Flukey bias incidents?

The Remarkable Donald Trump. Michael Busler – “In spite of 90% of media coverage of him being negative, in spite of every Democrat consistently opposing anything he wants to do, and in spite of some members of his own party being against him, he has managed to change the direction of the country.

“He is moving toward more individual freedom, more individual responsibility, lower rates of taxation, and a smaller role for government. Those are the principles that allowed our country’s economy to increase from birth to the largest in the world in less than 150 years.

Solar Power to Hit the Wall in Nevada. Norman Rogers – “The left calls its acceptable methods of generating electricity “renewable energy.” The definition of renewable energy, enshrined in renewable portfolio laws in many states, tells us what the left likes and doesn’t like. It is very arbitrary.

“In states where a lot of solar has been installed, such as California and Nevada, solar is running into a wall that is related to the time delivery of solar power versus when the electrical grid’s need for power.

The cost of a solar installation with batteries would nearly double the cost and the batteries will probably wear out periodically. The promoters of solar have a solution for that — have the federal government subsidize the cost of the batteries.

Solar installations are approximately 70% subsidized by the federal government and by state energy quotas that energize favorable financing.

The bottom line is that solar is not a good method of supplying electricity and it is not a good method for reducing CO2 emissions. It keeps going because the promoters constantly lie and spread propaganda. They often brag about cheap solar purchase contracts without mentioning the huge subsidies and the state mandates that force utilities to buy solar (and wind).

Why Do Democrats Have a Secret List of Supreme Court Nominees? Ken Blackwell – “The latest example of such bold duplicity by the Democratic Party is the secret “A-list” of potential Supreme Court (SCOTUS) judges Democrats refuse to reveal while they turn blue on Capitol Hill screaming for more transparency from the Trump administration.

“President Trump openly campaigned on the need for more conservative judges to serve on the nation’s federal courts and the SCOTUS. The president never hid his intentions — he boldly embraced the issue. …

Sens. Durbin, Schumer, Blumenthal, Booker, and many other liberal town criers in Washington, D.C. miss no opportunity to malign the Trump administration for its allegedly clandestine acts. How much longer are they going to whine about imaginary backroom shenanigans with the Russians? Yet Democrats are secretly building lists of judicial nominees — dubbed “Building the Bench” — and keeping the names hidden from the public. …

Such dishonesty raises serious questions.

When it comes to selecting people to serve on the nation’s highest court and federal district courts around the country, secret lists, deals, and backdoor maneuvers to hide nominees or political intentions undermine our judicial system and America’s faith in political leaders. If Democrats are genuinely proud of who they are and what their party stands for, they should be honest and open about whom they want to serve in government. Anything less reeks of dishonesty and should spark distrust among voters.

Emails Show Obama State Department’s Role in Anti-Trump Coup Cabal. Tom Fitton – “John Kerry, President Obama’s secretary of state, seems to be having trouble staying within the legal bounds of the Logan Act, so it’s not surprising that his State Department lieutenants were getting their hands dirty in the conspiracy to bring down Donald Trump.

New York approves driver’s licenses for illegals over public opposition. Jazz Shaw – “Yes, you read that correctly. New York is specifically crafting legislation to shield the identity of illegal aliens from immigration enforcement officials.”

“Aren’t these elected officials – particularly the Governor – supposed to be in the business of defending and supporting the rule of law? I mean, isn’t that basically their job? We’re supposed to working to remove lawbreaking aliens, not shielding and coddling them.

How do you pass a law with such significant, majority opposition among the public and expect to win another statewide election? Is this the final straw before the voters in New York stop sending this same pack of increasingly unhinged Democrats back to Albany every two years? We can only hope, but if history teaches us anything, it’s that the majority of voters in New York are painfully slow to learn.

Dems’ new strategy to defeat executive privilege: Subpoena randos! Ed Morrissey – “calling witnesses who never worked in the White House.

“As for subpoenaing Corey Lewandowski and Chris Christie, there is no “at best” scenario. It’s pure stuntwork and nothing more. Neither man worked in the White House, so they can’t speak to obstruction. No one has ever hypothesized that either man was in the Russia-collusion-hypothesis loop either. They literally have nothing to add to any impeachment case proposed by Democrats. Democrats will use them as props, targets for their soliloquies about Trump while producing nothing at all of substance.

The aims of leftist labeling and censoring of conservative pundits as extremists … neo – “For a while, the phenomenon of leftist censorship of the right concentrated on potential speakers at college campuses. … Lately, de-platforming and/or de-monetizing from various social media and internet sites such as YouTube is all the rage,

“That way it’s easy to keep the maximum number of people insulated and protected from any ideas on the right that are factually and logically correct and might even persuade a person to change a long-held idea—or, in some cases (such as that of left-to-right political changers) to change one’s mind politically in a more fundamental way. That’s why it’s even more important to label the more moderate, thoughtful conservatives as extreme and offensive than the ones who actually are extreme and offensive, because an open-minded reader or listener will probably be able to find out and decide on his/her own which pundits and writers really are extreme and offensive, and which ones are making good points. It’s that latter group the left and the MSM is most afraid of—the ones who could change the opinions of a lot of people, if they were to be given a forum and listened to with an open mind.

Let’s not ruin the internet over flukey ‘bias’ incidents like the recent one on Pinterest – Publications – AEI. James Pethokoukis – “What passes for “evidence” of Big Tech bias against the right tends to be of the anecdotal variety.” this one is a rationale for censorship. Note the minimization and qualification of the impact of events and the bigoted hyperbole “right-wing media got pretty excited about that, too” – “This is especially the case when the problem really isn’t much of a problem at all.” There is no credence given to concerns that don’t fit the author’s narrative and anything that might cast shadows on that narrative are dismissed ad hoc.

Comments are closed.