The Following Was Posted On Facebook On Sunday

DNM’s World posted the following on Facebook on Sunday:

Say what you like about the Star Trek: TOS episode “And The Children Shall Lead” but I am going to use it as an aid to make a real world point. More often than not, someone is using the children to advance evil causes and agendas.

In the episode Gorgan, a noncorporeal being (and anything BUT a “Friendly Angel”) is using the children of Federation scientists to advance his desires. Through these children, he has manged to kill those very scientists, and now Gorgan has his sights on Marcos XII and its population of children to recruit for his cause to rule the universe. Kirk was able to stop Gorgan by showing his evil to the children (using the videos of them with their families…and their deaths) and what this monster really did to their parents and the children called Gorgan’s bluff.

Now we have to deal with a similar evil and unlike the noncorporeal Gogan, the environmental statists of flesh and bone are using children to destroy our liberties and freedom. They are using the children not just in America, but the whole world (which for the most part has embraced Marxism) to advance their cause.

On September 20, 2019; with the approval of public school administrators and teachers (and the parents that agree with them), coupled with our major media news outlets with MSNBC leading the charge (remember they are trying to convince you that climate change is real and we must give up our freedoms for the greater good); most public high school students walked out of class to protest on behalf of our natural environment. Not just American governments (local, state, national), but governments all over the world to demand that they step up and do something to deal with our changing climate. 

“As You Believe So Shall You Do, As You Believe So Shall You Do, As You Believe So Shall You Do, As You Believe So Shall You Do…”

Here is a question to ponder. Would our schools grant dismissals if the children would go to some kind of rally in support of America or perhaps go in support of something like say…the Second Amendment or something that supports the true intentions of the First Amendment like freedom of faith and religion? The short answer is No, while my answer would be “I Don’t Think So.” The progressives leftists are truly in control of most of the educational institutions on the planet and that includes our so-called public/government (Common) elementary and secondary schools.

Spock and Dr. McCoy said it best regarding the evil that our “green blooded” hero and his best friend and captain would have to face very soon regarding Gorgan’s ‘adopted children;’  

Spock: “Evil does seek to maintain power by suppressing the truth.”

McCoy: “Or by misleading the innocent.”

While Swedish born Greta Thunberg, the 15 year old face of the movement; we adults have to question about the adults who are pulling the strings as the children do their “fist pounds” to make the rest of us submit to the powerful ‘Gorgans’ of the world who would not only impose terror and fear into our lives, but make us all slaves to the permanent underclass forever in poverty and forever needing the “help” of the rich elites everywhere in the world.

Thunberg has been given lots of publicity by our major media, and like any leftist either a mastermind or some kind of “useful idiot,” you know that the our own American Democrat Party Press (if not most major international media outlets that lean progressive) will jump on any opportunity to advance the progressive cause. Thunberg also has the blessings of Ellen DeGeneres, Michael Moore, Bette Midler, Whoopi Goldberg and Melissa Fumero.

Right now one of the biggest environmental causes at the moment is the very communist-socialist concept that is named the “Green New Deal” (by the way it does not impress our young environmentalist leader), which is not about saving the planet but rather setting back the human race a thousand years or so when we did not have electricity or food that could actually kill us and not because it’s processed but it was rancid.

Even the food inspectors will not be able to help the masses should the Green Statists have it their way…and chances are those very same statists will be able to enjoy the comforts of electricity and healthier food (processed or not) as they rule over the masses with Iron Fists of greater power. It seems they will never be happy until the masses are miserable…and even then they are not happy, but want to impose more suffering.

As with Captain Kirk and Spock, we must tame our own beasts and demons and do what we can to fight these children and their puppet masters who have enslaved them and their desire to enslave the rest of us…for if they are not stopped, we will not only be stripped if our liberty but our children’s liberty will be stripped as well.

Our environment will truly be worse and filthy if these Communist Greens have it their way.

Just look at what has happened to California. Rest assured the elite will have their personal clean environments and comfortable lifestyles as they look down on the “dead waste of civilization” who they view as neanderthals.

 

The Need For Civility (And Sanity)

Yesterday Townhall posted an article about some recent remarks by Elie Mystal on MSNBC Thursday night.

According to Legal Talk Network:

Elie Mystal is the Managing Editor of Above the Law Redline and the Editor-At-Large of Breaking Media. He’s appeared on MSNBC, Fox, and CNN, and pretty much any network that will invite him. He’s written editorials for the New York Times, the Daily News, and would make a good character in a Billy Joel song. He graduated from Harvard University in 2000, Harvard Law School in 2003, and was an associate at Debevoise and Plimpton.

Townhall reports:

Earlier this week Rep. Joaquin Castro in Texas “named and shamed” San Antonio supporters of President Donald J. Trump in what he says was an effort to get these Americans to think twice before being “complicit in white supremacy.” Anybody with common sense understood the move was dangerous, especially coming from a public official, as it could paint a target on these individuals’ backs regardless if the information was already public or not. On MSNBC Thursday night, guest Elie Mystal took the hysteria over supporting President Trump one step further, saying that protesters should form literal mobs outside the SoulCycle and Equinox chairman’s home in the Hamptons due to his support for the commander-in-chief.

“People of color are already targeted under this administration,” Mystal said Thursday night regarding Rep. Castro’s actions. “I have no problem with shining the light back on the donors who fund this kind of racialized hate.”

“I mean I go further, I want pitchforks and torches outside [Stephen Ross’] house in the Hamptons,” Mystal continued. “I’ve been to the Hamptons, it’s very nice. There’s no reason why it has to be. There’s no reason he should be able to have a nice little party. There’s no reason why people shouldn’t be able to be outside of his house and making their voices peacefully understood.”

I am amazed that such a well-educated man would say something that stupid. Just for the record, people of color are not being targeted under the Trump administration. First of all, let’s take a detour here to look at some actual facts. President Trump signed the First Step Act into law, a bipartisan measure to give prisoners getting out of jail a chance to find jobs and contribute to their communities. Since 38 percent of prisoners at the state level are people of color, that law will have a positive impact on people of color.  Unemployment for people of color is at historic lows under President Trump. Second of all, pitchforks and torches? Really?

Whatever happened to the calls for civility?

Unbelievable Quote


The video below was posted at Breitbart on Sunday. Yes, Elie Mystal actually said that.

In case you missed the quote:

In reference to questions from Donald Trump, Jr. about Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) and her race, Mystal accused African-American voters that vote Republican of having their votes “colonized” by Republicans or Russia.

Wow.

Whatever Happened To Transparency?

Yesterday Hot Air reported that all of the cable networks except MSNBC will be banned from live coverage of the South Carolina state Democrat convention. Who made this deal, and why did they make it? C-Span is included in that ban.

The article reports:

Every political junkie in America knows that C-Span is the place to go when looking for coverage of anything political. This is particularly true during political conventions and other large partisan events. The cable channel’s live coverage is unsurpassed. Viewers don’t have to worry about partisan journalists or talking heads from standard cable news networks chiming in or interrupting coverage for commercial breaks. South Carolina Democrats have decided to give MSNBC, the most partisan liberal-leaning cable network, exclusive rights to live coverage. All the other networks, including C-Span, CNN, and Fox News Channel, are required to wait three hours after the convention ends to show their live footage.

The article explains how the coverage is supposed to be handled:

South Carolina is an early primary state. The Democrat state convention is a required stop for the presidential candidates. The cattle call, er, showcase of candidates give the state’s voters a leg up in hearing from all the candidates in person. MSNBC was chosen to “enhance the proceedings”, according to a party spokesman. Two MSNBC show hosts, Joy-Ann Reid, and the Rev. Al Sharpton will interview all of the candidates in attendance using a set specifically built for them to do so inside the convention hall. I doubt it is a coincidence that two black show hosts were chosen to do the interviews. The majority of South Carolina Democrat primary voters are African-American. This is important because South Carolina follows Iowa and New Hampshire as the third state to hold its primary vote. It is known as the First in the South. What better choice could MSNBC have made than to pick their two loudest race-baiters to interview the Democrat candidates? It’s all about putting on a good show, you see.

I suspect the MSNBC coverage will be a new dimension of slanted news. That is a serious disservice to the voters of South Carolina.

When The Press Works Hand In Hand With A Political Party

We have all heard examples of news articles being withheld until after an election or until the politicians involved can figure out a spin. (see article here). Well, someone blew the whistle on NBC recently. In an article posted at The Daily Wire today, investigative reporter Yashar Ali reported that the managing political editor for NBC News and MSNBC bullied him on behalf of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) into holding a scoop that he broke yesterday. Think about that–the managing political editor for NBC News and MSNBC was helping the DNC.

The article reports:

“Yesterday, I received a call from @DafnaLinzer who serves as managing editor of NBC/MSNBC politics,” Ali tweeted. “Dafna’s conduct during the call was highly inappropriate and unethical. So what was the purpose of her call? She called me to bully me on behalf of the DNC.”

“Dafna, who oversees the political coverage for NBC and MSNBC, was calling to bully me into delaying the publication of an innocuous scoop and at no point did she advocate for her network, it was only about the DNC,” Ali continued. “Yesterday morning I received a tip from a trusted source. The source told me the DNC would be announcing the dates of the first 2020 primary debates later that day. The source gave me the dates they would be announcing: June 26 and 27.”

This is the most interesting part of the story:

“I realized that @DafnaLinzer, the head of all political coverage for NBC News and MSNBC wasn’t calling to advocate for her network, she was calling to advocate the DNC’s position,” Ali continued. She wanted me to wait so they could call state party leaders. I thought to myself ‘this is how people think it works.’ It’s not. But Dafna was doing it. She kept pressing me. Now I acknowledged, for stuff that isn’t about serious investigative reporting, there is no problem holding something. But I knew once others got the call.”

So much for objective reporting.

The March For Life

Today was the March for Life in Washington, D.C. The Gateway Pundit posted a story today about the March. The media never reports this event exactly as it is.

The article at The Gateway Pundit notes:

An estimated 100,000 people — including Vice President Mike Pence — gathered in DC on Friday for the annual March for Life.

…USA Today, the first result when you search for the march in Google News, began their story by saying, “more than a thousand  anti-abortion activists, including many young people bundled up against the cold weather gripping the nation’s capital, gathered at a stage on the National Mall Friday for their annual march in the long-contentious debate over abortion.”

CNN and MSNBC chose not to report on the March.

Here are some of the best signs from the March (posted at The Daily Signal):

 

Is An “Ism” Always Responsible For A Loss?

Am I the only one tired of hearing some ‘ism’ blamed for the loss of an election or the loss of a position? Well, it happened again today.

The Washington Free Beacon reported today that Representative Barbara Lee will be replaced as Democratic caucus head by Representative Hakeem Jeffries from New York.

The article reports:

Rep. Barbara Lee (D., Calif.) on Wednesday attributed her loss in the Democratic caucus chair race to ageism and sexism, saying she “absolutely” believes she lost because of discrimination.

Earlier in the morning, Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D., N.Y.) defeated Lee, a fellow Congressional Black Caucus member, with a vote of 123-113. The Democratic Caucus chair is the fifth most powerful position in House Democratic leadership.

Huffington Post reporter Matt Fuller asked Lee, 72, after the loss whether she believed “ageism or sexism played a part in this race.”

“Well, I think you heard and saw what took place. So I absolutely think that’s the case,” Lee said.

…Jeffries appeared on MSNBC’s “Meet the Press Daily” on Monday, where he told fill-in host Katy Tur that he has “nothing but respect for Barbara Lee” but he believed he was in a better position to “help the caucus maintain its message, discipline, the operational unity, get things done on behalf of the American people.”

Tur asked about some of the Democratic leaders, including Lee, being older and whether Jeffries believed there needed to be somebody younger in a leadership position.

“I made clear I’m not running against anyone,” Jeffries said. “I am running for the House leadership position.”

Jeffries has been in office since 2013 and Lee, since 1998.

It’s nice to see someone other than Republicans being accused of ‘isms.’

What New Craziness Is This?

Yesterday Breitbart posted an article that included a video of Jennifer Rubin on MSNBC. You can follow the link to watch the entire video (I couldn’t figure out how to embed it), but there is just one part I want to share.

This is Ms Rubin’s comment regarding Sarah Sanders:

“[N]o one is telling them to be violent protesters, but we’re not going to let these people go through life unscathed,” Rubin told host Joy Reid. “Sarah Huckabee has no right to live a life of no fuss, no muss, after lying to the press, after inciting against the press. These people should be made uncomfortable, and I think that’s a life sentence, frankly.”

So, if at any point in my life I work for someone the media does not approve of, I am to be made miserable for the rest of my life. Not only is that ridiculous, it is dangerous. Who appointed Ms. Rubin the judge of all that is correct? Where is the civility the political left is always talking about?

Much of our news media has become mentally unbalanced. They are like an animal backed into a corner–they know their glory days are ending as Americans get wise to their bias, and they are not going down without a fight.

A Perfect Job For A Creative Writer

Ben Rhodes has been described as an aspiring novelist who somehow became a major player in President Obama’s foreign policy. In May of last year, he gave an extended interview (my notes here) with The New York Times describing his part in selling the Iranian nuclear agreement to the American people.

The New York Times article states:

Rhodes singled out a key example to me one day, laced with the brutal contempt that is a hallmark of his private utterances. “All these newspapers used to have foreign bureaus,” he said. “Now they don’t. They call us to explain to them what’s happening in Moscow and Cairo. Most of the outlets are reporting on world events from Washington. The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old, and their only reporting experience consists of being around political campaigns. That’s a sea change. They literally know nothing.”

Somehow that is not comforting.

Today The Daily Caller posted an article about Ben Rhodes’ new job:

Former White House aide Ben Rhodes, who served as Deputy National Security Advisor for Strategic Communications and advised former President Barack Obama on foreign policy issues, will start his new job on Sunday as a politics contributor for MSNBC and NBC News.

MSNBC’s public relations department made the announcement on Twitter on Saturday, noting that Rhodes will make his official debut on Sunday’s “Meet the Press” and Monday’s “All In With Chris Hayes.”

I’m not holding my breath waiting for the time a true conservative shows up on MSNBC as a political contributor. The network is entitled to hire anyone they want, but the viewers need to be aware of the political leanings of the people who are designated as political contributors.

Nine Recent Fake News Stories

Today Breitbart posted an article listing nine recent news stories that were blatantly false yet made it into the mainstream media. Please follow the link to the article to see the details on why each story is false, but here is the list of the stories:

  1. CNN caught lying about Donald Trump, Jr.
  2. ABC News spreads lie about Mike Flynn proving Trump colluded with Russia.
  3. Reuters, Bloomberg, Wall Street Journal spread lie about Trump bank subpoenas.
  4. MSNBC‘s Brzezinski questions accuser with photograph of Franken groping her.
  5. CNN’s Alisyn Camerota says anti-Trump Russian Dossier is ‘corroborated’.
  6. PolitiFact spreads lies about Breitbart, Roy Moore accuser’s forgery.
  7. Facebook flags Breitbart’s 100 percent accurate story, does not flag CNN’s fake news.
  8. Washington Post handwriting expert debunked by Moore accuser.
  9. New York Times falsely claims Secretary of State Tillerson will be forced to resign.

None of these stories are true, yet all were reported by the mainstream media and theoretically believed by the Americans who depend on the mainstream media for their news. We have reached the point where you are more likely to read accurate news on the Internet than on the major networks. That is sad.

 

Ignoring The Obvious

It has been widely reported that the terrorist who ran over people with a truck yesterday afternoon shouted “Allahu Akbar!” I think that might be an indication of what his motives were.

Newsbusters posted a story today illustrating how some of the media chooses to overlook the obvious.

The article reports:

Just hours after news broke that a radical inspired by ISIS drove into a bikepath, killing eight people and injuring over a dozen others, MSNBC was already out deflecting blame from the radical religious ideology behind the attack. The network’s terrorism analyst, Malcolm Nance, defended Islam, saying it wasn’t responsible for Tuesday’s terror attack. He even brought Christianity into the mix, saying that sometimes Christians were responsible for terror.

 Hardball host Chris Matthews brought Nance into the conversation on Tuesday night’s program, asking him about the trend of terrorists using vehicles to go on their violent rampages. Nance responded that it was nothing new, and had been employed by terrorists in Israel dozens of times already.

I’m sorry, Mr. Nance, I don’t remember the last time Christians were responsible for terror. I know sometimes Christianity has been blamed for terror, but there is nothing in the Bible that condones terror. The Quran, on the other hand, has many verses that encourage the killing of infidels.

Mr. Nance then stated:

A few minutes later, the counter-terrorism expert again defended Islam and accused Christians of becoming radicalized terrorists as well:

I have been in the house of Osama Bin Laden in Jalalabad. I have seen the power of how he corrupted Islam and gotten an entire of multiple generations to follow what he believed. ISIS is just the fifth generation of that corrupt ideology. But then when you get down to the street level, you have these former petty criminals, these guys who were really sort of losers in their own society. Even Christians, we have seen Catholics in Canada who converted to quote on quote, Islam and carried out acts of terror. You see them do this and what you really see is a person who either has a mental defect or who has some loss or vacuum in their world, and they decide ISIS or Al-Qaeda ideology and those acts will validate them once and for all in their life.

It wasn’t their Catholic theology that encouraged them to become terrorists–it was the Islamic theology they converted to. Jihad, waging war on infidels, is part of Quranic Islam. We ignore that fact at our own risk.

The so-called counter-terrorism expect is lying. He is lulling Americans into a false sense of security by saying that Islam is not responsible for yesterday’s terrorist attack. It is time to begin to look at what is being taught in America’s mosques. Constitutionally we cannot interfere with anyone’s freedom of religion, but when that freedom becomes a vehicle to encourage terrorism, we need to know who is involved and what they are preaching.

 

 

The Media Continues To Misinform

Townhall posted an article today about some ‘news reporting’ done by Chuck Todd on MSNBC.

The article reports:

Chuck Todd thought he had caught Roy Moore in a hot mic moment and sought to expose his ignorance of the Constitution. The MSNBC anchor shared the following soundbite, in which Moore, fresh off of his win in the Alabama Senate primary, told a reporter that “rights don’t come from government, they don’t come from the Bill of Rights, they come from God.”

The Declaration of Independence states:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

Our Constitution builds on this concept.

The article at Townhall concludes:

Thankfully, Todd doesn’t teach U.S. constitutional law in college. But, he does have a dangerous platform of millions of viewers to espouse his arrogant, elitist views.

Chuck Todd’s statement is one of many reasons we need to teach our children about the Declaration of Independence and the U. S. Constitution. Our freedom will only endure if those who inherit it understand what they have inherited.

When You Pump Raw Sewage Into Your Home Every Night, Eventually Your House Will Smell

This morning I was watching one of the major network news shows. They had a segment about an upcoming show about a transgender child’s fight to use the school bathroom of his/her choice. While I understand that this child might feel ostracized by having to go to a special bathroom that was inconvenient, I want to consider what else is going on here.

The interview was slanted to make the child a very sympathetic character. Anyone who was not sympathetic to the problem faced by this child because he had to walk down an extra hallway to get to his/her bathroom was seen as unfeeling. I believe the child was a girl transitioning to a boy and wanted to use the boys’ restroom. The purpose of this show is to make parents and students comfortable with the idea of a biological girl using the boys’ room. As a parent or a student, are you comfortable with that? I understand the dilemma if the child is truly transgender (that is another wholly separate discussion), but what about the child who simply wants to use the other bathroom and tells the teacher (or whoever) that he (or she) is transgender when he/she is not? Are we putting our school students at risk here? Is it an unnecessary risk?

Television has been used to impact the culture since it arrived. There have been some positive influences and there have been some fun influences, but the majority of television’s network programming undermines the basic foundations of our society. The news on the major news channels is no long objective and is aimed at promoting a specific point of view. The mainstream networks no longer report news–they tell us what to think and what to be outraged about.

We are at a crossroads. It is interesting that a few people in Hollywood have realized that filth does not sell as well as good things and are making family movies again. However, television has not yet gotten the message. When you look at the ratings of MSNBC, you wonder why they are still on the air. The answer is simple–someone is paying their way because they are supporting a definite political viewpoint that their supporters want put forth. All of us need to be very careful what we let come into our house–both in terms of people and in terms of entertainment. We are in danger of losing our values and thus our way of life.

There Are Those In America Who Work Against Free Speech

It isn’t news to anyone paying attention that there are people in America who are working against free speech. Up until the advent of talk radio, the mainstream media, which at that time was slightly left of center and is now seriously left of center, held a monopoly on the news. Americans saw what the mainstream media wanted them to see and heard opinions the mainstream media wanted them to hear. That changed with the advent and popularity of talk radio. The political left has been attempting to regain its monopoly ever since. The political left has maintained its monopoly of thought on almost all college campuses (which is troubling for the future of America), but they have failed to gain a foothold in the marketplace of talk radio and alternative news.

Yesterday World Net Daily posted an article about some information recently discovered by email hackers.

The article reports:

Among the 2,500 documents hacked from Soros’ Open Society Foundation are documents in which Soros’ Open Society Foundation boasts of funding a minority activist campaign against advertisers that succeeded in ousting Glenn Beck from Fox News and Pat Buchanan from MSNBC.

In a memorandum dated March 27, 2012, Bill Vandenberg, the head of Soros’ Democracy Fund, discusses a two-year grant to support the Color of Change, an online organizing group described within the document as the largest online political activist group representing African-American issues.

…Eric Boehlert, reporting in Media Matters – another Soros-funded, leftist organization – wrote on April 7, 2011, in the wake of Beck’s firing, that Color of Change “was advertising,” while neglecting to report that Soros either funded the advertiser boycott campaign or participated in funding Color of Change through his Open Society Foundation.

Another hacked Soros document, a memo from Diana Morris to the U.S. Programs Board of the Open Society Foundation, dated Jan. 30, 2012, makes clear the two-year grant discussed in Vandenberg’s memo cited above was an extension of a pre-existing funding commitment.

“It is important to recognize U.S. Programs’ primary role of granting money to other organizations,” Morris wrote.

“While we undertake our own communications and advocacy efforts, we also invest in others to advance open society in the United States. Some grantees, such as the Center or American Progress, Media Matters, and Color of Change, to name a few, are sophisticate communications machines, while other grantees scarcely engage in any communications efforts,” Morris continued. “There was broad agreement in the working group that it is important to strengthen grantee communications efforts.”

The article goes on to explain the details of the campaign to get Glenn Beck off of the air. This is disturbing. It is an assault on free speech. Worse than that, it is an assault on free speech funded by a foreign citizen with an agenda to tear down America. It would behoove all of us to remember that George Soros made his millions by collapsing currencies.
Because of media bias, which includes not reporting stories that don’t fit the required agenda, the low-information voter in America is either a person who is too busy to pay attention to what is actually happening around him or a person who depends on the mainstream media for his news. A number of months ago, I was talking with some people who are considerably better educated that I am who depend on The New York Times for their news. I shared two stories with them that they were totally unaware of. Unless voters learn to do their own research, we will continue to live in a country run by an elite political class making laws for the rest of us that they choose not to follow. That is not the future I want for America.

This Might Be Part Of The Problem

The Washington Examiner posted an article today about a statement made by Senator Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., during a Thursday appearance on MSNBC‘s “Morning Joe.”

Senator McCaskill stated, “Part of the problem is that our framers were a little maniacal in that if you look at other democracies around the world, when one party wins the congressional branch, they take the executive branch. Not in our country.”

The Senator might want to take a look at the statement of James Madison in Federalist Papers, No. 47, p. 301. He states, “The accumulation of all power, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tryanny.” The separation of powers did not mean that the branches always had to work together, the separation was to provide checks and balances on each branch from the other branches. It wasn’t maniacal–it was brilliant in its understanding of human nature.

The article further reports:

The senator, who has endorsed fellow Democrat Hillary Clinton for president, said that if “Donald Trump would bother to read the Constitution he would understand that that means there is a special obligation to try to unite.”

“Hey listen, I think the Founding Fathers were geniuses. And that’s why I’m somebody who likes to preach the gospel of compromise. That’s what they wanted. They wanted us to compromise.”

They didn’t want us to compromise–they wanted us to follow the Constitution and limit the power of government. We have not done a very good job of either!

This Is Important

As previously stated, I am not a Trump supporter. However, I understand the anger of the people supporting him and the hope they have that he will change the culture of Washington. He has an appeal that easily crosses party lines. Aol News reported one example of that yesterday.

The article states:

Former Democratic presidential candidate Jim Webb, whose centrist campaign folded not long after the first primary debate, said Friday he won’t vote for party front-runner Hillary Clinton – and is open to giving Republican favorite Donald Trump his vote instead.

“No, I would not vote for Hillary Clinton,” said Webb, a former Democratic senator from Virginia, when asked on MSNBC‘s “Morning Joe” if he could support her. When it comes to Trump, he added, “I’m not sure yet. I don’t know who I’m gonna vote for.”

Though he served with her in the Senate, “it’s nothing personal about Hillary Clinton,” Webb told hosts Joe Scarborough and Willie Geist. A vote for Clinton, he said, is a vote for the status quo, while a vote for Trump is a vote to blow up a gridlocked, dysfunctional system of government.

The above statement is a reflection of the feelings of many people. The reason I don’t support Trump is that I am skeptical of his ability to change the climate in Washington. I fear that people are projecting on him whatever they want him to be, much like what happened with President Obama. I am skeptical, but I will vote for Trump if he is the nominee. Hillary Clinton and her husband belong in jail–not in the White House.

It Makes A Good Talking Point, But It Isn’t True

On Thursday, Investor’s Business Daily posted an editorial about the impact of the Dodd-Frank regulations on the banking industry. Both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders have hailed Dodd-Frank as the solution to the problems that caused the 2008 financial meltdown. Unfortunately, if Dodd-Frank is the solution, they have misunderstood the problem.

The article reports:

In their recent debate on MSNBC, both Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders bashed Wall Street and the banks, blaming them for the financial meltdown and subsequent record-slow economic recovery.

Sanders, a socialist, called Wall Street and the banks “criminal” and “corrupt” and implied that he would jail CEOs at big financial companies for their “illegal activity.”

And Clinton issued a literal threat: “You know, we now have power under the Dodd-Frank legislation to break up the banks.” Doubling down, she said that she now wants the same power over investment banks, insurance companies, mortgage companies and others.

Blaming banks and Wall Street might have populist appeal, but it’s false. In his definitive analysis of the financial crisis, “Hidden In Plain Sight,” Peter Wallison, who served on the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, showed that it was the systematic weakening of mortgage lending standards under the U.S. government’s own housing policies that led to the meltdown — and to the phony call by Democrats to go after Wall Street and the banks.

The editorial includes a chart showing the number of regulations that were imposed on banks as a result of Dodd-Frank:

EDIT3_banks2_021216

The article reports the result of Dodd-Frank:

Banking consultant Eric Grover of Intrepid Ventures recently wrote in The American Banker, “Under Dodd-Frank, new bank formation has essentially ceased.” The data are shocking: From 2011 to 2014, just one new commercial bank and no new savings banks were chartered. In the 15 years before Dodd-Frank, an average of 140 new commercial banks and 15 new savings banks were chartered each year. While small banks are going out of business at a record rate due to regulatory costs, big banks with over $50 billion in assets are now “too big to fail.”

The American economy does better when the government stays out of our business–not when the government over-regulates things.

Bias?

Sometimes bias in the media is not illustrated by how a story is reported but rather if a story is reported. Real Clear Politics posted an article yesterday illustrating this fact.

The article tells the story of the spiking of an important story:

That is exactly what the national media have done to an important story about the White House’s intimate working relationship with MIT professor Jonathan Gruber, who helped craft the Affordable Care Act. You may remember Gruber from his infamous videotapes, the ones in which he called the American public too stupid to understand the law. He added their stupidity was helpful to Obama, Pelosi, and Reid in passing the law.

…They vaguely remembered somebody named Gruber or Goober or something but, fortunately, he played only a marginal role in health care. Thanks for asking. Next question?

Now, this may surprise you, but it turns out the White House knew Gruber very well and knew he played a crucial role in the health care bill. The White House simply decided to lie about it. Perhaps they agree with Gruber’s judgment about your intelligence.

How do we know about Gruber’s role? Not because the White House released any documents, not because the media dug into it, but because the House Oversight Committee, chaired by Utah Republican Jason Chaffetz, got MIT to turn over the relevant emails. There were 20,000 pages of emails back-and-forth between Gruber and the White House in the crucial months when the bill was being crafted and passed.

Amazing. The Wall Street Journal reported the story. I believe Fox News also reported it. Otherwise the major media has been totally silent on the issue. As far as the average American voter is concerned, President Obama and his cronies were perfectly honest in their descriptions of the role MIT professor Jonathan Gruber played in the development and selling of ObamaCare.

The article also points out what happened with the role of Jonathan Gruber was mentioned on a morning news show:

What happened on Morning Joe was fascinating. One of the hosts, Mika Brzezinski, called attention to the Journal story. Her co-host, former GOP Rep. Joe Scarborough, followed up. Turning to Mark Halperin, who is the co-managing editor of Bloomberg Politics and a former senior reporter at Time, Scarborough asked if the story was inconsistent with White House statements. “I owe my Republican sources an apology,” Halperin said, “because they kept telling me he [Gruber] was hugely involved, and the White House played it down.”

Then Scarborough asked the money question: “Did the White House lie about that?”

“I think they were not fully forthcoming.”

That answer did not come from a White House official or a Democratic operative. It came from a big-time reporter. And not just any reporter. It came from a reporter to whom the White House had deliberately lied in background briefings. Does he call them out? Nope. He spins for them.

If a voter is depending on the major media for his news, he will, because of this sort of bias, be a low-information voter. We have reached a point where a voter who reads The New York Times, at one time one of the most respected newspapers in the nation, will be a low-information voter. That is truly sad.

The Outrageous Claim Of The Day

The following statement made on MSNBC (and reported at Hot Air) gets my award for the Outrageous Claim of the Day:

If only there was someone around who could educate the American public about the actual level of risk. Someone who was trusted as a public health expert and whose job it was to help us understand what we really need to worry about and what precautions we should take.

Actually, that is one of the primary responsibilities of the United States surgeon general. There’s just one problem: Thanks to Senate dysfunction and NRA opposition, we don’t have a surgeon general right now. In fact, we haven’t had a surgeon general for more than a year now — even though the president nominated the eminently qualified Dr. Vivek Murthy back in November 2013.

I am supposed to believe that there is only one man in all of America who can educate the American public on how to deal with ebola? Wow. Just for the record, the fact that Dr. Murthy’s nomination did not go through was not the fault of either the NRA or the Republicans (two favorite targets of blame on MSNBC). Conservative Democrats opposed the nomination because of Dr. Murthy’s stand on gun control (which he considers a health issue). The NRA opposed the nomination because the Doctor did not support the rights of Americans outlined in the Second Amendment. However, the Congressmen who voted are responsible for their vote–not the NRA.

The article at Hot Air concludes:

Murthy is a vigilant spokesman for the idea that guns are a health issue, and doctors should be asking patients if they have weapons in their homes. (Not to mention potentially collecting that information and passing it along.) This is very much along the same lines as finding out who enjoys hang gliding or lives in tall apartment buildings. The problem with this sort of muddled thinking is that it confuses the topics of disease and injury. We want to reduce the incidence of illness among Americans and education can play in important role in that mission. But injuries are a different category, and gun injuries in particular have nothing to do with communicable health hazards.

Murthy is a willing volunteer in a somewhat obscure column of the army trying to limit the Second Amendment rights of Americans. We don’t need him taking a seat in the Cabinet. And in the meantime, the White House can surely find someone else with a medical degree to talk about Ebola.

I wonder if people who get all of their news at MSNBC actually believe what the network is saying.

Who Do Your Children Belong To?

The Heritage Foundation posted an article today pointing out that because parents are become more aware of what the program is, many states are renaming the Common Core program in order to sneak it past the parents. The curriculum is unacceptable to parents for a variety of reasons.

The article reports:

The Common Core State Standards Initiative, as it is officially known, began in earnest in early 2009. The National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers drafted the standards, but the effort quickly became a Washington-centric one. To induce states to adopt the standards, the federal government:

  • Offered more than $4.35 billion in Race to the Top grants.
  • Directly financed the two national testing consortia developing the assessments to test whether students learn according to the standards.
  • Have offered waivers to states from the onerous provisions of No Child Left Behind in exchange for common standards adoption.
  • Have created a technical review panel for the tests housed at the U.S. Department of Education.

Parents recognize that Common Core national standards and tests will require them to relinquish one of their most powerful tools to effect school improvement: control of academic content, standards, and testing through their state and local policymakers. Parents recognize that Common Core takes their seats at the table, further removing them from the decision-making process in favor of decisions being centrally made by national organizations and Washington bureaucrats.

The last thing this country needs is Washington bureaucrats messing up children’s education.

The article quotes a very troubling statement:

“The children belong to all of us,” former Massachusetts Education Secretary Paul Reville recently stated. Likewise, according to MSNBC host Melissa Harris-Perry, “We have to break through our kind of private idea that kids belong to their parents or kids belong to their families and recognize that kids belong to whole communities.” Wrong.

Part of the problem with the education our children are currently receiving is that  the involvement of parents in our schools has decreased greatly because of the need for two wage earners in families. Common Core will totally freeze parents out of all decision processes concerning educational standards for their children–these will now be standards set by the federal government that have no room for individuality.

Common Core needs to be replaced by a plan that allows states and communities to set educational standards that fit their communities. In education, one size does not fit all.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Anatomy Of A Smear

Before “bridgegate,” Chris Christie was beating Hillary Clinton in preliminary presidential polling. Considering the political history of the Clintons in dealing with their opponents, there was no way that was going to be allowed to stand. Just for the record, I would like to repeat that I do not support Chris Christie for President. My three choices are Scott Walker, Bobby Jindal, or Rick Perry, none of which at this time has a realistic chance for the nomination because the Republican establishment would never support them.

The first attack on Governor Christie was about the closing of the traffic lanes in Fort Lee. I will get to that later. After that attack, the Democrat Mayor Dawn Zimmer of Hoboken claimed that Christie’s administration threatened to withhold Sandy relief funding if she didn’t approve a building development project favored by the governor. The media went wild. Now they had him–he was bullying this poor innocent mayor–and bullying right now is the worst crime anyone can commit. Well, things are not always what they appear to be.

Guy Benson at Townhall.com did some research. He discovered that the Journal entry she claims to have made was undated and unverifiable. To add to the story, an attorney who represented a client in an unrelated case has stepped forward to point out that Mayor Zimmer testified that she does not keep a record or journal of conversations on city business. She said so in a sworn deposition taken last July, then again at trial.

The article further reports:

David Mello is the only shred of independent corroboration in this case — in support of Zimmer, that is. He is described by MSNBC as a Zimmer loyalist, and openly admits that he was adamantly opposed to Christie’s re-election. Why he waited for several days after this story broke to remember his conversation with Zimmer is unclear, but a core question remains: Why didn’t he, a hardcore Christie opponent, report the alleged corruption scheme to authorities or the voting public when he first learned of the issue?

…The initial MSNBC article that went viral several weekends ago left a strong impression that the city of Hoboken, which was 80 percent flooded after Sandy, had been denied virtually bereft of all relief aid, save for an insignificant pittance. In truth, the city has been approved for roughly $70 million in direct relief and reconstruction aid from the federal and New Jersey governments. Christie’s office says Hoboken is set to receive even more, pending federal approval. Zimmer’s chief complaint was about “hazard mitigation” funds. She says she requested more than $100 million in that specific type of aid, but only received approximately $350,000. Her original ask was unrealistic in the extreme. The pot of money Christie’s administration had to distribute for this purpose was about $300 million — total, for the entire state.

…Mayor Zimmer fingered two separate Christie officials, who she says delivered corrupt, quid pro quo threats on behalf of the administration. One was the Lieutenant Governor, who strongly denies it, and the other is a man named Richard Constable. Zimmer says Constable confronted her on the set of a television show, on which they both served as panelists. The network has no record of their supposed conversation, and another panelist who sat directly next to Zimmer has explicitly refused to back up her version of events. Matt Doherty is the Democratic mayor of Belmar, New Jersey. He says he remembers no such conversation ever taking place, and went out of his way to praise Christie’s professionalism and responsiveness after the storm hit.

There is also the fact that the story changed after it was first reported. Originally Mayor Zimmer had claimed that he governor’s anti-Hoboken retaliation was rooted in her decision not to endorse his re-election bid. This, of course, was considered to be another example of the kind of bullying that closed the traffic lanes. Later Mayor Zimmer claimed she was threatened because she did not support a building project. Even later, Mayor Zimmer explicitly told CNN that Hoboken had not endured any form of retaliation from Christie’s office. All three stories happened in the same week.

Later, Mayor Zimmer was praising Governor Christie for the great job he has done. It just doesn’t add up.

So what about the lane closings? Yesterday a lawyer for the former official, David Wildstein, stated that Mr. Wildstein has evidence that Chris Christie knew about the lane closings beforehand. David Wildstein is a high school friend of Mr. Christie’s who was appointed with the governor’s blessing at the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which controls the bridge. The lawyer has not revealed what the evidence is, and an article at Townhall.com includes a tweet from Josh Barro that asks the question, “If Wildstein has evidence the governor knew about the lane closures, why didn’t he turn it over in response to the NJ Leg subpoena?” Good question.

Hot Air posted an article about the ‘new evidence’ that included the following:

Wildstein’s got two possible reasons to lie. One, obviously, is revenge on Christie. Wildstein resigned in early December, no doubt under pressure from the governor’s office. Maybe he has an axe to grind now, if only because he assumed Christie would go to bat for an old friend like him. The other reason is immunity: He’s spent the last two weeks whispering to people that he’s willing to talk if he’s spared the threat of prosecution. The U.S. Attorney hasn’t taken the bait yet. This is an obvious pot-sweetener.

Stay tuned. All is not what it appears to be.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Rewriting Recent History When Convenient

Ed Morrissey at Hot Air posted an article today about a recent chyron on MSNBC. Just in case you are not a news junkie, the chyron is the group of words at the bottom on the screen that either gives the latest headlines or adds to the discussion taking place on the screen. In this case, the chyron read, “GOP flubs Obamacare launch.” Wow. I wasn’t even aware that the GOP were the ones who had launched ObamaCare. The real GOP flub in the launch of ObamaCare was allowing it to go forward with a broken website and exemptions for Congress and big business and not for average Americans, but that wasn’t a flub–that was just the make-up of Congress.

Mr. Morrissey comments:

Ironically, the entire segment demonstrates why the chyron would be inaccurate in any context — and why the tactical retreat on the shutdown might turn out to be a strategic victory for Republicans in the long run.  Without the breathless minute-by-minute updates from Capitol Hill on the shutdown, the biggest national story and shared experience is the disastrous ObamaCare rollout, which is so bad and so big that even MSNBC can’t ignore it.

Stay tuned. I’m sure there is more to come. I want to see if MSNBC and their cohorts can successfully convince the American public that the Republicans are actually responsible for the botched roll-out of ObamaCare. If they can, we are in more trouble than I thought.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Behind The Scenes In The Student Loan Battle

Today’s Wall Street Journal posted an editorial about the current debate over student loan interest rates.

Today the Senate voted on student-loan subsidies. The news just reported that an attempt to roll back the interest rate increase has failed a procedural hurdle. One proposal suggests that the interest rate on the loans be tied to the 10-year Treasury rate. The advantage of this idea is that the taxpayers do not have to guarantee the lower rate to borrowers while the cost of the loans to the government goes up.

The Congressional Budget Office recently estimated taxpayer losses on student loans to be $95 billion over the next ten years. Remember that the government takeover of student loans was part of ObamaCare. (see rightwinggranny.com)

The article in the Wall Street Journal reports:

Liberals apologize for the price hikes imposed by their friends in the faculty lounge by pretending that universities are starved for revenue. Rep. Frank Pallone (D., N.J.) claimed on MSNBC on Saturday that “the federal government is not making the investment in higher education.” Perhaps he’s forgotten that annual Pell grant spending of $34 billion has roughly doubled in the Obama era, or that Uncle Sugar now originates more than $100 billion in annual loans.

In October 2011, I wrote in rightwinggranny.com:

The article also points out that under the proposed changes, the government would be entirely responsible for college loans. Students would borrow directly from the government and pay the government back. What happens when students default? The taxpayers pick up the tab. Aside from the fact that the benefits to the students of this program are minuscule, we need less government in all aspects of our lives–not more.

In a New York Post article quoted in the above article, John Podhoretz wrote:

One federal study found that between 1982 and 2007, tuition costs rose 432 percent while family income rose only 147 percent.

As taxpayers, we are subsidizing inflationary spending on the part of higher education. There is no incentive to cut costs if you know that the money will keep pouring in and that the government will enable the students to afford the rising tuition. Until parents refuse to pay the rising tuition at some of the prestige schools, we will continue to have this problem.

The Harvard University website reports:

The complete budget at Harvard College (exclusive of transportation) for 2012-2013 is $57,950. Tuition – $37,576; Room and Board – $13,630; College Facilities Fees (for use of library and other University facilities including the Health Services) – $3,290; Minimum for extras (books, clothing, dues, recreation, etc.) – $3,454.

In some parts of America, you can buy a house for that amount.

Enhanced by Zemanta

President Obama And Israel

YouTube has posted an 18 minute video American voters should watch before they vote. This is the video:

YouTube describes the video as follows:

A new, 18-minute mini-documentary follows the journey of Irina, a 23-year-old liberal, Jewish New Yorker who voted for Obama in 2008. Yet as her connection to Israel has grown, and she has learned more about the President’s policies across the Middle East and towards Israel in particular, Irina has come to realize that “when the chips are down,” the President may not “have Israel’s back” as he says.

The short film features:

Exclusive interviews with leading journalists and politicians in Israel
(Bloomberg, London Times, Jerusalem Post, etc.)

Mainstream news reports (CNN, MSNBC, ABC, BBC, etc.),

Clips from longtime Democratic supporters including: Harvard Professor Alan Dershowitz Former NYC Mayor Ed Koch Senator Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) Senator Bob Menendez (D-NJ) Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY)

Enhanced by Zemanta

A New Low In Media Reporting

The Blaze posted two videos on Thursday of a Romney-Ryan rally in Ohio. The first video was played by MSNBC host Martin Bashir to illustrate his point that Paul Ryan was overshadowing Mitt Romney in the presidential campaign. A similar video had been played on “Morning Joe” the day before. I am not posting that video, if you would like to see it, follow the link to “The Blaze” above.

The unedited (untampered with) clip is at the bottom of the article at “The Blaze.” Here it is:

The article also provides an eyewitness account of the events. The eyewitness account and the unedited video clearly show that the crowd was not shouting “Ryan”–they were shouting “Romney,” and Mitt Romney encouraged them to change the shout to “Romney-Ryan.”  It is very discouraging to see videotape edited to fit the picture the mainstream media is trying to paint of this presidential campaign. This altered video clearly shows the reason we need the Internet as an alternative news source.

Enhanced by Zemanta