+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Biden always finds himself behind the eight ball because he is a total loser and always has been. It shows you how pitiful our government is allowing someone so incompetent to reach the level of their incompetence.
He has border issues he created and no plan to resolve. He left Afghanistan by ending a war and leaving Americans ad military equipment behind because he had no plan. He has caused inflation to rise and energy abundance to decline because he had a dumb plan.
He had no plan regarding COVID other than to confuse the public with changes predicated on wrong information that was driven by politics.
He told us he would heal our division and has done the complete opposite and continues to do so because he has dictatorial tendencies borne out of frustrations created by his incompetence and association with Obama.
He spends like a drunken sailor because he has no plan for the economy beyond believing spending money, we can ill afford but which costs nothing, is the way to govern. His concepts are based on the more dart throwing the more likely you are to eventually hit targets.
Finally, he is a corrupt coward who lies and hides.
He is steering the ship of state toward shoals while "we the people" arrange the deck chairs for the inevitable disaster. It reminds me of the ancient movie: "Ship of Fools!" which was a 1965 drama film directed by Stanley Kramer, set on board an ocean liner bound to Germany from Mexico in 1933, starring:
Meanwhile:
40+ radical programs Dems don't want you to see in Biden's budget | |
Headline: House Conservatives Break Down Biden's $3.5T Budget Madness The First take: Let's be clear, this is not infrastructure. This is all about what Barack Obama promised in 2008 -- "The fundamental transformation of America." No thanks. | |
|
Finally:
| ||||||||
| ||||||||
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Outside the White House, much of the world is moving toward reliable energy.
By James Freeman
Part of Mr. Biden’s problem is that much of his agenda is disconnected from the current challenges facing the country. The federal government has pumped so much money into the economy that for the moment increasing numbers of Americans don’t even feel the need to work—yet his top legislative priority is to spend trillions more.
It’s not just the historic amount of money that is troublesome. The pending reconciliation bill would pour gargantuan subsidies into renewable energy projects that even some of the most ardent climate activists in the world are beginning to abandon.
Outside of the leadership of the Democratic Party in the U.S., politicians world-wide are moving toward embracing the energy source that can reliably generate significant power without greenhouse gas emissions—and without a large geographic footprint. Michael Shellenberger writes on Substack:
National leaders around the world are announcing big plans to return to nuclear energy now that the cost of natural gas, coal, and petroleum are spiking, and weather-dependent renewables are failing to deliver.
Anna Gross reports from Paris for the Financial Times:
President Emmanuel Macron has said France will invest €1bn in nuclear power by the end of this decade as Europe’s energy crisis spurs renewed interest in the contentious source of power...
Early in his presidency Macron announced the intention to shut 14 reactors and cut nuclear’s contribution to France’s energy mix from 75 to 50 per cent by 2035.
But the mood has now changed. Macron said on Tuesday he would begin investing in new nuclear projects “very quickly”.
“We will continue to need this technology,” he said.
Even committed leftists like filmmaker Michael Moore have figured out that wind and solar energy projects have been oversold. Ms. Gross notes that the views of French citizens are also evolving:
While a recent opinion poll by Odoxa found that the French public is still on the whole more favourable to wind power than nuclear, at 63 per cent compared with 51 per cent, French citizens’ support for nuclear has increased 17 percentage points over the past two years, while positive perceptions of wind power have decreased by the same amount.
According to the same survey, nuclear power is judged to be less expensive than wind and less damaging to the landscape, as well as being a field in which France is “more advanced than its neighbours”.
Meanwhile Sakura Murakami reports for Reuters from Tokyo:
Japan’s new prime minister, Fumio Kishida, defended his pro-nuclear energy policies on Monday, saying that re-starting nuclear power plants mothballed since the 2011 Fukushima disaster was vital.
Energy became a key issue during the ruling Liberal Democratic Party’s (LDP) recent leadership race, during which Kishida beat Taro Kono, a former vaccine minister who had spoken out against nuclear energy, to become prime minister.
“It’s crucial that we re-start nuclear power plants,” Kishida said as he faced opposition questions in parliament for the first time since becoming prime minister last week.
Oliver Wright recently reported in The Times of London:
Ministers are backing a multibillion-pound plan to build another large-scale nuclear power plant in Britain to ease pressure on electricity supplies as the country moves towards net zero.
The government is in discussions with the American nuclear reactor manufacturer Westinghouse about a proposal to develop a new plant on Anglesey in north Wales.
The project would be in addition to a second nuclear plant at Hinkley Point, Somerset, which is under construction, and a proposal for a new reactor at Sizewell, Suffolk, that is at an advanced stage of planning.
“What explains the change? Rising energy prices and growing popular and political support for nuclear,” writes Mr. Shellenberger, who adds:
Finland has joined France, Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic in lobbying the European Union to categorize nuclear power as sustainable. According to the Finnish Broadcasting Company, Finland’s pro-nuclear lobbying marks a U-turn within the Green Party, which is part of the current government.
He concludes:
There is no technical fix to the stigma that has hung over nuclear energy since its creators, including Robert Oppenheimer, condemned it, out of guilt for having created the bomb, and the political Left in the Western World turned against it. Public opinion must be won back the hard way, through building a pro-nuclear movement, testifying before governments, and publishing cutting-edge analyses...
Is there time to win the hard way against the Biden plan to convert the U.S. economy to more costly, less reliable forms of energy?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
AA-The reason why Rock and Roll will never die-VID-20210608-WA0007.mp4
(9,526K)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
More aimless talk while Iran plows ahead:
Blinken to Have ‘Candid’ Conversation With FM Lapid on Israel’s China Ties
Joe Biden could be involved in FBI probe of `prodigal' son Hunter's finances as new emails leaked |
And: Leaked Documents Show Stunning Release of Illegals into the U.S. Since March, the Biden administration has released at least 160,000 illegal immigrants into the United States with little to no supervision. They likewise included broad use of parole authorities since August, making over 30,000 immigrants eligible for work permits. Biden-Harris administration is allowing hundreds and thousands of illegal immigrants with no supervision Border Patrol documents received by a news outlet gave a partial picture of how the Biden-Harris administration has been releasing a huge number of migrants into the United States. This is done often with no supervision, insufficient oversight, and with no critical risk of deportation. According to data, at least 94,500 illegal immigrants were allowed into the country with only Notices to Report. Those immigrants who received this notice are merely obliged to check in with any ICE office once they get to their final destination, which could be anyplace in the United States. Those who check in with ICE will not be deported or detained, as their immigration proceedings are being processed. On the other hand, since August 6, the Biden administration released around 32,000 illegal immigrants into the U.S. through parole. This gives illegal immigrants some sort of legal status. It also allows them to apply for work permits. However, according to federal law, parole authority should only be used on a case-to-case basis for “significant public benefit” or for “urgent humanitarian purposes.” In most cases, only a few parole cases are being handed out by officials. Included among the parole recipients are the tens of thousands of Afghans who were let go into the U.S. in accordance with Operation Allies Welcome. Former Border Patrol Chief: Biden administration is abusing their parole authority According to Rodney Scott, a former Border Patrol chief, he has reviewed the documents and believes the Biden administration is abusing the parole authority. Scott noted that by regulation and by law, parole can only be given on a case-to-case basis either for significant public benefit or for humanitarian reasons. Yet, neither of these reasons apply to the present situation. The former Border Patrol chief added that the number of paroles brings into issue the approval and review process. Scott also noted that as a field chief, he has never approved over five or ten paroles within a year. Whenever he would give parole, he made sure the immigrants were continuously monitored, detained, or released as soon as the situation allows. The document likewise showed that since August 6, an additional 40,000 illegal immigrants were released into the U.S. and on their own recognizance. On top of this, on a single day in Del Rio, 128 adult illegal immigrants were allowed to go into the country without ATD, which in most cases includes a tracker by phone or an ankle monitor. And: From China With Love: Biden Bought Chinese Drones Over Pentagon Objections++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Justice Thomas remains true to his convictions: A Radical Dissent by Justice Clarence Thomas Offers a Reproach to Merrick Garland Editorial of The New York Sun To those stunned by Attorney General Merrick Garland’s plan to use the USA Patriot Act* against parents protesting school curriculums, we commend the dissent by Justice Clarence Thomas in a case called Brown v. Entertainment Merchants. It will reassure you that you are not alone. There is at least one justice who comprehends the constitutional standing of parents in respect of their own children. The case, Brown v. Entertainment Merchants, was decided by the Supreme Court in 2011. The court cashiered an attempt by California to prohibit the direct sale of violent video games to minors. The court reckoned the law was afoul of the First Amendment’s freedom of speech clause. Justice Thomas’ opinion is one of those dissents that, in the long haul, could well prove to be more important than the majority opinion. That’s because Justice Thomas’s dissent is one of the most radical statements in the Himalayas of our Supreme Court jurisprudence on the constitutional prerogatives of parents. Parents are the very group in respect of whom Attorney General Garland has set the Justice Department athwart. He did so after the National School Boards Association sent a letter to President Biden likening parents protesting at what is taught in schools to domestic terrorists. Brown v. Entertainment Merchants arose after California passed a law banning the sale of violent video games to persons under the age of 18. California was promptly sued by, in Entertainment Mercahnts, a trade association. They were opposed by the governor, Edmund Brown, and the state attorney general, one — remember this — Kamala Harris. At the Supreme Court, the state of California lost. The majority opinion was written by The Great Scalia, as the justice is known in these columns. The opinion noted that the high bench had already rejected attempts by states to “shoehorn” violence into unprotected category of obscenity. More broadly, the majority of justices reckoned that the California law “does not comport with the First Amendment,” which prohibits laws abriding the freedom of speech. Joining Justice Scalia in the majority were Chief Justice Roberts, and Justices Kennedy, Ginsburg, Sotomayor, and Kagan. Justice Alito wrote a separate concurrence. So it turned out that the only justices to side with Governor Edmund Brown and Attorney General Kamala Harris — both Democrats — were Justice Breyer and, in Clarence Thomas, the most right-wing member of the high court. Justice Breyer concluded that the law did comport with the First Amendment. Justice Thomas, though, came in from deep right field. “The founding generation,” he wrote, “ would not have considered it an abridgment of ‘the freedom of speech’ to support parental authority by restricting speech that bypasses minors’ parents.” He referenced, among others, the Puritans settlers and their view of the authority of the parents. Parents were, Justice Thomas wrote, “not to let their children read ‘vain Books, profane Ballads, and filthy Songs’ or ‘fond and amorous Romances, ... fabulous Histories of Giants, the bombast Achievements of Knight Errantry, and the like.’” After going through history over the centuries, Justice Thomas summed up with words to which, we’d like to think, protesting parents might find encouraging. “‘The freedom of speech,’ as originally understood, does not include a right to speak to minors without going through the minors’ parents or guardians,” Justice Thomas concluded. It would no doubt be an error to make too much of those words. Justice Thomas was, after all, alone in his dissent. It would not be an error, in our view, for America’s beleaguered parents to take heart from what Justice Thomas wrote. For sometimes it takes time for the law to catch up with our great dissenters. The idea that our school authorities can start cramming leftwing ideologies into their minor students without having to address the concerns of — and seek a mandate from — parents is an affront to the deepest strains of the American tradition. And the go-to sage is now the most senior figure, in terms of time in grade, on our nation’s highest court. _____ * USA Patriot Act is short for: The Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools to Restrict, Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ |
No comments:
Post a Comment