- Hallo friendsCAPITAL STORIES FOR CHILDREN, In the article you read this time with the title , We have prepared this article for you to read and retrieve information therein. Hopefully the contents of postings Article ADVENTURE, Article ANIMATION, Article LATEST DONGENG, Article WORLD OF ANIMALS, We write this you can understand. Alright, good read.

Title :
link :

Baca juga


WWW.MOEISSUESOFTHEDAY.
BLOGSPOT.COM Sat. Dec. 29, 2018
All Gave Some~Some Gave All*****


President Trump Threatens To Close Southern Border If ‘Obstructionist Democrats’ Don’t Cave On Wall Funding

President Trump Threatens To Close Southern Border If ‘Obstructionist Democrats’ Don’t Cave On Wall Funding
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/dec/28/shutdown-day-7-donald-trump-threatens-close-southe/


Stephen Moore: Follow the (Climate Change) Money

Stephen Moore By Stephen Moore

The first iron rule of American politics is: Follow the money. This explains, oh, about 80 percent of what goes on in Washington.

Shortly after the latest "Chicken Little" climate change report was published last month, I noted on CNN that one reason so many hundreds of scientists are persuaded that the sky is falling is that they are paid handsomely to do so.

I said, "In America and around the globe governments have created a multibillion dollar climate change industrial complex." And then I added: "A lot of people are getting really, really rich off of the climate change industry." According to a recent report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office, "Federal funding for climate change research, technology, international assistance, and adaptation has increased from $2.4 billion in 1993 to $11.6 billion in 2014, with an additional $26.1 billion for climate change programs and activities provided by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act in 2009."

This doesn't mean that the planet isn't warming. But the tidal wave of funding does reveal a powerful financial motive for scientists to conclude that the apocalypse is upon us. No one hires a fireman if there are no fires. No one hires a climate scientist (there are thousands of them now) if there is no catastrophic change in the weather. Why doesn't anyone in the media ever mention this?

But when I lifted this hood, it incited more hate mail than from anything I've said on TV or written. Could it be that this rhetorical missile hit way too close to home?

How dare I impugn the integrity of scientists and left-wing think tanks by suggesting that their findings are perverted by hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayer handouts. The irony of this indignation is that any academic whose research dares question the "settled science" of the climate change complex is instantly accused of being a shill for the oil and gas industry or the Koch brothers.

Apparently, if you take money from the private sector to fund research, your work is inherently biased, but if you get multimillion-dollar grants from Uncle Sam, you are as pure as the freshly fallen snow.

How big is the climate change industrial complex today? Surprisingly, no one seems to be keeping track of all the channels of funding. A few years ago, Forbes magazine went through the federal budget and estimated about $150 billion in spending on climate change and green energy subsidies during President Obama's first term.

That didn't include the tax subsidies that provide a 30 percent tax credit for wind and solar power — so add to those numbers about $8 billion to $10 billion a year. Then add billions more in costs attributable to the 29 states with renewable energy mandates that require utilities to buy expensive "green" energy.

Worldwide the numbers are gargantuan. Five years ago, a leftist group called the Climate Policy Initiative issued a study that found that "global investment in climate change" reached $359 billion that year. Then to give you a sense of how money-hungry these planet-saviors are, the CPI moaned that this spending "falls far short of what's needed" a number estimated at $5 trillion.

For $5 trillion we could feed everyone on the planet, end malaria, and provide clean water and reliable electricity to every remote village in Africa. And we would probably have enough money left over to find a cure for cancer and Alzheimer's.

The entire Apollo project to put a man on the moon cost less than $200 billion. We are spending twice that much every year on climate change.

This tsunami of government money distorts science in hidden ways that even the scientists who are corrupted often don't appreciate. If you are a young eager-beaver researcher who decides to devote your life to the study of global warming, you're probably not going to do your career any good or get famous by publishing research that the crisis isn't happening.

But if you've built bogus models that predict the crisis is getting worse by the day, then step right up and get a multi million-dollar grant.

Now here's the real scandal of the near trillion dollars that governments have stolen from taxpayers to fund climate change hysteria and research. By the industry's own admission, there has been almost no progress worldwide in combating climate change. The latest reports by the U.S. government and the United Nations say the problem is getting worse, and we have not delayed the apocalypse by a single day.

Has there ever been such a massive government expenditure that has had such minuscule returns on investment? After three decades of "research" the only "solution" is for the world to stop using fossil fuels, which is like saying that we should stop growing food.

Really? The greatest minds of the world entrusted with hundreds of billions of dollars can only come up with a solution that would entail the largest government power grab in world history, shutting down industrial production (just look at the catastrophe in Germany when they went all in for green energy), and throwing perhaps billions of human beings into poverty? If that's the remedy, I will take my chances on a warming planet.

President Donald Trump should tell these so-called scientists that "you're fired." And we taxpayers should demand our money back.

Stephen Moore is a senior fellow at The Heritage Foundation and an economic consultant with FreedomWorks. He is the co-author of " Trumponomics: Inside the America First Plan to Revive the American Economy."


LINDSEY GRAHAM WRITES AN OPEN LETTER TO NANCY PELOSI ABOUT THE BORDER WALL

Molly Prince | Politics Reporter

Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham told House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and her Democratic caucus on Friday that there would not be a deal on a funding bill unless it included appropriations to construct a wall on the U.S.-Mexico border.

“To Nancy Pelosi and the House Democrats,” Graham tweeted. “No Wall Money, No Deal.”

Lindsey Graham @LindseyGrahamSC

To Nancy Pelosi and the House Democrats:
No Wall Money, No Deal.

11:05 AM - Dec 28, 2018

The House passed a stopgap funding bill on Dec. 20 that included $5.7 billion for a border wall, however, with a 51-seat majority in the Senate, Republicans fell short of the necessary 60 votes needed to send it to President Donald Trump’s desk for signature.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer vowed to kill the legislation on arrival in the Senate, and consequently, a government shutdown has been in effect since funding expired Dec. 21.

Pelosi has reportedly walked away from further shutdown negotiations and pledged not to appropriate a single dollar toward funding a wall. The California congresswoman promised to put forth a funding bill that does not include any of Trump’s demands when she assumes the speakership in January.

President Donald Trump speaks next to VP Mike Pence while meeting with Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer and House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi at the White House. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque

President Donald Trump speaks next to Vice President Mike Pence while meeting with Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer and House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi at the White House. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque


Graham has been a vocal advocate for building a wall. In early December he urged Trump not to concede funding, but rather stand strong and require at least $5 billion in appropriations.

“If I were the president, I would dig in and not give in on additional wall funding — I’d want the whole $5 billion because the caravan is a game changer,” the South Carolina senator said. “$1.6 billion is available to the president, he wants $5 billion, and after the caravan, if you don’t see the need for additional border wall security, you’re just not paying much attention.”

Follow Molly @mollyfprince



Mother of Migrant Child Who Died After Illegally Crossing Border Says She Sent Him on Treacherous Trip to Make it Easier for Her Husband to Cross

by Cassandra Fairbanks

The mother of the eight-year-old Guatemalan boy who died after crossing the border this week says that she sent her young son on the treacherous voyage to help her husband’s chances of being able to stay in the US illegally.

The boy’s mother Catarina Alonzo told Reuters that bringing children is the easiest way for migrants to be accepted into the US.  According to the Washington Post, the smugglers also charge less than half the price if a child is accompanying the adult “knowing that migrants can turn themselves in to border agents and will soon be released.”

“Lots of them have gone with children and managed to cross, even if they’re held for a month or two. But they always manage to get across easily,” Alonzo told Reuters.

Guatemala’s foreign ministry is warning that coyotes and human traffickers are using President Trump’s plan to build a wall along the border to urge migrants to take their chances now.

“According to interviews (with migrants), the coyotes are saying ‘it’s now or never’ because the wall is going to be built, and it won’t be possible to cross,” the spokeswoman told Reuters.

The boy is the second child to die this month after being dragged along on the dangerous trip. An official cause of death has not yet been made public.

Now, the family is asking that they let the boy’s father stay and work in the US so that his “death won’t be in vain.”




Hungary Has a Wall, Israel Has a Wall, Turkey Has a Wall, Nancy Pelosi’s Backyard Has a Wall… Why Can’t the US Have a Wall?

Jim Hoft by Jim Hoft

Dear Cryin’ Chuck and Nancy,

#Hungary has a wall.
#Turkey has a wall.
#Israel has a wall.
Nancy Pelosi’s backyard has a wall.

At least 65 countries have border walls. Why can’t America?




Five Dumb Arguments Against ‘the Wall’



So many asinine assertions, so little time.

The benefits of building a wall on our southern border are so obvious and abundant that, in a sane political environment, there would be no debate about whether it should be done. Indeed, until Donald Trump made “the wall” a central component of his presidential platform, proposals for such an obstacle weren’t even controversial. As the President and others have pointed out, most Democrats supported the idea and have voted for legislation that included funding for the construction of some sort of physical barrier. Their policy pirouette on this common sense measure has thus led to some truly comical claims.

Most of the arguments against the wall are variations of the perennial claim that Democrats and their “progressive” supporters make against any proposal of which they don’t approve — it won’t work. Just as they claim that the free market somehow doesn’t work in health care (thus the urgent need for a centrally controlled, government-run medical system), they insist that a wall on the southern border will produce none of the outcomes promised by Trump. By far the most hilarious contribution to this genre was made by rapper Talib Kweli Greene, who took to Twitter and offered wall supporters the following history lesson:

So, you’re unaware of the fact that Nazi Germany had a wall called the Berlin Wall that was torn down in 1991 in order to foster humanity and diversity? Walls didn’t work for Nazis so why build them here? Build bridges not walls Nazi lover.

After excavating himself from the mountain of ridicule beneath which he was inevitably buried pursuant to this exercise in smug ignorance, Greene took down the Tweet. Fortunately, the Western Journal published a screen capture so posterity will not find itself bereft of this valuable source of mirth. But Greene is by no means the only advocate of the Berlin Wall analogy. Last June, the Los Angeles Times published a column by Carolina Miranda titled, “What the dismantling of the Berlin Wall can teach us as Trump tries to build his wall.” The obvious answer is “absolutely nothing,” yet she conjured a comparison:

This year, Feb. 5 marked the day that the wall had been gone as long as it had been up — 10,316 days … the deconstruction of the Berlin Wall and its attendant Cold War legacies highlights the construction of walls elsewhere — such as the “big, fat, beautiful wall” President Trump wants for the US-Mexico border.

Miranda isn’t quite illiterate enough to claim the Nazis built the Berlin Wall, but her analogy is just as absurd. That wall was built to keep people trapped in East Germany. It was erected by the leaders of that communist hellhole to halt the flow of its best educated and most productive citizens to the free market economy of democratically governed West Germany. The “big, fat, beautiful wall” the President wants to build along the southern border of the United States will be designed to stop uneducated and unskilled immigrants — many of whom are also infected with communicable diseases — from entering our country illegally.

Other dumb analogies compare the border wall to various ancient barriers like Hadrian’s Wall. CNN published a particularly moronic piece on this subject. “The wall was finished in 128 AD, and 10 years later, Hadrian died.… Soon after the Roman’s power in the region started to decline, and in 410 AD the Roman rule ended.” As it happens, Hadrian’s Wall was built for military purposes, and served its purpose (slowing down sporadic incursions by the Picts) well. Moreover, Roman withdrawal from Britain had nothing to do with the wall or “declining power in the region.” They left to fight the Germans who were invading Italy.

A slightly less stupid, but equally ineffective argument to which the anti-wall crowd has inevitably reverted involves the claim that a physical barrier will damage the environment and doom certain flora and fauna to extinction. A gaggle of environmentalist zealots sued the government based on the claim that the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, signed into law in 1996 by Bill Clinton to strengthen the nation’s immigration statutes, somehow violates the separation of powers established by the Constitution. If this seems a little thin to you, you are not alone. The Hill notes:

The Supreme Court on Monday refused to hear an appeal from conservation and animal protection groups challenging the Trump administration’s power to bypass state and local environmental laws in building a border wall.… The justices did not provide any explanation for why they refused to hear the appeal.

Presumably, the justices didn’t want to dress down the plaintiffs for bugging them with frivolous litigation. But flippancy is a central feature of the anti-wall movement. This is obvious in the treatment the wall has received in the “news” media. The Washington Post, for example, ran a piece last January on what the wall would cost if one built it out of dollar bills. Meanwhile, Senate Democrats have made the absurd claim that it will cost $70 billion. If Trump’s puerile critics were serious people, they would produce a legitimate estimate and compare it to what illegal immigration is costing the taxpayer. Watchdog.org reports:

According to the most recent analysis by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), one illegal immigrant living in America today costs U.S. citizen taxpayers about $8,075. In total, illegal aliens cost American taxpayers $116 billion annually.

Predictably, the Democrats and the media dispute this, although they rarely produce credible alternate figures. But for those who prefer a more conservative number, the Heritage Foundation looked at this five years ago and came up with the following estimate:

These households impose a net fiscal burden (benefits received minus taxes paid) of around $54.5 billion per year. The fiscal cost of unlawful and low-skill immigrants will be increased in the future by government policies that increase the number of low-skill immigrants.

In other words, even using conservative estimates compiled five years ago, the funding Trump is asking for in the current budget is about 10 percent of the annual cost taxpayers incur to provide services to illegal immigrants. One hardly needs to consult a sophisticated financial analyst to see that the return on investment for the wall is huge even if the wall merely stops half of what the Democrats and the media refer to as undocumented citizens from crossing the border. But Schumer, Pelosi, et al. prefer a government “shut down” to what is obviously a good deal. If they weren’t crooks and demagogues, they would cough up the $5.7 billion.

So, Trump’s proposed border wall isn’t remotely analogous to anything done by the Nazis. And only someone illiterate concerning history would compare it to the Berlin Wall or Hadrian’s Wall. Likewise, it is impossible to make a legitimate environmental case against it, and anyone familiar with arithmetic can see that the cost of the wall will be dwarfed by the amount it will save the taxpayers. Nonetheless, these are just a few of the many absurd arguments made by the Democrats and the media against the wall. The true reason for their opposition is obvious, however. They need fraudulent votes from illegals to save their party.




Leftists Mock First Lady Melania For Wearing ‘Timberland Boots’ – But They Loved Michelle Obama’s Streetwalker Thigh-High Glittery Boots

Cristina Laila by Cristina Laila

Our lovely First Lady Melania joined her husband and surprised US troops in a post-Christmas visit to Al Asad Airbase in Iraq this week.

As usual, Melania Trump looked gorgeous in a mustard yellow top and dark pants. She swapped her usual high heels for ‘Timberland boots.’

The First Lady is in a combat zone so she’s trying to balance fashion and comfort, but the left just can’t help themselves — they had to mock Melania’s shoes.

Why does she dress so weirdly? Timberland boots, really? pic.twitter.com/XbsQj66Zgr

— Very Legal and Very Cool Elayne (@chatelainedc) December 26, 2018

The hate-filled leftists who always attacks Melania Trump for her heels and now these ‘Timberland’ boots just loved Michelle Obama’s streetwalker thigh-high glitter boots she paired with an ill-fitting dress.

First Lady Melania Trump already has set a number of records as First Lady.

Melania Trump is:

  • First First Lady not to have been born a citizen of the United States or in what would later become the United States. (Though Louisa Adams was born outside of the United States, she was the daughter of an American father – Joshua Johnson, the American Consul in London – and American citizenship was therefore her birthright.)[38][39] She naturalized in 2006.[40][41][42]

  • First First Lady to be born in Slovenia.

  • First First Lady to be fluent in five languages.[22] Besides Slovene, which is her native language, she speaks English, German, French and Italian.[43]

  • First First Lady to be a non-native speaker of English.[22]

Melania Trump is also the first First Lady to have a successful career as a fashion model.

And on Wednesday Melania Trump became one of the first First Ladies to enter a combat zone.

But leftists only have the brain power to talk about Melania’s shoes and debate whether our troops violated military rules because Trump signed red MAGA hats. Let that sink in.



Report: Alabama AG Probes Meddling Targeting Roy Moore

a dejected roy moore throws his left hand up helplessly, partially blocking his face

Defeated Alabama GOP Senate candidate Roy Moore (Brynn Anderson/AP)

By Cathy Burke   


Alabama's top prosecutor announced Thursday his office is looking into whether disinformation tactics used against Republican Roy Moore during a 2017 special election violated state campaign laws, The Washington Post reported.

GOP Attorney General Steve Marshall said he was worried the operation — reportedly known as Project Birmingham — could have affected the closely fought Senate race.

"The information is concerning," Marshall told the Post. "The impact it had on the election is something that's significant for us to explore, and we'll go from there."

Moore lost the election to Sen. Doug Jones, D-Ala., who said he supports a federal investigation of the disinformation campaign, the Post reported.



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/2018/12/www_28.html

Subscribe to receive free email updates:

Related Posts :

0 Response to " "

Post a Comment