I generally post pictures of my family but this is the new granddaughter of some of our closest friends from Atlanta. Sutton, needs to meet Blake!
===
This company's products produce diabetes so government needs to stop them, close them down. The consequences of their products are worse than climate change. To make matters worse they make ads that encourage killing yourself by drinking their product. ISIS is the way of life - Santa is a myth for innocent minds. Sharia is the way of the future. Obama is our Santa and we must follow him to Mecca !
https://www.youtube.com/embed/eOPhBWlF5bo
In order to deflect attention from his many policy failures, the new one being the recent "terrorist" act in California, Obama has fallen back on shooting off his mouth about gun control.
Logic would suggest if every lawful citizen were commanded to turn in their weapons, and even did so, those who are intent on terror and other heinous acts, including anarchy, are unlikely to do so. Consequence, we will be less safe but 'what difference does it matter?'
Gun control, like climate control, is a convenient spin matter that liberals, progressives and PC'ers like to trot out because it takes attention from their stupidity and failures. So they attack gun control and so it will be until another disaster occurs. (See 1 below.)
Nothing positive will happen, regarding our inept attempts to thwart terrorism, as long as Obama remains president. The best and most rational thing we can do is ignore him because, when it comes to solving problems, he is totally irrelevant.
The problem is, Obama refuses to remain irrelevant.
===
Yesterday, Obama ordered the military to open all combat positions to women. Since America no longer seems committed to winning wars much less engaging in them, I am reminded of Hillarious' comment "what difference does it matter?"
However, the current Chief of Staff, a Marine General, was involved in the investigation when it came to The Marines and the report concluded it would render units less effective for a variety of reasons among which were ability to carry weight loads, overall strength issues etc.
From every indication, Obama's "Hope and Change" has been effective but not in a positive manner. He hoped he could change us and he has and his push for climate change is another example of same. (See 2 below.)
In instance after instance, virtually everything Obama has done has worked against our nation in terms of: our security, cohesiveness of our citizenry, issues between the races, improved health care at lower costs, integrity that government is effective and can be trusted, our military is stronger, our position in the world has shrunken, our borders remain unsafe etc.
===
Whether this actually happened is inconsequential because it needs to be said, read and understood (See 3 and 3a below.)
===
Hitler said: 'to defeat me you will become like me.'
We will not defeat ISIS until we declare war on them and can employ many of their tactics to do so.
War is hell, innocents die, bad things happen but when it comes to ISIS or us, I have no problem becoming somewhat like them because if we destroy them we will revert back to being a democracy and Obama will be long gone.
Another enemy is our 'constipated' PC thinking!
===.
Dick
========================================================================
1)
I live in California—San Fernando Valley to be exact—with my family. It’s about 60 miles West of San Bernardino, the scene of yesterday’s mass shooting where 14 people died people and 17 were wounded. Only 60 miles away.It’s not New York, not Texas, not Paris, not Lebanon, not London. It was on my doorstep. It was on the doorstep of millions of Californians who woke up thinking the exact same thing as I did as I dropped my son off at daycare.It was just another day. How wrong we were.
SWAT on scene (Image: AP)
Something we take pride in here at Absolute Rights is to report the facts as and when we get them. If news breaks, we report it. If they are unconfirmed reports, we’ll say that and update as and when it’s confirmed (or not if the case may be).Yesterday, the media did a stellar job reporting the facts as active shooters unleashed terror, in Southern California.Such is the power of social media and the 24/7 news reporting this day and age, we sometimes get the story before the police get to the scene. This was apparent yesterday. It’s also thanks the power of social media where, deep in the bowels of the Internet, around 100,000 people were listening into the police scanner and reporting minute by minute updates.
Let me tell you what you may not know. We (the media) knew the shooters were Muslim from around 1pm. We knew Syed Farook was the main suspect.We knew that the international press named him and called the shootings a “terrorist attack.” We knew there was a woman involved by around 3pm.We knew that the authorities knew this too. We knew there were an unknown number of explosives at one or more locations.We also knew that this was, most likely, going to point towards a terrorist attack. We also knew that, if the media knew, then President Barack Obama knew this.So why, a day later, are we still skipping around calling it EXACTLY what this was? Why, a day later, are the authorities not taking all the evidence they have so far and admitting that this is a terrorist attack? Because make no mistake about it. They know what this was. They just won’t admit that the enemy is here and the war has begun.
The bullet riddled car where shooter Syed Farook died along with a female associate (Image: Screenshot)
We live in the greatest country in the world. The land of the free and home of the brave.A country where the most well-known law enforcement agencies in the world work tirelessly to protect the law abiding citizens. A nation filled with patriots who would, quite literally, die to protect their families, their homes and the soil they stand on. This is the United States of America. So can you tell me why our FBI, our police force and our government are looking like a bunch of inept fools just now? Can you please explain to me why not one of them seems to know ANYTHING about this coordinated attack by three heavily armed Muslims wearing body armor? Anyone? Let me help. It’s because they are not allowed. Why? Simple…President Barack Obama.
Our Commander In Chief will not tell the nation what we all know because this is his worst nightmare coming true. Everything he has done during his time in the white house has been fine tuned to suit his needs and agenda.By using the left leaning media, he’s managed to control what we read, what we see and what we hear. This is the man who, when Nidal Hasan murdered 13 people and injured more than 30 others at Fort Hood, Texas while shouting ‘Allahu Akbar‘as he opened fire, called it “work place violence.” This is the man who has yet to attach the word “Islamic” to any jihadi terror attack. This is the man who wants to bring 20,000 Syrian refugees into the U.S. even when his closest allies and White House confidants strongly advised him not to. This is the man who, only last week, told us there are no known threats to our nation and it’s citizens. This is the man who thinks our greatest threat is Climate Change. And this is the man who,even when all roads seem to point to a Jihadi Terror Attack where 14 American’s were cut down where they stood and now lie in a morgue, pushes gun controlduring a time when EVERY AMERICAN SHOULD BE ARMED to protect themselves and their family.
Our President. Barack Hussain Obama.The man who ripped our nation apart from the very foundations Americans spilled blood to build had his world rocked yesterday. This is the one situation when good Americans unite. This is when our patriotism shines.No matter what your color may be or what your political standing is, when our loved ones are put in danger from an enemy with deep hatred for everything we stand for, we stand tall. And when that enemy, who are so savage, so unforgiving and so brutal that they will die for their cause are integrated in our society and can strike at anytime,every one of us will want to use our 2nd Amendment rights to protect ourselves and our loved ones.
And if our president thinks he can take away our right to protect our families at the time when we need our guns the most, he will find out the power of We the People and his days in the Oval Office will be over!
2)
It’s been a big week for environmental extremists. President Obama and most world leaders trooped to Paris to pay homage to their models predicting doom for the planet
while generally downplaying the more pressing threat of Islamist terrorism. The Paris climate change conference may well commit developed nations to both reduce their carbon emissions as well as to pay “reparations” to Third World governments. That will presumably compensate them for any limits on their activity as well as to make amends for the West’s sinful exploitation of fossil fuels as they built modern economies. The bill for that could amount to $100 billion per year with much of the cost being borne by the United States. But as
New York Times economic columnist Eduardo Porter
troubled to notice in his column today, these arrangements aren’t really what most of the ideologues driving the environmental movement are after.
Yes, you read that right. A growing number of environmental activists, as well as some of their more mainstream voices, are advocating an end to economic growth. That would mean less production and less consumption, shrinking incomes to the levels they were in 1976, and even drastically cutting the average number of hours worked to keep us at subsistence levels.
As Porter points out, human history has known long periods without economic growth. Incomes were higher during the height of the Roman Empire than they were a millennium later. Indeed, until the development of capitalism, no growth was more or less the rule everywhere. And that’s precisely the conundrum at the heart of the environmental extremist agenda.
Though,
as the Federalist’s David Harsanyi points out, the world leaders and the activists burned lots of carbon on their way to Paris and, no doubt, while living it up in the City of Light while they were there, their prescription for the rest of us is a return to a hardscrabble existence. Young hipsters may parrot Al Gore’s lies about the world burning up in our lifetimes, but they have no interest in living in the world that their parents and grandparents grew up in. Without economic growth, the next generation of college grads will have a lot more to complain about than their student loans.
As a number of credible scientists have pointed out, the 2 degree Centigrade average temperature increase that the Paris commitments will be based on is a number pulled out of thin air. So are much of the projections that will be used to calculate how much economic activity to which nations will limit themselves. This is not to say that climate change is a myth. The climate of the planet has been changing throughout recorded human history. That’s why Greenland was green when the Vikings landed there during a warming period. It’s possible that human activity is causing some temperature increase, but those are theories, not proven facts. But even if we want to hedge our bets and try doing something to avert the nightmare scenarios environmentalists have been peddling, the only way to achieve their goals would be to reduce our economies to zero or negative growth.
As Porter writes, that wouldn’t create a workers utopia but rather a nasty and brutish world in which the avenues for social mobility and advancement at the core of capitalism’s success would be closed off. That would be harder for the powerless and most vulnerable, not easier, and would create a new world that would resemble dystopian fantasies like “Mad Max” or “The Hunger Games” more than a Jeffersonian fantasy.
This isn’t an accident because at the heart of the zeitgeist that drives extremist environmentalism has always been a Luddite spirit. Global warming activists don’t want to destroy modern economies because they put carbon in the atmosphere so much as they see the whole edifice of capitalism as inherently sinful, even if, like Gore and the Paris partygoers, most of them gleefully enjoy heavy carbon footprints in their own lives. Listen to them roll out their predictions of doom for the planet and it’s easy to see that they’re not so much warning us as happily anticipating the chickens coming home to roost for a human race that dared to use its talents and resources to better the lives of people throughout the planet via capitalism and economic freedom.
These are depressing conclusions, and Porter doesn’t shrink from pointing out the disconnect between the projections and the toll of destruction and suffering that would result from a no-growth world. But, since he writes for the New York Timesand no skepticism or even a sober evaluations of the poor cost/benefit ration of the kind of limits President Obama is planning on imposing on the United States is allowed, Porter shrinks from the logical conclusion to his piece. Instead, he breezily suggests in a throwaway sentence that technology will allow civilization to keep growing without the planet burning or melting.
That may be so. But maybe a serious evaluation of the situation would compel economists and scientists to rethink their assumptions and begin to understand that even if there are costs associated with the slight, incremental temperature rises that we may experience in the coming decades, the remedy the Paris partygoers are proposing is far worse than the disease.
========================================================
3)
Prof Greets Incoming Class of Precious Snowflakes with Speech Crushing Their PC Beliefs
Welcome back to class, students! I am Mike Adams your criminology professor here at UNC-Wilmington. Before we get started with the course I need to address an issue that is causing problems here at UNCW and in higher education all across the country. I am talking about the growing minority of students who believe they have a right to be free from being offended. If we don’t reverse this dangerous trend in our society there will soon be a majority of young people who will need to walk around in plastic bubble suits to protect them in the event that they come into contact with a dissenting viewpoint. That mentality is unworthy of an American. It’s hardly worthy of a Frenchman.
Let’s get something straight right now. You have no right to be unoffended. You have a right to be offended with regularity. It is the price you pay for living in a free society. If you don’t understand that you are confused and dangerously so. In part, I blame your high school teachers for failing to teach you basic civics before you got your diploma. Most of you went to the public high schools, which are a disaster. Don’t tell me that offended you. I went to a public high school.
Of course, your high school might not be the problem. It is entirely possible that the main reason why so many of you are confused about free speech is that piece of paper hanging on the wall right over there. Please turn your attention to that ridiculous document that is framed and hanging by the door. In fact, take a few minutes to read it before you leave class today. It is our campus speech code. It specifically says that there is a requirement that everyone must only engage in discourse that is “respectful.” That assertion is as ludicrous as it is illegal. I plan to have that thing ripped down from every classroom on campus before I retire.
One of my grandfathers served in World War I. My step-grandfather served in World War II. My sixth great grandfather enlisted in the American Revolution when he was only thirteen. These great men did not fight so we could simply relinquish our rights to the enemy within our borders. That enemy is the Marxists who run our public universities. If you are a Marxist and I just offended you, well, that’s tough. I guess they don’t make communists like they used to.
Unbelievably, a student once complained to the Department chairwoman that my mention of God and a Creator was a violation of Separation of Church and State. Let me be as clear as I possibly can: If any of you actually think that my decision to paraphrase the Declaration of Independence in the course syllabus is unconstitutional then you suffer from severe intellectual hernia.
Indeed, it takes hard work to become stupid enough to think the Declaration of Independence is unconstitutional. If you agree with the student who made that complaint then you are probably just an anti-religious zealot. Therefore, I am going to ask you to do exactly three things and do them in the exact order that I specify.
First, get out of my class. You can fill out the drop slip over at James Hall. Just tell them you don’t believe in true diversity and you want to be surrounded by people who agree with your twisted interpretation of the Constitution simply because they are the kind of people who will protect you from having your beliefs challenged or your feelings hurt.
Second, withdraw from the university. If you find that you are actually relieved because you will no longer be in a class where your beliefs might be challenged then you aren’t ready for college. Go get a job building houses so you can work with some illegal aliens who will help you gain a better appreciation of what this country has to offer.
Finally, if this doesn’t work then I would simply ask you to get the hell out of the country. The ever-growing thinned-skinned minority you have joined is simply ruining life in this once-great nation. Please move to some place like Cuba where you can enjoy the company of communists and get excellent health care. Just hop on a leaky boat and start paddling your way towards utopia. You will not be missed.
Earlier this year, Adams won a court victory against the school, when he sued, asserting that he was not promoted due to his outspoken conservatism
3a)
A New American Battleground: Words & Names
|
|
|
|
|
By Richard Friedman, BJF Executive Director
Words and names, as a recent Washington Post story suggests, are becoming a new and potentially explosive American battleground marked by anger and divisiveness.
The headline of the Post story was this: "Harvard College ‘House Masters’ to get new titles because of slavery connotation." The story also noted, "The debate over the title 'Master' comes alongside other efforts to purge higher education institutions of names that now carry controversial, racially-charged associations."
The story is worth reading because it gives good insight into the growing intensity of the "words and names" debate -- and the polarization that's starting to take hold between those who are advocating such changes and those who challenge these racial interpretations and favor maintaining the status quo.
As I wrote in Update a few weeks ago during a visit to my alma mater American University, where I reflected on the turmoil that framed my late 1960s and early 1970s college years, I'm concerned that growing tensions on our campuses are indicators of what may become increasingly divisive and difficult times for us as Americans.
This darkening horizon especially concerns me as as a Jewish leader who understands that Jewish organizations often find themselves pressured by groups on both sides of difficult issues, as well as our own constituencies, to take a stand.
So that America can move forward, however, I believe that for institutions that have a voice and make an impact, such as the Birmingham Jewish Federation, there is another avenue: To motivate people to listen to one another; to encourage people to try to understand each side's views, fears and frustrations; and for us, as an institution, to promote thoughtful and informed discourse around contemporary issues.
These are not the easiest things to do. But the times we are in are challenging all of us, as individuals and institutions, to be leaders. How well we respond will affect our American future.
============================================================
|
|
|
|
No comments:
Post a Comment