Thirty-two years ago, Canadian poet Margaret Atwood, looked down upon Ronald Reagan’s America and decided it was theocratic.
After four years of Ronnie, the nation had not banned abortion, pornography, or homosexuality, but Atwood saw the specter of Americans believing in Christ again — and so she wrote “The Handmaid’s Tale,” a warning that women would be cloistered and become breeding cows to men.
Now liberals have dusted off this road apple, polished it up, and put it on Hulu as a warning of what The Donald will do.
Except it is true. All of this is happening. And on President Trump’s watch.
It just is not happening here, but rather in the Islamic State
Which turned Iran into an Islamic Hell for women (and men) 40 years ago when Carter was president. Over time, things have gotten worse.
An update on the missing members of the extended Merrell family
Grand Canyon National Park officials said Friday that a body found is likely that of a 14-year-old hiker who went missing in the park two weeks ago with his step-grandmother.
The lie we were told as kids was this: The end of American liberty would come at the hands of the political right.
Conservatives would take away our right to speak our minds, and use the power of government to silence dissent. The right would intimidate our teachers and professors, and coerce the young.
And then, with the universities in thrall, with control of the apparatus of the state (and the education bureaucracy), the right would have dominion over a once-free people.
Some of us were taught this in school. Others, who couldn’t be bothered to read books, were fed a cartoon version of the diabolical conservative in endless movies and TV shows. The most entertaining of these were science fiction, sometimes with vague references to men in brown shirts and black boots goose-stepping in some future time.
But the lie is obvious now, isn’t it?
Because it is not conservatives who coerced today’s young people or made them afraid of ideas that challenge them. Conservatives did not shame people into silence, or send thugs out on college campuses to beat down those who wanted to speak.
The left did all that.
It’s there in front of you, the thuggish mobs of the left killing free speech at American universities. The thugs call themselves antifas, for anti-fascists.
They beat people up and break things and set fires and intimidate. These are not anti-fascists. These are fascists. This is what fascists do.
Saving America by hating everyone.
The Atlantic’s May cover features Alec Baldwin covered in orange makeup holding up a Trump wig. The cover asks, “Can Satire Save the Republic?”
What is satire saving the Republic from? Republicans. While making America safe for Socialism.
After Bush won, Democrats fought back by doubling down on the ridicule. Before long they were getting their news from Jon Stewart’s smirk. Stewart spawned a whole range of imitators. Today you can find numberless clones of the Daily Show across cable and even on CBS and, soon, on NBC.
The left is devoutly convinced that this snickering can save America. That it’s better than the news.
The Peabody awards celebrated the Daily Show as “a trusted source of news for citizens united in their disappointment and disgust with politics and cable news”. But the media was the first in line to anoint the politics of contempt, ridicule and disgust as the future of journalism. Now the future is here.
The Washington Post, once a paper of record, swarms with snarky Stewartesque headlines like, “Jeff Sessions doesn’t think a judge in Hawaii — a.k.a. ‘an island in the Pacific’ — should overrule Trump”. Journalism is dead. And replacing it with snarky lefty spin hasn’t saved the Republic. Or anything else.
The left loves embracing the idea of “tolerance,” yet the rest of us have long observed that all the Left ever seems tolerant of is itself. A new survey from Dartmouth College provides yet more evidence that the volatile political divide in this country is being caused by the intolerant left.
Yup. The side that is currently breeding violence against speech they disagree with happens to be intolerant of opposing views. They’ve practically built an entire movement on preaching “tolerance,” while those of us who didn’t fall for it recognized it as Orwell’s “newspeak.”
…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.
This is also a new page so it stays on the front page.
This story hasn’t gotten anywhere near enough attention. Dr. John Christy and Dr. Roy Spencer are eminent climate scientists. They are realists who have done much to demolish the hysterical claims of the politically- and financially-motivated climate alarmists.
Both Dr. Christy and Dr. Spencer teach at the University of Alabama Huntsville, where there was a left-wing “march for science” last Saturday. The march passed near by the National Space Science and Technology Center building where both Christy an Spencer have offices. Some time in the hours after the march, someone fired seven shots into the Space Science and Technology Center, near Christy’s office.
A total of seven shots were fired into our National Space Science and Technology Center (NSSTC) building here at UAH over the weekend.
All bullets hit the 4th floor, which is where John Christy’s office is (my office is in another part of the building).
Given that this was Earth Day weekend, with a March for Science passing right past our building on Saturday afternoon, I think this is more than coincidence. When some people cannot argue facts, they resort to violence to get their way. …
“Our street is fairly quiet, so I doubt the shots were fired during Saturday’s march here. It was probably late night Saturday or Sunday for the shooter to have a chance of being unnoticed. Maybe the “March For Science” should have been called the “March To Silence”.”
Campus and city police say they believe the shots were fired from a passing car, based upon the angle of entry into one of the offices. Shell casings were recovered outside. The closest distance a passing car would have been is 70 yards away.
Apparently local authorities were quick to brand the shooting as ‘random’, although it is not clear what evidence supports that conclusion. Dr. Spencer adds:
(1) the bullets had hit the other end of the building,
(2) on the first floor,
(3) it didn’t happen on Earth Day weekend, and
(4) there was no March for Science that weekend, I would still consider 7 shots fired into our building a probable act of ecoterrorism. I am not surprised this happened at all.
For the last 25 years our science has been viewed as standing in the way of efforts to institute a carbon tax or otherwise reduce carbon dioxide emissions. The amount of money involved in such changes in energy policy easily run into the hundreds of billions of dollars…more likely trillions.
When I was at NASA, my boss was personally told by Al Gore that Gore blamed our satellite temperature dataset for the failure of carbon tax legislation to pass.
So why am I not surprised that our building was shot up?”
Because people have been killed for much less reason than hundreds of billions of dollars.
Oroville Dam Update
Following the terrorist attack outside Britain’s Houses of Parliament on March 22, 2017, it was not surprising or wrong that many Muslims denounced the attack and declared it to be un-Islamic. Two days afterwards, Dr. Mohammed Qureshi, chairman of the Board of Trustees for the Shropshire Islamic Foundation, said:
We need to be united in this situation.
We should not give any religion a bad name and these people need to be dealt with in full force and there should be zero tolerance when it comes to dealing with them.
My heart goes out to these victims. And my heart goes out to the people’s families and those who are injured. I pray they all have peace in their minds.
There is no place for these acts in the religion of Islam.
The people are being radicalised and the young and vulnerable people need to be protected.
We need to disassociate this with Islam, as Islam is a religion of peace.
This view was echoed in a press release by the Foundation, in which sympathy for the dead and their families was followed by a commitment to non-violence: “as a community, we need to come together to condemn violence and hatred and work towards cohesion and tolerance”.
More recently, a document about Islamophobia published by the Green Party of the United States affirmed the purportedly peaceful character of Islam:
The highest goal of the Islamic faith is Peace. Peace is pursued over all and for Muslims the world over, ‘holy war’ has nothing to do with the concept of jihad. The Arabic word translates as ‘struggle,’ and is used a handful of times in the Quran to speak of the struggle to stay on the righteous path, to fulfill obligations to family, community and Creator, what the Islamic scholars call a higher jihad.
These claims, however, seem innocent of the verses that say:
So when you meet those who disbelieve [in battle], strike [their] necks until, when you have inflicted slaughter upon them, then secure their bonds…. And those who are killed in the cause of Allah — never will He waste their deeds. Surah Muhammad [47:4]
And prepare against them whatever you are able of power and of steeds of war by which you may terrify the enemy of Allah and your enemy and others besides them whom you do not know [but] whom Allah knows. [Sahih International] Verse (8:60)
Yesterday, President Trump signed an executive order requiring a review of the large national monuments that have been created over the last 21 years. The president ran on a platform of reducing regulations to promote jobs and economic growth, but he inherited vast areas — nearly a billion acres in total — that have been shut off from productive use under the Antiquities Act.
His predecessor, Barack Obama, was the king of Antiquities Act abuse, designating more monuments covering more area than any prior president. He tripled the total area restricted, adding more than 500 million acres in new and expanded monuments. Most of this area was locked up during the last year of Obama’s presidency, once he was no longer accountable to voters.
The suggestion that some of these controversial monuments may be reconsidered has caused alarm among environmental groups, who routinely lobby for more and more monuments. They blithely assumed that these decisions were permanent and insist that they must be because no president has previously revoked a monument.
On one level, the argument that the president has this authority is obvious. Suppose, for instance, that a monument was created to protect an artifact that has since been excavated and taken to a museum, removing the monument’s justification. Or imagine a president designates a monument to protect what he later learns was a hoax. What sense would it make to forever forbid the use of federal lands in such circumstances? And what if a president declares a monument that violates the Antiquities Act? Are subsequent Presidents forever bound by that illegal action? Of course not.
Annnnnd we’re two-for-two.
North Korea launched a ballistic missile on Friday, but the missile “broke up in flight” over the Peninsula and has been deemed a failure, two U.S. officials have confirmed to Fox News.
The missile has been assessed to be a KN-17, a former Scud missile that officials believe is being tested to one day target ships. It flew roughly 25 miles and was in the air for about 15 minutes, officials tell Fox News. The KN-17 was launched from Pukchang.
As no one in particular said:
“How long is it going to take these Megla-Morons to figure out we have a couple of team members of Korean descent sitting low with shades on in the front seat of ’86 Diahatsu with a TransFluxCapacitorDemodulator that was built from parts out of one the last Radio Shack stores in New Jersey before they closed. This device produces a pencil thin beam of energized particles that scrambles any kind of electrical control signal necessary for a successful launch of their so called Doomsday Missiles.
Upon ignition and power up, these guys just turn on the TFCD device, powered off the cigarette lighter, put the laser designator on the missile and “FOOF”…all the control circuits go crazy…and then “KABOOM” goes the missile.
Keeping straight faces, our Operators then ease on out of the parking lot and go enjoy a little Kimchi.“
Poor CNN having to post this.
On the eve of his 100th day in office, President Donald Trump used a speech at the National Rifle Association to help renew his standing among a conservative base that’s wary after watching the President reverse course on a series of campaign promises.
Trump declared that an “eight-year assault” on gun ownership rights had come to a “crashing end” with his election.
“A fair debate on the issue is needed, but liberal lobbying groups refuse to participate.”
I’m shocked, shocked I tell you!
When you receive glowing media attention and have hundreds of millions of dollars to spend, you don’t really have to debate. Michael Bloomberg just announced last week that he would be putting $25 million into next year’s House and Senate races. From 2013 to 2016, he donated $48 million toward congressional races. By contrast, the NRA contributed a measly $2.1 million. And Mr. Bloomberg spent about 85 percent more on lobbying, more on television advertising, and much more for state and local political races.
Mr. Bloomberg’s groups, like other gun control organizations, usually have control over whom they debate on TV and radio. I know this from personal experience. On a half dozen occasions, I have been asked to appear on CNN or elsewhere, only to be canceled on because the representative from Mr. Bloomberg’s group didn’t want to appear with me on the show. I have even been told this as I was driving to the studio. All that the producers could give me was their sympathy. A couple of them even asked me if I could recommend someone to replace me.
The U.S. military is investigating whether two Army Rangers killed during a raid in Afghanistan were struck by friendly fire, U.S. Forces in Afghanistan said on Friday.
Military investigators are examining the “possibility” that the two members of the 75th Ranger Regiment were “accidentally killed by friendly fire during the more than three-hour fight,” the U.S. Forces said in a statement.
“We investigate all combat deaths of U.S. service members, and because we believe that there is a possibility of friendly fire in this case, it is appropriate to notify the families. Once the investigation is complete, USFOR-A will provide the results to our chain of command,” the statement said.
The two Rangers were killed and a third was wounded during a raid Wednesday night in Nangarhar Province that involved two platoons of U.S. Rangers and the same number of Afghan Special Security Forces.
Hail and Farewell Rangers.
And it always takes years for anti-gun crap like this to wind it’s way through the courts. I’ll bet
A Cleveland gun offender registry and several gun regulations passed by city council in 2015 are unconstitutional, a three-judge panel at the Ohio Eighth District Court of Appeals declared on Thursday.
Most of the laws contained in the package, proposed by Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson and passed by City Council in the wake of a flurry of gun violence in 2014 and 2015, conflict with state law, thus rendering them invalid, the judges found.
The panel sent the case back to Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Judge Shirley Strickland Saffold who left the gun registry intact in August, but ruled that three laws violated a state law that gives state legislators preemptive control over gun laws, including a provision that allowed police officers to confiscate guns.
The new regulations included:
- A requirement that people convicted of crimes involving a firearm self-register with the city, akin to a sex-offender registry.
- A rule that prohibits leaving a firearm where it can be accessed by someone under the age of 18.
- A provision that requires people who aren’t gun dealers to report the sale of guns or weapons.
- The law that requires gun owners to report lost or stolen firearms to the city.
- A provision that requires police to be notified if a gun is found on school property.
- A ban on the negligent transfer of firearms to someone who is intoxicated or is a convicted felon (state law already prohibits reckless transfer).
- An increased penalty for failing to secure a dangerous ordnance, such as an explosive material or device.
- A new, stricter definition of automatic weapons.
- The prohibition of shooting a firearm within 500 feet of a park, playground, or recreation center.
- A provision allowing police to seize a gun from someone drinking, disturbing the police, threatening bodily harm or causing a disturbance or violence.
- A provision prohibiting the defacing of identification marks on firearms or the possession of defaced firearms a misdemeanor; it is already a felony under state law.
The General Assembly took away power from cities and villages to enact gun laws that go further than state statutes [this is ‘state preemption, and the proggies hate it with a purple passion ed.], and as a result, Cleveland’s laws could not stand, the judges found.
The appeals judges that found all but two of those laws were more restrictive than existing state gun laws. The restriction on selling to people who are intoxicated and the prohibition on giving guns to a minor are allowed to stand because they mirror existing laws established by the legislature, according to the decision.
A warming trend of 0.32 °C/decade during 1979–1997 to a cooling trend of − 0.47 °C/decade during 1999–2014.
Remember the much ballyhooed paper that made the cover of Nature, Steig et al, “Warming of the Antarctic ice-sheet surface since the 1957 International Geophysical Year”, Nature, Jan 22, 2009 that included some conspicuously errant Mannian math from the master of making trends out of noisy data himself? Well, that just went south, literally.
And it just isn’t because the Steig et al. paper was wrong, as proven by three climate skeptics that submitted their own rebuttal, no, it’s because mother nature herself reversed the trend in actual temperature data…
In Germany there is no 1st amendment that prohibits the ‘establishment of religion’
The 500th anniversary of Martin Luther mailing his ’95 Theses’ to the Archbishop of Mainz – considered the start of the protestant reformation – is October 31st.
A project created by a child is something other children are bound to understand. Presumably, that’s also true for adults, in particular if the kids use a popular type of toy found in every German child’s toy box – Playmobil figures.
The exhibition “Es begann mit Luther” (It Started with Luther) in Mühlacker parish, which is situated between Stuttgart and Karlsruhe, has been on show since Reformation Day 2016, that is, October 31. It was primarily children who created the exhibition using tiny plastic Playmobil figures to recreate six key historical events in the life of Martin Luther.
Well, at least he was going over there, instead of going jihadi here.
FBI agents took Laith Waleed Alebbini, 26, into custody Wednesday afternoon almost immediately after he obtained his boarding pass for a flight to Chicago O’Hare. Alebbini admitted he intended to travel to Turkey and join the fight for ISIS, court records show.
Oh, and that “admitted he intended to travel to Turkey and join the fight for ISIS”?
He’s stupid too.
As I posted elsewhere,
the National Firearms Act of 1934 is, and has been, obsolete for nearly 60 years!
In an obscure ruling penned in an eight-paragraph letter to a little-known gun parts maker, America’s top firearms law enforcement agency reversed an earlier decision on the legal use of a gun accessory that could have major implications for industry and may even undercut more than 80 years of gun control.
Developed by military veteran Alex Bosco to help his wounded warrior friend shoot heavier handguns more easily at the local firing range, the SB-Tactical pistol stabilizing brace was largely considered a curiosity by most of the shooting public when it was released in 2013.
But the biggest, and perhaps most significant, effect of the ruling could be the undermining of the National Firearms Act. The technology of today has forced the feds to tie themselves in knots trying to write rules that comport to a gun law written when the Thompson submachine gun was the biggest threat and revolvers ruled the handgun world.
Besides the AR-15 pistols vs rifles, you have AK pistols vs rifles.
Remington XP-100 pistol vs their M600 rifle over 50 years ago.
Ruger Challenger pistol vs the 10-22 rifle
Thompson Center Contender and Encore convertible Rifle/Pistol ‘kits’.
Mossberg Shockwave and Remington 870 TAC-14
Henry Mare’s Laig pistol
Under the NFA laws and ATF regulations, the sequence, merely the order that the parts were put together, plus the use of a very few distinct parts like these arm braces, makes them either fall under NFA restrictions…or not.
If it wasn’t about guns, which the proggies absolutely hate to see in the hands of the ‘riff-raff’ (that’s us), any other product that had this set of illogical laws governing it’s manufacture or possession would’ve been repealed decades ago.
Just to make clear,
VOX is a radical proggie website.
THE ONION is a satirical parody news website masquerading as a real one.
Universal coverage is obviously important. But making alcohol, tobacco, and driving vastly more expensive is arguably more so.
— Dylan Matthews (@dylanmatt) April 25, 2017
I added the ‘self defense’ tag because one day we’ll need to actively go down that avenue with these tin horn wanna-be tyrants.
That last paragraph down there is along the lines of something that, to me, seems to be a ‘feature’ not a ‘bug’.
Looking at these sites it’s a little strange to me that there’s many that ‘just happened’ to contain vast mineral and other resources. Knowing that the national debt is impossible to repay, it just walks and quacks like a duck to me that what might happen, when the U.S. finally gets to the point of being unable to service the debt and the markers are presented for payment (and U.S.$ not being wanted) is that the government will – ‘reluctantly forced by circumstances’ – repeal the law that forbids their sale. However the truth will be that they’re simply handed over to whoever is holding the Treasury debt. The word ‘collateral’ coming to mind.
But, that’s just me and my cynical side.
Obama placed 265 million acres under the control of the federal government, more land than any previous president. The designations ranged from underwater canyons and mountains off Cape Cod, Mass., to the vast Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument in the Pacific Ocean.
“The Antiquities Act does not give the federal government unlimited power to lock up millions of acres of land and water, and it’s time we ended this abusive practice,” Trump said at the signing at the Interior Department.
Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke will review two dozen monuments created over the past 21 years by Obama, George W. Bush and Bill Clinton. That includes two protections in Utah where the state’s Republican-led lawmakers want to revoke the monument status for sites believed to hold fossil fuel resources.
Gee, you think it might have something to do with a vehicle?
The mood on migration in Sweden appears to have shifted dramatically this year, with a majority of people now saying they want the Nordic nation to take in fewer asylum seekers.
The most recent survey, conducted in autumn and winter, found that 52 per cent of respondents said Sweden should slow the migrant flow, with only 26 per cent opposed to the idea.
By contrast, Swedes asked the same question in 2015 were almost evenly split on the issue — 40 per cent said they felt the country should be receiving fewer asylum seekers, whilst 37 per cent wanted to see the influx continue.
Just a little factoid from the previous post, because sometimes it’s necessary to drive the stake in with a sledgehammer.
According to a 2013 PEW Research Center survey, the household gun ownership rate in rural areas was 2.11 times greater than in urban areas (“Why Own a Gun? Protection is Now Top Reason,” PEW Research Center, March 12, 2013). Suburban households are 28.6% more likely to own guns than urban households. Despite lower gun ownership, urban areas experience much higher murder rates. One should not put much weight on this purely “cross-sectional” evidence over one point in time, but it is still interesting to note that so much of the country has both very high gun ownership rates and zero murders.