Displaying the most recent of 90908 posts written by

Ruth King

Democrats In Key Battlegrounds Are Refusing To Debate Republican Opponents By: Tristan Justice

https://thefederalist.com/2022/09/13/democrats-in-key-battlegrounds-are-refusing-to-debate-republican-opponents/

Democrat candidates in pivotal races across the country are avoiding opportunities to defend their platforms before the voters.

Democrat candidates in pivotal races across the country are avoiding opportunities to defend their platforms before the voters two months before the November midterms.

On Sunday, Arizona Secretary of State and fall gubernatorial candidate Katie Hobbs became the latest Democrat nominee to refuse a debate with her Republican rival. In a statement, the Hobbs campaign declared former television anchor Kari Lake too extreme to share the stage with the Democrat candidate.

“Unfortunately, debating a conspiracy theorist like Kari Lake — whose entire campaign platform is to cause enormous chaos and make Arizona the subject of national ridicule — would only lead to constant interruptions, pointless distractions, and childish name-calling,” Hobbs campaign manager Nicole DeMont said. “We must respectfully decline the invitation.”

Hobbs’ campaign had demanded separate half-hour interviews instead.

Lake called on Hobbs to “grow a spine” in a video published on Twitter.

“I have asked the Clean Elections Commission to extend the deadline for you to confirm your attendance to the day of the debate,” Lake said, announcing plans to speak across from an empty chair on Oct. 12 if need be.

The Regime’s ‘Operation MAGA Fascist’ Gains Ground The only good news is that Joe Biden and the ruling class have a lousy track record at winning wars. By Julie Kelly

https://amgreatness.com/2022/09/13/the-regimes-operation-maga-fascist-gains-ground/

After nearly two years of lies related to the events of January 6, 2021, the regime finally has admitted the truth: The widening legal dragnet to scoop up Donald Trump, his associates, and his voters has nothing to do with the four-hour disturbance on Capitol Hill that afternoon. It is, rather, a thus-far successful crusade to criminalize wrong think about the outcome of the 2020 presidential election.

A barrage of subpoenas issued recently by the Department of Justice—U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Matthew Graves’ office specifically—against Trump aides is not seeking  information about the Capitol protest but personal communications discussing what happened with the election and plans to fight the results. Graves wants records dating back to October 2020 “constituting any evidence (a) tending to show that there was fraud of any kind in or relating to the 2020 Presidential Election, or (b) used or relied upon to support any claim of fraud in relation to the 2020 Presidential Election.”

Targets must produce correspondence detailing “any strategies or options for ensuring the certification of Donald J. Trump.” Graves also is demanding information about how Trump raised money from “efforts to contest the 2020 election.”

Of course, this is what the January 6 hysteria has always been about. As the chaos unfolded on January 6, Joe Biden and his apparatchiks immediately denounced believers of the so-called “Big Lie”—the claim the election had been rigged, if not stolen, by powerful interests who wanted nothing more than to defeat Trump—and vowed revenge would come swiftly. “The totalitarian company line is any suggestion that election fraud exists is tantamount to sedition,” I wrote on January 11, 2021. “Americans who dare doubt the results, a popular political sport for Democrats over the past four years, are now vilified as ‘insurrectionists’ and plenty of our fellow countrymen want it punished accordingly.”

Oh, how their dreams have come true. Nearly 900 Americans face criminal charges for mostly nonviolent participation in the Capitol protest; lives have been destroyed, even ended, as a result of this cruel, vengeful prosecution recently rebranded the “Capitol Siege” investigation by Graves’ office. The weapons used in the first war on terror—secret surveillance, invasive investigation, armed raids, torture, and political prisons to name a few tactics—have been aimed at Trump supporters across the country in a show of force and intimidation.

“Operation MAGA Fascist” appears to be the commander-in-chief’s unofficial name of the regime’s war on terror against millions of Americans, which now is reaching a version of the Battle of Fallujah but without the bloodshed. (Let’s hope.) The unprecedented FBI raid on Mar-a-Lago on August 8 ratcheted up the fever of the war by a considerable measure—the regime’s desired response. 

The Democrats’ Filibuster Scheme Byron York Byron York

https://townhall.com/columnists/byronyork/2022/09/14/the-democrats-filibuster-scheme-n2613042

Vice President Kamala Harris appeared in a pre-taped interview on NBC’s “Meet the Press” last weekend. As is often the case with her interviews, Harris said a few awkward, ill-informed or downright odd things. For example, she claimed that the U.S.-Mexico border is “secure.” When asked if she was confident of that, Harris answered, “We have a secure border in that that is a priority for any nation, including ours and our administration.” It’s hard to figure out what that meant.

The most newsworthy thing Harris said concerned the state of the Senate filibuster. Democrats have been in control of the Senate since the 2020 election, but with a 50-50 tie, they do not control a majority of seats. Their margin of control is the vice president’s tiebreaking vote. But even to get to that point on a partisan measure, Democrats have to unite all 50 of their senators. That has been difficult when two centrist Democrats, Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona, sometimes declined to go along with their colleagues.

So a goal of Democrats in this November’s election — a dream scenario, actually — would be to win 52 seats. That way, even if Manchin and Sinema defected, there would still be 50 Democratic votes for a partisan measure, and Harris could cast the tiebreaking, winning vote.

The Secret Curriculum Inside the twisted world of progressive indoctrination camps. by Betsy McCaughey

https://www.frontpagemag.com/the-secret-curriculum/

School is starting, but don’t count on getting answers about what your child is being taught. School administrators commonly lie or give parents the runaround.

That explains the fireworks over Jeremy Boland, a Greenwich, Connecticut, elementary school assistant principal, bragging about how the school pushes kids to think in a “progressive” way that he hopes will make them Democratic voters.

The school’s hiring process, he explains in a video, is geared to accomplish indoctrination. Prospective teachers who are Catholics or over 30 are disqualified. They’re too set in their ways, he says. Catholics are unlikely to “acknowledge a child’s gender preferences” or go against parents. He says, “You don’t hire them.”

When the video was released last week, Greenwich authorities immediately put their free-speaking assistant principal on leave. But Peter Sherr, who served on the Greenwich Board of Education for 12 years until last December, attests that Boland’s comments are very accurate. “I can say with a high degree of confidence that Mr. Boland is not alone,” he said.

The video, made by the undercover investigative nonprofit Project Veritas, is part of a “Secret Curriculum” series. Another video shows Jenn Norris, director of student activities at New York City’s Trinity School, swearing she’d never allow a Republican speaker at the school. “Not on my watch.”

Secrecy is a problem across the country. Officials discourage parents’ inquiries and throw up roadblocks to those who persist.

From Civil Rights to ‘Diversity’ ‘Race has no place in American life or law,’ JFK said. It’s time to recover that ideal. By Ward Connerly

https://www.wsj.com/articles/from-civil-rights-to-diversity-affirmative-action-grutter-harvard-supreme-court-race-discrimination-america-jfk-treatment-11661886845?mod=opinion_lead_pos10

In a nation where the issue of race never seems to be fully settled, we are again confronted with the question of what to do about affirmative action. America is dedicated to the proposition that each of us is equal at birth and constitutionally entitled to be treated equally by our government. We enshrined that right as the 14th Amendment. But the spirit of fairness sometimes compels us to take a detour from our foundational principles in the name of becoming a more perfect union.

America has come a long way since 1939, when I was born in Jim Crow Louisiana. In 1961 President John F. Kennedy signed Executive Order 10925, which required federal contractors to take “affirmative action” to ensure that employees wouldn’t be discriminated against because of race, creed, color or national origin. It wasn’t meant to discriminate against formerly favored groups. “Race has no place in American life or law,” JFK said.

Martin Luther King Jr. believed Kennedy’s order was insufficient to achieve integration, and he lobbied President Lyndon B. Johnson to strengthen affirmative action. After Congress passed the 1964 Civil Rights Act, LBJ signed Executive Order 11246 on Sept. 24, 1965, firmly establishing that nondiscrimination in employment would be the law of our land.

Yet this strategy to prevent discrimination ended up driving discrimination against whites and Asians in education—all in the name of “diversity.” That’s a word I rarely heard before I began my 12-year term as a regent of the University of California in 1993, but I heard repeatedly until my departure in 2005. It wasn’t a description but a goal, something we were expected to make a conscious effort to “build.”

A Debt That Can Destroy a Nation by Lawrence Kadish

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/18902/national-debt

For as long as there have been politics there have been deals.

Of course, it is illegal to trade one’s vote for cash, but those with the power to dispense patronage, projects, and promotions have a unique advantage in seeking the support of those whose endorsements can tip the balance for any given issue.

Whether it was the drafting of the Constitution, confronting the infamous slave trade, Tammany Hall’s “favored sons” or directing federal funds for a bridge, this kind of give-and-get has long been woven into the cynical side of politics.

It is unprecedented, however, when the stakes have become so high that these kinds of backroom deals can disrupt an election or even plunge a nation into an unrecoverable cycle of debt and economic despair.

That is why the “Inflation Reduction Act of 2022” that has come out of the Senate “sausage machine,” courtesy of its current majority leader, Sen. Charles Schumer, and his surprising enabler, Sen. Joe Manchin, needs to be closely examined. With its $700 billion price tag, it has the potential to seriously harm our nation’s economic future.

One of its elements requires a particularly hefty dose of sunlight. This massive spending plan will allow John Podesta, a Biden adviser, former Clinton aide, and longtime Democratic political strategist, to administer some $370 billion in energy programs of his selective choosing.

ELECTRIC CARS ARE NOT ZERO-EMISSIONS VEHICLES:JAMES D. AGRESTI

https://issuesinsights.com/2022/09/14/electric-cars-are-not-zero-emission-vehicles/

“In reality, electric cars emit substantial amounts of pollutants and may be more harmful to the environment than conventional cars.”

While praising California’s decision to ban the sale of new gasoline-powered cars by 2035, Governor Gavin Newsom declared that this will require “100% of new car sales in California to be zero-emission vehicles” like “electric cars.” In reality, electric cars emit substantial amounts of pollutants and may be more harmful to the environment than conventional cars.

Toxic Pollution

The notion that electric vehicles are “zero-emission” is rooted in a deceptive narrative that ignores all pollutants which don’t come out of a tailpipe. Assessing the environmental impacts of energy technologies requires measuring all forms of pollution they emit over their entire lives, not a narrow slice of them. To do this, researchers perform “life cycle assessments” or LCAs. As explained by the Environmental Protection Agency, LCAs allow for:

the estimation of the cumulative environmental impacts resulting from all stages in the product life cycle, often including impacts not considered in more traditional analyses (e.g., raw material extraction, material transportation, ultimate product disposal, etc.). By including the impacts throughout the product life cycle, LCA provides a comprehensive view of the environmental aspects of the product or process and a more accurate picture of the true environmental trade-offs in product and process selection.

LCAs are subject to multiple levels of uncertainty, but an assessment published by the Journal of Cleaner Production in 2021 shatters the notion that electric cars are cleaner than conventional ones, much less “zero emission.” The LCA found that manufacturing, charging, operating, and disposing of electric vehicles produces more of every major category of pollutants than conventional cars. This includes:

an increase in fine particulate matter formation (26%), human carcinogenic (20%) and non-carcinogenic toxicity (61%), terrestrial ecotoxicity (31%), freshwater ecotoxicity (39%), and marine ecotoxicity (41%) relative to petrol vehicles.

Foreshadowing that result, a 2018 report by the European Environment Agency warned that studies on the “human toxicity impacts” of electric vehicles were “limited” and that electric cars “could be responsible for greater negative impacts” than conventional cars.

By 2-To-1, Voters Call Biden MAGA Remarks Divisive: I&I/TIPP Poll Terry Jones

https://issuesinsights.com/2022/09/14/by-2-to-1-voters-call-biden-maga-remarks-divisive-ii-tipp-poll/

President Biden’s recent comments about Trump supporters espousing “semi-fascism” and accusing the former president’s followers of representing “an extremism that threatens the very foundations of our republic” shocked many Americans. Now, despite White House denials of ill intent, a majority of voters call Biden’s remarks divisive, September’s I&I/TIPP Poll shows.

During his campaign for the presidency and even in his inauguration speech in 2021, Biden vowed to “unify” the country after years of often-bitter political division. Voters warmed to the idea that he could bring Americans together after years of angry ideological debates, polls showed.

But the latest I&I/TIPP Poll shows Americans no longer believe that Biden is a uniter, but a divider.

The online poll of 1,277 adults taken from Sept. 7-9 showed that 62% of Americans believed Biden’s comments about Trump and his MAGA followers “increases division in the country.” Just 29% disagreed. The poll’s margin of error is +/- 2.8 percentage points.

Perhaps surprisingly, Democrats — at 73% — were more likely to say that Biden’s MAGA comments increased division than either Republicans (50%) or independents (57%). Blacks and Hispanics (70%) exceeded white respondents (58%) in seeing the comments as divisive.

New Durham bombshell: FBI paid Russian accused of lying as a confidential informant against Trump Prosecutor says Igor Danchenko, the primary source for the discredited Steele dossier, was paid by FBI as confidential human source for three years despite prior concerns he was tied to Russian intelligence services. JohnSolomon

https://justthenews.com/accountability/russia-and-ukraine-scandals/new-durham-bombshell-fbi-paid-russian-accused-lying

In a bombshell revelation, Special Prosecutor John Durham revealed Tuesday in court filings that the FBI paid a Russian businessman as a confidential human source in the investigation of Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign even though it had prior concerns that businessman was tied to Moscow’s intelligence services.

Durham persuaded the federal judge in the upcoming trial of Igor Danchenko to unseal a motion revealing that Danchenko, the primary source of the now-discredited Steele dossier, was paid by the FBI as a confidential human source for more than three years until the fall of 2020 when he was terminated for lying to agents.

Danchenko is charged with five counts of lying to the bureau during that relationship and faces trial next month in federal court in the Virginia suburbs of Washington D.C.

“In March 2017, the FBI signed the defendant up as a paid confidential human source of the FBI,” Durham’s unsealed court filing disclosed for the first time. “The FBI terminated its source relationship with the defendant in October 2020. As alleged in further detail below, the defendant lied to FBI agents during several of these interviews.”

The revelation means that the FBI first fired former MI6 agent Christopher Steele, the author of the Hillary Clinton-funded dossier, as a human source in November 2016 for having unauthorized contacts with the news media. And it then turned around a few months later and hired Steele’s primary informer to work with the bureau even after determining some of Danchenko’s statements in the Steele dossier were uncorroborated or exaggerated.

Even more stunning, Durham confirmed that the FBI had concerns about Danchenko’s ties to Russian intelligence a decade earlier, opening up a counterintelligence probe on him after learning he was trying to buy classified information from the Obama administration

Life Expectancy in the Covid Era: Joel Zinberg

https://www.nationalreview.com/2022/09/life-expectancy-in-the-covid-era/

New life-expectancy estimates are out for 2021, and they paint a grim picture: Life expectancy declined in 2021 by 0.9 years to 76.1 years, the lowest it has been since 1996. This followed a decline in 2020 leading to an overall decrease in life expectancy between 2019 and 2021 of 2.7 years for the total population. Covid-19 was responsible for 50 percent of the 2021 longevity decline. A grab bag of other causes of death was responsible for the balance with unintentional injuries being the most common (16 percent).

But closer examination of the tables from the CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics reveals an interesting fact. While Hispanics and blacks both had substantially greater life expectancy losses than whites during 2020, in 2021 the situation was reversed. The white population saw a one-year decline in life expectancy while blacks saw a 0.7 year drop and Hispanics saw a 0.2 year drop.

Many public-health experts and media pundits blamed the disproportionate losses suffered by people of color in 2020 on “structural inequalities” and “systemic racism.” Dr. Steven Woolf, director emeritus of the Center on Society and Health at Virginia Commonwealth University, for example, wrote that the foremost cause of “disproportionate reductions in life expectancy among racial and ethnic groups in the US” in 2020 was “systemic racism.” Now these experts are scrambling to explain what happened in 2021.

The New York Times quotes Woolf as saying that the worse 2021 outcomes for whites “reflects the greater efforts by Black [sic] and Hispanics to get vaccinated, to wear masks and take other measures to protect themselves, and the greater tendency in white populations to push back on those behaviors.”

Put these lines of reasoning together and the relatively worse outcomes for people of color in 2020 was whites’ fault (systemic racism) and whites’ relatively worse outcomes in 2021 was their fault too (intransigence and failure to “follow the science”).

Yet this explanation makes little sense.