Talk:Main Page/Archive index/173

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search


The shutdown

It is now day 20 of the shutdown. The liberal media is hyping polls that supposedly show a public backlash against Trump. Bill Clinton currently holds the shutdown record; Twenty-one days in 1995 to 1996. Did he suffer any backlash from it? Not that I recall. The bottom line is that if Trump succeeds in getting a wall (or "steel slat barrier"), he's our golden warrior. Otherwise, he can kiss 2020 goodbye.
January 11 is the moment of truth. That's when find we out whether or not the federal employee unions hate the border wall so much they are willing to defer their paychecks. The partisan lineup in the House is 235 to 199. So 18 Dems need to switch to resolve this crisis. The Secure Fence Act had bipartisan support in 2006. This act was supposed to build 700 miles of double fencing. Only about 40 miles of it actually got built. Now opiates are pouring across the border. How can the issue be less urgent now than it was then? That no virtually no Dems support border security at this point is Trumpspite. PeterKa (talk) 03:50, 10 January 2019 (EST)

What should Trump do? I don't think declaring a national emergency and bypassing Congress is a good idea. What next? "I have pen, I have phone"? A Republican president should not act like an Obamaesque emperor. From their statements yesterday, it's clear that Chuck and Nancy see themselves as the tribunes of those hardworking federal employees. I say cut out the middle man and negotiate directly with AFGE and the other federal employee unions. It's just like negotiations with North Korea, which never went anywhere until Trump leaned on China. PeterKa (talk) 12:15, 10 January 2019 (EST)
Everybody will get everything. The laid off workers will get paid for being laid off. DACA kids will be resolved. Immigration reform. The wall will get built. And Pelosi will get a minimum wage hike or whatever's dear to her heart.
The issue isn't a wall - it's a slogan. They don't want to give Trump his winning slogan. So it's gotta be called "infrastructure" or border security or some such. All they need to do is put it in an infrastructure package and give Pelosi and Schumer a couple new airports or highways and it's a done deal. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 12:42, 10 January 2019 (EST)
I don't care. I'm going to open the package and make a lot of noise with my fellow conservatives when it happens. VargasMilan (talk) 20:45, 10 January 2019 (EST)
Everybody's a winner. It's like the Financial Crisis of 2008. Henry Paulson and Tim Geithner asked for an emergency meeting for emergency spending of $450 billion to save the planet from global financial apocalypse, Immediately, without further hearings. Congress asked for a delay, and came back in 72 hours and appropriated $750 billion with all kinds of pork barrel for their states and districts. Trump's only asking for $5.6 billion. You always want a crisis to go to your waist with pork, not to waste. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 21:11, 10 January 2019 (EST)
They're arguing over a slogan, "Build the Wall," not its cost or efficiency. What's Pelosi's price to give Trump a victory and take the heat in 2020 for betraying her hate rhetoric, is the issue. And it further highlights the weakness of the Impeachment case, since she's fearful it'll get Trump re-elected.
Alternatively, IMO, the idea is to bring impeachment charges just before the 2020 elections, and put pressure on GOP Senators running for re-election. Democrats have nothing to loose, they only have one incumbant Senator up in 2020. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 21:42, 10 January 2019 (EST)
Judging from this video, the Dems are ready to concede on everything except the word "wall." I'm certainly fine with a "secure" double border fence. Congress approved this idea in 2006. After the Dems took control of Congress in 2007, they removed funding for the fence from the budget. But the Secure Fence Act is still the law, and property has already been bought to allow it to be built. PeterKa (talk) 08:31, 12 January 2019 (EST)
How about, "smart border defense"? Trump agrees to give up a demand for "Wall funding," in exchange he gets wall funding, fencing, drones, infrared sensors, more agents and facilites. Democrats get DACA reform, infrastructure, etc. The total price tag should be about $50 billion instead of the $5.6 asked for. That's how compromise works. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 20:56, 12 January 2019 (EST)
In the 1970s, Gov. Ronald Reagan wanted to charge tuition at California universities. The Board of Regents were adament - they refused to end California's tradition of "Free Tuition." Reagan agreed to drop the demand, and instead asked for a "Student Fee." The Regents immediately agreed. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 21:08, 12 January 2019 (EST)

The Democrats need big government more than Republicans do. Non-essential government workers and programs are being starved. Trump is starving the enemies supply line. That is why Pelosi/Schumer often appear rattled in public. They know they will have to cave first.

Trump needn't give DACA road to citizenship in exchange for a wall. And if he does Coulter and others will vilify him.

Trump merely needs to keep using his bully pulpit and keep hanging tough.Conservative (talk) 23:17, 12 January 2019 (EST)

It's not going to work like that. Immigration judges are some of the non-essential workers laid off, border apprehensions can only be held so many days without a hearing, and without a deportation order they must be released inside the United States.
Trump himself wants DACA reform, and he'll get it. It'll all be rolled into an infrastructure bill.
They only issue is a slogan, "wall." Trump never promised to build it across the continent, and has already backed off use of the term, (for now). Dems simply need cover for voting for a wall, which they'll get in "infrastructure" and "DACA reform." RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 23:52, 12 January 2019 (EST)
The issue of "a wall" is ridiculous to begin with. It's only designed to keep people of Latin American heritage out. Canada has the most liberal, open borders policy in the world. They invite anyone in to dance across the border to the U.S. This has been true at least since the 1950s, when the KGB inserted Col. Rudy Hermann into Canada cause it was easier to get Canadian citizenship, and as a Canadian citizen it was easier for him and his family to enter and get U.S. citizenship. No one is suggesting we build a wall across Canada.
Wake up and smell the coffee. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 00:25, 13 January 2019 (EST)
Rob S., that was worst account of the southern border problem I've ever seen a conservative give. Check out this Turning Point USA video by Charlie Kirk for a much better account. VargasMilan (talk) 01:06, 2 February 2019 (EST)
What I'm saying is, $5.7 billion won't build a wall from sea to shining sea. It will build a wall where sections are needed, pay for drones, heat sensors, motion detectors, satellite reconnaissance, increased payroll, expansion of holding facilities to include facilities where children aren't separated from parents, medical facilities and personnel for illegals, etc. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 01:55, 2 February 2019 (EST)
Your honor, the witness is being non-responsive. VargasMilan (talk) 18:01, 10 February 2019 (EST)
The video adds nothing to the debate. The question is over placing a dividing line between past and future. Past = amnesty. Future = wall. Where and when we place the dividing line is the only debate. 04:54, 11 February 2019 (EST)
If the law of land is to admit 500,000 Mexicans every year to become citizens as Trump proposed, how effective is that in "keeping those with Latin American heritage out" when it shows the contrary, that they have a great deal of privilege.
The problem is what you appear to say: The wall is meant to keep Latin Americans out qua Latin Americans. When you should convey: keep out Latin Americans qua too many to assimilate or qua having been too lenient towards their illegal crossings in the past or qua participating in drug and human trafficking into the U.S or qua bringing in "loathsome and contagious diseases" like tuberculosis or typhus or qua because of proximity and size trashing up national parks and forests on the way here or qua giving hardened criminals in their country the choice of going to jail or leaving their country, one of many examples of forcing our country to deal with that criminal element (blending in with the other members of their ethnic or national group) in a population out from which it is hard to screen after they arrive here.
All of which could apply to any ethnicity—it isn't the case that Latin Americans populate every third-world country where these negative factors could or do present themselves, and the reasons for immigration diminution I listed shouldn't be considered a consequence of their "Latin-American heritage". There are plenty of ways immigration policy failure can happen with regard to any immigrant ethnic group or nation. But the wall will at least keep out the results of some countries' immigration policy abuse. VargasMilan (talk) 14:06, 12 February 2019 (EST)
Mexican immigration since the 1930s is largely driven by US agricultural subsidies. The New Deal saved farming for some in the US, but cheap food stuffs in the US devastated Mexican family farms. Farm workers took to the roads. NAFTA compounded the problem. For a decade or so in the 1980s US manufactures relocated to Mexico, but then moved to China with MFN (most favored nation) status. That experiment slowed Mexican immigration somewhat for a while.
After commie lib Democrats devastated Mexican family farms with the New Deal and Great Society, by the 1980s US agricultural subsidies were destroying family farms in Nicaragua and El Salvador.
In looking at the problem, here's what most people don't understand: 90% of Mexicans live within 250 miles of Mexico City. The other 10% - the Mexican version of country boys, country bumpkins, Mexican cowboys, rednecks, hicks and hillbillies have always made up the bulk of illegal Mexican immigrants. A few Mexico City boys follow the Underground Railroad and arrive here to pick tomatoes and oranges, but they don't last long in those jobs. And this group hasn't been comprised of criminal gangs for the most part. They tend to be skilled and semi-skilled workers in the construction trades. They tend to be carpenters and mechanics who work at non-union wages.
But having drained Mexico of its excess agricultural and semi-skilled labor (which bolsters wage rates in Mexico) the problem now is urban criminal gangs from Central America. The refugees created by gang warfare are using the Underground Railroad, as well as civilian refugees from the lawless Mexican provinces run by corrupt politicians and drug cartels. All this can be traced to the cocaine trade.
The solution from a globalist perspective would be, just as pot legalization in the US put Mexican pot growers out of business (the situation has reversed itself - Mexico is now a net importer of US pot) and Big Pharma cut into the Afghan heroin trade with opioids, would be for Big Pharma to invent synthetic cocaine, legalize it, and hand it out on a prescription basis. This would slow the violence in Mexico and Central America, the growth of drug cartels, and impact political corruption. It would also devastate the local economies outside Mexico City. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 12:36, 13 February 2019 (EST)
And lemme ask a simple questions: commie Dems make a big hooh-rah about children kept in cages, deaths, etc., yet the sticking point in negotiation right now is they want to reduce the number of beds in holding facilities. What's that all about? RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 13:25, 13 February 2019 (EST)
Uh, because illegal immigrants being in an indoor facility takes away grievance ammunition for commie Dems to use during election campaigns? Just a stab in the dark. VargasMilan (talk) 14:23, 14 February 2019 (EST)
They need "catch and release," it's key to their voter base and building a mojority for many decades now. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 15:11, 14 February 2019 (EST)

Rosenstein resigns

With any luck, the anti-Trump revolt in the Department of Justice will soon be quelled: "Rosenstein to leave DOJ once new attorney general confirmed: report." Rosenstein has been a friend of Hillary since he cleared her back in 1998 when he was an investigator for Ken Starr. He lied to the Senate at his confirmation hearing to conceal this fact.[1] Rosenstein's wife is a Clinton lawyer. On top of all that, he signed the Carter Page FISA warrant which was used to justify electronic eavesdropping on the Trump campaign.
Rosenstein wrote a memo to justify Comey's firing, and later supervised an investigation of that firing. (He apparently wanted Comey out so Mueller could be reappointed FBI director.) Somehow Sessions was recused from supervising the Mueller investigation, but not Rosenstein. The Ethics Office at the DOJ must be a partisan stronghold. PeterKa (talk) 06:17, 10 January 2019 (EST)

Tash Guahar and many other coup plotters are still in DOJ. And Barr is a deep state fixer. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 12:50, 10 January 2019 (EST)
The whole purpose of the Mueller investigation was never Russia collusion; it was to thwart Congressional and Inspector General investigations into Obama DOJ conduct. The very existence of the Mueller probe thwarted compliance with Congressional subpeonas and the IG investigation, with the added benefit of attacking Trump. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 12:58, 10 January 2019 (EST)
So your favorite institutional barrier to inequitable treatment within the Justice Department has been breached by the machinations of a partisan office-holder? Boo-hoo-hoo!—Join the club, pal. That may be an amazing discovery to you, but we've had to suffer with all of the other ones too in order of magnitude of damage for over a year now. They're so un-self-aware they go out of their way to embarrass Trump when, ironically, the newsreading public simply hasn't gotten through the national self-embarrassment generated by their biggest bosses to have reached their own unwittingly-produced supply yet. VargasMilan (talk) 13:51, 10 January 2019 (EST)
Say what? This is about recusement in general, the DOJ Ethics Office, or the IG system? PeterKa (talk) 23:40, 10 January 2019 (EST)
Read it again: "your favorite institutional barrier to inequitable treatment within the Justice Department". I'm sure we all have a favorite; yours just happened to be the expected execution of the appropriate conflict-of-interest policies by the supposedly-responsible recusal administrator, at least at the moment you were saying it, but close readers have all been hurt by the same disappointments at the time they take place and each time they recall the highlights reel, whether it be Strosz, Lisa Page, Comey, Rod Rosenstein, the acting Attorney General (I forgot her name), whoever was tasked to preserve the Page-Strozs e-mail record. It's good that you read the news, but I was pointing out with you as a typical reader that Department-policy-ignoring favoritism (or disfavoritism) was the rule not the exception. VargasMilan (talk) 01:58, 11 January 2019 (EST)
All of the senior staff at the Ethics Office recommended that Whittaker recuse himself. One of standards for recusal is that there has to be somebody else better qualified available for the assignment. In other words, they're saying that Rosenstein is more qualified and less conflicted than Whittaker, which strikes me as patent nonsense. No, I'm not surprised to learn that the Ethics Office is filled with partisan hacks. What does surprise me is that I have not encountered any media analysis (mainstream or conservative) of why the office never recommended that Rosenstein recuse himself. PeterKa (talk) 07:34, 11 January 2019 (EST)
Whittaker will recuse himself when NY AG Lettia James recuses herself. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 08:33, 11 January 2019 (EST)
That was the germ of truth in my reply. There was a story about the recusal of Attorney General Jeff Sessions and the non-recusal of Robert Mueller and the recusal administrator (a woman), but it apparently crash-landed that same day and was never mentioned again. I blame the levels of bureaucracy; there's no point in the conservative media catching a little fish when the bigger fish are still there.
But heads up, Peter, the deep state is trying for a win beyond the Sessions-Mueller-Rosenstein trifecta. It's come to this: hopefully Trump's own party will vote against Trump's Attorney General nomination. [2] VargasMilan (talk) 00:13, 12 January 2019 (EST)
Of course, one tends to assume that longtime federal staff are acting out of liberalism, or are at least afraid of WaPo. But until the recent stories on Whittaker, I haven't seen any specific news that confirms such cynicism about the Ethics Office. That the staff is now leaking on Whittaker is so....ethical.
That Barr is friends with Mueller just shows that the leadership of the justice department is inbred. Mueller is still the guy who drove New York Governor Elliot Spitzer out of politics by setting him up with a hooker sting. Rosenstein is in the habit of deferring to Mueller whereas Barr has experience supervising Mueller. So the relationship dynamics should be quite different. PeterKa (talk) 11:44, 12 January 2019 (EST)
I should have said: a deep-state win beyond the Sessions-Mueller-Whitaker trifecta of bogus conflict-of-interest determinations especially since Trump has never spoken against Rosenstein's tenure as Deputy Attorney General as such, but the deep state is trying to manufacture an effectual cloud of doubt around Whitaker. VargasMilan (talk) 14:56, 13 January 2019 (EST)

There ain't no ethics investigation cause ethics investigators can't look at documents and evidence Mueller is holding. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 22:00, 12 January 2019 (EST)

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez at the tipy top

I thought I was following the adventures of AOC because she says so many stupid things that I enjoy laughing at. But according to the Huffington Post, it's because she is "a direct threat to conservatives because her very existence in Congress." This is HuffPo's idea of science. Seriously: "Conservative Men Are Obsessed With Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Science Tells Us Why."
Aside from her entertainment value, there is another reason to follow AOC. As the recent "dance video" episode shows, she wields an awesome amount of media clout. A video AOC made in college was posted from a recently created Twitter account. Immediately after it was posted, various media outlets announced in unison that conservatives were attacking AOC dancing. Yet it's not clear whether any conservatives even knew about the video at that point. PeterKa (talk) 20:55, 11 January 2019 (EST)

Yes. You make a very important point. When all is said and done, she is the doll in Tales of Hoffman. Pelosi, Benny Ray Lujan, and the Soros machine are absolutely sexist for thier use and abuse of this woman. She was recruited and hired for her ability sell. No one respects her for her ideas, left or right, cause she has none. Someday, God willing, she'll wake up and see the Democrat establishment and Soros machine respects her intelligence as much as conservatives do. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 21:22, 11 January 2019 (EST)
The AOC dance video was edited from a longer video and posted by a conservative YouTuber on December 2. Nobody noticed it until AnnonymousQ1776, presumably someone who works on AOC's behalf, put it on Twitter on January 2.
The AOC phenomenon has a definite manufactured feel. The left was too enthusiastic at the news of her primary victory. Wasn't Rep. Joe Crowley a Democrat too? He must have taken a dive. Perhaps it is all about promoting her "Green New Deal." Nobody who thought global warming was a real problem would use such a slogan. It cynically turns what's allegedly a global crisis into yet another pork barrel project or make work program. PeterKa (talk) 00:33, 12 January 2019 (EST)
Even in Congress there is a division of labor, a specialization of tasks. This goes into and even beyond the make up of committees. Very few "legislators" write laws, which is the highest task - they only vote on them. In committees, some are good at questioning witnesses, others are useless and a waste of time. Each party in fact has a few members with no committee assignment, and work the floor. Some are good at giving press interviews, others are policy wonks who spend night and day studying the latest government reports.
Ocasio-Cortez's talents obviously are outside the halls of Congress - party outreach, organizing, fundraising, TV appearances. The Pelosi machine establishment will give her a wide berth provided she continues to bring in {1) voters {2} donations. While at work, she'll be instructed by staff and party bosses what to do, what to say, how to vote. As long she doesn't go off script, she'll be okay. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 02:12, 12 January 2019 (EST)
When she was in college, a hot young AOC used her dancing skills for good. Now she dances with Al Sharpton. This clip is almost as disgusting as the infamous "Hillary and Obama in love" image. PeterKa (talk) 23:05, 12 January 2019 (EST)
That's called outreach or organizing. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 00:33, 13 January 2019 (EST)

Who's going to pay for the wall? El Chapo

El Chapo is Mexican, isn't he? His assets are estimated at $14 billion: "Ted Cruz explains how he's going to make El Chapo pay for the border wall." Cruz calls his proposed legislation the "Ensuring Lawful Collection of Hidden Assets to Provide Order Act." This idea is way better than declaring a national emergency and bypassing Congress! PeterKa (talk) 00:28, 13 January 2019 (EST)

Yes, it's simply designating funds from asset forfeiture to a specific project. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 00:36, 13 January 2019 (EST)
And of course the title of the legislation spells out an acronym of ELCHAPO. As a Republican office-holder Sen. Ted Cruz is a frustrating ally—his gimmicks are so corny. VargasMilan (talk) 13:30, 13 January 2019 (EST)
This article argues that declaring a national emergency would allow Trump to surrender on the wall and then blame the courts. PeterKa (talk) 18:13, 13 January 2019 (EST)

Liberal lies

Sen. Mark Warner told Jake Tapper of CNN he received Gang of Eight briefings on Trump-Russia in the Summer of 2016.[3] Warner did not become a member of the Gang of Eight til January 2017. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 23:52, 13 January 2019 (EST)


CP went over 700 million over night. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 15:11, 14 January 2019 (EST)

Great catch! Posted.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 09:37, 15 January 2019 (EST)

William Barr

I expect that William Barr will be our greatest attorney general ever. Why? Because the media is taking extraordinary steps to derail his nomination. During previous federal shutdowns, we were treated to an endless parade of sob stories about the suffering federal workers. Usually, these stories are bogus. But the federal workers actually did miss a paycheck on January 11. Although this is a historic first, the event was barely covered. These days, the media is focused like a laser beam on Mueller and Russia. There hasn't been much in the way of real news about either subject lately. It's all about getting the base hepped up for the main event, Barr's confirmation hearing.
Barr's memo to Rosenstien defines obstruction of justice as "sabotaging a proceeding's truth-finding function." It also applies this definition to the question whether Trump committed obstruction by telling Comey to "let...go" of the Flynn investigation. He concludes that, "Mueller should not be permitted to demand that the President submit to interrogation about alleged obstruction." Rosenstien apparently disagrees with Barr on this matter since he is planning to resign as soon as Barr is confirmed. PeterKa (talk) 04:06, 15 January 2019 (EST)

There's really only two questions: (1) Will 1Q GDP be up or down? If it continues upward, that tells us we don't really need all these liberal, leftist, union dues paying, Democrat donating leeches and deadbeats in the civil service system and can let them go: and (2) How will Sen. Pat Leahy vote? If yes, the fix is in, nobody gets prosecuted for nothing, just like in Fast & Furious and Benghazi. If no, the gloves come off. There will be casualties on both sides. RobSDeep Six the Deep State!
As to the Barr Memo, the only issue in Senator's mind is Was Barr engaged in lobbying for the job for hinsrlf, signalling the President he'd let him walk once everyone knew Sessions was getting fired after the election? RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 04:58, 15 January 2019 (EST)
Of course, the answer to that question is "yes." But if Barr's legal advice is sound and offered sincerely, why should that matter?
That's a good point about the shutdown. Eventually, someone will get the idea, "Do we really need all these nonessential employees?" Obama went on a huge hiring spree, so there is plenty of excess staffing at this point. There is a labor shortage in the private sector, so anyone who can be let go should be let go.
Hey, it looks like we are not the only ones who are thinking this way: "I’m a senior Trump official, and I hope a long shutdown smokes out the resistance." PeterKa (talk) 07:52, 15 January 2019 (EST)
Get focused. The following excerpt has been in open source for 20 years. I recently shortened it and cleaned it up after Barr was nominated. Here it is: William Barr rebukes Bill Clinton. It was originally posted as The faired-haired boy.
I could say more about John Kerry's subcommittee investigation into narcotics smuggling and BCCI which follows Iran-Contra and overlaps Barr's DOJ tenure, which again Leahy plays a role, but first familiarize yourself with Barr's role in Iran-Contra. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 13:37, 15 January 2019 (EST)

Trump goes to McDonalds; reportedly draws ire of snobs

@Logo_Daedalus: "Andrew Jackson rolled a massive cheese wheel into the White House & had people come off the street to gouge chunks off it for themselves—yet the decorum pundits who wish they were in Victorian England will gasp—as if a McDonalds platter is not pure iconic americana.

"I really don't understand how these people have maintained their "shock" at Trump being extremely representative of America—it can only be that they are ashamed & scandalized by their country in general—Trump just reminds them of their alienation from their countrymen.

"He's obviously getting re-elected. Nobody comes close to his embodiment of America."

VargasMilan (talk) 17:12, 15 January 2019 (EST)

A new level of demeaning the Office of the President was reached when Johnson showed off his scars from gallbladder surgery to photographers and the world. Johnson is said to have given instructions to staff and press interviews while sitting on the toilet.[1] Johnson regularly used the "N" word.
Oh, if we had the old days when president's honored the office and showed respect and decorum! RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 18:11, 15 January 2019 (EST)
Andrew Jackson and LBJ are taking it back a ways. But you can see Bill Clinton getting his McDonald's fix here and here. In SNL's version, he steals a burger from a random customer. PeterKa (talk) 01:33, 16 January 2019 (EST)
Yes, that was the beginning of what we now call "the permanent campaign." In the old days, after a candidate took office, he focused on the people's business and started undoing all his promises. Clinton never stopped campaigning and filling the airwaves 24/7 will lies and promises. Of course, Democrats were all giddy about his McDonald's visit, "the kinda guy you'd like to have a beer with," which Elizabeth Warren just stole from the Clinton playbook. But after the Kavanaugh smear, nobody in their right mind would ever drink a beer with Elizabeth Warren. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 02:45, 16 January 2019 (EST)

Sexist thinking uncovered in Trump

"There is a feeling sweeping the land: A new way of engaging in politics in our country. And this is towards a dying ideology known as sexism.

"Sexism is a belief that men are superior to women and a kind of doubt that the privileged treatment that men receive in society was earned.

"You may ask yourself why a term whose name indicates a kind of political ideology or worldview with regard to sex differences in general only applies to men and why a more accurate name that could be used indicating the meaning combining words in a pattern already having currency in politics, "male supremacy", lies unused and has all but disappeared.

"Is it because you think this is a sign of a kind of mental disorder—perhaps a kind of 'hyper-discrimination' to discriminate against all men all at once by using a supposedly-neutral term selectively (that is, unequally) against men, ironically to complain about the problem of equal treatment on the basis of sex—that is being played out in the political arena? That's fine. But you'd better shut your yap about it!"

VargasMilan (talk) 07:09, 16 January 2019 (EST)

Two things I strongly suspect are true. Donald Trump was superior to Hillary Clinton when it came to winning the presidency in 2016. And Putin was superior to Hillary Clinton when it came to political cyber warfare and got by the DNC's defenses. Hillary and her fans: In politics and in the technical/computer world, it is still often a man's world and your side lacked machismo. One of the definitions of machismo is "exhilarating sense of power or strength." :) Conservative (talk) 11:02, 16 January 2019 (EST)
There is no evidence whatsoever that (a) Russians hacked the DNC, and (b) WikiLeaks got Democrat emails from Russia.
How easily you fall for liberal fake news and leftist propaganda. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 13:30, 16 January 2019 (EST)
Conservative has something better than an infallible ability to detect fraud in stories against Trump and his allies that are here today and gone tomorrow—and it shows in his writing. He has faith in America and its freedom, without which even "certified truthful" stories don't sink in to those politically hostile to Trump (in resistance to those daring to deflate their ethos) but only collapse against each other in their minds into heaps of mutually incomprehensible rubbish. VargasMilan (talk) 00:06, 17 January 2019 (EST)

More remediation for men

“Masculinity is fine but it's a problem when it's toxic. It’s also really bad for boys and men. They feel they can't show emotion, can't be affectionate to mates. They're raised to be tough. "Don't cry. Be in charge." @bkjabour #auspol #TheDrum —Bridie Jabour on Australian Broadcasting Network's "The Drum".

That's big of you to acknowledge that masculinity is fine. I was beginning to feel insecure about whether we still qualified(?) A good way to make friends is to reason about someone while making use of the conceptualizations with insulting assumptions in which you've placed them for political convenience. Has anyone ever spoken like this? There used to be jokes about the hyper-masculine, like in movies, giving them the "diagnosis" of "testosterone poisoning", but now were supposed to take it seriously as a categorical-level sociological classification (hint: yes, as soon as the phony narrative using the politically-convenient conceptualizations with insulting assumptions hardens and enough people have forgotten its pseudo-scientific origins)?! VargasMilan (talk) 01:57, 17 January 2019 (EST)

Fake news (papers)

Here a bit of an interesting story: [4]
It seems some leftist activists weren't content with how far the MSM is going to try to make lies into truth, and distributed their own forged version of the Washington Post. It made claims about Trump stepping down, something the author, Roychoudhuri, said " more reasonable than our current reality...and it's anything but far-fetched." --David B (TALK) 18:15, 16 January 2019 (EST)

That is if you ignore the signature approach of the liberal media towards the Trump Administration: that of the (empirically proven) piling on of negative coverage to the point of even damaging their own reputations as journalists in the process.
Roychouduri is a total troll who hopes to induce anger in conservatives by pretending he's incapable of gathering the relevant facts before making sweeping generalities that serve to flatter liberals. VargasMilan (talk) 18:53, 16 January 2019 (EST)

Pelosi and the State of the Union

Guess what? Pelosi won't let Trump address the House for the traditional State of the Union.[5] She cites the shutdown. But it is safe to assume that she is more concerned that AOC, Tlaib, or some other freshman will yell something rude. It could just like a football game, with Democrats kneeling and Republicans standing. Whatever the reason for it, the era of Democrat legislators treating Republican presidents with respect is apparently over. Trump should address just the U.S. Senate, our legitimate legislative body given the Dems' recent antics. PeterKa (talk) 01:47, 17 January 2019 (EST)

The Senate might not have the seating capacity. Better yet, Trump should have it at his Washington hotel. He could donate the time and space, and take a tax deduction for the fair market value of providing accommodations for 500 people. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 14:27, 17 January 2019 (EST)
I like the idea of having the SOTU at Trump International Hotel. President Trump is a simple man. If the Dems cared about reopening the government or any of the other issues they bray about, they'd hold the most imperial SOTU ever and fawn over him.
If I was Trump, here is what I'd say: "The congressional leaders have informed me that legislation to secure our southern border and reopen the government cannot be passed. There is no light at the end of the tunnel. I urge all furloughed employees to seek alternative employment. I expect the government to reopen following a 30 percent workforce reduction." PeterKa (talk) 05:38, 18 January 2019 (EST)
Little help on "fawning" as doubleplusgood Dem strategy? Thanks in advance. JohnZ (talk) 16:23, 18 January 2019 (EST)
Trump was not much of a conservative during the primaries. Why did he become one? Because conservative crowds cheer when he says something they like. As Marco Rubio can testify, out-Trumping Trump doesn't work. What was Warren thinking: "When Trump is called on his lies, he doubles down. I know! I'll go wide and back up my bogus ancestry claims with a fake genetics test." Julius Caesar, who claimed descent from Venus, would have been proud. PeterKa (talk) 21:38, 18 January 2019 (EST)
It's like they are daring him to declare a national emergency. When he does, history will record the seriousness with which Pelosi wanted the people informed on the national emergency. Pelosi herself called border defense a moral issue, the argument is over how much money to spend. Meanwhile they're vacationing in Puerto Rico and flying all over the world. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 08:05, 18 January 2019 (EST)

Sob stories

Now suddenly we're suppose to feel sorry for furloughed federal workers cause they can't destroy the planet with carbon emissions. They don't know when will be the next time they can "put gas in the tank," according to the DCCC chair. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 19:20, 18 January 2019 (EST)

Time to archive this page?

This page has gotten quite large, more so than in the past when it has been archived. Does anyone mind if I go ahead and archive most or all of the content here? It might be nice to tidy up a bit, and not need to scroll down through 50,000+ words to get to the bottom every time. --David B (TALK) 20:00, 17 January 2019 (EST)

Great idea! Please go ahead and archive this!--Andy Schlafly (talk) 20:15, 17 January 2019 (EST)
VargasMilan, I did consider leaving the last few, but perhaps not carefully enough, as I see that the last few sections have been active fairly recently. However, do you think it is useful to have content from December still here? It's not like it is getting deleted, just moved. Looking back at some of the other archives, I'm seeing some which are themselves considerably less than 100kb, which is what this page currently is. 100kb still seems like a lot of data to download every time, especially for those using slower internet connections. --David B (TALK) 01:34, 18 January 2019 (EST)
I would say go ahead and archive anything that hasn't been active in the last week. PeterKa (talk) 08:01, 18 January 2019 (EST)
I did not even read PeterKa's comment, but that's exactly what I did. When archiving, we should care more about how old/stale the discussions are than how many bytes the page is after archiving. --1990'sguy (talk) 08:43, 18 January 2019 (EST)
The last time this page was archived, by User:Conservative, the archive left 100kb here to read. Many users write sections with footnotes or wikilinks, particularly RobS and Conservative. Their longer-studied and deeper understanding results in reasoned discourse from which it takes longer to reap the benefits (by successive readings, as time allows), but provide a more complete diet with which to nourish our conservatism than one that is arbitrarily disconnected from the important information, interpretations and reasonings out of which their discourses grew. VargasMilan (talk) 08:57, 18 January 2019 (EST)
First, there's still a lot to read. Second, with 100,000 bytes and ~30-or-so extra discussions, the page is overwhelming and doesn't help "nourish" anyone. Third, Conservative archived way too little the last time he archived (and he archived significantly less than what is normally archived. We're not restoring all those stale discussions again. --1990'sguy (talk) 09:16, 18 January 2019 (EST)
You hurt my feelings. VargasMilan (talk) 02:49, 20 January 2019 (EST)

The Onion mocks Pelosi

This Photoshop classic belongs in MPR: "Defiant Pelosi Begins Swimming To Afghanistan After Trump Denies Use Of Government Plane." PeterKa (talk) 05:52, 19 January 2019 (EST)

Catholic Students in DC -- more blatant left-wing/MSM bias, bigotry, and piling-on

For the past couple of days, the media and the Left have been going hysterical over a group of Roman Catholic pro-life students who supposedly harassed an Indian (native) activist. Rather than critically examining the Indian man's narrative, trying to get any other perspectives, or even waiting for all the evidence to come in, the media piled on, instantly condemning the students, so much that the school "apologized" and is now considering expelling those students.

Problem is, there are two sides to every story, and this one is no exception.

It turns out, the students (substantiated by another video) had a completely different (and convincing) perspective[6][7][8] -- rather than harass the Indian activist, he forced himself into the middle of the group to play his drums and spent several minutes simply banging on the drums while the students awkwardly watched. It became clear that his intention was to make them look bad (after all, the activist has "victimhood" status in the eyes of leftists, and the students were wearing MAGA hats) -- though we should all note that the students did not do anything to harass the guy and simply watched.

This is another example of how biased the MSM is, and another example that most of the public displays of bigotry in our society come from the secular Left, not the religious Right:

--1990'sguy (talk) 14:20, 20 January 2019 (EST)

James Delingpole has a great op-ed on this story, which I recommend everyone to read: [9] --1990'sguy (talk) 22:12, 20 January 2019 (EST)
As a fair-weather conservative, I was among the first to disavow the students—and among the last to finally admit I was wrong. Although I still like to share lingering doubts that throw haze around specific falsehoods that I made but should have known better than to have and make a particular point of not bothering to wait for any replies to them. I think this will make me way more popular among the liberals than all of you. Come on guys—step up and do some outreach! VargasMilan (talk) 22:36, 20 January 2019 (EST)
This could be the biggest fake racism incident yet. The counterprotestor with the drum is an experienced activist who knew exactly what he was doing. Smells like a "Warren for president" gimmick. Obama got a lot of mileage by accusing others of racism. Now we will see if a white woman can do the same.
Trump should invite the school kids over to the White House. They can be our David Hogg. PeterKa (talk) 01:50, 21 January 2019 (EST).
This isn't going away. Some on the fake racism protest side are trying to get one step ahead of your idea, taking a protest to the students' school. The blacks at the Capitol that tried to incite hostility for 45 minutes (by a report of the video taken) are, by report, notorious "trolls" on the streets of New York. I can picture this building into a kind of "media war" even bigger than the Duke Lacrosse case. I hope Martin Luther King Jr. Day and thoughtful reminiscences of the man that day celebrates can inspire cooler heads. VargasMilan (talk) 06:25, 21 January 2019 (EST)
There are lawsuits being threatened against the usual media suspects and their accessories who blew up and distorted the story to render a moral indictment of the kids and got a bit too imaginative!
So everything got reduced to the kid's smirk. Adam Kolasinski just blew that out of the water an hour ago: "He wasn't blocking the drummer. The latter was deliberately getting up into his face. The boy peacefully but firmly stood his ground. The smirk was a perfectly appropriate reaction to such boorish behavior by the professional agitator banging his drum." Up to now it's been: At seventeen, he's old enough to have mastered and deployed a cynical racism to filter out distress projected by those other than himself [can you say "projection"?]—oh, but he's way too young to suspect or recognize political manipulation when it's happening. VargasMilan (talk) 14:22, 21 January 2019 (EST)
I heard from Rush Limbaugh that the Native American didn't object to the kid's response. But his face did resolve at times into a smirk. I didn't say this earlier, but the protest at the kid's school I told Peter about is said to be led by a Native American group. I thought the Native American groups at the school and the capital were linked somehow, but didn't want to accidentally imply that in the brief report I posted. Now I think they weren't connected and maybe the Native American's professional protesting is more like Laura Loomer's gonzo reporting and that nobody was being set up [by any Native American group], but rather the second Native American group is independently just trying to get in on the action. VargasMilan (talk) 19:56, 21 January 2019 (EST)
Here we have a connection between a false flag operation and fake news as well; you can expect similar incidents from the full menu of identity politics for the next two years from provacateurs. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 21:29, 21 January 2019 (EST)
Twitter may have been OK with calls for violence against the students,[10] but at least they banned what appears to be the account that spread the lies blindly picked up by the media in the first place.[11] --1990'sguy (talk) 00:00, 22 January 2019 (EST)

Tucker Carlson had a great monologue a few hours ago on this incident -- I encourage everyone to watch it: [12] --1990'sguy (talk) 00:20, 22 January 2019 (EST)

As an alumni of a similar school, with lots of experience working with young people to give me some perspective, I remember a strong, aggressive pack mentality, a 600 boy ecosystem where the strong preyed on the weak until the weak became strong. The school produced some impressive Christian warriors, the kind who flew helicopters into action in the first Gulf War, manned rescue lifeboats, organised charity relief on the ground in war zones etc. It also produced people one lad convicted trying to kill a policeman and several drug dealers. What I'm trying to say is these kids were doing the right thing, and doing it with a strong and evident faith, but I wouldn't bet the price of a pint of milk that they are angels either. Rafael (talk) 02:59, 22 January 2019 (EST)
To be fair, no one in life were angels, either. But I'm pretty sure that if they were like the guy who tried to become a cop killer or those who became drug dealers if that's what you're insinuating, they probably would have tried to attack the guy outright, not even care if they made the situation worse. Pokeria1 (talk) 03:11, 22 January 2019 (EST)
The original video slamming the students was posted from the Twitter account @2020fight.[13] This purports to be the account of a California schoolteacher. Yet it was putting out 130 tweets a day and is followed by major media organizations. The account has since been suspended. Perhaps it is controlled by a group that planned the hit, but doesn't want to be associated with the uproar. The media must know this is a political dirty trick feed. Yet they act innocent and claim that they are simply covering what's going on in "the social media." PeterKa (talk) 06:51, 22 January 2019 (EST)
Conservative allyAlly to conservatives Paul Joseph Watson four hours ago: "BREAKING: Trump to meet Covington students in White House as soon as tomorrow." Peter's suggestion anticipated Trump's actions once again [looks sly, wiggles thumb up and down against front of fingertips]. VargasMilan (talk) 21:49, 22 January 2019 (EST)

National Review now admits Phillips is a fraud: [14] --1990'sguy (talk) 10:43, 23 January 2019 (EST)

Yes, he was a private in the Marine reserves in 1972 to 1976. George W. Bush got an enormous amount of guff for being in the reserves during 'Nam. The media considered it a ruse to avoid the draft. PeterKa (talk) 12:21, 23 January 2019 (EST)
Not even sure if Phillips was that either, since TownHall indicated that even that was fraudulent. Pokeria1 (talk) 12:40, 23 January 2019 (EST)
Phillips, the Native American guy, may not have complained about the kid, but he said collectively that his classmates were racist. This after their being harassed for 45 minutes by black professional "street-trolls" (the issue they champion is that the true Israelites were black—a cause that has been around for at least fifty years, accompanied by collectivist overtones). Now he is transmogrifying that flimsy excuse into a positive political agenda from which to assume a leadership role, this week towards attempting to swarm a Catholic mass held at the National Shrine in Washington. VargasMilan (talk) 23:40, 23 January 2019 (EST)
It appears that Phillips also has a violent criminal record: [15] --1990'sguy (talk) 13:36, 24 January 2019 (EST)

Joy Behar admitted what many of us knew all along -- that the media slander of the Catholic students is "because we're desperate to get Trump out of office": [16] It's hard for the media to resist when it has an opportunity to demonize the perfect "bad guy" demographic (religious white conservatives wearing MAGA hats). --1990'sguy (talk) 13:45, 23 January 2019 (EST)

Phillips told Vogue he was a "recon ranger" in the Marines. He was actually a refrigerator technician.[17] Not only that, he was AWOL four times. If that counts as "being in the military," the media owes George W. an apology. PeterKa (talk) 06:34, 24 January 2019 (EST)

Shutdown Day 31: Let the layoffs begin

Trump can legally lay off federal workers who have been furloughed 30 days or more. The procedure is called "reduction in force" and requires that the employees receive 60 days notice. This article has a chart of who is eligible. We now can off load NASA's climate quacks, fire EPA bureaucrats, close down the education department, among other things. PeterKa (talk) 04:15, 21 January 2019 (EST)

Snopes has an item debunking this claim. Regardless of the law concerning RIFs, there are a lot of things Trump can do to make furloughed workers feel unwelcome and persuade them to find other jobs.
They really need to tighten up the shutdown. If the Feds have time for nonsense like this, not nearly enough workers have been furloughed: "FDA threatens to pull e-cigarettes off the market." Like Georgians during Sherman's march, the federal bureaucracy needs to howl before this war is over. PeterKa (talk) 08:35, 21 January 2019 (EST)
Imagine that. And Pelosi could have saved their jobs in the looming national emergency. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 21:22, 21 January 2019 (EST)

My solution to the shutdown

Here is my solution to the shutdown crisis:

  • Drop the word “wall.” Fully fund the Secure Fence Act of 2006. This Act calls for a 700-mile long double fence on the southern border. Only about 40 miles of this type of fence has been built so far.
  • Use money from civil forfeiture to fund the fence. This represents the proceeds of drug trafficking collected from El Chapo and others.
  • Enforce immigration law. No amnesty for DREAMERs or anybody else.
  • Get ready to dump furloughed federal workers permanently unless the fence is funded.
  • End birthright citizenship. To tell illegals that a baby makes it OK to break our laws creates a perverse set of incentives. PeterKa (talk) 23:51, 21 January 2019 (EST)
Early next day a report emerged that Trump's new compromise bill pledged Trump wouldn't use any of the wall prototypes Trump had inspected.
That reminds me, I am mirroring your political writings from here onto Patreon. What do you want me to do with the $50,000? VargasMilan (talk) 15:52, 22 January 2019 (EST)
In addition to funding a wall, a better school system needs to be developed/used. Because robotics/AI are probably going to eliminate more jobs than Mexicans.Conservative (talk) 01:02, 23 January 2019 (EST)

Furloughed workers protest

The Dems are ready to play their last card: Mobilize the furloughed workers as anti-Trump protesters. It's blatant partisan politics and everyone involved should be fired. At least we now know what obnoxious, entitled brats these people are: "‘Will work for pay’: Furloughed federal workers stage sit-in outside senators' offices; 12 arrested." Will work for pay?? It's called a job. Get one. We have full employment these days, if you haven't heard. Being a federal worker must be really cushy to be worth all this trouble. Oh, and here is the obnoxious part: The protesters bring their kids along and have them display anti-wall propaganda. PeterKa (talk) 05:33, 24 January 2019 (EST)

(Chuckles) Only an innocent child could get away with such crass partisanship. God bless them all. Amen. [with apologies to Montgomery Burns {1990}] VargasMilan (talk) 20:00, 24 January 2019 (EST)

Trump reopens the government

What was Trump thinking when he reopened the government after receiving no concessions from the Democrats? Does he think the federal workers will love him now? According to this tweet, he still hasn't figured out that this a big deal: "This was in no way a concession. It was taking care of millions of people who were getting badly hurt by the Shutdown with the understanding that in 21 days, if no deal is done, it’s off to the races!"[18] Uh, Mr. President, this line of reasoning is delusional. Trump's credibility is now shot and there is no way he can get a better deal by closing the government again.
Aside from adjusting to life as Pelosi's errand boy, I see one other option for Trump. He can start building the wall using the statutory authority he already has. The Secure Fence Act of 2006 is still the law, albeit unfunded. He can declare an emergency and move funds around.
Finally, he can order the military to build a fence along the border even without declaring a national emergency. The Department of Defense may construct "roads and fences and installation of lighting to block drug smuggling corridors across international boundaries of the United States,” according to 10 United States Code § 284. See "Congress’ nonpartisan research arm says Trump could build the wall without state of emergency or funding". PeterKa (talk) 04:53, 26 January 2019 (EST)

In a surprise move, Ka states the obvious; film at eleven

Shh! If the fence works beautifully, it could lead to loud internecine dissensions among the Democratic party ranks for their leadership not having seized the opportunity to get skin in the game of what could be an amazingly popular policy, but, by instead having listened to their most intransigent purists, are unable to take any credit at all for one that, furthermore, could end up making such a dramatic difference.

That's why Trump is offering to allow Pelosi and Schumer to take some credit: it would show Trump to be a statesman, not just a partisan, and he suspects that their ability to claim participation will outweigh the party's purists' objections to working with Trump in any way at all. Think of it this way: Trump wants Democratic support, but doesn't need it, but the Democrats need an ability to take part in a policy that gives support to fences but don't want it.

Pay attention to what Trump says and does and see how that need allows Trump to dangle offers to share credit in halting illegal immigration in front of the Democratic leadership, all the while threatening to remove any role for them in the policy's implementation whatsoever. That unspoken subtext is what makes reading Trump's Twitter feed and other public announcements very humorous. VargasMilan (talk) 06:27, 26 January 2019 (EST)

I doubt anything has been resolved here. It's a respite to collect their paychecks and tuck one more bi-weekly paycheck under their belt, than wash, rinse, repeat. And the issue has nothing to do with policy proposals or legislation - its all about slogans and how to sell a bi[artisan consensus to respective constituencies. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 10:44, 26 January 2019 (EST)
IOW, Trump supporters have to forget about the "wall" (at least til the 2020 election) and settle for "modernization" and "infrastructure." RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 10:56, 26 January 2019 (EST)
The wall was what got Trump elected. It was a central campaign promise. If Trump doesn't deliver on the wall, it will be like George H. W. Bush's "Read my lips, no new taxes". That is why the Democrats want to get Trump to break his promise. The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, illegal immigration and amnesty is a very big reason why American politics has shifted to the left. Most of the world is left of the USA so high levels of immigration shift American politics to the left.Conservative (talk) 12:17, 26 January 2019 (EST)
"The wall" is not an issue. "The Wall" is a campaign slogan, that has nothing to do with infrastructure improvements to a physical barrier. Democrats will never accede to "The Wall."
Immigration reform is about handling future cases, not having the Gestapo round up and deport everyone here illegally. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 13:25, 26 January 2019 (EST)

The fence/wall must be expanded or Trump will have broken a central campaign promise. Trump will push this to the nth degree. If Trump doesn't do this, he knows a significant portion of his base will not vote for him in 2020 (stay home, etc.). Coulter/Limbaugh complaining is what got Trump to take on Pelosi/Schumer concerning the fence/wall. Trump cares what his base thinks. At the same time, Trump has the chutzpah to stand up to Pelosi/Schumer/media if push comes to shove. If I am mistaken about this matter and Trump caves, I have my doubts he will be reelected.Conservative (talk) 22:27, 26 January 2019 (EST)

To get something, you have to give something. Now, ask yourself the question two ways:
  1. What would Trump be willing to give? DACA amnesty? amnesty for 8 million illegals? a minimum wage hike? single-payer? etc.
  2. For Pelosi to give Trump a shot at re-election, what would she demand? Green New Deal? RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 22:43, 26 January 2019 (EST)

Amnesty is out. It would be counterproductive.

When Trump goes into round 2, he will likely give a State of the Union speech (which highlights the need for a border fence) and he can claim he gave the legislative body time to deliberate in a non-government shutdown scenario. At that point, he can play a game of chicken until Pelosi/Schumer caves or he can declare a state of emergency and hope a post Kavanaugh Supreme Court will side with him. He could also give speeches across the USA on this matter to rally support.

Trump should also push for remittances to Mexico be taxed as well to bolster his case that Mexico paid for the wall.

If Trump shows weakness to Pelosi/Schumer, you can bet his base and China/North Korea will notice. And once he shows weakness to Pelosi/Schumer, they will not respect him and steamroll him later as well.

In addition, there will be attacks on Trump saying he broke a central campaign promise. Regarding Bush Sr.'s "read my lips, no new taxes pledge": "In the general election, Democratic nominee Bill Clinton, running as a moderate, also cited the quotation and questioned Bush's trustworthiness. Bush lost his bid for re-election to Clinton, prompting many to suggest his failure to keep the pledge as a reason for his defeat."[19] This is why Pelosi/Schumer want Trump to break a central campaign pledge.Conservative (talk) 23:17, 26 January 2019 (EST)

Trump ending the partial government shutdown probably emboldened Pelosi.
It would take many months for the courts to determine whether Trump declaring a national emergency about the border and the related issue of expanding a border fence is lawful.[20]
If Trump prevails, it will probably be a many month tough slog.
The root problems are that liberals/leftists have a stronger hand when it comes to the media, social media and the educational system plus the GOP did not tackle the immigration issue earlier. Also, the white majority in the USA has a below replacement level of births which probably increases the hand of the pro-immigration forces because companies need workers. In 2016, the fertility rate of the Unites States was 1.8 births per woman which is below the replacement level of 2.1. See: Data: White American Births Below Replacement Level in Every State.
Maybe Europe moving the right and being increasingly anti-immigration will continue to affect American politics. For example, Brexit did help Trump win in 2016.
In addition, Trump keeps filling up the courts with conservatives.[21] And Ruth Bader Ginsburg has a history of health problems. Washington Post on Ginsburg: "But, at the same time, her fragility has become clearer. Since Ginsburg’s appointment to the Supreme Court, she has survived both colorectal and pancreatic cancers. In November, she took time off after a fall. And this month , Ginsburg missed her first oral argument in 25 years while recovering from surgery for lung cancer. The result has been an unusually intense cultural preoccupation with Ginsburg’s mortality."[22]Conservative (talk) 04:33, 27 January 2019 (EST)
The biggest issue and driver of American/European politics is currently immigration. And the root cause of immigration is the sub-replacement level of births among irreligious and nominally religious whites (see: Atheism and fertility rates and Western atheism and race). Over the longer term, perhaps decades (but maybe sooner), the religious percentage of the Western World will rise due to the fertility rate of the native religious populations and due to religious immigrants (see: Desecularization).04:55, 27 January 2019 (EST)

Robert Mueller is an out-of-control prosecutor

...lest we forget, who has strayed far beyond his original mandate. Jerome Corsi is just one example. Mueller has a little conflict of interest of his own, to speak de minimus. He graduated in the same IV League class as John Kerry, and now he's prosecuting the man responsible for bringing Kerry's stolen valor charges so far to the forefront of the 2004 presidential campaign, that Kerry was forced to address them? What's up with that? VargasMilan (talk) 05:46, 27 January 2019 (EST)

I doubt Mueller is a ringleader or decision maker in all this. Mueller happily drove New York Governor Elliot Spitzer out of politics when he was FBI chief. He is not an ideologue, just a guy with a specific skill set looking for work. The courts have ruled that Mueller was not appointed based on the special counsel regulation, but rather based on Rosenstien's statutory authority. In other words, he's an assistant of Rosenstien's with a fancy title. That means he investigates whatever Rosenstien tells him to investigate. Rosenstien has announced that he will resign as soon as Barr is confirmed. With any luck, the new deputy attorney general will be someone more committed to the rule of law. PeterKa (talk) 06:58, 27 January 2019 (EST)
Mueller is a partisan - namely anti-Trump. His staffing choices of hardcore Democrats reveal this matter and so do his hardball tactics.
More importantly, it's obvious that the whole probe should be ended at this point. Russian disinformation (Steele dossier) played a significant role in getting the whole Mueller probe launched. Mueller's unreasonable degree of tenacity given what the evidence has so far revealed concerning the election points to him being an anti-Trump partisan. Hillary ran a poor campaign and America's democracy spoke and voted for Trump.Conservative (talk) 14:19, 27 January 2019 (EST)
The problem is, its not. He's got Trump supporters and conservatives cannabilzing each other, the same guys who Conservapedia combined into one entry for Conservative of the Year just a month ago. Time to wake up. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 14:48, 27 January 2019 (EST)
The Mueller probe will not succeed in taking out Trump. It will only somewhat damage/distract/irritate him.
The damage will be done by some people being afraid to work with Trump lest the crosshairs be put on them in the future. In addition, Mueller is enabling Democrats to play the guilt by association game as far as the unrelated crimes and unseemly behavior Mueller has uncovered (In other words, some of the people Trump has associated with such as Michael Cohen and Stormy Daniels related activity).
As far as the Mueller probe very much irritating Trump: "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu. Trump can have a volcanic temper.Conservative (talk) 16:06, 27 January 2019 (EST)

NFL recovers

It seems that most NFL fans prefer football to political protest: "The NFL Recovers From Kneeling Frenzy." PeterKa (talk) 23:20, 28 January 2019 (EST)

All's well that ends well.Conservative (talk) 01:02, 29 January 2019 (EST)

January 2019 trolls and hoaxes

I think a lot of conservatives and their allies used to watching the progress of alarmist events staged through the co-ordination of left-wing activists occupying positions of power and how their story-arcs are maintained from the beginning, to the middle, to the end over the past decade have wondered what stupid political movements left-wing activists would carry with them as they stepped one by one out of the clown car at the beginning of 2019.

We certainly weren't disappointed. Maybe you can picture a focus group for marketing liberalism coming up with a strategy to exploit these.

"What we need to do is to echo whatever the hating radical left comes up with; they'll come up with something—they can't contain themselves. After it gets blared for a couple of days, everyone will be so dazzled by the stupidity that they will be begging to listen to the left-wing everyday stupidity and corruption as a comparative voice of reason!"

All false:

  • Conservatives triggered over Ocasio-Cortez dancing
  • Trump ordered Cohen to lie to Congress about Trump Tower Moscow project
  • MAGA kids provoked confrontation with Native American & racially abused him


  • Left finally rejects Roe v. Wade—as too restrictive! (demanding late-term abortions must be allowed up until birth!)
  • As Conservapedia MPR says, bring back the ERA to fight the conservative war to favor separate sex roles (we have always been at war with sex identities, we have never been at war with failure to accommodate the reality of separate sex identities [that requires free daycare at work]).
  • Twelve Chicago detectives assigned and video camera footage totalling to months-worth scoured in response to claims of Trump-hat [Smollett denied telling police the supposed assailants wore MAGA hats] Trump-slogan associated racial attack against break-out star of black-family-centered too-pro-business television series Empire. Strangely the reports of the hoodlums centered largely around highly media-exploitable symbols of oppression they invoked like a noose they had ready-to-hand, "racial and homophobic slurs" and the recitation of Trump's campaign slogan in such a way as to reveal how it served for them as an unmistakably sinister impulse—done southern style.
It seems that Chicago and its visitors have nowhere left to hide, as apparently southerners have nothing better to do than to fly north to Chicago as tourists in the middle of winter and brave the seven-degree temperatures at two a.m. on the off chance an occasion arises with which they can simultaneously mask Chicago's crime demographics with a white-on-black crime and the recent Trump-hat-wearing hate-crime hoax at our nation's capital. And re-invoke the ideology and terror of the Democrat-populated Ku Klux Klan and newly conjoin it with Republican President Donald Trump and his supporters.
Fox Entertainment made a point to quickly condemn the "violence and hate" that inspired the altercation, and while the actor was reported to be in "good" condition, there were fewer reports about what an inspection of his bruises revealed.
Namely whether or not they supported an alternate, but perhaps less politically-charged scenario: He stayed up too late, slipped on the icy sidewalk, knew he would have to miss rehearsal the next day, established with the hospital attendants a cover story to back up what he expected to tell his boss and didn't expect them to call the police. Not to say that that's the only possible alternative story. VargasMilan (talk) 02:59, 31 January 2019 (EST)
All too true. And I have to admit, I never thought of the alternative Juicy Schmuckly (or whatever its name is) scenario til now. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 08:20, 31 January 2019 (EST)


Reports have named two Nigerian brothers as Smollett's attackers—paid by Smollett himself. Other sources say Smollett had been indignant that a racist letter sent to him weeks a week or two earlier didn't raise an outcry that he felt suited his status as an actor in a popular television production, so he choreographed the attack in a way that would provide a larger canvas on which to project the injured feelings of his big ego, collect the requisite excess sympathy in a proportion that he felt would compensatorily follow from reciting the account of this second episode and end up with an ego feeling remarkedly less cramped! VargasMilan (talk) 02:00, 19 February 2019 (EST)
How do we know Schmuckly didn't fake the letter, too. He's already on record as not co-operating with investigators in several incidences. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 10:03, 19 February 2019 (EST)
I don't know, but the first thing I do after doubts arise after I claim to have been the target of a politically convenient crime is to call skeptics "haters". VargasMilan (talk) 15:13, 19 February 2019 (EST)
Looks to me like he's lobbying for the job as Kamala Harris's FBI director. [23] RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 15:41, 19 February 2019 (EST)
I wonder how Smollett feels about having validated everything non-criminal non-violent non-fraudulent haters have ever suspected? Two examples:
  • that liberal activists only read news that is flattering to themselves making them tone-deaf to suspicious "tells" when they are themselves being untruthful or hearing the untruthful remarks of other liberals.
  • that liberal activists become conveniently hysterical when supplied with supposed elements of an alleged crime that carry with them widely-known symbolic associations that help smear together ideas of "simple opposition to" with "abuse of" a liberal identity group or one or more of its members (Ann Coulter covered this topic area in her book Guilty: Liberal Victims and Their Assault on America) in order to leap over the bounds of due process or the rule of a punishment proportional to the offense. Smollett himself tried this approach on January 20, 2019:
".@AOC [Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez] is only speaking facts. This is so far beyond political party affiliation. Across the matter the border...from sea to shining sea...45[th President Donald Trump] and all his white hooded cohorts are a national disgrace. And if you support are you. Clowns."
To them, the conclusiveness of the disposal of the necessity of any further moral analysis this convenient "discovery" of Trump's policy executives of either party being closet members of the Democrat-populated KKK provides or of any conversation it forstalls is only matched by the malleability of the sanctions now employable to cover [that is, shield] the application of nearly any punishment of whatever severity to Trump's defenders as now-"discovered" abusers. (talk) 18:31, 19 February 2019 05:50, 20 February 2019 (EST)
But who am I kidding? (I wonder how Smollett feels...) His associating his actions with his illegal drug use after being charged with filing a false report shows genuine abuse based on race is on the same level of significance in American life to him as a few-weeks-long booking of an act in a performance art club. VargasMilan (talk) 14:33, 22 February 2019 (EST)
We've had some interesting developments today: Kamala Harris distances herself from Democratic Socialists; Amy Klobuchar distances herself from the Green New Deal; Bernie Sanders jumps in the race; splinter Tories & Labourites may form their own group; and Ocasio-Cortez moves closer to being re-districted out of a job after the 2020 Census (NY is guaranteed to lose a seat in redistricting cause so many have migrated due to Democrat high taxes. She's No.1 on the list to go on the chopping block). Looks like leftists are at War with themselves. They should spend more energy ironing out their differences rather than challenging the "Dark Lord" Trump. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 18:48, 19 February 2019 (EST)
Oops. Looks like Smollett faces federal charges now. [24] RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 20:22, 19 February 2019 (EST)
The only out I see is that Smollett is an unwitting pawn in an effort by the Postal Service's investigative arm to apprehend some third party. But that seems too cruel to Smollett, if he's innocent. VargasMilan (talk) 09:21, 20 February 2019 (EST)
Forty-five minutes ago, Smollett moved from being a person of interest to being a suspect by the Chicago Police Department of the crime of filing a false police report. VargasMilan (talk) 18:06, 20 February 2019 (EST)
Class four felony + federal charges. Basically, what Smollett did is the same crime of Charles Manson- attempting to spark a race war, RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 18:12, 20 February 2019 (EST)
This is the down side of having a two-tier judicial system with hate crime legislation and protected groups; people who have been extended special rights, privileges, and protections, when they abuse the system, it cant be overlooked. And no, it's not racist to go after Smollett when Andy McCabe is guilty of the same crime - making false police reports. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 18:18, 20 February 2019 (EST)
According to CBS, fifty-three minutes ago, Smollett was charged with disorderly conduct by the Cook County prosecutors based on the information given them by the Chicago Police, a class four felony. VargasMilan (talk) 20:43, 20 February 2019 (EST)
My guess is that Chicago prosecutors are deferring to the feds, who haven't finished their investigation yet. He's being looked at by the FBI and Postal Inspectors for making terroristic threats via the mail. Cell phone tracking can reveal if he was anywhere near the point where the letter was mailed 11 miles from his residence within 24 hours before the letter was processed into the US Mail system. Typically, local and federal prosecutors agree before hand which will be the lead team in bringing charges, and the other one eventually fades away; in this case federal prosecutors don't have enough information yet from federal investigators. But local law enforcement now can produce a warrant (is he hiding out in California?) after his refusal to talk to local cops. If the feds build a case, they may do a Roger Stone on him. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 23:02, 20 February 2019 (EST)
Do you think Smollett was smart enough to leave his cell phone at home if he went to mail a threatening letter? The only reason I thought Smollett might be not guilty was that who in the world thinks that they can outsmart the police? Or did he think the filing a hoax hate crime report had never happened before, when it's happened dozens of times? Did all he think he had to do was call skeptics "fear mongrels [sic]" who were "trying to divide us" and become immune to prosecution?
And doesn't Smollett have to appear at a bond hearing or be a fugitive and afterwards pay the requisite bond? VargasMilan (talk) 01:54, 21 February 2019 (EST)
I'd imagine there looking at the Nigerian-American brothers cell records, too, or perhaps anybody else he paid in this elaborate conspiracy. But the letter incident happened in mid January and likely was perpetrated by himself without help. The theory is he staged the attack only after the letter failed to gain traction (i.e. publicity). Unbeknownst to Smollett, the Postal Inspectors already were investigating a week before the attack, as terroristic threats through the mail are handled very seriously.
This may explain his refusal to let Chicago cops look at his phone. By then, he might have been alerted to the Postal Inspectors investigation. Cell phone data evidently is a routine investigative technique by Postal Inspectors - the disclosure of "sources and methods" is a by-product of this whole incident (aside: Sharyl Attkisson's lawsuit against Eric Holder and the DOJ includes charges against the U.S. Postal Inspectors. The U.S. Postal Inspectors have really the longest reach of any federal agency into the private lives of American citizens. They know where everybody lives, and visit their homes daily. Since the Patriot Act, Postal Inspectors have been coordinating closely with Homeland Security, and evidently are the first people Homeland Security, the FBI, or US Marshall Service turn to to locate someone. The Atkisson lawsuit alleges the Postal Inspectors engaged in electronic surveillance of her home).
It's too much of a coincidence that the letter had a noose around his neck, and the incident has a noose around his neck, but a jury ultimately has to decide this.
As to a bond hearing, yes. And federal charges aren't fully developed yet. The BIG, BIG question right now seems to be whether they will notify his attorney to tell his client to turn himself in, or will they do a Roger Stone on him. He is, after all, another Charlie Manson, trying to ignite a national race war. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 02:37, 21 February 2019 (EST)
Smollett warned us that the incident would be exploited by fear-mongrels trying to divide us. What do you have to say for yourself? You don't know whether to laugh or cry. I don't know if FBI, Postal Inspectors and large city police department policy acknowledges that there may be more hoax attacks perpetrated by members of liberal identity groups against themselves than there are real attacks against them, but thankfully at least their police agents seem to suspect as much. VargasMilan (talk) 07:31, 21 February 2019 (EST)
He is, in a sense, a victim of institutionalized racism. Honkey's and gringos are not a protected species as people of color, Arabs and Jews are (an Obama directive defines Arab as a religion and hence places crimes against Arabs under the category of religiously protected hate crimes). If he were a white man, he wouldn't be pursued to the full extent that he is now. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 07:54, 21 February 2019 (EST)
There is a website someone put up called fake hate crimes, which logs fake hate crimes in the United States. So far they have logged 349 fake hate crimes with some duplication. VargasMilan (talk) 18:22, 21 February 2019 (EST)
Perhaps you meant ? --David B (TALK) 19:05, 21 February 2019 (EST)
Thanks DavidB, I copied the web address down wrong. VargasMilan (talk) 13:13, 22 February 2019 (EST)

Robert Kraft

What an idiot. It looks like local charges, but the surveillance on a location involved in human trafficking must've come from the feds. The good news is, the focus is off a poor, gay black man and back on a rich white man where it belongs. I guess Kraft will have to take a knee when Trump invites the Superbowl champs to the White House. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 13:33, 22 February 2019 (EST)

R. Kelly

Whew, what a relief. R. Kelly was finally arrested. Oh oh, Michael Avenatti may have redeemed himself. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 14:07, 22 February 2019 (EST)

Why aren't authorities warning that frigid cold is more dangerous than warming?

Is it really more dangerous? It is certainly less deadly than the last heatwaves! The deaths in heatwaves are just less spectacular and public, as they happen to mainly the elderly and/or otherwise sick, often in their own homes. --AugustO (talk) 08:21, 2 February 2019 (EST)

The Medieval Warm Period:
"The three centuries beginning with the eleventh, during which the climate became distinctly more benign, witnessed a profound revolution which, by the late 1200s had transformed the landscape into an economy filled with merchants, vibrant towns and great fairs. Crop failures became less frequent; new territories were brought under control. With a more clement climate and a more reliable food supply, the population mushroomed.
The historian Charles Van Doren claimed that: "the ... three centuries, from about 1000 to about 1300, became one of the most optimistic, prosperous, and progressive periods in European history." All across Europe, the population went on an unparalleled building spree, erecting at huge cost spectacular cathedrals and public edifices. Ponderous Romanesque churches gave way to soaring Gothic cathedrals. Virtually all the magnificent religious shrines that we visit in awe today were started by the optimistic populations of the eleventh through the thirteenth centuries, although many remained unfinished for centuries.
Throughout the continent, economic activity blossomed. Banking, insurance, and finance developed; a money economy became well entrenched; manufacturing of textiles expanded to levels never seen before. Farmers in medieval England launched a thriving wine industry. Good wines demand warm springs free of frosts, substantial summer warmth and sunshine without too much rain, and sunny days in the fall. Winters cannot dip below zero Fahrenheit for any significant period. The northern limit for grapes during the Middle Ages was about 300 miles above the current commercial wine areas in France and Germany.
The medieval warm period, which started a century earlier in Asia, benefited the rest of the globe as well. From the ninth through the thirteenth centuries, farming spread into northern portions of Russia. In the Far East, Chinese and Japanese farmers migrated north into Manchuria, the Amur Valley and northern Japan. The Vikings founded colonies in Iceland and Greenland, then actually green. Scandinavian seafarers discovered "Vinland" along the East Coast of North America."[25]
I hope this helps clarify matters.Conservative (talk) 09:18, 2 February 2019 (EST)
User:Conservative, so nice to see you, I was under the wrong impression that you intended to edit less on this wiki! But looking at your list of contributions, it is no surprise to see you around - you are clearly fascinated by your (new-found?) interests!
"I hope this helps clarify matters", no, it does not. I was talking about weather, you are talking about climate. Do not be ashamed, the difference of these concepts is so subtle that even the greatest minds struggle to understand it from time to time.
--AugustO (talk) 09:58, 2 February 2019 (EST)
August, your wisdom is so immense that humble folk can only struggle to grasp your words! Frostbite in the extreme cold that we've been experiencing can occur in only a few minutes, yet the global warming alarmists fail to warn against that. Nothing comparable happens so quickly in warm weather.--Andy Schlafly (talk) 19:46, 2 February 2019 (EST)
Historically, the Roman Warm Period (250 BC to 400 AD) and the Medieval Warm Period (950 to 1250) were prosperous. Cold periods have never been good news. The collapse of Bronze Age civilization (1200 BC) was triggered by a series of droughts. This is the period of Joshua and Judges in the Bible, where the Canaanite collapse is described. The Dark Ages Cold Period (450-950) led to the collapse of Rome and classical civilization. The Maunder Minimum of the 17th century is associated with a cold climate, the Thirty Years War in Germany, and the Ming-Qing unrest in China. Peasants with farms destroyed by drought joined armies and went on rampages. PeterKa (talk) 07:56, 3 February 2019 (EST)

Germans don't truly believe in a global warming crisis. If they did, they would have decided to have a speed limit on most of the autobahn.[26] Conservative (talk) 00:48, 4 February 2019 (EST)

Liberal media can't accept reality: Democratic racism is here to stay

"We can't just wish it away." That's what many Democrats must be telling themselves now that Democrat Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia, Ralph Shearer Northam was found to have an indelible association with minstrelry and the Democrat's Ku Klux Klan.

The pictures and the location they were taken don't even bear out the interpretation of the misguided ignorance or esteem of a later century; the blackface in the picture is as much a caricature as professional minstrelry was, which by design acted to foster damaging stereotypes about blacks.

Today, remembering some anti-racist movies of the past thirty years, the costume of the Ku Klux Klan may also appear more clownish than racist to some today. But Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas' experience growing up in Georgia puts the lie to that: in a discussion for a decision he took part in, he made it known to those hesitating to rule against them that to him and all his fellow blacks the Ku Klux Klan and their activities were always received as terrorists living among them.

Meanwhile liberal news outlets are still in deep denial of the cravenest kind. During Governor Northam's televised response to the revelation, elitist Anderson Cooper's productionists changed the political affiliation on the text label of the response from a "D" for Democrat to an "R" for Republican. Simultaneously Politico released a story sure to make it into the search engines entitled "Trump targets Gillespie amid Northam race scandal". Trump had written:

“Ed Gillespie, who ran for Governor of the Great State of Virginia against Ralph Northam, must now be thinking Malpractice and Dereliction of Duty with regard to his Opposition Research Staff. If they find that terrible picture before the election, he wins by 20 points!”

Gillespie, who had disassociated himself from Trump during the election, was hardly being "targeted" by Trump, yet liberal Politico needed to recriminate against Gillespie on behalf of the Democratic Party so badly they treated as negative an event where it was rather the case that sheer horror of the revelation drew former enemies together.

These denials of such a deep level aren't just conventional political opposition; it's more existential than that, and in the coming days this year I hope people start repeatedly asking why. Why the racism? Why the denial? VargasMilan (talk) 08:49, 3 February 2019 (EST)

Hey, if throwing ice in someone's face in high school is enough to disqualify you from the Supreme Court, How come Northram is still Governor three days later? RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 12:32, 3 February 2019 (EST)

Nick Sandmann (Capitol Trump hat kid) media defamation gauntlet lawsuit: snapshot of a liberal media mob

Don't feel sorry for these liberal agents. If they couldn't confirm the basic facts of the story before opening their mouths, the preening videos of them in advertising gazing into the distance, are even more abusive deception and manipulation [than the fake story itself] when you consider they are not just P. R. hacks, but incompetent P. R. hacks of no use to America and maybe even hysterically eager to defame it.

The Washington Post, The New York Times, Cable News Network (CNN), The Guardian, National Public Radio, TMZ, Atlantic Media, Capitol Hill Publishing, Diocese of Covington, Diocese of Lexington, Archdiocese of Louisville, Diocese of Baltimore, Ann Cabrera (CNN), Sara Sidner (CNN), Erin Burnett (CNN), S. E. Cupp (CNN), Elliot C. McLaughlin (CNN), Amanda Watts (CNN), Emmanuella Grinberg (CNN), Michelle Boorstein (Washington Post), Cleve R. Wootson Jr. (Washington Post), Antonio Olivo (Washington Post), Joe Heim (Washington Post), Michael E. Miller (Washington Post), Eli Rosenberg (Washington Post), Isaac Stanley-Becker (Washington Post), Kristine Philips (Washington Post), Sarah Mervosh (Washington Post), Emily S. Roeb (New York Times), Maggie Haberman (New York Times), David Brooks (New York Times), Shannon Doyne, Kurt Eichenwald, Andrea Mitchell (NBC/MSNBC), Savannah Guthrie (NBC), Joy Reid (MSNBC), Chuck Todd (NBC), Noah Berlatsky, Elisha Fieldstadt (NBC), Eun Kyung Kim, HBO, Bill Maher, Warner Media, Condé Nast, GQ,, The Hill, The Atlantic,, U. S. Rep. Ilhan Omar, U. S. Senator Elizabeth Warren, Kathy Griffin, Alyssa Milano, Jim Carrey.

(Hat tip: Daily Wire) VargasMilan (talk) 07:43, 5 February 2019 (EST)

Do we have a Covington kids article yet? Its significant that a Democrat presidential contender has been accused of a hate crime, among other aspects. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 10:10, 5 February 2019 (EST)

Vox prunes media departments, Huffington Post closes opinion, health department, journalists pretend not to understand antecedent for brusque dismissals on Twitter in order to falsely wield moral leverage

John Ekdahl [@JohnEkdahl] explains:

Journalists STILL don't get the "learn to code" thing.
Let me help explain, even though it's what I do for a living so it's sort of insulting that journos just threw this around....
Obama *targets* industries that he doesn't like.
Journos: this is a good thing because green jobs.
People losing jobs: but you're killing our jobs.
Journos: there are other things you can do, because your jobs are dirty and bad.
Journos spin the job rolodex and come up with "coding" because it's a "modern" solution that maybe these uneducated yokels can learn like refrigerator repair, but it's more global. So hey, good luck.
I hear the Indians (dots [on foreheads], not feathers) are all into that. Good luck, coal miners.
[Know Your Meme[1]: "New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg at the Future of Energy Summit said, "You’re not going to teach a coal miner to code. Mark Zuckerberg says you teach them [people] to code and everything will be great."
Over the next year, other media outlets published pieces on coal miners learning to code. On November 18th, 2015, Wired published, "Can You Teach a Coal Miner to Code?" The article, which took issue with Bloomberg's assertion, focused on several coal miners who were, in fact, learning to code.
"Turning Coal Miners into Coders"
"Appalacian Miners Are Learning to Code"
"From Coal to Code: A New Path for Laid-Off Miners in Kentucky"
"Out-of-work coal miners find new work in computer industry"]

One gets the idea that these articles were more fig leaves for Obama than discoveries of surprising success stories.

[Know Your Meme: On January 24th, 2019, Jalopnik editor-in-chief Patrick George tweeted he believed in a "special, dedicated section of Hell" for people with anime profile pictures who tweet "learn to code" to journalists who had been laid off (shown below). Within 24 hours, the tweet gained over 1,300 likes and 260 retweets. The tweet was posted shortly after the announcements that BuzzFeed laid of 15% of its staff and The Huffington Post had eliminated its Opinion and Healthcare editorial sections.
That day, Redditor TheyreGoodDogsBrent submitted a post asking "What's the deal with Twitter users responding to layoffs of journalists with 'Learn to Code'?" to /r/OutOfTheLoop, to which Redditor downvotethrowaway responded with a link to the @bypatrickgeorge tweet, along with a message that the people posting the phrase "believe those news organizations have been s---ing on blue-collar workers for years." Also on January 24th, a post titled "President Trump General – Learn to Code Edition" was submitted to 4chan's /pol/ board, where commenters used the phrase "learn to code" to mock the laid-off journalists.
On January 28th, 2019, The Wrap editor John Levine tweeted that "a person in the know" [on Twitter] told him that directing tweets with "learn to code" to "any recently laid off journalist" would be considered a violation of the site's Terms of Service]
John Ekhdahl: And now, your industry is up for a major --market-- restructuring, you flip s--- on the people you deliberately targeted with *your* hate for throwing s--- back over the fence?
You're journalists, so a requirement of the job is supposed empathy, but I think we all know that ship sailed decades ago. DC/NYC/LA fo life!
The NYC/DC journo cabal wrote 1000 stories about the horrific treatment of federal employees in DC (1 missed paycheck!) to the actual people put permanently out of work by Obama green policies. Because they were the right people losing their jobs and they were the wrong jobs.
When you challenge journos to defend their 95+% Democrat partisan leanings, don't ask them if they know anyone that voted for Trump; ask if they know anyone that voted for ROMNEY.

And in the end, to Twitter, which can't tolerate dissidents, the journalists, not the displaced blue-collar workers, are designated the protected class. VargasMilan (talk) 16:03, 5 February 2019 (EST)

  1. Caldwell, Don (Jan-Feb 2019). "Learn to Code" Know Your Meme website.

Stay as long as you like, Governor Northam

After the uproar over blackface (or was it a Klan outfit?), it seems that Northam is likely to stay as Virginia governor for now, according to the AP. Hey, it's not like he said "macaca" or anything like that.
The knives were certainly out yesterday. Why the turn about? It has occurred to the Dems that if Northam resigns, he could be replaced by the Republican speaker of the state house. If political correctness ever gives a Republican a leg up, the Dems will step back. No Democrat believes that wearing blackface in the 1980s is worse than being a Republican today.
If you don't think that times have changed, check out this BBC show that was hugely popular in 1978: "The Black & White Minstrel Show." If Northam falls, the next dominos could be Kimmel and Falon: "Kimmel, Fallon avoid Ralph Northam controversy in late-night monologues; both have histories using blackface in skits". PeterKa (talk) 23:03, 7 February 2019 (EST)

Jack Prosibiec says the uproar over Megan Kelly's comments (Remember: she didn't wear blackface, only commented on it) was only an excuse to fire her and bring Matt Lauer back in a few months. If true, that is, is Lauer returns to NBC in a few months and Kelly doesn't, that's an admission that NBC makes knowingly false charges of racism, and is willing to overlook sex abuse charges. We'll see. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 03:31, 8 February 2019 (EST)
Hell will freeze over before Matt Lauer does another morning show on NBC. Women are a big part of the morning audience. And ladies will not stand for a creepy guy who had a button to lock women in his office. In a post Me-too age, Matt Lauer is toast. Al Franken is toast due to the "creepy factor" too. At some point, you have to cut your losses and move on.
Donald Trump is a master showman and persuader who despite being far outspent by Hillary Clinton finally got the "ick/creepy" factor tarred to Bill Clinton and "Crooked Hillary". Having Bill Clinton's accusers of sexual assault show up at a pre-debate press meeting and sit at the debate was a master stroke of political theater. Hillary is now toast too.Conservative (talk) 03:55, 8 February 2019 (EST)
Lauer was the highest paid daytime host on any network for decades. He brought in $700 million a year in advertising revenue. The man can sell. He was making $24 million a year. NBC took Kelly, the highest rated female nightime host, paid her a salary equal to Lauer's (gender pay equality at work) and ratings sank. She bombed at night. They gave her 5 minutes a day on Lauer's Today show and ratings sank. They gave her the worst spot (9:00-10:00 AM) on daytime TV and ratings sank. They needed an excuse to get rid of her.
Meantime, no one has filled Lauer's shoes, on any network. Lauer's replacement is overpaid at $2 million a year. NBC is desperate before some personality comes along on a competing network and locks up the advertising money, slowly leaking away, for another two decades.
Comebacks have happened before (Bill Mahar for instance). Since Lauer has not been criminally charged, its just a matter of settling with accusers, those that have come forward and those Lauer can remember) and getting them to sign non-disclosure agreements. The lawyers are working on it.RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 04:01, 8 February 2019 (EST)
Comebacks happen when you are able to gain power again. Post Hillary losing the election, I think the liberals lost a lot of power. Unless Democrats can win in 2020, I think they will lose the US Supreme Court which will super set back their agenda. I think the odds are stacked against the Democrats winning the presidency in 2020 unless the economy goes down. But who knows? Obama was elected a second time so who knows what is going to happen. At the same time, Romney was a RINO Mormon and not the greatest campaigner plus he had that big gaff at the end that made him sound like an elitist (which he probably is).Conservative (talk) 22:24, 11 February 2019 (EST)
Steve Bannon correctly said that two of the strongest political movements today are right-wing populism and the Me-too movement. I think Bannon is right about this matter. Creepy Matt Lauer is no match for the Me-too movement.Conservative (talk) 22:56, 11 February 2019 (EST)

Green New Deal: A caveat

"Green New Deal" is a slogan like "Build the Wall." Unfortunately, voter constituencies of both parties latch onto a broad concept not fully realizing (a) what they embrace, and (b) the elements of compromise necessary to achieve the end goal. For example "Build the Wall" is an infrastructure project that says nothing about DACA amnesty and deportations. "Green New Deal" clearly is re-packaged single-payer Obamacare targeted at younger voters with a sense of urgency because of an alleged climate crisis.

My point is, don't get to wedded to supporting or opposing a slogan without understanding all the particulars involved. Democrat community organizers are far better at this game of melding coalition groups together - environmentalists with people with per-existing conditions and the uninsured. Certain elements of this proposal are likely to become law between now and 2030 when the planet comes to an end. Just as DACA amnesty is the only way to get "The Wall," the only way to stop Green New Deal insanity is to toss a bone to certain provisions, which in exchange you might get infrastructure or a wall.

Making law is like making sausage: if you don't like how it's made, don't watch. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 19:47, 9 February 2019 (EST)

What's lacking from the "Green New Deal" yet is painting opponents as racist. But it's coming. Cory Booker says the Green New Deal promotes equality.
As a serious student of dissecting Marxist dialectics, I've recently been chewing on this gem (but the whole page is worth reading to see how seriously deranged this ideology is, yet still as strong as ever):
"As it is, much of our antiracist discourse uses the exact vocabulary and tropes of “identitarian” discourse, slapped awkwardly onto a class-struggle narrative. It ends up sounding like an after-the-fact add-on rather than a seamless element of our analysis. This is a shame, because our chapters nationally have been throwing themselves into racial and economic justice across the country. Our activism shows that we know and feel how antiracism is a central terrain in the class struggle. We just have trouble expressing it, and that “rhetoric gap” is sensed by the same audiences to which we’re trying to speak."[27]
RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 20:00, 9 February 2019 (EST)
AOC's Green New Deal calls for the abolition of all air travel, 99 percent of cars, and nuclear power. On the up side, we get high speed rail...and no farting cows![28] GND will also provide financial support for those "unwilling to work," fully paid health care, and higher education for everyone, even for foreigners who just snuck across the border. I mean, what could go wrong? PeterKa (talk) 00:45, 10 February 2019 (EST)
Hey, it's true. They're dangerous. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 01:48, 10 February 2019 (EST)
Future Onion writer Donald Trump has joined in the fun: "It would be great for the so-called “Carbon Footprint” to permanently eliminate all Planes, Cars, Cows, Oil, Gas & the Military."[29] AOC is up against some sacred cows this time. PeterKa (talk) 23:08, 11 February 2019 (EST)
This video tells you more than you need to know about cow farts. The methane caught fire and blew up a barn in Germany. PeterKa (talk) 23:50, 11 February 2019 (EST)
Eliminating cows is really an attack on McDonald's, moreso than Exxon. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 00:08, 12 February 2019 (EST)
Rob S, I'm surprised you didn't hear about the Republican strategy long ago: Instead of negotiating with it, vote on the bill now! It entails what? $40-50 trillion did I hear? It's like being charged at by your enemy with an enormous battering ram and having one of your troops rush to grab onto it and pull it even faster so the enemy loses control of it and gets carried away over the cliff! VargasMilan (talk) 03:25, 27 February 2019 (EST)
It is just a resolution right now, not a bill, but during the Presidential primaries the Republicans can ask why every Democrat doesn't agree so we can spend time to talk and talk and talk about it so the suicide Democrats can alienate themselves from the survival Democrats' constituencies and vice versa. VargasMilan (talk) 03:46, 27 February 2019 (EST)
Ocasio-Cortez joined the #NeverNancy movement and led a sit-down protest with the Sunrise Movement in Pelosi's office in December. In exchange for not voting against Pelosi as Speaker on the floor, Pelosi agreed to create the House Climate Crisis Committee. The Committee is tasked with producing a draft legislative proposal this year, to be presented to the full House by January 1, 2020. Knowing the legislation next year has no chance to pass the Senate or get a presidential signature, it is intended to be the platform all Democrats will run on in 2020. Justice Democrats, DSA, and others are already working to elect their candidates who support the GND, and primary those who don't. It's inclusion in the 2020 Democratic National Convention platform is a fight we await with baited breath. Most presidential candidates already committed to banning cow farts and spending 119% of World GDP. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 11:10, 27 February 2019 (EST)

Breaking MPR:Trudeau is toast

Au revoir. 13:23, 12 February 2019 (EST)

This comes just days after Trump banned Canada from US infrastructure projects, costing Canada thousands of jobs. 13:29, 12 February 2019 (EST)
The people who elect liberals have a high tolerance for corruption. Obama had scandal after scandal and he remained in office and the liberal press did not hammer him over and over like they did Nixon. The Clinton Foundation and pay to play issue was covered in the book Clinton Cash, yet nothing happened. As long as liberal politicians toe the liberal ideology line and give away free stuff, they are generally safe.Conservative (talk) 15:43, 12 February 2019 (EST)
According to Ezra Lavant, the CBC is a state-run commie lib mouthpiece larger than all private broadcast media in Canada combined. They simply don't report news and facts, and push the commie lib agenda. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 16:09, 12 February 2019 (EST)

High-speed rail dies

Listen up, AOC: "California abandons $77 billion high-speed rail plan." High-speed trains were cool in the 1960s when Japan built one. The future is electric airplanes with the electricity generated by thorium molten-salt reactors. PeterKa (talk) 17:15, 12 February 2019 (EST)

It's not dead. President Sanders will print the money to revive it. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 11:21, 27 February 2019 (EST)

The coming war over guns

If Trump declares a national emergency to fund the wall, the next Democratic president can retaliate by confiscating guns, according House Speaker Nancy Pelosi: "Pelosi warns GOP: Next president could declare national emergency on guns." When Clinton tried gun grabbing, we got Waco and the Oklahoma City bombing. There are way too many guns in America to plausibly claim that you can improve public safety by confiscating a few. The reason the Democrats hate gun owners is because they vote Republican. If you think that Trump's national emergency gambit is wrong (as I do), you should want to elect a president doesn't use national emergencies as a way to get around Congress. The Dems look at what Trump does and think, "Hey, we can do things that are way more insane than that." PeterKa (talk) 19:34, 14 February 2019 (EST)

Congress approves amnesty for child traffickers

If Trump signs the spending bill that just passed Congress, what's the point of a wall? No one who is a "potential sponsor" or a "member of a household of a potential sponsor" of a minor who crossed the border illegally can be deported.[30] So if you worry that you might be deported, contact a child trafficker and let him live in your house. PeterKa (talk) 22:11, 14 February 2019 (EST)

Wudd I say? It's about laying a dividing line between past and future -amnesty for the past, a wall for the future. Border Wall funds exist in the replenishment of Executive emergency reserve funds, which then members that oppose Wall funding can then say they didn't vote directly for it. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 22:28, 14 February 2019 (EST)
Read this article, for example the Exchange Stabilization Fund. The Executive Branch has emergency reserve funds available at the Executive's discretion (another example of a reserve fund is the money paid to the Mueller office without an Act of Congress). In the case of the Exchange Stabilization Fund, it was used in the 1990s to bail out Wall Street Banks, Bank of America, Citibank, etc., that made bad loans to Mexico (see Mexican Peso bailout). Congress didn't want to be seen as bailing out the Mexican Central Bank which couldn't pay off the Wall Street Banks, threatening a Wall Street banking crisis. This is the backdrop of the 2008 crash - Wall Street banks knew the federal government would bail them out for making crappy loans after the experience with the Mexican Peso crisis. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 22:36, 14 February 2019 (EST)
FEMA itself is basically a reserve fund. It has money available to deal with an emergency without an Act of Congress, everytime there's a wildfire, hurricane, or flood. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 22:40, 14 February 2019 (EST)
IOW, Congress hid wall funding in reserve funds. And it won't take the Pentagon or military personal to build it. Contractors will be used. The compromise here is, President Cory Booker will declare a War on Cow Farts and use executive reserve funds to exterminate all slaughter beef in a national emergency once he's elected. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 22:46, 14 February 2019 (EST)
  • The Pentagon has $21 billion available to build fences under section 284,[31] a provision I explain above. A 700-mile double-wide fence would cost around $1 billion. Declaring a national emergency is just a way to do nothing and shift the blame to the courts. PeterKa (talk) 22:49, 14 February 2019 (EST)
Exactly. Right there. And they don't have the personnel to divert to such task, so they hire a contractor, blueprints are already drawn etc. etc. etc. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 22:56, 14 February 2019 (EST)
Ultimately the Courts will come down on the side of the President. That's his job, after all, to protect national security and determine what a threat is. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 22:58, 14 February 2019 (EST)
The Omnibus is a nightmare, according to this story. The only place a fence can be built is in the Rio Grande valley, but not in any of the national or state parks. Construction elsewhere is possible only with approval of the local government and after the land is purchased, if it is privately held. PeterKa (talk) 23:30, 14 February 2019 (EST)
A briefing slide prepared by the Congressional Research Service last week identified no fewer than six federal agencies with jurisdiction over portions of the border: Bureau of Land Management, Bureau of Reclamation, Department of Defense, Fish and Wildlife Service, Forest Service, and National Park Service. Still other portions of the border are under tribal authority or are privately held. See Background: Using Defense Funds for Construction in a National Emergency, CRS briefing slides, February 6, 2019 (at p. CRS-4).
Use of the military to construct barriers along the border would normally require coordination and cooperation with each of the affected parties. But if the President were to declare a national emergency, such requirements could potentially be set aside, placing the "constitutional balance" at risk.
"Even in a worst-case national emergency, the military will always operate under civilian control," the Army publication said.
RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 00:08, 15 February 2019 (EST)

Who stole our president?

Did any significant group in the country like Trump's announcement that he would the sign the omnibus bill and declare a national emergency? Welcome to life under President Jared Kushner. See "Ann Coulter Fires Back at Trump: ‘The Only National Emergency Is That Our President Is an Idiot’." If Trump is serious about overturning what congress has decided, that's unconstitutional. But I doubt that's what's going on. Trump's wants to trigger the media so that the news cycle will focus something other than the fact that he has just signed an omnibus bill that gives every locality on the border veto power over building the wall. In other words, this declaration is a publicity stunt and not really all that different from the sixty (!!) national emergencies that are already in effect. PeterKa (talk) 23:57, 15 February 2019 (EST)

Huh? The walls getting built. That's all that matters. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 01:30, 16 February 2019 (EST)
I certainly hope so, but it seems unlikely. California and New Mexico are both in the Ninth Circuit. The omnibus bill limits construction to the Rio Grande Valley in Texas. Trump can get around this restriction by using Pentagon money. But there is nothing in the White House press release that suggests they are planning to do anything clever like that. As far as Texas goes, there is a lot of private land on the border. The Dems will send a battalion of lawyers to make sure that no local government or private landowner will want anything to do with this project. PeterKa (talk) 09:36, 16 February 2019 (EST)
To be fair, if he voiced such a plan through a press release, the liberals would inevitably find out about it and make efforts to stop it. Pokeria1 (talk) 10:04, 16 February 2019 (EST)
Here is the press release. It says $600 million from drug forfeiture money, up to $2.5 billion in Pentagon section 284 money, and up to $3.6 billion in other Pentagon money. PeterKa (talk) 10:18, 16 February 2019 (EST)
When it's revealed to the public, the media will find some way to criticize Trump and make moves to stop him. I know if I were in his position, I'd avoid directly stating trying to use Pentagon funds specifically to ensure the left-wing media doesn't try to twist my words and/or make measures stopping the build of the wall (not to say I wouldn't build the wall, but just avoid mentioning it). Don't think the left-wing media won't do anything to sabotage its development. Remember the Pentagon Papers fiasco? Besides, that crowdfunder thing is more than enough to fund the wall with or without Pentagon money. Pokeria1 (talk) 10:28, 16 February 2019 (EST)
It'a incrementalism, which makes sense. It's responding to sections of the border that need it. As a section of wall is built, a new trail is cut through the desert on the other side to get around it. A wall from Corpus Christy to San Diego would open the Gulf of Mexico and California coasts as the main entry points, which is already happening with homemade submarines. A hick border town in Texas with 5,000 people will be overrun with the first caravan of 10,000, and they don't have enough port-a-potties even if the town speaks the same language. They don't have enough jail space for all the shop lifters before the next caravan of 10,000 arrives a month later. I don't see what the hoo-rah is. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 11:22, 16 February 2019 (EST)
Take for example the fact that the 2018 migrant caravan headed for Tijauna rather than the Texas border. They knew the Texas border is better defended and thought they'd find a sympathetic ear in California. In Phoenix a Mexican once told me he was going home for Christmas, but rather than cross over at Nogales (the shortest route) he'd take the Interstate to Laredo, Texas and take the freeway to Mexico City. "It's a straight shot." He said from the Arizona border to Mexico City is all dirt roads and banditos, and he didn't know if he'd ever get home. And this was in the 1980s. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 08:28, 21 February 2019 (EST)
I was following Anne Coulter's lead. But after reading this story, I am not so sure that she is seeing this issue clearly. She wants Trump to start work on the wall citing his constitutional authority alone. IMO, it would obviously be better to wait for a court ruling. This story argues that the legal arguments in wall lawsuits are so similar to the ones in the travel ban case that the DOJ lawyers can just cite that decision. If the decision on the wall came just before the 2020 election, that would be a nice boost for Trump. But this scenario depends on Chief Justice John Roberts, who has argued with Trump before. PeterKa (talk) 00:33, 21 February 2019 (EST)
Coulter has fallen into the trap: she sees the issue in strictly political terms, ignoring the policy and legal basis of the argument. In this sense, Coulter looks like Ocasio-Cortez, Pelosi, Schumer, or God-help-me Maxine Waters, resorting to hyperbole and hysteria on the issue. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 08:05, 21 February 2019 (EST)
She's realised that Trump is a charlatan, though, which is more than can be said for most of you lot. JohnZ (talk) 15:30, 21 February 2019 (EST)
Oh yah? A charlatan is a guy who mocks Russia policy as a throwback to the 1980s while funding al-Qaeda and claiming al-Qaeda is the biggest national security threat, then has his FBI stooges claim Russia is a America's most formidable foe to justify illegal surveillance. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 18:16, 21 February 2019 (EST)

National emergencies

With all the publicity surrounding Trump's border wall emergency, you'd think he'd done something unprecedented, or at least unusual. Obama declared 13 national emergencies. The border wall is Trump's fourth national emergency.[32] PeterKa (talk) 04:46, 21 February 2019 (EST)

You don't know the half of it. Ten of Obama's emergencies are still on-going. As are eleven of President Bush's and six of President Clinton's. We need to schedule relocating the twenty million illegal aliens that are here a few weeks before the election into towns with liberal mayors who declare them so-called "sanctuary cities" to test if they are offering sanctuary, or if they admit Trump is right, and there is an emergency. VargasMilan (talk) 02:42, 27 February 2019 (EST)
You'd probably need another EO for that. This one only applies to a defense construction project. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 03:05, 27 February 2019 (EST)
They'd probably just register them to vote. VargasMilan (talk) 04:14, 27 February 2019 (EST)

Trump appoints a climate realist

Don't imagine that even the most distinguished scientific credentials can protect you from the New York Times`s juvenile name calling. See "New York Times hit with backlash for labeling Princeton physicist a 'climate denialist'." It seems that Trump has appointed Princeton physics professor emeritus William Happer to a climate science committee although he doesn't have a degree climate science. Well, well, well. Climate science is a very recently created field of study. Ten years ago, there was no such thing as a climate scientist. But that didn't stop astronomer Carl Sagan, mechanical engineer Stephen Schneider, or politician Al Gore from promoting AGW. For many years, the responsibility of determining the scientific consensus on climate rested with IPCC head Rajendra K. Pachauri. He is not a scientist at all, but a railway economist. PeterKa (talk) 10:22, 23 February 2019 (EST)

I don't want all roads leading to the Smollett case, but it has an oblique significance: I've read about eight different accounts of the temperature at the time of the staged attack, and not one of them was correct. It was: sub-zero temps, polar vortex temperature (-20°), too cold to keep bleach in a liquid form (at 19°), near freezing (that is, 32°+), -9° (assuming wrongly that 2am is the coldest hour of the night), sub-sub-zero, "middle of a polar vortex" (-20° to -30°), cold enough for a window being open to be suspicious...
No, no, no! We have a government agency called the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) that records temperatures in every town in America, and a simple Google search taken within the first three days after the incident would have revealed the temperature at every hour taken at Chicago's O'Hare airport. Polar vortices are fascinating I'm sure, but the one hitting Chicago had left long before the staged attack. It was 7° F. A typical and ordinary late-night temperature for winter in Chicago.
So first, isn't the truth interesting enough? Secondly, if we have a government agency dedicated to this sort of thing, why do no reporters, liberal or conservative, put it to good use? Do liberals think we need more government spending so NOAA can hand deliver the information to them? Or are conservatives so incompetent in pleading to cut government spending that they lack even the most rudimentary information about what the United States Government actually does?
Thirdly, of course, if liberals' publications are too incompetent to complete the task of accessing a temperature record, do you think that maybe they should hold back a bit in regarding themselves competent to judge disputes regarding not just weather, but climate when there are disagreements among experts belonging to a scholarly profession? VargasMilan (talk) 00:21, 24 February 2019 (EST)
And what about crime trends spouted off by every self-proclaimed liberal expert on television regarding that incident? Yet another case where the opinion of persons who aren't in a position to know are treated as gospel in order to demonize Trump supporters, and where the account of the falsification of their apparent personal authenticity is never rendered, remedied or settled. VargasMilan (talk) 01:05, 24 February 2019 (EST)
(1) The hard temperature and windchill are different readings, it's not uncommon for local broadcasters to report the windchill as the hard temperature; (B) 7 degrees Fahrenheit is the is the recorded temperature at he reporting station; temperatures and windchills still vary throughout the city. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 01:39, 24 February 2019 (EST)
Okay, but it's not like there's a series of micro-climates that exist there. VargasMilan (talk) 02:30, 24 February 2019 (EST)
The Great Lakes affect the local climate. Lake Michigan can produce a localized storm. I personally have seen 24 inches of snow fall on the Western shore of Lake Michigan while 5 miles inland it was 62 degrees. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 10:48, 24 February 2019 (EST)
But not daily! VargasMilan (talk) 23:38, 24 February 2019 (EST)
Depending on temperature and wind conditions, Lake Michigan can whip up a summer rainstorm or winter snowstorm on its western shore in minutes that is impossible to forecast; it doesn't appear on radar as part of a larger low pressure storm system. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 11:26, 27 February 2019 (EST)
Never fear, science to the rescue. They now have Science - Lake Snow Parameter to better forecast "lake effect snow." RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 11:31, 27 February 2019 (EST)
IOWs, the geographic features of the Great Lakes produces it's own climate that is not part of larger west-east airflows and storm systems. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 11:44, 27 February 2019 (EST)

Judicial activism at its worst

A North Carolina judge struck down a voter ID amendment passed by the legislature simply because the legislature's districts were gerrymandered: [33] Never mind the fact that voters approved the amendment in the 2018 elections by an 11-point margin: [34] The judge also struck down an income tax cap because of gerrymandering, despite an even larger margin of approval: [35]

Blatantly partisan rulings like this will increase if liberal Democrats gain more authority to make judicial nominations. Also, look to the European courts to see what leftists plan for the courts. --1990'sguy (talk) 15:07, 23 February 2019 (EST)

Likely a Clinton or Obama appointee; this is not a random, spontaneous fluke. Its a longterm programmed agenda. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 22:06, 23 February 2019 (EST)
To clarify: the gerrymandering was alleged to have affected legislative results but would not be even relevant to the outcome a North Carolina constitutional amendment referendum regardless, as the voters determined the decisions regarding the adoptions of the Amendments, not the members of the legislature. VargasMilan (talk) 00:31, 24 February 2019 (EST)
That it never would have been placed on the ballot is speculation by the judge, and unlikely at that. If the legislators were completely un-gerrymandered they would match the voter make-up of the referendums which were passed with considerable majorities, as 1990'sguy said. VargasMilan (talk) 02:41, 24 February 2019 (EST)

Smollett's celebs

On main page right there is a link to celebrities launching hysterical attacks on Trump supporters. It seems that the more media exploitable symbols are packed into the least space in a recitable declarative sentence, the more irresistible it is for liberal activists to exploit it.

Rob S remarked that Jussie Smollett intended to start a race war. Whether you believe that or not, consider this: Smollett seems to have staged the attack in a place where he believed the entire incident would have been recorded by a nearby video camera, but through a stroke of chance, the camera wasn't pointed there. Can you imagine the wall-to-wall coverage that would have ensued if a grainy video of two large unwitting accomplices that Smollett called white, their red caps an unmistakable link to Trump, assaulting the smallish Smollett while making use of the other media-exploitable symbols, actually existed? No hysterical reaction would have seemed too extreme.

Smollett had no compunction against accusing his acquaintances, as the story was falling apart, who thought they were rehearsing some kind of video drama, of both stalking and framing him. The video of them buying the clothes for the assault together with a few choice words from Smollett during the hypothetical media firestorm I described, could have forced them to keep silent about who had really put them up to their attack, and by their silence induce the conclusion it was a calculating Trump supporter. VargasMilan (talk) 02:24, 24 February 2019 (EST)

And he was on the phone with his manager while the attackers yelled "This is MAGA country!" His manager may have been a co-conspirator. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 11:02, 24 February 2019 (EST)
There you go. You try not to be hyper-critical, but if you relax your study, central details like that can slip out and get forgotten. VargasMilan (talk) 15:25, 25 February 2019 (EST)

Bernie pulls ahead in NH

Do Dems really see anything wrong with colluding with Russia? I ask because it seems that an old style pro-Moscow Marxist is pulling ahead in the race for president: "Bernie Takes Early Lead In New Hampshire Democratic Primary." In the 1970s, Bernie was tossed out of a commune for failing to contribute. So he's probably too lazy to collude himself. But never fear. He has hired Tad Devine, a former Manafort partner, as his chief strategist. PeterKa (talk) 13:38, 24 February 2019 (EST)

Tad Devine? Mueller office needs to investigate. Viktor_Yanukovych#American_advisors. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 13:43, 24 February 2019 (EST)

Kamala Harris's white privilege

When the Green New Deal passes, maybe Kamala Harris can pay reparations to herself. [36] RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 17:10, 25 February 2019 (EST)

Taking hoax hate crimes to a new level

In the past few years, we've seen numerous fake "hate crimes" that leftists used to smear Trump supporters but which were actually caused by leftists for that very purpose. However, I don't recall any of those past "hate crime" hoaxes consisting of someone burning down their own house and killing their pets in the process. That's what a homosexual/transgender activist in Michigan was just charged with doing: [37] This is an extreme example of Trump Derangement Syndrome, though it probably won't be the most extreme example of it. --1990'sguy (talk) 17:23, 26 February 2019 (EST)

How about a Hate crime hoax page? RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 20:17, 26 February 2019 (EST)
Good idea -- there are a number of good articles with lists of fake hate crimes: 1,2,3,4,5 --1990'sguy (talk) 20:30, 26 February 2019 (EST)
I think a better title is Hate crime hoaxes.Conservative (talk) 11:37, 28 February 2019 (EST)
Well, first we want to define what it is, then provide a list of incidents or examples. That way we can avoid creating two pages for now. RobSDeep Six the Deep State! 15:06, 28 February 2019 (EST)