meyer points out something about his critic that Jamie illustrates as well. Both of these climatistas use ad hominem and appeal to authority rather than properly supporting their criticisms with data, evidence, and effective logic.

Leave a Comment