Sunday, September 30, 2018

USA Today Insinuates Kavanaugh is a Child Predator, Gets Mocked Nationwide

None of the allegations (which are already non-credible) even involve children:

USA Today Insinuates Kavanaugh is a Child Predator, Gets Mocked Nationwide

Ashe Schow of the Daily Wire's Excellent Moral Panic Article

Ashe Schow of the Daily Wire's Excellent Moral Panic Article

YALE STUDY: One out of Nine People in America are Here Illegally - 48% OF US RESIDENTS IN TOP 5 CITIES DON’T SPEAK ENGLISH AT HOME; 67 MILLION OVERALL

Professors at Yale University have roiled the immigration debate with a new study calculating there are between 16 million and 30 million illegal immigrants in the U.S. — as much as three times more than most demographers figure.

The professors’ model looked at estimates of how many people came illegally, and how many people likely left, and concluded there are a lot more people who arrived than the 11 million suggested by traditional estimates. The model says the most likely figure is double that, at about 22 million.

If true, the numbers would mean U.S. officials have done a poorer job of catching illegal immigrants than imagined, and that one out of every nine people living in the U.S. is here illegally.

[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, September 30th, 2018.]


In New York City and Houston it is 49 percent; in Los Angeles it is 59 percent; in Chicago it is 36 percent.

Almost half of all US residents in the top five largest cities, or 48%, do not speak English at home according to the latest Census Bureau data. 
The Washington Examiner reports that the new report, conducted by the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), also reveals that “As a share of the population, 21.8 percent of U.S. residents speak a foreign language at home — roughly double the 11 percent in 1980.” Overall, roughly 67 million residents don’t speak English at home.
In New York City and Houston it is 49 percent; in Los Angeles it is 59 percent; in Chicago it is 36 percent; and in Phoenix it is 38 percent. –CIS
In terms of population, Spanish is the most commonly spoken language at home at 41 million residents in 2017, up from 37 million in 2010. Chinese is the next most common language at 3.4 million using it primarily at home.
In terms of the fastest growing non-English languages spoken at home, Telugu experienced the most rapid growth, followed by Bengali, Tamil, Arabic, Hindi, Urdu and Punjabi.
Ranking non-English speakers by state, California leads the pack, followed by Texas, New Mexico, New Jersey, Nevada and New York.
In terms of percentage growth by state, Washington D.C. experienced the largest percent growth in non-English speaking homes between 2010 and 2017, followed by Wyoming, North Dakota, Utah, Delaware, Nevada, Maryland and Nebraska.
The study comes amid several reports of altercations over the use of English, such as last week’s report about a couple who was refused service at a Florida Taco Bell because they did not have any English speaking employees.
In another case last May, a New York man threatened to call immigration police if customers and employees didn’t stop speaking English in a restaurant.
Among the top findings from the CIS report:
  • In 2017, a record 66.6 million U.S. residents (native-born, legal immigrants, and illegal immigrants) ages five and older spoke a language other than English at home. The number has more than doubled since 1990, and almost tripled since 1980.
  • As a share of the population, 21.8 percent of U.S. residents speak a foreign language at home — roughly double the 11 percent in 1980.
  • In America’s five largest cities, 48 percent of residents now speak a language other than English at home. In New York City and Houston it is 49 percent; in Los Angeles it is 59 percent; in Chicago it is 36 percent; and in Phoenix it is 38 percent.
  • In 2017, there were 85 cities and Census Designated Places (CDP) in which a majority of residents spoke a foreign language at home. These include Hialeah, Fla. (95 percent); Laredo, Texas (92 percent); and East Los Angeles, Calif. (90 percent). Perhaps more surprisingly, it also includes places like Elizabeth, N.J. (76 percent); Skokie, Ill. (56 percent); and Germantown, Md., and Bridgeport, Conn. (each 51 percent).
  • Nearly one in five U.S. residents now lives in a city or CDP in which one-third of the population speaks a foreign language at home. This includes Dale City, Va. (43 percent); Norwalk, Conn., and New Rochelle, N.Y. (each 42 percent); and Aurora, Colo., and Troy, Mich. (each 35 percent).
  • In contrast to many of the nation’s cities, in rural areas outside of metropolitan areas just 8 percent speak a language other than English at home.
  • The data released thus far indicates that nationally nearly one in four public school students now speaks a language other than English at home. In California, 44 percent of school-age (5-17) children speak a foreign language at home, and it’s roughly one-third in Texas, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, and Florida.
  • Of school-age children (5-17) who speak a foreign language at home, 85 percent were born in the United States. Even among adults 18 and older, more than one-third of those who speak a foreign language at home are U.S.-born.
  • Of those who speak a foreign language at home, 25.9 million (39 percent) told the Census Bureau that they speak English less than very well. This figure is entirely based on the opinion of the respondent; the Census Bureau does not measure language skills.

Republicans Move to Make Trumps Tax Cuts Permanent Past 2025

Republicans Move to Make Trumps Tax Cuts Permanent Past 2025

Reddit Does More Censorious Commie Crap, Gets Mocked By Everyone - Reddit Turns 9/11 Discussion Into a Leper Colony

Reddit Turns 9/11 Discussion Into a Leper Colony

Reddit tells us if we want the truth about the event, we should surf over to the government to the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States website.

It is a sincerely astounding document that puts forth all kinds of conspiracy theories—for instance, how Arabs supposedly violated the laws of physics—and these assorted fairy tales and scary bedtime stories are expected to be accepted without question, lest one become a “truther” and face the scorn of the state and now social media.

The near perfect “pancake” or “gravitational” collapse of the WTC is impossible, to say nothing about the absurd theory jet fuel melted steel girders.

And yet, thanks to the government and its tethered media, if you question the science of the collapse you’re deluded a “tinfoil hatter,” maybe dangerous, an extremist.

It’s interesting Reddit decided to call this a quarantine. It has locked down the board in the hope the contagion of questions will not spread. It is like sending lepers to a remote island in the South Pacific.

Not that it matters. For most of the American people, 9/11 is a distant memory. Its horrific legacy—a surveillance and police state, the permanence of war and war crimes—has faded into the white noise of social media.

The occasional reappearance of the truther virus must not be allowed, not by Reddit or the government, for as Robert Gates, the former CIA boss and “defense” secretary under Bush and Obama said: “The American people know what they saw with their own eyes on September 11, 2001. To suggest any kind of government conspiracy in the events of that day goes beyond the pale.”

[Posted at the SpookyWeather blog, October 1st, 2018.]
Reddit Does More Censorious Commie Crap, Gets Mocked By Everyone - Reddit Turns 9/11 Discussion Into a Leper Colony

Trump to UN, "We reject the ideology of globalism." HIGHLIGHTS

Trump to UN, "We reject the ideology of globalism." HIGHLIGHTS

The Donald Trump video everyone needs to see

The Donald Trump video everyone needs to see

Judge Rules CA 'Sanctuary State' Law Unconstitutional

Judge Rules CA 'Sanctuary State' Law UnconstitutionalAn Orange County judge on Thursday ruled that SB54, California's so-called "sanctuary state" law, is unconstitutional.ABC

Watch that new border wall going up where it is needed most

Congress still refuses to fund a complete border wall, but that isn’t stopping the king of construction, Donald J. Trump, from delivering the goods where it is needed most. The El Paso Times has provided an entertaining and interesting video of construction of a new, much bigger border wall being built on the border separating the metropolises of Juarez, Mexico and El Paso, Texas, with a combined metropolitan population of at least 2.7 million souls. In an environment of scarcity, priorities must always be established, and the most densely populated areas should pay the greatest dividends in limiting the prospects of border-jumpers. San Diego and Tijuana, along with El Paso and Juarez are ground zero.

Kanye West Delivers Pro #MAGA Censored SNL Speech (REACTION)

Kanye West Delivers Pro #MAGA Censored SNL Speech (REACTION)

3rd Kavanaugh accuser has history of legal disputes

The Associated Press
Julie Swetnick, one of the women who has publicly accused Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct, has an extensive history of involvement in legal disputes, including a lawsuit in which an ex-employer accused her of falsifying her college and work history on her job application. Legal documents from Maryland, Oregon and Florida provide a partial picture of a woman who stepped into the media glare amid the battle over Kavanaugh’s nomination for the nation’s highest court. Court records reviewed by The Associated Press show Swetnick has been involved in at least six legal cases over the past 25 years. Along with the lawsuit filed by a former employer in November 2000, the cases include a personal injury suit she filed in 1994 against the Washington, D.C., regional transit authority. Her lawyer, Michael Avenatti, told AP that court cases involving her have no bearing on the credibility of her claims about Kavanaugh. Avenatti said the suit from her ex-employer — it was dismissed a month after it was filed — was “completely bogus, which is why it was dismissed almost immediately.”



Freedom-lovers of all stripes show up in solidarity for Alex Jones and free speech

Members of conservative group Patriot Prayer gathered and marched across Austin, Texas to show support for radio show host Alex Jones on Saturday.
The “Free Alex Jones Rally” was organized after tech giants Facebook, Twitter, Apple, and YouTube banned Jones’s content.



Police, Second Amendment demonstrators physically attacked with bottles, clubs, even fake hand grenades in attempts by Antifa to spark other side to fight back so media can declare new Charlottesville weeks from election

Infowars sent reporters to Kent State University in Ohio on Saturday to cover an Open Carry Event on campus, where Antifa showed up instigating violence to spark a new Charlottesville situation in an attempt to blame the violence on gun owners, but their attempts failed.
The event began with several interviews of Open Carry attendees, but the scene soon devolved into leftist-driven violence.
One Antifa member tried obstructing the police from keeping the Open Carry group safe:
“This is getting really heated,” Millie said. “The Anti-gun protesters are literally here screaming, yelling, trying to intimidate, trying to stop the march from proceeding forward, trying to violently protest the Second Amendment.”
“They threw some kind of a fake grenade water balloon!” she added. “The police just said ‘I think a lot of people are going to get hurt.'”
“A guy has just been arrested by the cops for most likely assaulting a police officer.”
“It’s really sad, because I think a lot of this is fueled and stoked by the media, the leftist media outlets that decided to post fake, lying, libelous articles on Kaitlyn Bennett’s Open Carry rally, trying to say this rally somehow has something to do with fascism or racism when everyone here has disavowed any of that.”
One Open Carry demonstrator said the violence would likely be blamed on Second Amendment supporters.
“How much of the hundreds of Antifa people that showed up here are literally a repeat of history from the 1970s, that being bussed-in agitators?” he asked.
Campus Open Carry Group Arrives At Kent:

Diamond and Silks full interview with Roseanne Barr

Diamond and Silks full interview with Roseanne Barr

Saturday, September 29, 2018



Rape Survivor with PTSD Doesn’t Believe Dr. Ford

RUSH: Susan in Massachusetts. You’re first on Open Line Friday. Hi.
CALLER: Hi, Rush. First, it’s an honor to speak with you. I’m a listener since 1990.
RUSH: Thank you very much.
CALLER: I have been watching the hearings. I watched them all day yesterday, and, as a rape survivor, I just want to tell you: You don’t forget one minute of the whole thing. You remember the color of the walls, you remember how you got home, you remember the face, you remember the music that was playing, you remember the layout of the house. You don’t forget it, particularly as she said she had PTSD? I’ve been diagnosed with PTSD. You relive that every single day. You never forget it! So I don’t believe one word of this woman, and I feel sorry that I have to say that, because women should be believed. But this is so blatantly political and partisan, I can’t stand it anymore! That’s my comment.
RUSH: Well, I’m glad you called. You wanted to get it off your chest.
CALLER: Oh, yes.
RUSH: Now, wait a minute. Let me just ask you something.
RUSH: Are there not some traumas that are so harrowing that victims do repress the memory and forget?
CALLER: Not with PTSD. PTSD, part of the symptoms is you relive it every day, and sometimes multiple times.
RUSH: A-ha. A good point! She did say PTSD.
RUSH: PTSD, in order to have it, you have to have the memory. Is that what you’re saying?
CALLER: Well, you know what? Then she had more than one beer, which makes her a perjurer.
RUSH: Yeah.
CALLER: Okay? My question is —
RUSH: Your question is?
CALLER: Go ahead. I’m sorry.
RUSH: No! What’s your question?
CALLER: My question is, “Can Brett Kavanaugh sue for defamation of character?”
CALLER: Why not?
RUSH: Well, everything’s possible. In politics, it’s really difficult to do this because of the First Amendment. The First Amendment was really written for political speech. No limits on it whatsoever. So you can defame people in political ads, for example. People have tried to run defamation suits. But they usually end because of this thing called “discovery.” (chuckles) You have to open your life up to the competing client and lawyer. Let me tell you something about PTSD. I know a guy who had to go to drug rehab, and he told me a story about it.
One of the things that they do in drug rehab is try to take you back to the earliest memories you have in life that could have caused some kind of psychological disorder, which could have led to your being unable to face reality and looking for ways to numb pain and so forth. And he told me they tried to tell him, based on some stories that he described of this childhood, that he had PTSD because of the way his parents treated him, and he had never…
Until he had been told in drug therapy, he’d never considered any of the sort of thing. But they zeroed in on his upbringing and stories he told about growing up. They turned around and said, “You have been traumatized. Your parents traumatized you.” My point is that therapists out there have… There are certain hot issues that go from time to time. PTSD is one, and I’m not informed enough to know what all the different disorders are.
But somebody who never thought they had PTSD — it would never even occur that they had Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, especially from the way their parents treated ’em — were told that they had it. Now, if you happen to be somewhat insecure and if you happen to be looking for excuses to explain the things about yourself that you don’t like, and somebody comes along and tells you, “You have PTSD,” it may be easy to believe it. And thereby have a built-in excuse for whatever is wrong with you. I just think it’s interesting that somebody that had never even considered it, they tried to convince him he had it and it was why he was behaving the way he was.

5 Ways Giant Corporations Are Threatening Free Speech in America

by John Hawkins

Conservatives quite correctly consider the government to be the primary threat to their freedom in America. However, free speech goes beyond the First Amendment — and the government is not the only threat to it. As long as they’re at least lightly regulated and face real competition, corporations are not a threat to free speech. If anything, we over-regulate corporations in America, so that’s not a big worry. On the other hand, even though breaking up monopolies is a conservative idea with a long pedigree, it has fallen out of favor in recent years. That has allowed corporations in a number of areas to become monopolies with the power to determine who gets heard and who doesn’t. The first way they’re doing this has started to get a lot of attention.

1. People on the right being silenced on social media

Conspiracy theorist Alex Jones was dropped by Facebook, Apple, YouTube, and Spotify at the same time. Whatever you may think of Jones, this is extremely disturbing because it indicates that Jones was dropped for who he is, not for some violation of policy. Twitter banned mainstream conservatives Gavin McInnes and multiple Proud Boys groups he founded, presumably (we don’t really know) because liberals falsely accused them of being white supremacist groups. You don’t have to imagine being banned from a social media website — not because of what you say, but because of what liberals say about you — because it has already happened to McInnes and the Proud Boys. “Accidental” banning, censoring, and suspensions of conservatives have become a regular happening. Are most of these really accidents? Probably… but it also seems entirely possible that these social media networks are testing the limits of what they can get away with. If there is a big enough outcry, the “accident” is fixed; if not, they censor people they don’t like. When giant monopolies control who gets to talk in the 21st-century version of the public square, free speech is guaranteed to be a loser.

2. Loans/insurance

Liberals haven’t been able to convince the public to go along with their dream of getting rid of the Second Amendment, but corporations can be a little easier to coerce.  After the Department of Justice under Barack Obama was accused of targeting gun shop owners by cutting off their access to banking, New York began using the same tactics. After pressure and fines from the state of New York, the NRA is no longer able to get insurance or banking in that state. The NRA is suing and says it may have to shut down large portions of its operations over it. There are also liberals expressly urging banking/financial organizations to take away your Second Amendment rights by refusing to deal with any company that deals in firearms. If you can’t get loans and insurance, then you can’t do business.

3. Controlling the flow of information

Although most people don’t realize it, this is by far the most dangerous one on the list because if you can control what information people see over the long term, you can control how they think. Services like Twitter, Facebook, and Google don’t present information to you chronologically, they use an algorithm to control what you see and what you don’t. They suggest to the public that the algorithm is “neutral,” but of course, it’s not. An algorithm is written by human beings with biases and preferences that will be reflected in the results. For example, most conservative Facebook pages are lucky to do one-tenth of the traffic today that they did in 2015. An algorithm didn’t make that decision, human beings at Facebook did and then they changed the algorithm to reflect what they wanted to happen.
Consider the fact that 86 percent of American web searches go through Google and then reflect on this information:
Randomized, controlled experiments conducted with more than 10,000 people from 39 countries suggest that one company alone — Google LLC, which controls about 90 percent of online search in most countries — has likely been determining the outcomes of upwards of 25 percent of the national elections in the world for several years now, with increasing impact each year as Internet penetration has grown.
As online information becomes more detailed and computers that analyze it become more sophisticated, you’re going to increasingly see social media networks, advertisers, and political campaigns that may know more about how to press your buttons than you do.

4. Content Delivery Networks

A “distributed denial of service (DDoS) attack is an attempt to make an online service unavailable by overwhelming it with traffic from multiple sources.” DDoS attacks have become common on the Internet, so much so that large websites can’t remain functional without using a service like Cloudflare. One website that was using Cloudflare was the famously loathsome Nazi website, the Daily Stormer. Here’s an excerpt from Matthew Prince, the owner of Cloudflare, who  explains the dangers of his decision to ban the website from using his services,
The size and scale of the attacks that can now easily be launched online make it such that if you don’t have a network like Cloudflare in front of your content, and you upset anyone, you will be knocked offline. In fact, in the case of the Daily Stormer, the initial requests we received to terminate their service came from hackers who literally said: “Get out of the way so we can DDoS this site off the Internet.”
In a not-so-distant future, if we’re not there already, it may be that if you’re going to put content on the Internet you’ll need to use a company with a giant network like Cloudflare, Google, Microsoft, Facebook, Amazon, or Alibaba.
101 Things All Young Adults Should Know


by Sir John Hawkins

John Hawkins's book 101 Things All Young Adults Should Know is filled with lessons that newly minted adults need in order to get the most out of life. Gleaned from a lifetime of trial, error, and writing it down, Hawkins provides advice everyone can benefit from in short, digestible chapters.
For context, Cloudflare currently handles around 10% of Internet requests.
Without a clear framework as a guide for content regulation, a small number of companies will largely determine what can and cannot be online.
Someone on our team asked after I announced we were going to terminate the Daily Stormer: “Is this the day the Internet dies?” He was half joking, but only half. He’s no fan of the Daily Stormer or sites like it. But he does realize the risks of a company like Cloudflare getting into content policing.
If you love the idea of a handful of giant corporations deciding who gets to have a website and who doesn’t, then this should thrill you. For everybody else, it’s a little scary.

5. Advertising

When I first started running ads through Facebook’s Instant Article service, I was told by the people that I was working with not to run anything “controversial” that might offend the liberals on the website. So, nothing on Muslim terrorism, Black Lives Matter, transsexuals in bathrooms, etc., because it could potentially get you kicked off the service. Google’s AdWords, which control a third of online Internet advertising, are also notoriously finicky about what they find offensive. At YouTube, which Google controls, many videos have been demonetized solely for presenting a mainstream conservative viewpoint. If you asked whether people are being censored, you would hear a “no,” but videos with high production values take a lot of man-hours to produce. If liberals are allowed to make money with their videos on YouTube, but many conservative channels like PragerU are told, “You’re not allowed to make money on conservative content, no matter how popular it is,” you’re going to see a lot of them give it up over time. Advertising networks can and already do have an enormous impact on what sort of content websites create. If they decide that you’re not allowed to tackle certain topics or slants, you will simply see those disappear over time. It’s already happening and it’s only going to get worse.