The World Health Organization has listed bacon as a carcinogen, along with beef. Translated, WHO is stating that bacon is as bad as asbestos and arsenic. Read More
Ahmed Mohamed is famous (infamous?) for making a clock, bringing it to school and being handcuffed for it. At least, that’s what many in the main stream media will say as they scream loudly about Islamophobia, and other pretend concepts.
Ahmed never made anything; there was no “invention.” He took apart a clock, and put it back together in a pencil case. It looked like a bomb. He then took it to multiple teachers, even when told not to, in hopes of getting the negative attention he was (clearly) seeking.
Bring on the press, and a fame-loving father. Soon after, it was appearances on tv stations across America, a paid trip to Mecca and a meeting with the President of Sudan – known to you and me as the Butcher of Darfur. Then came the meeting with President Obama, at Obama’s invitation.
And now, Ahmed and his family have decided to move to Qatar to further his studies.
But this story was never about Ahmed. It was always about the complicit press, and Ahmed’s fame-
loving whore father.
14 year-old kids decide to meet with terrorist leaders? They decide to move to Qatar? Even the clock itself; From the beginning, the story seemed off. Odd. Forced. Then you learned that the father had a long history of promoting Islamophobia in the United States.
Ahmed is not the decider of his fate. Rather, he is a pawn in it. I don’t know what the future of Ahmed holds (he may turn out fine or may turn out awful,) but, clearly, his fame-whore father is guilty of child abuse. He has used his son as a human shield, as propaganda, as a prop.
And far too many in the complicit main stream media have cheered the abuse, every step along the way.
Michael Walsh’s latest piece in the New York Post on Donald Trump, the use of plants by Jeb Bush and the possible “plot” against him, has gone viral.
Walsh, the author of The Devil’s Pleasure Palace: The Cult of Critical Theory and the Subversion of the West, joined me to talk about how frightened the GOP is of Trump and the possibility of him getting the nomination.
We also discussed whether Trump was smart in going after former President George W. Bush, basically blaming him for September 11th.
Hillary doesn’t know what capitalism is. She doesn’t understand how it works. And, if you asked her how she would reign in the “excesses” of capitalism, any answer she would give would be untrue.
Why? Because there are no excesses of capitalism.
From my original post:
Capitalism is good. Capitalism saves lives, builds wealth and makes lives better. This is clear. History has proven it. The science is settled. There are no such things as excesses of capitalism. It’s not real.
If there is an excess of capitalism, it means somebody out there has to determine what’s the right amount to make and, then, what’s the excess. And Hillary Clinton thinks she’s the person with the moral compass to determine what’s enough, and what’s excess.
The GOP, and to an extent Conservatives, are looking for perfection in their candidates heading into the 2016 Presidential election. They want, it would seem, a flawless candidate.The problem is that flawless candidates don’t exist. If Jesus was the candidate, even he would have a hard time convincing Republicans that he was good enough.
The chase for a candidate who has everything will leave the GOP with nothing. Baby steps, if started now, can lead to a long and prosperous future for Republicans, and America.
From the show:
The answer is, yes, it (the vacation) has something to do with the backlash. With those who were disgusted by her debate performance. But I have heard now that Megyn Kelly has gotten death threats over her debate performance.
If a Trump supporter sends Megyn Kelly a death threat over her debate performance, that’s fanaticism. And the biggest problem the party is facing right now is fanatacism. Absolutism. Litmus tests over the acceptable amounts of Conservatism one has.
Take a look at Planned Parenthood. Look at those people who are pro-life. They are going to miss this very important moment of defunding Planned Parenthood. You’ve got to say to yourself, “…if you can’t get everything, you’ve got to at least get something!” The Absolutists are going to jump over defunding Planned Parenthood to get rid of abortion. What the party has to start doing – Conservatives and Republicans -is that they have to start recognizing what they can get. “What can we win today?,” they should ask. And then, win it.
The Progressive Left wants single-payer healthcare. But, they got Obamacare. Ok, now they’ll keep moving toward single-payer. Piece by piece. Bit by bit. It’s called Incrementalism. They don’t stop moving towards their goals, they are just willing to accept the small victories that happen along the way. And, for them, it’s working.
In one swing, Republicans and Conservatives are not going to outlaw abortion in the United States. But they can, at this step, defund Planned Parenthood because they sell baby body parts. And America, in the main, doesn’t accept the selling of baby body parts. It disgusts them.
Isn’t that a good first step? Or are you such an Absolutist that you can’t understand how to move something down the line? The country isn’t prepared to outlaw abortion, but they could very well be prepared to defund Planned Parenthood. If that’s not a first step, isn’t it at least a good step? Why would you deny that opportunity? Because you have to do it all? You have to outlaw it? You can’t! Not in one swing.
This type of attitude is exactly what’s happening in the 2016 GOP field. Absolutism. A candidate has one issue, and they’re out. So we’re clear, Jesus ain’t running in this election. And if he was, Republicans and Conservatives wouldn’t vote for him. Why? Too Jewish. They will find a flaw with everyone.
Those people who want to move a non-progressive into the Oval Office have to get off the perfection idea, and have to get on to the Incrementalism idea. You elect someone today, and you elect someone better tomorrow.
The Tilt of America, as I call it, started in 1913, with direct election of Senators, with the creation of the Fed and with the creation of the income tax. Progressivism has continued its Incrementalism from there. It is 102 years later; it’s going to take time to get back.
Republicans and Conservatives want to right the country in one swing. That won’t work, because that’s not the way it works. To win, you need a long term plan, you need to work the plan, you need to accept small victories while working towards larger victories and you need to get started.
All anyone wants it to do is stop. The lectures. The posturing. The race/class/gender warfare. And, mostly, the never ending Progressive Anger Mill. Especially when there’s nothing to be angry about.
Let the Progressives – who have destroyed the Democrat party – have a loss, and they’ll tell you how they need to continue the struggle. Let them have a victory, and they’ll tell you how they need to continue the struggle.
Give them Obamacare as re-written buy the Supreme Court. Give them Obergefell, a ruling made out of whole cloth (regardless of anyone’s acceptance of same sex marriage.) Heck, give them President Barack Obama (Twice!,) and a strong chance at a Hillary presidency, and they double down on the need to continue the struggle!
What are they talking about? Can’t they just stop being angry so the rest of us can go get lunch?
In the aftermath of Charleston, SC, where nine people were murdered at the Emanuel AME church, the families of the victims forgave the murderer.
I was asked about this by Cam Edwards, host of Cam and Company on NRA News. I responded that I find forgiveness at times like this not a show strength, but actually a “curious weakness.”
Certainly, Christians are taught forgiveness, and no one should be surprised that these families looked to their faith to find a way to deal with the tragedy that has befallen them.
I have a far different view of forgiveness, in this case, than many. When I spoke with Cam, I said my view was far more honest and, “…far more natural and, in many ways, far more decent than sometimes the reactions I see.”
I said, “When someone kills your father, your mother, your friends, your family, and our default response is forgiveness; with all due respect, and they can choose how they are, I don’t wan’t forgiveness. I want to put my hands around them and I want to kill them myself.”
I find it a moment of curious weakness that we do not respond with, “You don’t get to kill us. We kill you. As a matter of fact, we kill you ten-fold.”
Yes. I don’t want to forgive murderers. I want to kill those who do such harm to the ones I love.
That’s rough talk. As I stated on my morning show:
I didn’t know that, particularly, I have a problem with forgiveness. But I do. I’m very bothered. I look at the forgiveness, and I am angered. I am vexed. Part of me is disgusted. I do not want forgiveness towards those who murder us. I want to destroy those who are trying to kill us and trying to separate us.
Wanting to kill the murderer, and acting out on such wants, are two very different things. We have a legal system which I believe in. My conversation was (which I have discussed over the last year in detail) on how we deal with those in our society who want to be violent, and want to do harm and destroy lives and property.
I want those people to know, before they do harm, that they do so at their own peril. I want society to be prepared for the worst situations, as that preparation will do the most to deter many of the worst situations from happening.
It would be wrong of me to decide how others decide to deal with their grief, but I am not deciding how others deal with grief. I am voicing a point of view that, honestly, I don’t want to forgive this murderer. He doesn’t deserve it.
Some might tell me that the forgiveness is for me, not for him. We will probably never agree. As I also stated, “If you want to argue with me that we need more love in the world, I will say OK. But can’t we direct it at those who deserve it?“
In a piece for Indianapolis Monthly magazine, the official poster girl for Moms Demand Action — Bloomberg devotee and financial recipient Shannon Watts – claimed to be a Second Amendment supporter while blaming the National Rifle Association for the nation’s woes. She bills herself as a gun activist. As we have learned from her actions, Watts is no activist. Watts is a propagandist.
Indianapolis Monthly magazine did an expose about a growing trend of violence in the Circle City. Yes, its been a problem, as “Nap” Town transitions into a mid-west powerhouse with a growing tech sector, a thriving arts scene and some of the best food, chefs and restaurants in the nation. The problem, as they see it, is focused on guns and not those who engage in criminal acts with guns; gang members and drug dealers killing each other, and the innocent.
The magazine brought in “experts” to give their point of view on guns, gun rights, and the future of the city. Opinions, well, everyone has one.
Watts partaking in this type of conversation is not surprising. There were no questions being asked. There was no one to rebut her statements, ask a follow up or press the facts over her emotion. As she stated (emphasis mine):
The rhetoric of the NRA has created an extremist group terrified their guns are going to be taken away. Which could not be further from the truth. We support the Second Amendment. Many of our members are gun owners. We’re terrified our children will be taken away. That’s the emotion that will win this debate.
Emotion. Not facts.
Watts statement requires the type of cross-examination that she seems to be unwilling to engage in. Watts doesn’t do interviews. I host the morning show on the largest talk station in Indiana, where she resides. No, we have not been able to get an interview with her.
Loesch wanted to confront Watts on lies she told about Dana’s connection to the gun accessory manufacturer MagPul. This wasn’t about politics, this was about setting the record straight.
The event was over, but Watts was not heading for the exits. She was talking with others at the rally, and to the mainstream press that had arrived. Loesch came with her camera crew, introduced herself to Watts and proceeded to ask a question.
Watts refused to answer; she refused to admit that she unfairly linked Loesch to a gun company to better her own narrative, and to denigrate Loesch in the eyes of her followers. Then, Watts ran. That’s not hyperbole. That’s what happened. Shannon Watts ran away from questions.
Watts recently excoriated law enforcement for arresting a man who tackled another man with a firearm inside a WalMart. This wasn’t the case of a deranged villan firing upon defenseless children. The man in question had a concealed weapons permit, and went shopping.
The other man, seeing the gun on his hip, determined that this person carrying a gun was clearly dangerous and rushed him, putting him in a choke hold and tackling him to the ground. Watts thought it was wrong that the tackling man got arrested; For Watts, the issue was the tackled man who dared to engage his right to lawfully carry a firearm.
Watts believes that tackling law abiding citizens in big box stores is a virtue. When asked her rationale for this line of thought, she said nothing. Why? Because, as far as I know, she’s never answered any questions. Watts does not allow herself to be asked. She does not engage. She bullies (see Kroger Supermarkets) and she runs.
Shannon Watts is not a gun activist. Shannon Watts, by her words and actions, is an anti-gun propagandist. Her rhetoric for Indianapolis Monthly (we support the 2nd Amendment) is far different than her rhetoric on social media (tackle anyone who has a gun), or in person (run away from questions).
For Watts to really engage in activism, she’ll have to engage. Activists don’t shy away from conversation, they crave it. They want to share their thoughts and ideas. They want to reach an audience and bring people to their side. They want to change things to their point of view, and work tirelessly to do so.
If Shannon Watts is an activist, then it’s time for Shannon Watts to act like it. I have a microphone waiting for her whenever she decides to start.
This article originally appeared in The Daily Caller.
This story originally appeared on WIBC.com:
A firestorm erupted when Gov. Mike Pence announced a plan to create a government run news service in Indiana called “JustIN.” The service, as described, would, “break news — publishing information ahead of any other news outlet. Strategies for determining how and when to give priority to such ‘exclusive’ coverage remain under discussion.” JustIN would also offer lighter fare, “including personality profiles.”
Republicans and Democrats alike denounced the idea. The Governor had to “clarify” his remarks, in press conferences and on WIBC. In trying to contain the damage, he has hurt his image, and, possibly, his re-election chances and potential presidential aspirations. Here are 4 problems that Gov. Pence and his staff have created for themselves:
 Pence looks inept
Pence, in trying to control the situation and limit the damage, called the brouhaha around #JustIN an “understandable misunderstanding.”
The release called it a news service, and said the state would be breaking news. Where, exactly, is the misunderstanding? The misunderstanding should have been corrected when the governor looked at his staff quizzically, stood up behind his desk, and asked in a loud, clearly disgusted voice, “Are you out of your mind with this idea?”
In speaking with Greg Garrison, Gov. Pence said that he learned about the memo from “press reports,” and that he only had “passing knowledge of this project.”
Those are words you hear (and laugh at) from President Obama. It’s stunning to hear this admitted lack of awareness from Pence.
 Pence looks like he has no control of his staff
This has a history to it. It was 2013 when Pence’s office was caught deleting negative comments from the governor’s official Facebook page on the subject of same-sex marriage. Egregious on it’s face? Somewhat, but not earth shattering. Compared to that, #JustIN might make some think all of this hubbub is just a tempest in a teaspoon.
But a careful and critical view shows a potential pattern: When given the opportunity, Pence staffers will do things that are ridiculous, and with zero potential for a positive result. When given the opportunity – which is to say, when they are not properly trained and controlled – they will propose and implement the worst ideas; Ones that are guaranteed to do the most damage to the governor’s reputation and re-election chances.
I’m sure there are good, smart, people in the Governor’s office. To paint them all with the broad brush of ineptness would be wrong. However, these are two world class black eyes for Governor Pence. He needs to gain control of his house. Probably should start with a good cleaning.
 Pence has united Progressives and Conservatives against him
When Matthew Tully of the Indianapolis Star and Noah Rothman of HotAir.com agree that his idea is awful, you have a problem. That’s not to say that what Tully or leftist site Raw Story wrote are decent or completely accurate. Raw Story called Pence the, “NPR hating, Tea Party governor” in their headline. Tully said this will allow Indiana to run favorable stories about the Koch Brothers.
Both are remarkably daft statements. And neither would have ever been looked at if Pence and his staff hadn’t given them cover. As Rothman writes, Pence’s explanation of an “understandable misunderstanding” is “cold comfort:”
If the purpose of this venue is merely to disseminate press releases to reporter and average Joe alike, there is no need for the creation of a new outlet. The “newsroom” section of the governor’s website serves that purpose just fine. If Pence’s news agency has the mission of repackaging and spinning news stories with a “voice” presumably favorable to the administration, then it would be an abomination. How would that be distinct from the objective of institutions like TASS, IRNA, or Xinhua?
 Pence doesn’t look Presidential (right now)
While time heals most all wounds, the timing of #JustIN effectively ends all 2016 talk – whether that talk is for the top or the bottom of the ticket.
Pence already had a tough road to the White House this cycle, and conversations with some people close to the situation pointed to Pence not heading down that path. Yet, Pence had a brilliant moment with his trip to Israel over Christmas.
He met with Netanyahu, and forcefully declined a meeting with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas. He referred to Israel as the Holy Land, and brought his entire family with him.
He made himself look presidential; He looked strong. He owned the media cycle for over a week. Pence had found a way to highlight himself as the kind of guy who’s in charge and in control; A guy whom you could look at and say, “Hmmmm. Maybe.”
But that was then. Now, Pence is the guy who didn’t see the clear danger of promoting anything with the words “state-run” and ” breaking news” in the same sentence, and that’s enough to destroy people’s faith in him. He can’t control his staff, and, based on his conversation with Garrison, his staff is not filled with the right kind of professionals. The concept of #JustIN, and his response, gives the opposition evergreen content to use against him. And they will.
Yes, time heals most all wounds. But there’s not enough time between now and 2016 for the White House. He should hope there’s enough time for that house on Meridian.