Title :
link :
WWW.MOEISSUESOFTHEDAY.
BLOGSPOT.COM
Wednesday, Mar. 7, 2018
All Gave Some~Some Gave All
*****
Dog lover? Take a few minutes for this... https://www.youtube.com/embed/FbzRYrLOHyc?rel=0&controls=0&showinfo=0
Thanks to Bruce...
Planned Parenthood Is The NRA Of The Democratic Party
Well, there is one glaring difference: The NRA doesn’t get $500 million a year in government funding.
By Michael Graham
A pro-life Democrat flipped a seat blue Tuesday in a state that had been solidly Republican for decades. Only, you wouldn’t know Democrat Phil Spagnuolo was pro-life because he rarely mentioned it. In fact, when the New Hampshire Journal posted an article about his beliefs on the eve of the election, Spagnuolo immediately rushed out a response: “While I believe as much in my personal life, I don’t think it should be the government’s role to tell women what they can or can’t do with their bodies,” he said.
In Western Pennsylvania, pro-life Democrat Conor Lamb is facing a Republican in a special election March 13. The race is neck-and-neck, despite the fact that Donald Trump carried the district by 20 points. Lamb’s candidacy in this conservative district is helped by the fact that he’s Catholic — a self-styled moderate who’s not a slave to Democratic Party orthodoxy. In fact, he’s already pledged not vote for Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House. “I’ve already said on the front page of the newspaper that I don’t support Nancy Pelosi,” Lamb says in his latest TV ad.
What else won’t Lamb vote for? Any restrictions on abortion, including the recent GOP proposal to limit late-term abortions — specifically abortions after 20 weeks when, according to overwhelming scientific evidence, babies in the womb can experience pain.
“[Catholics] believe that life begins at conception,” he told The Weekly Standard, “but as a matter of separation of church and state, I think a woman has the right to choose under the law.”
So Lamb’s not afraid to tell the top House Democrat to take a hike, but he’s too timid to vote his conscience on late-term abortions? Why? Because Planned Parenthood is the NRA of the Democratic Party. Only worse.
“People are complaining about NRA but the abortion lobby is just as strong,” says Kristen Day of Democrats for Life America. “There are sitting members of the House and Senate who are pro-life, but who are too afraid of the abortion lobby to vote that way.
Day’s organization is pushing for a big-tent approach on the abortion issue inside her party as a strategy for winning back seats lost during the Obama years. Day is quick to point out that as recently as 2008 there were more than 60 pro-life Democrats in Congress. “Now there are three.” And she holds Planned Parenthood responsible, along with its fully-owned subsidiary the Hillary Clinton campaign. “The Clinton campaign really pushed the party in the wrong direction on this issue,” Day said.
And Planned Parenthood really pushed Clinton. In May 2016 the Huffington Post published, “Inside Planned Parenthood’s $30 Million Campaign For 2016,” about the organization’s $30 million effort to “make sure Donald Trump doesn’t get the chance” to become president. This was in addition to the $15 million Planned Parenthood spent on direct electioneering, according to OpenSecrets.org.
“Planned Parenthood’s PAC is among the most powerful lobbying groups in American politics, shelling out $40 million last year for ‘public policy’ and investing upwards of $175 million in such nebulous categories as ‘movement building,’ ‘strengthening and securing Planned Parenthood,’ and ‘engaging communities,'” writes Alexandra Desanctis in National Review.
All of this has pro-gun people asking, “And this differs from the ‘nefarious’ actions of the NRA … how?”
Well, there is one glaring difference: The NRA doesn’t get $500 million a year in government funding.
Then there’s the impact the two groups have on the parties they tend to support. Planned Parenthood and the NRA are both virtually 100 percent partisan in their spending (Democrats vs Republicans, respectively). However, while there are a number of Republicans with less-than-perfect grades from the NRA, there is only one Democratic senator — Joe Donnelly of Indiana — with less than a 100 percent rating from NARAL Pro-Choice America.
Last year when Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chairman Ben Ray Lujan (D-N.M.) announced he would not support a “litmus test” on abortion for Democratic candidates, Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards declared him “totally wrong.”
“It’s a shocking sort of misunderstanding of actually where the country is … which is overwhelmingly supportive of abortion rights,” Richards told Politico. And Planned Parenthood’s allies immediately issued a statement decrying any moderation on the abortion issue. “Our party is pro-choice, it’s written into our platform” said then-DNC CEO Jess O’Connell.
Meanwhile, a Republican president is pushing for legislation the NRA opposes like age limits on the purchase of long guns. Republican senators like Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania and John Cornyn of Texas have been teaming up with Democrats to push bipartisan reforms of gun laws. There is an ongoing debate over gun laws in the GOP that’s ranging from banning bump stocks to banning so-called “assault rifles.”
Try to imagine a similar debate on any aspect of the abortion issue in the Democratic party today. It’s impossible, because Planned Parenthood and its allies wouldn’t let it happen. Which is why at the Democratic National Convention in 2016, an effort to simply debate the party’s most extreme pro-abortion platform ever — supporting taxpayer-funded abortion — was shot down before it ever started.
“I tried to raise the issue of the language that was used on abortion, that I thought was so alienating to good Democratic voters,” longtime Democrat James Zogby told The Hill. “The outcome was that there was no discussion possible.”
Planned Parenthood and the abortion lobby are proof that you don’t need a gun to be a bully.
Michael Graham hosts the "Michael In the Morning" podcast at Ricochet.com. Follow him on Twitter at @IAmMGraham.
South African Parliament Declares That All White Famers Must Be Punished
It is becoming increasingly difficult to discern where political correctness has drawn the line on racism these days, with a wide ranging and ever-mutating list of rules to be followed in order to clear your name.
And, unless you’ve been living in a cave for the last decade, you are already a racist. It’s inherent in all of us, according the lunatic fringes on the left side of American politics, where you will always be considered guilty until proven virtuous.
It’s the democratic version of the oldest story of the Bible, in which you are all inherently sinners and only the Progressive Prophet of the week can truly save you. This is precisely how American democrats retain what little power they have, by creating a savior of The State, and allowing their followers to subscribe only to that visage of divinity. You have no free will, according to the left, because, with free will you could sin again. Just relinquish control to a Clinton or an Obama, and allow them to be your own personal democratic deity.
Of course, this is no way to treat anyone, let alone the constituents from whom you wish to gain confidence and trust. This is an oppressive system at best because, unlike religion, this salvation is based solely on the desires of the wicked, not the unending glory of true faith.
And, like any good political cult, the democrats have a way to make you squirm under their magnifying glass of social justice. It’s called political correctness, and it is being handled like a six-shooter aimed at the feet of Marty McFly.
The comparison, while certainly a bit silly, is a powerful one: The left’s use of political correctness is represented by the six shooter being handled by our villainous wretch, Biff Tannen. They’ve got a limited amount of ammunition, always delivered in exactly the same method, and always rotating in the same direction.
Why, in the movie, does our antagonist not simply raise his weapon and deliver the fatal blow to McFly’s midsection? Simply because such action would immediately put him in the wrong. He would no longer have the upper hand, legally or morally, and would still find a similar fate to McFly.
The difference would be that Tannen’s fate would come after weeks of scandalous character assassination for the entire public to be made aware of.
In many ways, the empathy that would come to McFly is far more advantageous than the anger aimed at Tannen could ever be. McFly comes out ahead at the end of this, dead or not.
And that is why the left won’t simply stride into the total neo-Fascism that they are constantly flirting with: They would then be revealed as the monsters that they truly are. Instead, they simply endanger and not maim.
Marty McFly’s moonwalk in the clip is what the social justice warriors have compelled all of the world’s realists to learn. They’ll cozy up to the idea that they should vanquish their foes, but they simply won’t do it. Instead, they aim for embarrassment, and the possibility of keeping the realist right wing under their oppressive thumb of shame.
It is better, after all, to fight the enemy you know instead of the enemy you don’t.
So political correctness is a tool of oppression, first and foremost, and when weaponized as it has been in America, it is apt to spread.
One example of the spreading of this weaponized thought control comes to us from the European Union, where Syrian migrants have become an enormous lightning rod of controversy.
Leftists within the EU and its leadership are leaning heavily on the idea of political correctness in their mandating of member nations to accept a certain number of these refugees, who are attempting to seek asylum due to a raging civil war within Syria. In order to persuade the otherwise unwilling nations, the EU mucky-mucks waged a campaign of shame against those supposedly sovereign nations who are rightfully concerned about the addition of a culturally distant populace to their established nations.
Poland, Hungary, and Slovakia has all been mercilessly shamed in the European media for their unwillingness to simply allow the EU to mandate their national identity into forced diversity.
So, what happens when this political correctness is applied retroactively? South Africans are learning that lesson as we speak.
To understand what is occurring in South Africa, we need to have ourselves a little refresher on Apartheid.
According to Wikipedia, Apartheid “was a system of institutionalised racial segregation and discrimination that existed in South Africa between 1948 and 1991.[1] It was based on white supremacy and the repression of the black (African, Coloured and Indian) majority of the population for the benefit of the politically and economically dominant group, Afrikaners, and other Whites.”
During Apartheid, 85% of the nation’s farms were owned by white farmers, as if to illustrate the point. Now, 33 years after the end of Apartheid, that number has dropped to 73% – a number that the South African parliament felt wasn’t nearly acceptable.
That’s where the idea of retroactive political correctness has come in the form of unabashed racism masquerading as reparations.
“The country’s constitution is now likely to be amended to allow for the confiscation of white-owned land without compensation, following a motion brought by radical Marxist opposition leader Julius Malema.
“It passed by 241 votes for to 83 against after a vote on Tuesday, and the policy was a key factor in new president Cyril Ramaphosa’s platform after he took over from Jacob Zuma in February.
“Mr Malema said the time for ‘reconciliation is over’. ‘Now is the time for justice,’ News24 reported.
“‘We must ensure that we restore the dignity of our people without compensating the criminals who stole our land.'”
And, as if we believed that this weren’t ugly enough, the next step could wind up being something far more serious altogether.
“Mr Malema has a long-standing commitment to land confiscation without compensation. In 2016 he told his supporters he was ‘not calling for the slaughter of white people – at least for now’.”
Wow.
South Africa could be just the beginning of such vitriol as well. There is no reason to believe that this sentiment will remain contained to this modern nation, especially in a world where news travels faster than it even occurs.
What could be next of the leftist ideologues who are now empowered by the success of this radical never racism in South Africa? Will African Americans in the United States attempt another push for reparations, to be paid from the descendants of Europeans who may or may not have even been on the continent during the horrific practice’s residency.
Or will ISIS soon begin suing the families of drone operators in the U.S. who stealthily incapacitated their terror-inducing patriarchs?
Meet the Conservative Parkland Massacre Survivor the Media Has Largely Ignored
Guy Benson
PARKLAND, FLORIDA -- On the afternoon of February 14, 2018, Kyle Kashuv found himself in the midst of a waking nightmare, huddled in a classroom closet for two harrowing hours, attempting to console and reassure terrified fellow students. An apparent fire drill had abruptly turned into a bloodbath after a gunman calculatingly lured potential victims into the halls of Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School by pulling the fire alarm -- a ghoulish maneuver designed to maximize the bodycount. Teachers began following protocol by locking classroom doors after an active shooter alert was announced over the campus intercom system. Kashuv ended up piling into one room only after an instructor made a judgment call to unlock her door to accommodate a group of panicked students.
The closet felt "like the safest place to be," he remembers. "I was trying to calm people down who were crying hysterically, letting everyone know that everything would be alright." Kids frantically checked their phones and social media feeds for emerging information as they remained holed up, waiting for a SWAT team's liberation. It finally came around 4:30pm. They had survived; seventeen others had not.
This southeastern Florida community is still reeling. On a warm Sunday afternoon, people are milling around a makeshift memorial that lines the fence outside of the school. It's filled with layer after layer of placards, flowers and candles. Passers-by slow down as they drive past the scene of this heinous crime; some pull off the road and simply stare. In a nearby park, Kashuv, a 16-year-old junior, is matter-of-factly relaying his personal story from that horrible day, probably for the umpteenth time. He'd reached out to me through Twitter, expressing a willingness to talk about his experiences and the state of public debate over what happened inside his school a few weeks ago. With his parents' permission, I agreed to meet him. He has a lot to say but can't help but wonder aloud if many in the mainstream media have any interest in listening. Some of his schoolmates have gained prominence as television mainstays in the aftermath of the killings, their opinions validated with verified social media statuses, amassing millions of followers in the process. Kashuv is just as much a Parkland survivor as now-familiar names like David Hogg and Cameron Kasky, yet his views have only garnered limited attention.
I ask him why he thinks that's the case. "I don't know," he says, hesitantly. "Maybe because I don't use inflammatory language. I speak calmly and logically without much emotion. I don't necessarily make the very best headline." He's politely referring to some of his more "famous" peers' propensity to launch provocative and partisan attacks, such as repeated assertions that people who disagree with their political or policy preferences "don't care" about dead children, or have 'blood on their hands.' But Kashuv knows that the disparate treatment he's lived isn't merely attributable to stylistic differences; he's convinced that the substance of his views is what has diminished his appeal to many activists and journalists.
"I'm a very strong Second Amendment supporter and I will continue to be throughout this entire campaign." he tells me. "As of right now, my main goal is to meet with legislators and represent to them that there are big Second Amendment supporters in our community. Through this entire thing, my number one concern has been making sure that the rights of innocent Americans aren't infringed upon." He says that when he visited the state capitol to talk to lawmakers shortly after the tragedy, he consistently asked for guarantees that the constitutional rights of law-abiding gun owners wouldn't be attacked or abridged. He's waded into this debate "kind of reluctantly," he admits, observing that at some point he realized that he was one of the few conservatives in his school who were speaking up in public. "It's not even by my choosing, it's just come to that," he remarks. "I feel somewhat obligated to do this because the other half of America needs to be heard. I'm doing this because I have to."
Kashuv counts himself as a believer in the 'Never Again' cause, but feels ostracized and ignored by those -- including students and the adults supporting them -- who disagree with his conservative politics. "It's quite saddening because I support this Never Again movement in some aspects. Everything that isn't for gun control, I fully support. But a lot of people in the movement, they view it as 'you're with us or you're against us.' There's no middle ground. So either you support them on all of their policy ideas, or you're an enemy. That's sad because I really do love this movement, and I want it to do a lot of good work. But simply because I have a different opinion on what needs to be done [on guns], I'm not represented as a leading member."
He wasn't invited to participate in CNN's raucous and emotional town hall meeting in the wake of the shooting, watching it instead on television along with the general public (he says some of the pro-gun control students who traveled with him in Tallahassee were flown back for the event). He didn't like what he saw. "The entire CNN town hall was very ineffective. It worsened the divide," he laments. "It was so counterproductive because Republicans would answer back, and they weren't really able to voice logical concerns and [talk about] what they wanted to do because they were just booed. It was simply counterproductive. That's the only word for it."
Conservative Florida Senator Marco Rubio attended the forum, throughout which he was showered with jeers and heckles. His job approval rating has taken a hit as a result, according to a recent poll. Kashuv -- who hopes to meet with Rubio in the near future to discuss the Senator's newly-unveiled policy proposals -- thinks that's an unjust outcome. "I respect [Rubio for showing up] a lot because he didn't have to go. He knew there was going to be so much backlash, but he still went." Kashuv's opinion of another public official on stage that night is decidedly less generous: "What really angered me was Sheriff Scott Israel. He sat there and he was practically virtue signaling, and this was all while he knew that his department hadn't acted properly."
The right-leaning student appears uncomfortable directly criticizing his headline-grabbing schoolmates, seemingly worried about fueling a pitched "Right vs Left" battle. But their actions have increasingly grated on him, and Kashuv is starting to push back more forcefully. He was particularly bothered by Hogg's boast on Bill Maher's HBO program that he'd hung up on the White House during a call designed to arrange a conversation with the president about potential solutions. "Simply hanging up, whether it was the president or his assistant -- that's terrible. And then to brag about it on national television? It's extremely counterintuitive to actual change. You get a call from the president's office, and instead of talking, or reaching a middle ground, or seeing what can be done, you hang up on them? I think that's just extremely immature." Visibly agitated, Kashuv isn't finished. "[Some of their statements and actions] are divisive and pushing people further away from reaching a middle ground. It's terrible and it's hypocritical -- someone saying they want to make change, then they're pushing away some of the people who would help make that change."
Buzzfeed reported last week that a small cadre of pro-gun control Parkland students have received financial and logistical support from a raft of national political organizations, including Everytown, MoveOn and Planned Parenthood. But as Kashuv tries to lend his perspective to the debate, he often feels like an isolated one-man band. "I don't have any entities supporting me at all. Everything is my personal doing. Like, me reaching out to people. Not many have reached out to me at all -- not many big media names have reached out to me." Nevertheless, he's been motivated to keep engaging by a steady stream of quiet encouragement from other students who've confided that they support what he's doing, but are reticent to lock arms with him in public. "There have been other kinds who've reached out to me and said, 'hey Kyle, I really support what you're doing, I love what you're doing.' But a lot of them are fearful of the negative consequences" of getting openly involved.
The son of first-generation Israeli immigrants, Kashuv describes himself as a conservative, but is adamant that he doesn't want to become a partisan gladiator. He also emphasizes that his convictions are his own. "My family has not been political at all. Everything I say is my own perspective. Nothing was like spoon-fed to me, or forced. Everything has come from my own research and understanding. I generated my own perspective," he says, adding that he's rebuffed efforts to enlist him as an ideological agitator in the model of Hogg and Kasky. "I have been asked to make an organization that would represent the conservative point of view in this debate, but I do not want to do that. I consider myself conservative, but I still want to reach the middle ground here, and that's my end goal: To reach a proper solution that is bipartisan. There is a middle ground."
As we walk around the outskirts of his campus, Kashuv reflects on the unexpected and unusual experience of being thrust into an intense nationwide argument. He tells me he has no desire to run for office or to become a "television person." His aspiration is to study business at the University of Florida, then attend Wharton or Harvard for graduate school. As he seeks to offer a reasonable voice in pursuit of bipartisan solutions to the horror his community experienced, he and a friend have helped develop an app designed "to provide emotional support -- not official counselors, but emotional support -- from volunteers to assist children in need." He hopes that his project, School Guardians, will go national. "It has so much potential," he says, nearly smiling for the first time in our entire encounter.
Before we part ways, I ask if there's anything he wants to make sure to say. Kashuv doesn't hesitate: "The only way change will be accomplished is if we stop using inflammatory language, we sit down and have a logical discussion, we don't call the person the enemy, we don't shout at them, and we don't boo them. That's the only way a positive change will be made." Thus far, this young man's cautious, earnest, relatively low-decibel voice has not been featured as a significant part of our national conversation after Parkland. Meanwhile, a handful of newly-minted spokespeople who've escalated their aggressive and sometimes alienating tactics have been ubiquitous. What does that say about incentives and the seriousness of our debate? Some of the adults in politics and media who serve as gatekeepers and adjudicators of America's debates should have to answer that question.
Gary Oldman Thanks America in Academy Award Acceptance Speech
'Darkest Hour' star sang quite a different tune than his Hollywood colleagues — who touted leftist ideas and went after Trump
by Zachary Leeman
In a surprising turn of events at Sunday night’s Academy Awards, actor Gary Oldman actually thanked America in the acceptance speech he gave when he won the Oscar for Best Actor.
The “Dark Knight” star took home an award for his work as Winston Churchill in the hit film “Darkest Hour.”
The British-born actor said this country stood behind the success of both his career and his family.
He thanked America for the “wonderful gifts she has given me.”
He also thanked movies for giving him “a dream” to follow in his life.
It was a surprisingly patriotic moment not often seen at a Hollywood awards show. Sure, it lasted a nanosecond — but in such a liberal-drenched evening, the remarks stood out starkly.
Others at the Academy Awards were mostly busy preaching about illegal immigrants, women, Donald Trump, and gun control.
Gary Oldman instead shared a moment of thanks for the country to which he'd immigrated legally — and for the industry in which he made his career.
He also thanked his mother and his wife.
PopZette editor Zachary Leeman can be reached at zachary.leeman@lifezette.com. Follow him on Twitter.
Judicial Watch sues DOJ for Bruce and Nellie Ohr records related to Fusion GPS, anti-Trump dossier
Conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch is suing the Justice Department for records related to Bruce Ohr, his wife Nellie Ohr, and their involvement in the now-infamous anti-Trump dossier.
The suit was filed Monday, following the Justice Department’s failure to respond to Judicial Watch’s December 2017 Freedom of Information Act requests about the couple and their connection to research firm Fusion GPS.
Judicial Watch’s first lawsuit, related to their FOIA request from Dec. 7, 2017, seeks records of contact or communications between Ohr, Steele, and Fusion GPS co-founder Glenn Simpson, along with any other Fusion GPS employees; calendar entries, and travel requests for Ohr.
Conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch is suing the Justice Department for records related to Bruce Ohr, his wife Nellie Ohr, and their involvement in the now-infamous anti-Trump dossier.
The suit was filed Monday, following the Justice Department’s failure to respond to Judicial Watch’s December 2017 Freedom of Information Act requests about the couple and their connection to research firm Fusion GPS.
Judicial Watch’s first lawsuit, related to their FOIA request from Dec. 7, 2017, seeks records of contact or communications between Ohr, Steele, and Fusion GPS co-founder Glenn Simpson, along with any other Fusion GPS employees; calendar entries, and travel requests for Ohr.
Bruce Ohr had a close relationship with ex-British Intelligence officer Christopher Steele even after he was terminated as a source for the FBI. (AP)The second suit is connected to the group’s Dec. 12, 2017 FOIA request, seeking emails, text messages and chats between Justice Department officials in the Attorney General’s office and Nellie Ohr.
Bruce Ohr, who has since been demoted from a top post at the Justice Department, was a close contact for British ex-intelligence agent Christopher Steele, who compiled the dossier on behalf of Fusion GPS.
According to the memo crafted by Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee last month, Nellie Ohr, was “employed by Fusion GPS to assist in the cultivation of opposition research” on President Trump.
The memo also said Bruce Ohr passed the results of his wife’s research, which was paid for by the Democratic National Committee and the Clinton campaign, along to the FBI.
Steele worked as a key source for the FBI, but was terminated for what the bureau defined “as the most serious of violations”—an “unauthorized disclosure to the media of his relationship with the FBI.”
But even after his termination, Steele remained in close contact with Ohr, and their relationship was “inexplicably concealed from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC),” during the FBI’s effort to receive a FISA warrant for former Trump campaign official Carter Page.
“Once again, the Deep State Justice Department is covering up evident misconduct targeting President Trump,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a statement. “A top Justice Department official in the Obama administration had an obvious conflict of interest through his wife Nellie’s work with the Clinton/DNC vendor Fusion GPS on the anti-Trump Dossier.”
Fitton added: “The Justice Department needs to come clean about this scandal and turnover the documents as federal law requires.”
Fox News learned in the fall of 2017 that the dossier was paid for by the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee through the law firm Perkins Coie in an effort to conduct opposition research against the Trump campaign.
According to House Intel Republican memo, the FBI and the Justice Department were aware of the political origins of the dossier, but were not included in FISA warrant applications to surveil Page.
Steele worked as a key source for the FBI, but was terminated for what the bureau defined “as the most serious of violations”—an “unauthorized disclosure to the media of his relationship with the FBI.”
But even after his termination, Steele remained in close contact with Ohr, and their relationship was “inexplicably concealed from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC),” during the FBI’s effort to receive a FISA warrant for former Trump campaign official Carter Page.
“Once again, the Deep State Justice Department is covering up evident misconduct targeting President Trump,” Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in a statement. “A top Justice Department official in the Obama administration had an obvious conflict of interest through his wife Nellie’s work with the Clinton/DNC vendor Fusion GPS on the anti-Trump Dossier.”
Fitton added: “The Justice Department needs to come clean about this scandal and turnover the documents as federal law requires.”
Fox News learned in the fall of 2017 that the dossier was paid for by the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee through the law firm Perkins Coie in an effort to conduct opposition research against the Trump campaign.
According to House Intel Republican memo, the FBI and the Justice Department were aware of the political origins of the dossier, but were not included in FISA warrant applications to surveil Page.
IEA Report: America Will Dominate Global Oil Markets
by SEAN MORAN
AP/Gregory Bull/Will Kincaid
One year into President Donald Trump’s policy of “American energy dominance,” the International Energy Agency said Monday that the United States will dominate the global oil markets for the foreseeable future thanks to the shale oil boom.
IEA Executive Director Fatih Birol said in a report released on Monday, “The U.S. is set to put its stamp on global oil markets for the next five years.”
The rising demand for oil has “unleashed a new wave of growth from the U.S.,” according to the IEA.
The IEA argued in its report that American production will cover more than half of the world’s oil demand growth to 2023.
During his presidential campaign, then candidate-Donald Trump called for a policy of “American energy dominance,” which called for repealing onerous energy regulations and opening up federal lands to oil exploration.
President Trump signed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act in December, which opened up sections of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) to oil and natural exploration and drilling.
Energy Secretary Rick Perry charged at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in February, “America became energy independent. Today American is the number one oil producing oil country in the world.”
“We just don’t export LNG; we export freedom,” Perry added.
Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke also argued at CPAC that his agency is “just getting started” in creating a regulatory framework that will grant access to America’s abundant energy sources.
“We are producing today about 10.3 million barrels a day in this country, and for the first time in 60 years, we’re a net exporter of liquid natural gas,” Zinke said.
“[Trump] said, ‘Energy dominance,’ and that’s what we’re delivering to America and the world.”
The Nuclear Option: Hope Hicks Stuns the Swamp — with the Truth
by CHARLES HURT
Here is the truth about White Lies.
Hope Hicks has more integrity and is far more honest than any of the lying politicians on the House “Intelligence” Committee who grilled her for nine hours this week about whether she has ever lied on behalf of her boss, the president of the United States.
Seriously? Are you kidding me?
You have a panel of politicians who lie for a living sitting up on their high chairs interrogating Hope Hicks — an honorable non-politician — about the nature of politics in Washington that they themselves have so utterly disgraced with their own lies and lying political campaigns.
This place is a sewer of lies. I swear, sometimes I think these people take an oath of office when they get up here vowing to never tell the truth, so help them God.
There is not a single person on that House panel interrogating Ms. Hicks who can honestly say they have never lied or told underlings to lie on their behalf in the course of their political careers.
The only difference is that if you asked one of them that question, they would simply lie.
Ms. Hicks is not one of them and so she told the truth.
Sure, she has told some little “white lies.”
As in: “Hope, does this combover cover my bald spot?”
“Yes, Mr. President.”
White lies are the lubricant of civility, the secret to happy marriages. The problem is that the swamp snakes around here have co-opted “white lies” into a means for smearing good people, dodging responsibility and shamelessly seeking personal political gain off the senseless murders of 17 people — mostly children — in a school massacre.
This blurring of the line between white lies and rank black lies is the first delusion of these people around here.
This strange tactic Ms. Hicks used of answering a question truthfully so stunned the swamp politicians that they reacted the only way they know how.
They twisted her testimony into the worst mischaracterization they could think up and then leaked their lies to the press.
All of it goes to the very heart of why President Trump is such a threat to these lying goons around here. Why the professional politicians despise him so much. Why Mr. Trump is such a profound threat to their very existence.
Mr. Trump is not afraid to hold up a mirror to these people and expose them for exactly who they are. And then he beats them at their own game.
• Charles Hurt can be reached at churt@washingtontimes.com; follow him on Twitter via @charleshurt.
• Charles Hurt can be reached at churt@washingtontimes.com; follow him on Twitter via @charleshurt.
Dear California: Call Me When the Commies Leave
(Getty Images)
It finally happened. After 22 years in Los Angeles -- 13 on its West Side -- I threw half my life into boxes, the other half into dumpsters, and returned to my native Arizona. It wasn't a decision I had been pondering for very long. After the first of the year I began to kick the idea around rather casually, then a few things fell into place quite unexpectedly and, by the middle of January, getting out seemed like the only logical thing to do.
Emotionally, it was a different story. I love California. More specifically, I love Los Angeles. There have been many people I've known both in and out of the entertainment industry who seemed to be working on an exit plan as soon as they arrived in L.A. They were regret-free when they did get out, which was usually sooner rather than later.
My time in California may have begun solely because I was an entertainer. However, I had always been politically active too and my years there saw my most intense activism. Alas, I was perhaps focusing too much on national issues when I should have been throwing some effort behind keeping my home state from rushing headlong off of a progressive cliff.
Some of my efforts were actually spent at home. While so many conservatives in California were longing to get to more politically friendly states, I was relentlessly advocating for staying and fighting. States that were already electing conservatives and/or Republicans didn't need more conservatives there, I maintained. It was the places in America that were becoming liberal wastelands that were in need of some opposition voices.
It was a pitch that could have been applied to any number of states, but I meant it for California. I don't care what the libs do to the likes of New York, Chicago, or the Pacific Northwest. Let the progressive loons have cities and states that are already cold, wet and miserable.
But, as I often asked audiences, why should we let them have a place as glorious as California?
Apparently, no one was listening.
When the Democrats gained a super-majority stranglehold on the California legislature, they didn't waste any time letting their far-left freak flag fly. As soon as some bills were floated, then passed, people began asking me in private and in public interviews about the legislative madness issuing forth from Sacramento.
I thought most of it was boilerplate liberal lunacy that wouldn't stand up to any strict legal scrutiny, which made me shrug it off.
Last summer, however, the extent of the lunacy started to really come into focus and made it more difficult to keep at arm's length.
The far-left progressive Democrats in the California Assembly went to war with their still quite left "moderate" Democratic colleagues for not being fully on board with a single-payer health care bill that was problematic, to say the least.
This escalated quickly, which led to an effort to recall Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon, who, by the way, is progressive.
Not progressive enough though, it would seem.
Rendon is a proponent of single-payer health care. His only objection to the bill in question was its funding, which was practically nonexistent.
Now firmly in the grip of the supermajority, California politics had devolved into an ideological battle between the far left and people who think Fidel Castro was too conservative.
Forget hoping that moderate Republicans would have a voice in Sacramento, the moderate Democrats didn't even have a chance.
Conservatives? Yeah...no.
It was at this point that I began to wonder if the two progressive factions had pulled California's political center so far to the left that it could never be brought back to a sane place on the spectrum. In years past, I would dream of a day when control of the state would return to the adults and there would be a huge correction.
The legislative madness of 2017 was bad enough, but the state hit full "hold my beer" mode in 2018.
One Democratic legislator actually proposed fining wait staff in restaurants for offering plastic straws to customers. Ian Calderon, the legislator behind this, isn't some newbie backbencher who is trying to make a name for himself, he is currently the assembly's majority leader.
The only people who aren't rich who seem to be moving to California from other parts of the United States are young, idealistic people who want to be in the entertainment industry. They usually get jobs in bars and restaurants when they arrive.
The Democrats now want to make their lives more miserable.
That idea is the kind of thing that makes people from other parts of America see all of California as a literal lunatic fringe of the continental U.S. It's too insane to worry about because it probably won't ever come to be.
More problematic is the open hostility that the Democrats running California have for things like the rule of law and lower taxes. You know, things that sane, rational free people enjoy.
It was when the state's attorney general said he would prosecute hard-working citizens who were providing jobs if they obeyed the law that I began to take a serious look at how far away from me California had drifted.
We'd never been a good fit politically. I used to live in Maxine Waters' district. I went from there to Henry Waxman's. My senators were Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, who was then succeeded by Kamala Harris.
Put very mildly, I wasn't feeling very well represented in this country that is supposed to be a representative republic.
It was then that I began to ponder a return to the desert.
Emotionally, it was a different story. I love California. More specifically, I love Los Angeles. There have been many people I've known both in and out of the entertainment industry who seemed to be working on an exit plan as soon as they arrived in L.A. They were regret-free when they did get out, which was usually sooner rather than later.
My time in California may have begun solely because I was an entertainer. However, I had always been politically active too and my years there saw my most intense activism. Alas, I was perhaps focusing too much on national issues when I should have been throwing some effort behind keeping my home state from rushing headlong off of a progressive cliff.
Some of my efforts were actually spent at home. While so many conservatives in California were longing to get to more politically friendly states, I was relentlessly advocating for staying and fighting. States that were already electing conservatives and/or Republicans didn't need more conservatives there, I maintained. It was the places in America that were becoming liberal wastelands that were in need of some opposition voices.
It was a pitch that could have been applied to any number of states, but I meant it for California. I don't care what the libs do to the likes of New York, Chicago, or the Pacific Northwest. Let the progressive loons have cities and states that are already cold, wet and miserable.
But, as I often asked audiences, why should we let them have a place as glorious as California?
Apparently, no one was listening.
When the Democrats gained a super-majority stranglehold on the California legislature, they didn't waste any time letting their far-left freak flag fly. As soon as some bills were floated, then passed, people began asking me in private and in public interviews about the legislative madness issuing forth from Sacramento.
I thought most of it was boilerplate liberal lunacy that wouldn't stand up to any strict legal scrutiny, which made me shrug it off.
Last summer, however, the extent of the lunacy started to really come into focus and made it more difficult to keep at arm's length.
The far-left progressive Democrats in the California Assembly went to war with their still quite left "moderate" Democratic colleagues for not being fully on board with a single-payer health care bill that was problematic, to say the least.
This escalated quickly, which led to an effort to recall Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon, who, by the way, is progressive.
Not progressive enough though, it would seem.
Rendon is a proponent of single-payer health care. His only objection to the bill in question was its funding, which was practically nonexistent.
Now firmly in the grip of the supermajority, California politics had devolved into an ideological battle between the far left and people who think Fidel Castro was too conservative.
Forget hoping that moderate Republicans would have a voice in Sacramento, the moderate Democrats didn't even have a chance.
Conservatives? Yeah...no.
It was at this point that I began to wonder if the two progressive factions had pulled California's political center so far to the left that it could never be brought back to a sane place on the spectrum. In years past, I would dream of a day when control of the state would return to the adults and there would be a huge correction.
The legislative madness of 2017 was bad enough, but the state hit full "hold my beer" mode in 2018.
One Democratic legislator actually proposed fining wait staff in restaurants for offering plastic straws to customers. Ian Calderon, the legislator behind this, isn't some newbie backbencher who is trying to make a name for himself, he is currently the assembly's majority leader.
The only people who aren't rich who seem to be moving to California from other parts of the United States are young, idealistic people who want to be in the entertainment industry. They usually get jobs in bars and restaurants when they arrive.
The Democrats now want to make their lives more miserable.
That idea is the kind of thing that makes people from other parts of America see all of California as a literal lunatic fringe of the continental U.S. It's too insane to worry about because it probably won't ever come to be.
More problematic is the open hostility that the Democrats running California have for things like the rule of law and lower taxes. You know, things that sane, rational free people enjoy.
It was when the state's attorney general said he would prosecute hard-working citizens who were providing jobs if they obeyed the law that I began to take a serious look at how far away from me California had drifted.
We'd never been a good fit politically. I used to live in Maxine Waters' district. I went from there to Henry Waxman's. My senators were Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer, who was then succeeded by Kamala Harris.
Put very mildly, I wasn't feeling very well represented in this country that is supposed to be a representative republic.
It was then that I began to ponder a return to the desert.
One Low Key Way Conservatives STICK IT To Gun Grabbers
by: Donny Bomenabori
Conservatives do not protest naturally. They work for a living, and have better ways to spend their time, which is why the Tea Party movement was so remarkable. Instead, conservatives act in others ways, rather than just emoting publicly for all to see. In the case of gun control, conservatives outsource their protest to a favorite ally: the National Rifle Association (NRA).
According to the Daily Mail: "Google searches for 'NRA membership' have risen roughly 4,900 per cent since the week before the February 14 shooting, with new members flocking to support the gun owners' rights group." To put that in graphical terms, you can see the massive spike in this image from Google.
It seems that the sickening display put on by CNN after the Parkland shooting had the opposite intended effect, as the "townhall" was supposed to manipulate your emotions against the Second Amendment, yet catalyzed support for their biggest advocates. There are only five million NRA members as of May of 2017, and tens of millions of American gun owners; thanks are in order for the liberals who are closing that gap.
According to the Daily Mail: "Google searches for 'NRA membership' have risen roughly 4,900 per cent since the week before the February 14 shooting, with new members flocking to support the gun owners' rights group." To put that in graphical terms, you can see the massive spike in this image from Google.
It seems that the sickening display put on by CNN after the Parkland shooting had the opposite intended effect, as the "townhall" was supposed to manipulate your emotions against the Second Amendment, yet catalyzed support for their biggest advocates. There are only five million NRA members as of May of 2017, and tens of millions of American gun owners; thanks are in order for the liberals who are closing that gap.
M*A*S*H Star Loses Battle to Cancer at Age 75, Dies Peacefully at Home
By Keeley Brooks
M*A*S*H remains today the most-watched series finale in television history, after an 11-season run from Sept. 1972 to Feb. 1983.
The show’s success even spun three spin-off series following its conclusion.
It was one of the most popular television shows of all-time.
It comes with great sadness that news broke today that one of the cast members had passed away after a courageous battle against bladder cancer.
David Ogden Stiers died of cancer on Saturday, March 3, his agent confirmed. He was 75 years old.
“I am very sad to report that David died this morning March 3, 2018 peacefully at his home in Newport, Oregon after a courageous battle with bladder cancer,” Stiers’ agent, Mitchell K. Stubbs tweeted. “His talent was only surpassed by his heart.”
I am very sad to report that David died this morning March 3, 2018 peacefully at his home in Newport, Oregon after a courageous battle with bladder cancer.
His talent was only surpassed by his heart.
I am very sad to report that David died this morning March 3, 2018 peacefully at his home in Newport, Oregon after a courageous battle with bladder cancer.
His talent was only surpassed by his heart.
Stiers, who played Major Charles Winchester III, earned two Emmy nominations for his role on M*A*S*H. Stiers starred on the series from 1977 to 1983.
He was also well-known for lending his voice in eight Disney films, including Cogsworth in Beauty and the Beast and Jumba in Lilo & Stitch. Stiers also had regular appearances on Star Trek: The Next Generation, Matlock, Touched by an Angel, and Frasier.
Reactions quickly started pouring in with touching memories and kind words about the late-actor.
He was also well-known for lending his voice in eight Disney films, including Cogsworth in Beauty and the Beast and Jumba in Lilo & Stitch. Stiers also had regular appearances on Star Trek: The Next Generation, Matlock, Touched by an Angel, and Frasier.
Reactions quickly started pouring in with touching memories and kind words about the late-actor.
G’ day…Ciao…
Helen and Moe Lauzier
Thus Article
That's an article
This time, hopefully can give benefits to all of you. well, see you in posting other articles.
You are now reading the article with the link address https://capitalstories.blogspot.com/2018/03/www_6.html
0 Response to " "
Post a Comment