History Facts: Trump, Churchill, and Future of America

History Facts:

Trump, Churchill, and Future of America

keySo….is DT good for America?  I honestly believe that he has been  already.Do I agree with all he says?  Not at all.  Is he a “Cyrus” that is being raised up by God to preserve  America ?  Time will tell. This I know.  I will vote for the best chance for America .  I  will pray for our leaders as I have already.  In the end….God will continue to be my source  and my hope.   I do believe that God has had a hand in  America ‘s history.  I hope He also will have a hand in its  future. 

From a Pastor

Is Trump good for America ?  I mentioned Sunday that I would speak on this next week.  Unfortunately, I felt I was shoehorning this topic  into my planned message.  To properly present what I want to speak on Sunday, I may have to leave the Donald out of it!  Let me take a  minute for those that wonder and give some thoughts.
When I first heard that DT was entering the race last year, I told my wife that I felt that it was a good thing for the party and America .  I knew that he was not a “saint,” but I knew that he would be like a bull in a china shop.  He is a disrupter and I believe America could use a fresh thinker especially in the political arena.  I didn’t think he  would get the nomination, but felt it would shake up politics as  usual.  I was correct  on the shaking up part.
Lance Wallnau likens him to a biblical Cyrus.  Someone who is dynamically used of God even though not perceived by many as a God  follower.  God has used many people in history that I would probably not like or agree with.  I’m not sure I would have liked the disciples, or David, or Moses.  Somehow, God did not seem compelled to consult with me!
churchillI have always liked Winston Churchill.  He is seen as one of the  greatest national leaders in the 20th century.  Last year, I had the privilege of going through the War Museum in London. Winston is  a key feature.  His life is controversial.  He was not always celebrated as a great leader.  He was a bombastic, cigar smoking, at times crude, even misogynistic leader.  It is alleged   that he told off color stories to his children before bedtime!
A woman once told him he was disgustingly drunk.  His response was, “My dear, you are disgustingly ugly, but tomorrow I shall be sober and you  will still be ugly!”
There are many websites that discuss the outlandish comments and activities of this great world leader.  He had exactly what was  needed to stop Hitler at the Channel, to rouse a nation to never give up and to partner with America to find final victory in Europe .
You  wouldn’t want him as your pastor, maybe not even your father, but he was the right leader for that moment in England ‘s history.  Such a brazen man that would go up to the roof of his quarters in central London and smoke cigars as Hitler’s air force bombed all around him.  I’m  not sure I would have voted for him….but he was the right man
I think it would be awesome to have a righteous leader, that understood  the intricacies of the economy, health care, defense, immigration, with  great sensitivity to religious institutions, a heart for the poor, a  vision for the future.  If that leader was a praying person,  formidable in the word of God and loved the local church, I would  rejoice! 

I do not think that is the choice we will have in November.           
Instead….we will look for someone who is imperfect, yet will fit the times we are living in. Particularly, that ‘whoever’ we vote for will be someone who might possibly have the opportunity to appoint up to  three supreme court justices.  That could shape our culture in America for the next 30 years…radically. 

Trump-Make-America-Great-MAPThe America of our  grandchildren could be very different….and that may not be good.

We cannot stay still.  A non-vote is a passive vote for a direction  we may regret.   

So….is DT good for America?  I honestly believe that he has been  already.  He has shaken the political system.  Do his comments  offend me?  At times.  Do I agree with all he says?  Not at all.  Is he a “Cyrus” that is being raised up by God to preserve  America ?  Time will tell.
        

This I know.  I will vote for the best chance for America .  I  will pray for our leaders as I have already.  In the end….God will continue to be my source  and my hope.   I do believe that God has had a hand in  America ‘s history.  I hope He also will have a hand in its  future. 

 

Presidential? Man for our Times?

Trump Heads to Flood-Wrecked Louisiana… Obama Golfs, Hillary Rests


Shocks with ‘Regret’ Speech… I May Say the Wrong Things, but ‘I Will Always Tell You the Truth’ 

 

 

 

 

History Facts: Climate Change Theory History Timeline

History Facts:

Climate Change Theory History Timeline

Conflicting Views on Climate Change: Fire and Ice

This isn’t a question of science. It’s a question of whether Americans can trust what the media tell them about science. Most scientists do agree that the earth has warmed a little more than a degree in the last 100 years. That doesn’t mean that scientists concur mankind is to blame.

Journalists have warned of climate change for 100 years, but can’t decide whether we face an ice age or warming

By R. Warren Anderson and Dan Gainor

Global Research Editor’s Note

This article first published in May 2006 provides an interesting review of the debate on Climate Change.

It was five years before the turn of the century and major media were warning of disastrous climate change. Page six of The New York Times was headlined with the serious concerns of “geologists.” Only the president at the time wasn’t Bill Clinton; it was Grover Cleveland. And the Times wasn’t warning about global warming – it was telling readers the looming dangers of a new ice age.

The year was 1895, and it was just one of four different time periods in the last 100 years when major print media predicted an impending climate crisis. Each prediction carried its own elements of doom, saying Canada could be “wiped out” or lower crop yields would mean “billions will die.”

Just as the weather has changed over time, so has the reporting – blowing hot or cold with short-term changes in temperature.

Following the ice age threats from the late 1800s, fears of an imminent and icy catastrophe were compounded in the 1920s by Arctic explorer Donald MacMillan and an obsession with the news of his polar expedition. As the Times put it on Feb. 24, 1895, “Geologists Think the World May Be Frozen Up Again.”

Those concerns lasted well into the late 1920s. But when the earth’s surface warmed less than half a degree, newspapers and magazines responded with stories about the new threat. Once again the Times was out in front, cautioning “the earth is steadily growing warmer.”

Global Cooling: 1895-1932

Fear spread through the print media over the next three decades. A few months after the sinking of the Titanic, on Oct. 7, 1912, page one of the Times reported, “Prof. Schmidt Warns Us of an Encroaching Ice Age.”

Scientists knew of four ice ages in the past, leading Professor Nathaniel Schmidt of Cornell University to conclude that one day we will need scientific knowledge “to combat the perils” of the next one.

The same day the Los Angeles Times ran an article about Schmidt as well, entitled “Fifth ice age is on the way.” It was subtitled “Human race will have to fight for its existence against cold.”

That end-of-the-world tone wasn’t unusual. “Scientist says Arctic ice will wipe out Canada,” declared a front-page Chicago Tribune headline on Aug. 9, 1923. “Professor Gregory” of Yale University stated that “another world ice-epoch is due.” He was the American representative to the Pan-Pacific Science Congress and warned that North America would disappear as far south as the Great Lakes, and huge parts of Asia and Europe would be “wiped out.”

Then on Sept. 18, 1924, The New York Times declared the threat was real, saying “MacMillan Reports Signs of New Ice Age.”

Global Warming: 1929-1969

Today’s global warming advocates probably don’t even realize their claims aren’t original. Before the cooling worries of the ’70s, America went through global warming fever for several decades around World War II.

The nation entered the “longest warm spell since 1776,” according to a March 27, 1933, New York Times headline. Shifting climate gears from ice to heat, the Associated Press article began “That next ice age, if one is coming … is still a long way off.”

One year earlier, the paper reported that “the earth is steadily growing warmer” in its May 15 edition. The Washington Post felt the heat as well and titled an article simply “Hot weather” on August 2, 1930.

That article, reminiscent of a stand-up comedy routine, told readers that the heat was so bad, people were going to be saying, “Ah, do you remember that torrid summer of 1930. It was so hot that * * *.”

The Los Angeles Times beat both papers to the heat with the headline: “Is another ice age coming?” on March 11, 1929. Its answer to that question: “Most geologists think the world is growing warmer, and that it will continue to get warmer.”

Global Cooling: 1954-1976

The ice age is coming, the sun’s zooming in
Engines stop running, the wheat is growing thin
A nuclear era, but I have no fear
’Cause London is drowning, and I live by the river

— The Clash “London Calling,” released in 1979

The first Earth Day was celebrated on April 22, 1970, amidst hysteria about the dangers of a new ice age. The media had been spreading warnings of a cooling period since the 1950s, but those alarms grew louder in the 1970s.

Three months before, on January 11, The Washington Post told readers to “get a good grip on your long johns, cold weather haters – the worst may be yet to come,” in an article titled “Colder Winters Held Dawn of New Ice Age.” The article quoted climatologist Reid Bryson, who said “there’s no relief in sight” about the cooling trend.

Thanks to A.F. Branco at Legal Insurrection for his great cartoon

Journalists took the threat of another ice age seriously. Fortune magazine actually won a “Science Writing Award” from the American Institute of Physics for its own analysis of the danger. “As for the present cooling trend a number of leading climatologists have concluded that it is very bad news indeed,” Fortune announced in February 1974.

The New York Times noted that in 1972 the “mantle of polar ice increased by 12 percent” and had not returned to “normal” size.

Was the ice melting at record levels, as the headline stated, or at a level seen decades ago, as the first line mentioned?

On Sept. 14, 2005, the Times reported the recession of glaciers “seen from Peru to Tibet to Greenland” could accelerate and become abrupt.

This, in turn, could increase the rise of the sea level and block the Gulf Stream. Hence “a modern counterpart of the 18,000-year-old global-warming event could trigger a new ice age.”

Government Comes to the Rescue

Mankind managed to survive three phases of fear about global warming and cooling without massive bureaucracy and government intervention, but aggressive lobbying by environmental groups finally changed that reality.

The Kyoto treaty, new emissions standards and foreign regulations are but a few examples.

Global Warming: 1981-Present and Beyond

The media have bombarded Americans almost daily with the most recent version of the climate apocalypse.

Global warming has replaced the media’s ice age claims, but the results somehow have stayed the same – the deaths of millions or even billions of people, widespread devastation and starvation.

In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, Nicholas D. Kristof of The New York Times wrote a column that lamented the lack of federal spending on global warming.

2005— New Term: “Climate Change”

“We spend about $500 billion a year on a military budget, yet we don’t want to spend peanuts to protect against climate change,” he said in a Sept. 27, 2005, piece.

Kristof’s words were noteworthy, not for his argument about spending, but for his obvious use of the term “climate change.” While his column was filled with references to “global warming,” it also reflected the latest trend as the coverage has morphed once again.

The two terms are often used interchangeably, but can mean something entirely different.

The latest threat has little to do with global warming and has everything to do with … everything.

The latest predictions claim that warming might well trigger another ice age.

Conclusion

What can one conclude from 110 years of conflicting climate coverage except that the weather changes and the media are just as capricious?

Certainly, their record speaks for itself. Four separate and distinct climate theories targeted at a public taught to believe the news. Only all four versions of the truth can’t possibly be accurate.

For ordinary Americans to judge the media’s version of current events about global warming, it is necessary to admit that journalists have misrepresented the story three other times.

Yet no one in the media is owning up to that fact. Newspapers that pride themselves on correction policies for the smallest errors now find themselves facing a historical record that is enormous and unforgiving.

It is time for the news media to admit a consistent failure to report this issue fairly or accurately, with due skepticism of scientific claims.

Recommendations

It would be difficult for the media to do a worse job with climate change coverage. Perhaps the most important suggestion would be to remember the basic rules about journalism and set aside biases — a simple suggestion, but far from easy given the overwhelming extent of the problem.

Three of the guidelines from the Society of Professional Journalists are especially appropriate:

“Support the open exchange of views, even views they find repugnant.”

“Give voice to the voiceless; official and unofficial sources of information can be equally valid.”

“Distinguish between advocacy and news reporting. Analysis and commentary should be labeled and not misrepresent fact or context.”

Some other important points include:

Don’t Stifle Debate:

Most scientists do agree that the earth has warmed a little more than a degree in the last 100 years. That doesn’t mean that scientists concur mankind is to blame. Even if that were the case, the impact of warming is unclear.

People in northern climes might enjoy improved weather and longer growing seasons.

Don’t Ignore the Cost:

Global warming solutions pushed by environmental groups are notoriously expensive. Just signing on to the Kyoto treaty would have cost the United States several hundred billion dollars each year, according to estimates from the U.S. government generated during President Bill Clinton’s term.

Every story that talks about new regulations or forced cutbacks on emissions should discuss the cost of those proposals.

Report Accurately on Statistics:

Accurate temperature records have been kept only since the end of the 19th Century, shortly after the world left the Little Ice Age. So while recorded temperatures are increasing, they are not the warmest ever. A 2003 study by Harvard and the Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, “20th Century Climate Not So Hot,” “determined that the 20th century is neither the warmest century nor the century with the most extreme weather of the past 1,000 years.

Bibliography

For sources click here

To read the rest of this excellent article, please visit:

Conflicting Views on Climate Change: Fire and Ice

Remember the fable of “Chicken Little?” See this related post for an amusing view of today’s hysterical journalists.

Science Facts, Global Warming Hoax, and a Fable with a Moral

Learn more about the forgotten Scientific Method Here

 

YouTube Video: Milton Friedman, Capitalism and Freedom

Dinner Topics for Wednesday

YouTube Video: Milton Freedman, Capitalism and Freedom

From Rush Limbaugh Radio

miltonfriedman2One sound bite is two minutes of Milton Friedman schooling Phil Donahue and his audience in greed and capitalism and virtue.

RUSH:  [Obama] was quoting Reverend Wright, and he said that’s for me, man, I love that.  White folks’ greed runs a world in need.  So let’s go to 1979, ancient times for many of you.  We may as well be going back to the Roman Coliseum for this.  Nineteen seventy nine, I was 28.  Ancient times for many of you.  Phil Donahue interviewing Milton Friedman, and they had this exchange.  And Donahue starts off wanting to know about greed and capitalism.  Here it is.  And listen to this.

DONAHUE:  When you see around the globe the maldistribution of wealth, the desperate plight of millions of people in underdeveloped countries, when you see so few haves and so many have-nots, when you see the greed and the concentration of power, did you ever have a moment of doubt about capitalism and whether greed’s a good idea to run on?

Greed Definition

FRIEDMAN:  Well, first of all, tell me, is there some society you know that doesn’t run on greed?  You think Russia doesn’t run on greed?  You think China doesn’t run on greed?  What is greed?  Of course none of us are greedy. It’s only the other fellow who’s greedy.

The world runs on individuals pursuing their separate interests.  The great achievements of civilization have not come from government bureaus.  Einstein didn’t construct his theory under order from a bureaucrat.  Henry Ford didn’t revolutionize the automobile industry that way.  In the only cases in which the masses have escaped from the kind of grinding poverty you’re talking about, the only cases in recorded history are where they have had capitalism and largely free trade.  If you want to know where the masses are worst off, it’s exactly in the kinds of societies that depart from that.

So that the record of history is absolutely crystal clear that there is no alternative way, so far discovered, of improving the lot of the ordinary people that can hold a candle to the productive activities that are unleashed by a free enterprise system.

DONAHUE:  But it seems to reward not virtue as much as ability to manipulate the system.

Virtue Definition

FRIEDMAN:  And what does reward virtue?  Do you think the communist commissar rewards virtue?  Do you think Hitler rewards virtue?  Do you think American presidents reward virtue?  Do they choose their appointees on the basis of the virtue of the people appointed or on the basis of their political clout?  Is it really true that political self-interest is nobler somehow than economic self-interest?  You know, I think you’re taking a lot of things for granted.  Just tell me where in the world you find these angels who are going to organize society for us.

DONAHUE:  Well —

FRIEDMAN:  I don’t even trust you to do that.

RUSH:  Milton Friedman back in 1979 schooling Phil Donahue, and everybody else who heard that on the notions of virtue and greed and just basically upsetting Phil’s applecart.  Phil wasn’t smart enough to know it was happening. He’s still running around lamenting the accident of birth. If he’d been 30 miles south he would have grown up in poverty.  Anyway, we wanted to play that for you and recognize Milton Friedman.

miltonfriedmanMilton Friedman:  “If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in five years there will be a shortage of sand.” 

 Milton Friedman:  “Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself.” 

Another Milton Friedman quote:  “Most of the energy of political work is devoted to correcting the effects of mismanagement of government.”  

Boy, isn’t that true? Pass another law.  Government comes along and creates a program.  The program is an absolute disaster.  Government says, “That’s gotta get fixed.”  Government says, “Okay, we’ll fix it.”  And it compounds itself, one error atop another. (Rush)

Another Milton Friedman quote:  “Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program.”  

I’ll tell you, the guy was great.  He was a genius.  He lived into his late eighties.  He would have been a hundred years old this week. (Rush)

Dinner Talk

1. Who does Mr. Friedman say is greedy?

2. Do you think political self-interest is better than economic self-interest? Why or why not?

3. According to Mr. Friedman, which system fosters a stronger economy— management by government bureaucracies (socialism), or free enterprise? Why?

Leadership Styles: Procrustes Definition, Liberal Egalitarianism, and Inequality for All

 

Procrustes Definition, Liberal Egalitarianism, and Inequality for All

Leadership Styles

Month-Defining Moment

Definition of Procrustean Leadership Styles

Procrustes—a legendary robber of ancient Greece noted for stretching or cutting off the legs of his victims to adapt them to the length of his bed.

Procrustean—marked by arbitrary often ruthless disregard of individual differences or special circumstances

Liberals do not lift others to a better life; They pull everyone down to the lowest common denominator. ~Rush Limbaugh

Rush Limbaugh

Liberal Egalitarianism=Inequality for All

procrustesbedSome kids get more goods than other kids, and that makes it unfair.  Of course as liberals, the answer is not to help the kids who are not in good familiesThey become the lowest common denominator.  They become the baseline.  Everybody must be made to be like them in order for everything to be fair and equal.  The natural tendency of the left is to punish success, to punish achievement, to punish anything that they believe gives an unfair advantage.

It is who they are, and you’re seeing evidence of it all over the country, if you have the courage to stop and recognize it.  Here’s a pull quote from the story: “In contrast, reading stories at bedtime, argues Swift, gives rise to acceptable familial relationship goods, even though this also bestows advantage.  ‘The evidence shows that the difference between those who get bedtime stories and those who don’t — the difference in their life chances — is bigger than the difference between those who get elite private schooling and those that don’t,’ he says.

“This devilish twist of evidence surely leads to a further conclusion — that perhaps in the interests of leveling the playing field, bedtime stories should also be restricted.”  There really are expert academicians and philosophers who are pushing the idea that being a good parent and reading to your kids and being loving gives your kids an unfair advantage in life.  You know, in the old days — and it wasn’t that long ago — families like that were what you emulated! Families like that were what you wanted to be.

Liberals: Reading to Your Kids Gives Them an Unfair Advantage

fatherreadingfireplaceThere’s a theme for today’s program, and that is: Everything I’ve told you about liberalism is being demonstrated. It’s on parade in the Drive-By Media today.  All you have to do is notice it and take note…  Never make people better, but always take the people at the top and bring them down so that everybody is equally disadvantaged, equally miserable.

Having a loving family is an unfair advantage, is a social justice problem, and there are people in this article who literally make the claim that abolishing the family and letting the state and government raise kids may be the only answer.  This is in the UK.  I erred when I said Australia first.  In the UK.  Makes it even closer to home.  But liberals here and liberals in the UK, liberals are liberals in Australia. They’re liberals everywhere and the same, no matter where you go.  And they’re dead serious about this.

Admittedly, there are some of them who think it’s a bad idea to ban or abolish the family as an educational institution.  There are some people here who will say it’s a bad idea to abolish the family and let the state or the government raise kids for the purposes of education, but even those people still think that good families give kids an unfair advantage, and they measure that by “familial relationship goods.”

Only 18% of 8th-graders are ‘proficient’ or above in US history, and only 23% are proficient in civics.”

Anti-American Book

Anti-American Book

RUSH: From Breitbart: “Results of the ‘Nation’s Report Card’ released this week by the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) show that only 18% of 8th-graders are ‘proficient’ or above in US history, and only 23% are proficient in civics.”

Now, it should be noted that you have to be able to read in order to learn history.  Just listening won’t get it done because you never know if who’s telling you about it is being truthful.  But the saddest thing is that many of those who are rated “proficient” in history have probably been taught a bunch of psychobabble, probably a brand of Howard Zinn’s hate-America-first history.

 

slavery-democrat-thing“Despite hundreds of billions of dollars poured into education programs in the United States via the US Department of Education, the ‘Nation’s Report Card’ states that 8th-graders’ average NAEP scores in US History, Geography, and Civics demonstrated no significant change since 2010 when students were last assessed.” Just think of all the money that Obama and the Democrat Party have poured into the teachers… (Ahem!) I was gonna say teachers union; I mean education.

corruption2The stimulus bill alone sent the teachers unions untold billions of dollars.  It was disguised money.  They were telling us it was going to education, to rebuild schools and roads and bridges.  But we now know, looking back, that the vast majority of the money went to teachers unions, part of the Democrat Party’s very well-constructed money-laundering scheme using the unions to do so. 

Judeo-Christian Worldview: Nuclear Family Values and History

Judeo-Christian Worldview:

Nuclear Family Values and History

 

Welcome to Western Culture Dinner Topics!

                LIFE IS FRAGILE. HANDLE WITH PRAYER. Also fragile is the nuclear or traditional family. More than thirty years ago, Christian leaders warned us: Satan has declared war on the family. As I have endeavored to defend the traditional family over the years, I have found this to be true, first hand.

Popular among the many chants of today’s chorus of moral equivalence is: “all variations of the family are essentially equivalent, so why does Western society agonize over the collapse of the family? What’s the big deal? After all, we know this from decades of experimentation.”

Decades, hmm? Really?

                “The bottom line is that not all family structures are equal, and not all variations are compatible with basic social and human needs,” William J. Bennett, eminent author and champion of moral values reminds us. This he concludes after a profound study of the history of the nuclear family—not of mere decades or scarcely a generation—but of millennia, about three thousand years. Which study is more credible—the one based on whims of instant gratification, or the one with a foundation of time-tested human experience?

“Why? What is the big deal?”

                In their mad scramble for self-fulfillment, comfort, and convenience, adults overlook the greatest victims of their selfishness: children.

                Which family structure best meets the needs of children? “We desperately need to reestablish marriage as an exclusive arrangement between a man and a woman,” Bennett continues. “Marriage, monogamous and freely chosen, must be the institution through which children are conceived and born, loved and disciplined, nurtured and raised. And marital permanence must once again become the ideal to which individuals commit themselves and which they strive to maintain.”

Truths restored from ancient history remain unchanged.

The family is ordained of God. Marriage between man and woman is essential to His eternal plan. Children are entitled to birth within the bonds of matrimony, and to be reared by a father and a mother who honor marital vows with complete fidelity.[1]

           Someone wisely said we study history to “know who we are.” As Paul told the Romans, “we are children of God.” Knowing that our Heavenly Father loves us so much that He sent His Son to rescue us from the misery of sin, we can safely conclude that God approves of the family unit, and that “happiness in family life is most likely to be achieved when founded upon the teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ.”[2]

The nuclear family is not the result of mere happenstance. “Shaped as we are by long human experience, we must be all the more careful not to lose what has required so much time and so much effort to accomplish. The modern nuclear family is a rare construct; we tamper with its essentials at our peril. As the long record of human experimentation attests, civilizations, even great civilizations, are more fragile and perishable than we think.” (Bennett, The Broken Hearth, 67, 70)

To forever families,

Christine Davidson

Teach your family the Key to Survival in a Difficult World

 

Project Veritas exposes Facebook Media Bias; Twitter favors Sharia Law; Conservative Social Media alternatives offered

Project Veritas exposes Facebook Media Bias

“If you don’t read the newspaper, you’re uninformed. If you read the newspaper, you’re misinformed.” ~ Mark Twain

Facebook bias exposed, Conservative social media alternatives offered

May 2019 – Earlier this year, Project Veritas released an exclusive interview with a former Facebook employee who revealed several documents concerning the deboosting of conservative pages.

Deboosting means suppressing distribution

Thanks to A.F. Branco at Comically Incorrect  for his great cartoon

The term deboosting appears to mean “suppressing distribution” which can effectively prevent other Facebook users from interacting with certain content and blocks the promotion of said content.

The anonymous Facebook insider revealed that one of many tactics Facebook implements is to label a user a “troll,” an internet troublemaker, simply based on terminology the user employs. Pages and profiles that use terms like SJW (social justice warrior) and MSM (main stream media) are flagged and labeled “alt-right.”

Several conservative pages, including conservative commentator Steven Crowder, have dealt with the throttling of their pages in the past and were able to correct them. However, deboosting can occur without prior warning from Facebook and without the user’s knowledge.

In the wake of this and past incidents, several conservative alternatives to Facebook have emerged including usa.life and trumptown.com. These sites offer a social media experience free from conservative censorship.

projectveritas.com, 2/27/19; onenewsnow.com, 2/27/19

 

Twitter favors Sharia Law

 

Twitter favors sharia law

Twitter favors Sharia law

May 2019 – Twitter has warned a number of its users, including columnist Michelle Malkin, that their posts violate Pakistan Sharia laws.

On February 8, Twitter-legal wrote, “You may wish to consult legal counsel about this matter,” even as it denied providing legal advice to users such as Malkin.

She had re-tweeted cartoons about Mohammed. The dozen cartoons were first published in a Danish newspaper in 2005 and were shared by Malkin in 2015.

“There’s no hate, violence, profanity, or pornography – just harmless drawings and peacefully expressed opinions about the Western media’s futile attempts to appease the unappeasable enforcers of Sharia law, which bans all insults of Islam,” wrote Malkin.

She has asked Twitter to explain why U.S. citizens on Twitter are subject to Pakistan’s anti-blasphemy laws. She stated she will continue to re-tweet the questioned post to her 2.1 million followers in support of free speech and thought as protected in America.

michellemalkin.com, 2/26/19; twitter.com, 2/27/19

Twitter favors Sharia law

 

Socialism Fails again: Green New Deal Vote Results—NO Senate Votes supported it

Socialism Fails again:

Green New Deal Vote Results—NO Senate Votes supported it

Ocasio-Cortez’s ‘Green New Deal’ Fails In Senate. NO Senators Supported It.

By Ryan Saavedra

More A.F. Branco cartoons at FlagAnd Cross.com here.

Socialist Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s (D-NY) “Green New Deal” overwhelmingly failed in the Senate on Tuesday when it was put to a vote, as not a single senator voted in support of it.

“Not a single senator backed her bill during the vote, a 57-0 filibuster,” The Washington Times reported. “Forty-three Democrats voted ‘present,’ refusing to take a stand.”

“Republicans said it was a devastating blow to the democratic socialist movement’s marquee proposal, which called for an upheaval in American energy, overhaul of the construction sector, and the largest expansion in history of the social safety net,” the Times added.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said he was putting the far-left proposal to a vote to see which Democrats supported it.

“The American people will see,” McConnell said before the vote. “They’ll see which senators are so fully committed to radical left-wing ideology that they can’t even vote ‘no’ on self-inflicted economic ruin that would take a sledgehammer to America’s middle class.”

The Times noted that even Democrat Senator Ed Markey, who co-authored the bill with Ocasio-Cortez, did not vote for it.

Ocasio-Cortez responded to the Senate’s rejection of her “Green New Deal” by claiming on Twitter that she told Democratic Senators not to vote for it and to instead vote “present.”

https://www.dailywire.com/news/45143/breaking-ocasio-cortezs-green-new-deal-fails-ryan-saavedra/

Political Cartoon: After Mueller Investigation Cost of 30 Million Dollars, Mueller Probe Fails

Political Cartoon:

After Mueller Investigation Cost of 30 Million Dollars, Mueller Probe Fails

After 2 years and approximately 30 million dollars later Adam Schiff, the Democrats, and the entire mainstream media has been proven wrong. There was no Russian Collusion or obstruction. Political Cartoon by A.F. Branco ©2019.

See more Legal Insurrection Branco cartoons, click here.

Christian News: Homeschooling Growth Rate Increases; Victory for Life; Video Games and Violence

Christian News

American Family Association News

Homeschooling Growth Rate Increases;  Victory for Life; Video Games and Violence

Homeschooling Growth Rate Increases

Safety concerns motivate homeschooling

September 2018 – Homeschool associations such as the Texas Home School Coalition are seeing increased interest in homeschooling. Many parents are concerned about school safety due to school shootings and bullying.

“Most parents homeschool for more than one reason,” said Brian Ray of the National Home Education Research Institute. “But when we ask families why they homeschool, near the top nowadays is concern about the environment of schools, and that includes safety, pressure to get into drugs, and pressure to get into sexual activity.”

While states are not required to track homeschooling numbers, the U.S. Department of Education estimated 1.69 million homeschool students in the spring of 2016. Ray suggests the number is closer to 2.3 million.

“Homeschooling has been growing at an estimated 2% to 8% per year, and that’s compounded,” he said.

For example, there was a 25% increase in homeschooling between 2012 and 2016.

christianheadlines.com, 6/1/18; washingtontimes.com, 5/30/18

Victory for Life in Two States

September 2018 – The U.S.Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in favor of California pregnancy resource centers affected by California’s FACT (Freedom, Accountability, Comprehensive Care and Transparency) Act. Since FACT passed in 2015, any pro-life center that failed to inform its clients of the state’s free or low-cost abortions was subject to fines of $500-1000. On June 26, the court ruled in NIFLA v. Becerra that the California FACT Act was a violation of free speech.

Penny Nance, CEO and president of Concerned Women for America, said the case “centered on an inappropriate mandate of the state compelling pro-life clinics to promote abortion in violation of their consciences.”

On another front, Louisiana passed HB 449, The Adoption Option Act, authored by Rep. Rick Edmonds (R). It ensures Louisiana’s Department of Health website contains proactive information for birth parents about the benefits of adoption, and it guarantees that materials distributed to women in abortion facilities will also contain information on adoption.

“My bill is designed to reach couples facing the trauma and violence of abortion with empowering information on the simple first steps to consider the heroic option of adoption,” Edmonds said.

Passage of the legislation followed a red carpet premier at the Governor’s Mansion of the short film I Lived on Parker Avenue (See AFA Journal, March 2018.), that documents the journey of LSU law student David Scotton to meet his birth parents.

foxnews.com, 6/26/18; concernedwomen.org, 6/26/18

Trump DOJ Helping Protect Freedom of Worship

September 2018 – U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions has taken steps to support the religious freedom of churches by launching the “Place to Worship Initiative,” an education program for federal agencies and attorneys. This initiative is to help them understand how to carry out the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, a federal law passed in 2000 mandating that the government refrain from placing unnecessary burdens on churches and prisoners in relation to their places and manner of worship.

“President Trump’s DOJ is doing a good job protecting religious freedom in this area,” said Travis Weber of Family Research Council. “And we really are advocating for it to be protected across the board.”

onenewsnow.com, 6/21/18

U.S. withdraws from UN council

Nikki Haley with Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu

September 2018 – “A cesspool of political bias.” That’s how Nikki Haley, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, described the Human Rights Council just before she announced that the U.S. is withdrawing from the council.

One reason for withdrawal, Haley stated, is the council’s repeated acceptance and protection of countries with human rights problems, such as the Democratic Republic of Congo and Venezuela.

Haley added the council’s mistreatment of Israel as reason for the withdrawal, calling it a “chronic bias” against Israel.

U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo stated, “Since its creation, the council has adopted more resolutions condemning Israel than against the rest of the world combined.”

timesofisrael.com, 6/20/18

Video Games and Violence Affect Young Players

September 2018 – Do violent video games have an adverse effect on American teens? Does a graphic television show about suicide alter the mental state of its viewers?

Culture critic Robert Knight believes the answer to both is a resounding yes, labeling the current situation a “culture war on children.”

“The military uses violent videos to train people to kill,” Knight argues. “So it seems reasonable to assume that violence-laden video games may make some kids numb to real violence. …”

Knight referenced a game called “Active Shooter.” Players in this game can carry out school shootings from the comfort of their living rooms, with the game keeping tabs onscreen of how many people the player has killed.

Knight also cited the Netflix hit show 13 Reasons Why, a drama centered around the suicide of a teen named Hannah. Following season one, a 26% increase was seen in the Google searches for how to commit suicide. Season two aired in May with sex scenes, rapes, homosexuality, pornography, and gun violence.

Knight acknowledged one opposing statistic, which claims 80% of mass shooters reveal no interest in video games.

However, he raised this question: “If viewing has no effect on behavior, why do merchants invest billions of dollars on ads to influence people’s buying choices?”

Netflix airs ‘Salute to Abortion’

September 2018 – Netflix has recently come under fire as the network pursues its commitment to promoting the darkest aspects of human nature. For example, in early July, Netflix aired Michelle Wolf’s Salute to Abortion in which the alleged comedian declared, “God bless abortion!”

In another case, critics have accused Netflix of airing child porn in a recent foreign film.

AFA continues partnering with Parents Television Council and a broader coalition of groups to urge Netflix to end its sleazy suicide series 13 Reasons Why.

Join the efforts; sign a petition at afa.net/Netflix urging Netflix to pull both seasons one and two of 13 Reasons Why. (See related story here.)

 

Suicide: a leading cause of death in U.S.

September 2018 – Suicide has become the 10th leading cause of death in the U.S., with an increase of nearly 30% over the past decade, according to a report from the Centers for Disease Control. In 2016, nearly 45,000 suicides occurred in the U.S. – more than twice the number of homicides. And among ages 15-34, suicide is the second leading cause of death.

In 27 states, 54% of suicides were not linked to any diagnosed mental health problem. While the most common method of suicide involved firearms, suicides from opioid overdoses doubled between 1999 and 2014. In 2014, those with opioid addiction were 40-60% more likely to consider suicide. Other factors associated with suicide included strained relationships, financial stressors, and physical health conditions.

“Suicide is a public health crisis when you look at the numbers, and they keep going up,” said Nadine Kaslow, former president of the American Psychological Association. (See related story, here.)

washingtonpost.com, 6/7/18

Abuse of Power Update: Trey Gowdy Horowitz hearing Reveals Swamp Cover Up of Political Bias in FBI Investigation

Abuse of Power Update:

Trey Gowdy-Horowitz hearing Reveals Swamp Cover Up of Political Bias in FBI Investigation

And that great pit which hath been digged for the destruction of men shall be filled by them that digged it. ~1Nephi 14:3

Undeniable Political Bias in FBI Investigation

GOWDY: All right. So we’re three for three on her working on the two most important bureau investigations in 2016 and beyond. Now, is this the same Lisa Page that Andy McCabe used to leak information to a news outlet?

HOROWITZ: She was a special counsel, and as we indicated in our earlier report, she was the individual through whom he provided that information.

GOWDY: The same Lisa Page who admonished the agent interviewing Hillary Clinton not to go into that interview “loaded for bear” because Clinton might be the next president, and it’s the same Lisa Page who said Trump was “loathsome,” “awful,” “the man cannot become president; Clinton just has to win,” and that Trump “should go F— himself.” And we are somehow supposed to believe that she did not prejudge the outcome of that investigation before it was over? She already had Hillary Clinton winning. I don’t know how you can win if you’re gonna wind up getting indicted and/or plead guilty or be convicted of a felony.

RUSH LIMBAUGH: It’s impossible for us to replay the whole thing. We’d have had to go gavel to gavel on it. Gowdy was at this for about 20, 25 minutes. Just hammered Horowitz. But he wasn’t hammering Horowitz. He was just getting Horowitz to admit what was in the report but in an entirely different context. (snort) Gowdy made it plain that it was nothing but political bias guiding all these people, and he was stunned that nobody could see it in terms of the final report. Here’s the next example.

GOWDY: Senior FBI agent Peter Strzok wrote, “No. No, he’s not. We’ll stop it.” I think this is the same Peter Strzok who worked on the Clinton email investigation? Do I have that right?

HOROWITZ: That’s correct.

GOWDY: Same Peter Strzok who not only worked the Russia investigation when it began, was one of the lead investigators at the inception of the Russia probe. Do I have the right Peter Strzok?

HOROWITZ: That’s my understanding.

GOWDY: Now, is it the same Peter Strzok who was put on the Mueller special counsel team?

HOROWITZ: Yes.

GOWDY: Same Peter Strzok. And this is not the only time he managed to find the text feature on his phone, either. This is the same Peter Strzok who said, “Trump is an idiot. Hillary should win 100 million to zero.” Now, Mr. Inspector General, that one is interesting to me, because he’s supposed to be investigating her for violations of the Espionage Act, and he can’t think of a single, solitary American that wouldn’t vote for her for president. Can you see our skepticism?

GOWDY: What do you think the “it” is in that phrase “we’ll stop it”?

HOROWITZ: Oh, I think it’s clear in the context it’s we’re gonna stop him from becoming president.

GOWDY: That’s what I thought too. Now, I wonder who the “we” is in the “we’ll stop it.” Who do you think the “we” is?

HOROWITZ: Well, I think that’s probably subject to multiple interpretations — them or a broader group beyond that.

GOWDY: How about “finish it”? When he said, “I unleashed it. Now I need to fix it and finish it,” what do you think he meant by “finish it”?

HOROWITZ: I think in the context of the emails that occurred in August, the prior August that you outlined, I think a reasonable explanation that or a reasonable inference of that is that he believed he would use or potentially use his official authority to take action.

GOWDY: Did you ever have an agent when you were a prosecutor with this level of bias?

HOROWITZ: My view of this was that this was extremely serious, completely antithetical to the core values. In my personal view having been a prosecutor and worked with FBI agents, I can’t imagine FBI agents suggesting, even, that they might use their powers to investigate, frankly, any candidate for any office.

Swamp Cover Up

Thanks to A.F. Branco at Comically Incorrect  for his great cartoon

RUSH: Let me tell you what would happen if you watched this whole thing, as I did. If you watch Gowdy from beginning to end, with even more of what we haven’t had time to air here, you cannot conclude anything other that this is one of the sleaziest, dirtiest, most corrupt, politicized and biased attempts to destroy a particular presidential candidate while protecting another one. It is paramountly obvious.

The way Gowdy unpacked this and presented it versus the way the inspector general presents it? The two techniques, Gowdy and Horowitz, are so disparate that the conclusion has to be that the inspector general report — as filed, as reported, and as written — is actually part of the cover-up and the fix being in for all of this from the get-go. Because, folks, if this thing were interpreted as Gowdy did and written by the IG as Gowdy has interpreted it and any common sense person with the information would, these people would be in handcuffs already.

They would have been charged. The things they have done are worthy of serious criminal charges. And yet they’re still employed, many of them and still receiving paychecks. And specially they have been exonerated under the theory that there wasn’t any operational bias here that determined the outcome of any of these various operations. So I think — especially after listening to Gowdy the way he presented this today — it is clear that the ongoing effort to cover up and to water down what actually happened is still widely in practice.