Happy Halloween!

The ghost gif above is an actual ghost caught on the TV show Paranormal Caught on Tape season 1, episode 4. The title of the episode is called “Gettysburg Ghosts and More.”  I think this is another example of a residual haunting.

Walking Nurse Ghost

The ghost gif above is an actual ghost caught on the TV show Ghosts of Morgan City season 1, episode 3. The title of the episode is called “Blue Shirt of Idlewild.” I believe this is what paranormal researchers call a residual haunting. Think psychic recording.

It was pitch black in the house and the ghost did not make a sound.

How We Can Safeguard Our Election Process

From The Daily Signal.com (Aug. 19):

In the freest nation in the world, our system of government and our very liberty depend on free and fair elections. Whether they’re selecting a mayor or the president of the United States, every American must be able to trust the process, or the democratic system itself breaks down.

When someone commits voter fraud, the process is no longer fair, everyone’s vote gets diluted, and in some cases, election results are changed.

Contrary to the claims of many on the left, voter fraud is a very real problem. As the Supreme Court noted when it upheld Indiana’s voter ID law, flagrant examples of voter fraud have been documented throughout this nation’s history.

The National Commission on Federal Election Reform has said that in many close elections, fraud can absolutely change the outcome. Cases of local elections getting overturned because of fraud have occurred in New Jersey, Indiana, and other states.

Although hundreds of people have been convicted in recent years, voter fraud often goes undetected. And even when it’s discovered, overburdened prosecutors rarely prioritize these cases.

Fraudsters can steal votes and change election outcomes in several ways, including: voting in someone else’s name, registering in multiple locations to vote multiple times in the same election, voting even though they’re not eligible because they’re felons or noncitizens, or paying or intimidating people to vote for certain candidates.

…………….

How can we fix the problem?

Since states control much of the electoral process, they must pass laws requiring government-issued IDs to vote. That ensures people aren’t stealing others’ identities and their right to vote.

States should join voter registration cross-check programs to identify voters registered in multiple places. One cross-check program has identified hundreds of thousands of potential duplicate registrations across 30 states as well as evidence of illegal double voting.

States should also compare voter rolls with government records to identify convicted felons and noncitizens who should be removed from the rolls. And the federal government should cooperate with these efforts and make Department of Homeland Security and other databases available to state officials. [read more]

Sounds good to me.

Other articles on the election process:

• Dr. Robert Epstein on Google's ability to affect the outcome of elections
• The search engine manipulation effect (SEME) and its possible impact on the outcomes of elections

#RedforEd Activists from Chicago Teachers Union Go to Venezuela in Support of Maduro’s Socialist Regime

From Breitbart.com (July 31):

A four member delegation from the Chicago Teachers Union (CTU), all active supporters of the #RedforEd movement, traveled to Venezuela earlier this month to provide support for the socialist regime of Nicolas Maduro.

The delegation consisted of Richard Berg,  a former Teamsters Union official who currently works for the CTU, and “rank and file” CTU strike captains Sarah Chambers, Fabiana Mariel, and V Voeta Vargas, according to press reports. [read more]

This sounds crazy, then again it is the Left.

The Truth About Progressives Part 1

Progressives fear an armed citizenry that can stand up to defend itself once their tyranny becomes obvious. Progressives believe they can get away with their revolution as long as they carry it out behind the scenes, and, as we’ve already seen, that strategy has been working for them. But once they seize power outright, they will have to come out into the open.

Climate policy has simply provided a convenient cover for an otherwise fairly standard progressive agenda item. The climate affects the entire world, so naturally, the UN should wield worldwide authority, they reasoned. And with that authority, progressives can build their “better world” by slowly regulating the free market out of existence, thereby eliminating the choice they fear—until their new world is the only choice left. It’s Cloward-Piven on a global scale.

In The Promise of American Life, he argued that the Federalists who drafted the Constitution represented “chiefly the people of wealth and education,” and as such they “demanded a government adequate to protect existing propertied rights.” This resulted in a Constitution that, according to Croly, “did succeed in giving some effect to their distrust of the democratic principle.” To Croly, the Founders were rich men looking out for their fortunes who were “distrustful” of democracy.

Rich liberals have no real interest in fixing “income inequality”—at least as it applies to their own income.

You might further think it strange that Clinton, who made $3 million for giving three speeches in 2013, is telling the rest of us to fork over more money to the government. But it’s not strange. It’s predictable. Because none of this is really about helping the poor. It is about control.

Progressives don’t have a realistic plan to make the poor richer. That would involve encouraging independence, entrepreneurship, ambition—all qualities the Left deplores. All they really do know is how to make everyone else poorer. Except, of course, themselves. Do as I say, not as I do.

Source: Liars. How Progressives Exploit Our Fears for Power and Control (2016) by Glenn Beck.

Meanwhile, This Is What LGBTQ Organizations Are Doing to Society

From Town Hall.com (Aug. 13):

Virtually every week, there seems to be another issue that preoccupies the country. But while our attention is focused on President Donald Trump, Google, Charlottesville, Russia, impeachment, Jeffrey Epstein, the next elections, racism, a trade war with China, the #MeToo movement or something else, LGBTQ organizations are quietly going about their work dismantling ethical norms, making a mockery of education, ruining innocent people's lives and destroying children's innocence. If you think this is overstated, here are some examples:

The LGBTQ Dismantling of Women's Sports

Last month, a transgender weightlifter won multiple gold medals at the 2019 Pacific Games in Samoa. Laurel Hubbard of New Zealand won two gold medals and a silver in the three heavyweight categories for women weighing more than 87 kilograms, or 192 pounds. Hubbard is physically male.

Last year, two biologically male sophomores at different Connecticut high schools competed in female division of the state open track and field competition. They came in first and second place in the 100- and 200-meter dashes.

Because the Western world cowers before LGBTQ demands, no matter how unfair they are to women athletes, men who deem themselves female must be allowed to compete against women. They almost always win.

The Dismantling of Male and Female -- Even at Birth

As reported by the Associated Press: "Parents also can choose (gender) 'X' for newborns. New York City is joining California, Oregon, Washington state in allowing an undesignated gender option on birth certificates. A similar provision takes effect in New Jersey in February."

What percentage of Americans believe children are lucky if born to parents who will not identify them at birth as male or female? On the other hand, how many of us think such parents are engaged in a form of child abuse? [read more]

Pure insanity.

The other ways the LGBTQ organizations are doing to society according to the article:

• The Dismantling of Children's Innocence and Parental Authority
• The Dismantling of Educational Norms
• The Dismantling of Reality

Articles on similar issues:

• I Spent a Year as a Trans Man. Doctors Failed Me at Every Turn.
• ‘Batwoman’ Actress Ruby Rose Is Happy She Didn’t Transition to a Man
• Teacher Fired Over Trans Pronouns Sues School
• Rev. Graham on Beto: 'I Will Not Bow Down at the Altar of the LGBTQ Agenda'
• Rev. Graham: 'I Hope Every Christian' Votes Against Godless 'LGBTQ Agenda'
• 'Transgender mandate' struck down by federal court
• In Georgia, Parents Win Battle Over Transgender Bathrooms at School

The Muslim Brotherhood, Mother of Islamist Terror Groups

From American Thinker.com:

When the average American hears the term “radical Islamists” or thinks “terrorism,” the first notion that comes to mind is groups like Al Qaeda, ISIS, Taliban, or Hamas.

In reality, the world’s wholesale terror producer is none of the above, is headquartered in Jordan, works hand-in-hand with the monarchy there, and has evil tentacles that stretch across the globe wherever democracy and free choice thrive. Named the Muslim Brotherhood (MB), they are the quintessential terrorist organization, and are evil by sheer definition – they, strike fear into the hearts of man.

………………
The MB is so large and important to the history of the region that they boast a very specialized group of graduates: Osama Bin Laden, Ayman Zawahiri, and ISIS caliph Abu Baker Baghdadi – to name a few.

Osama Bin Laden was personally indoctrinated and trained by Jordanian MB leader, Dr. Abdullah Azzam. Terrorism is so accepted, supported and encouraged by the Jordanian Monarchy, that Bin Laden was allowed to freely travel to Jordan to receive a “moral education from Azzam.”

Ayman Zawahiri, Bin Laden’s second in command, who is still alive, began his terroristic career as an MB member in Egypt.

ISIS’s caliph, Abu Baker Baghdadi, was also an MB member according to statements issued by ISIS itself.

The MB’s operations as a “terror university’ is so commonplace, interwoven and approved in Jordan that graduates openly do political business with the king’s regime.

In fact, many forget that Hamas was originally founded as the “Palestine Chapter of Jordan’s Muslim Brotherhood”. This was confirmed by Osama Abu Irshaid, a Jordanian, PhD in his dissertation at a renowned British university.

The evil spawned by the MB has spread throughout the Middle East, and since its inception, has proudly carried out hundreds of terror attacks against Israeli civilians. The MB has also been a strong participant in the creation of at least 2 wars between Israel and Gaza along with dozens of skirmishes, and their Hamas branch was responsible for carrying out a bloody coup in 2006 when it took Gaza by force and butchered Palestinian civilians.

One of the things that makes the MB so effective is the value of the “AlWalaa Wal Taa” or “Loyalty and obedience” concept.  The MB controls their ranks with that concept, and as such, their global headquarters are in plain sight in downtown Amman, and they have been rewarded with friendship with a corrupt Hashemite king who has turned his back on their activities because he profits financially. [read more]

Other articles on the war on terror:

• CAIR: An Islamic Trojan Horse
• CAIR and the Rabbis
• Terrorist Plot in New York City Thwarted Before Labor Day Weekend
• Trump Sends Warning to Taliban on 9/11 Anniversary
• Senior Al Qaeda leader killed during joint US-Afghan raid on Taliban compound, officials say

‘Fixing’ Our Democracy Would Only Make Matters Worse

From The Daily Signal.com (Aug. 1):

During Tuesday night’s Democratic presidential debate, Pete Buttigieg proposed a raft of supposed “reforms” that have, until recently, been the provenance of fringe groups and politicians such as D.C.’s nonvoting Democratic congresswoman, Eleanor Holmes Norton.

The South Bend, Indiana mayor said:

When I propose the actual, structural, democratic reforms that might make a difference—end the Electoral College, amend the Constitution if necessary to clear up [the Supreme Court ruling in] Citizens United, have D.C. actually be a state, and depoliticize the Supreme Court with structural reform—people look at me funny.

Those funny looks are well-deserved. Each of those proposals would harm the integrity of the constitutional republic that our Founders so painstakingly crafted.

1. The Electoral College

Ending the Electoral College and moving to a national popular vote for presidential elections gained momentum on the left immediately after President Donald Trump’s victory.

While the idea of a national popular vote may seem appealing, it would be a disaster in a country as large and diverse as ours.

If we did away with the Electoral College, the trail to the White House would run through New York City, Los Angeles, and Chicago, and that’s about it.

……………..

2. Overturning Citizens United

The call for a constitutional amendment overturning Citizens United in order to prevent American citizens and corporations from spending money on political speech is another misbegotten anti-speech idea that is, nonetheless, common among progressives.

Immediately after the Supreme Court ruled that citizens have a right to make unlimited independent expenditures—that is, expenditures that are not coordinated with any political party politician’s campaign—undoing Citizens United became a fixation on the left. But the Supreme Court got it right.

The connection between the freedom of speech and the freedom to reach an audience—which typically costs money—is clear. If freedom of speech does not include a right to broadcast our words, the First Amendment protects little more than our ability to mumble quietly to a small circle of friends. [read more]

Yea, Buttigieg’s ideas are stupid. As for Citizens United, to the Left Big Labor funding campaigns is fine, but don’t ever let a corporation fund a campaign because they are evil (read: oppressive) unless they are Left-wing like Costco's or Ben and Jerry’s.

Cuba, China Join Forces to Create ‘International Research Institute of Artificial Intelligence’

From Breitbart.com (July 31):

Cuban and Chinese universities are moving forward with the creation of a joint “International Research Institute of Artificial Intelligence.” The project is intended to bring economic benefits to ailing Cuba while enlisting more scientists in China’s bid to achieve AI dominance, the countries confirmed this week.

The project is headed up by Cuba’s Camagüey University and the Hebei University of International Studies in China, although most of Cuba’s top universities and tech academies are also involved. Cuba’s Yaile Caballero has been named director of the AI institute.

“The center is also expected to involve specialists from Spain and Belgium,” Caballero said on Monday.

Caballero cited the importance of artificial intelligence technology in many areas of scientific research and economic development, adding that the project would provide an opportunity for Cuban researchers to demonstrate their “capacity and potential.”

Many details of the AI institute have yet to be worked out, prominently including precisely where it will be located, although Caballero’s comments implied it would be physically headquartered somewhere in Cuba.

Cuban researchers have been pitching themselves to China as a useful resource for AI research for years, presenting a large-scale joint AI project as a means for the Chinese Communist Party to help Communist Cuba build up international prestige and escape economic pressure from the United States. The Cubans see themselves as trailblazers in the field, having established a primordial society for AI research in the late 1990s. [read more]

China and Cuba joining forces? That can’t be good.

Other stories on AI:

• AI Used For Social Engineering. Fraudsters Mimic CEO’s Voice in Unusual Cybercrime Case
• An A.I. System Passed an Eighth-Grade Science Test. Can You?
• Artificial Intelligence Can Now Gauge Your Risk of Cardiovascular Death
• How artificial intelligence is transforming the global battle against human trafficking
• AI bias: How tech determines if you land job, get a loan or end up in jail
• Disney to ‘Spellcheck’ Scripts for Gender-Bias Using AI Technology
• Why Computers Will Never Be Truly Conscious

Liars book excerpts

Jakob Böhme, was a German Christian mystic who believed that the fall of Adam and Eve was a first necessary stage so that mankind could achieve self-awareness. Man was separated from God, but through evolution over centuries, he could eventually achieve perfect knowledge with science and education.

The Great Lie actually starts with word progressive itself. They constantly mislead about what it actually means. They want you to believe that progressives are basically forward-thinking liberals who believe in democracy, open debates, free thinking, and looking out for their fellow man. They are harmless leftists.

Progressives claim that they stand for the future. The truth is that progressives actually represent the oldest impulse known to mankind: the will to power, to dominate, and to exploit. At the heart of progressivism is a deeply regressive ideology, one that eliminates individual freedom and makes men serfs and slaves.

Progressives claim that they are basically warmed-over liberals. The truth, as you’ve seen in the history of the founding fathers of progressivism, beginning with Hegel through Marx and Wilson through LBJ and Obama, is that progressivism is the opposite of liberalism, at least as it was once properly understood. Liberals—philosophers such as John Locke, John Stuart Mill, and Adam Smith—invented the idea of individual freedom. This idea captured the imaginations of a generation of freedom fighters born in thirteen colonies some three centuries ago. They took those ideas and put them into practice with two radical documents: the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. Theirs was a reaction against centralized government, a revolution of the individual against the collective.

But progressivism stands for the idea that freedom isn’t enough, that voluntary cooperation and the free market and individual rights do not work. To improve the quality of life for everyone, government must intervene with rules and regulations. Progressivism is the salve for the struggle, pain, and anxiety of living in a difficult and unpredictable world.

Progressives claim to fight for the average man. The truth is that most of them have both pity and contempt for human beings. They see the rest of us as machines that can be tinkered with and perfected. They believe they know what’s best for everyone. They think that if we submit to the government expert-determined progressive agenda—which included disenfranchisement of African-Americans in the Jim Crow South in the late nineteenth century, prohibition of alcohol in the 1920s, eugenics and eliminating supposedly defective races (which animated Hitler’s campaign of extermination in the 1930s and ’40s)—we can create utopia. They believe that under the banner of “social justice” we can, in effect, become God, that they can create heaven on earth. It may take centuries or even longer, but gradually, generation by generation, progressives can do it. If patience is a virtue, progressives are the most virtuous people on earth.

Progressives claim to believe in a compassionate, tolerant, live-and-let-live society. But in fact, the heart of progressivism lies in two core principles:

1. Individual and human society is perfectible, and therefore all problems known to man have solutions.
2. An enlightened few can impose these solutions on everyone else.

Both principles are obviously false. The first runs counter to everything most of us believe about human nature, selfishness, and sin—not to mention plenty of historical evidence that men living today are just as capable of depravity and evil as they were millennia ago. The second principle, a kind of tyranny of good intentions, is deeply antidemocratic. It rejects most Americans’ fundamental belief in human equality.

Source: Liars: How Progressives Exploit Our Fears for Power and Control (2016) by Glenn Beck.

Why the Carbon Tax Would Backfire on America

From The Daily Signal.com (July 30):

Several members of Congress have floated different carbon tax bills in recent days, some of which have both Democratic and Republican sponsorship.

But marginal bipartisan support for enacting a new tax on American families and businesses doesn’t make it good policy. 
Different models and prices have been proposed, but they all tax activities that emit carbon dioxide on the premise that emissions are responsible for global warming, a cost to society which otherwise isn’t accounted for. They propose to address this “market failure” with a policy that could well lead to economic failure.

Families would pay more at the meter and the pump. Approximately 80% of America’s energy needs are met by natural gas, oil, and coal, which means the costs would be economy-wide. It would cost more to manufacture, which would drive up the price of manufactured goods. And it would cost more to farm, which would drive up the costs of food.

Analysts at The Heritage Foundation used the U.S. Energy Administration Information’s energy model to estimate the effects of a carbon tax to reduce carbon dioxide emissions as aggressively as possible between now and 2040. According to the model’s results, a carbon tax would cause:

• A peak employment shortfall of more than 1.4 million jobs.
• A total income loss of more than $40,000 for a family of four.
• An aggregate gross domestic product loss of more than $3.9 trillion.
• Increases in household electricity expenditures of 12% to 124%.

Even worse, the burden would be heaviest on low-income families who spend a higher portion of their budget on energy costs. Some carbon tax proposals acknowledge this and offer rebates from the tax revenue collected. [read more]

Yea, the carbon tax is a stupid idea. Then again if you are pagan like most Leftists are then this makes sense since pagans sacrifice themselves to the earth.

Other climate articles:

• Jair Bolsonaro: 'Poop every other day' to protect the environment
• The Cruelty Is The Point Of Environmental Regulation
• Why Flushing the ‘Clean Water Rule’ Was the Right Thing to Do
• 500 Scientists Write U.N.: ‘There Is No Climate Emergency’
• Carbon Dioxide Known Only Since 1930
• A Climate Modeler Spills the Beans
• If You Can't Sell Your Hysteria to Adults, Try Kids
• The Cynical Plot behind Global Warming Hysteria
• Here Are 4 Outrageously Insane Climate Proposals
• Idiotic Environmental Predictions

IRAN’S PLAN TO KEEP DONALD TRUMP FROM BEING REELECTED

From JPost.com (July 25):

Iran is, today, doing precisely the same thing* as it did in 1980. All the Iranian attacks are intentional. Donald Trump ran for president on two fundamental principles: 1) the economy, and 2) no further wars in the Middle East. The Iranians want US President Donald Trump to attack, and will do everything humanly possible to provoke him. They believe an attack on Iran would have a cataclysmic effect on the New York Stock Exchange and would keep Trump from being reelected.

At the same time, they are closely watching what the ayatollahs call the “Little Satan.” The US is the “Great Satan,” and Israel is the “Little Satan.” There is another race looming; that of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. On September 17, 2019, elections will take place in Israel. The Iranians do not want to do anything to guarantee an attack before that date. In doing so, Netanyahu would be guaranteed another term in office. Israel’s most important priority is security. Thus, Iran will stall until October for their “surprise.” [read more]

When Iran attacked Saudi Arabia’s oil field with drones that was definitely a provocation. Iran would rather have a push-over like Obama as a president.

Another article on Iran: Drug Trafficking Feeds the Ayatollah's Power


*When Iran held hostages at America’s embassy.

A Sign of Hope for Affordable Health Care

From The Daily Signal.com (July 29):

A final rule on health reimbursement arrangements set to take effect in August could expand opportunities for American workers and their families to attain affordable health care, increase access to health care for employees of small businesses, and create new competitive market forces that will increase coverage charges for all.

The rule, which would loosen many of the restrictions that have limited the scope and utility of health reimbursement arrangements, represents a large step in shifting the rigid defined-benefits insurance structure toward a defined-contributions structure that allows patients to direct their health care spending.

“We want more decision-making and power in the hands of the consumer and worker over how to finance their health care,” said Brian Blase of the National Economic Council in summarizing the goal of the rule change.

A health reimbursement arrangement is an employer-based, tax-advantaged account that allows employees to pay for their health care needs using funds deposited by their employer. Employees can then use the funds to pay for health care expenses as agreed upon with the employer in the terms of the arrangement.

Funds deposited by the employer will not be taxed, and funds used by employees will not be taxed as income. Furthermore, funds in the account may roll over year to year depending on the terms set by the employer.

This rule change will create two new health reimbursement arrangements—the individual coverage HRA and the excepted benefits HRA—and allow funds in a health reimbursement arrangement to be applied to purchasing health insurance plans.

Small employers who cannot afford a traditional group plan, or employees dissatisfied with their employer’s group health plan, instead can be offered a health reimbursement arrangement to purchase a plan from the individual market.

Health reimbursement arrangements, which don’t have the administrative expenses of normal health insurance plans, can be much less costly than traditional employer-based group health insurance, an important consideration for small businesses. [read more]

Other articles on health care:

• Can Socialists Save Us from Surprise Medical Bills?
• Rejecting Democrats' Socialist Healthcare Schemes
• The Healthcare Death Spiral That’s Waiting to Happen
• How America’s Decision on Health Care Will Affect Doctors, Patients, and Taxpayers
• When Government Runs Health Care

BreakPoint: Asteroid 2019OK’s Near Miss Rocks Scientism

From Break Point.org (Aug. 2):

In the 1998 movie “Armageddon,” the Administrator of NASA, played by Billy Bob Thornton, informs the President that a huge asteroid is on a collision course with Earth. The President then asks, “Why didn’t we see this coming?”

The administrator replies that their budget only “allows us to track about 3% of the sky, and begging your pardon sir, but it’s a [really big] sky.”

This scene came to mind after reading about an asteroid designated 2019OK. On July 25^th, the 100-meter wide piece of rock passed within 73,000 kilometers of Earth. To put that distance in perspective, the moon is 384,000 kilometers from Earth.

While 2019OK wasn’t big enough to be a “planet killer,” it could have taken out a large city. That’s why one planetary scientist called the pass-by “uncomfortably close.”

Even more uncomfortable was that no one noticed this big rock coming our way until it was almost on top of us. It wasn’t being tracked, so it wasn’t on any list of objects that would be passing near Earth.

But, as they say in sports, “no harm, no foul.” Sure, it jangled some nerves, but no one was hurt by our failure to detect 2019OK until it was too late to do anything about it. Still, there’s a lesson to be learned here.

Though no one was hurt physically, our collective scientific egos should be hurt, or at least chastened. The consistent claims of omniscience afforded to science these days has proven, once again, to be false.

Too often what is called science these days is, in fact, “scientism.” Scientism holds that science, as defined by its proponents, is the only “objective means” by which we should judge things, and the only legitimate way we can know in the first place. [read more]

I agree with the author. Scientism isn’t science. There are other ways like religion and philosophy to judge things.

The Founders and Native Americans

Interestingly we see that white attitudes toward the Indian in the eighteenth century were largely sympathetic. The Founders did not consider Native Americans to be inherently inferior to the white man. Rather, they held that the primitive circumstances of the native were responsible for what was perceived to be his barbaric state. They were confident that education and civilization would raise the typical Indian to the level of the white man.

In his Notes on the State of Virginia, Jefferson praised the intelligence, courage, and integrity of the Indians. They are, he wrote, “formed in mind as well as in body on the same model as Homo sapiens Europaeus.” Jefferson rejected proposals to dispossess the Indians of their land on the pretext that they were savages or barbarians. Rather, Jefferson urged that whites include the Indians in American civilization. He expressed the hope that the Indians, rather than clinging to their old ways, would “incorporate with us as citizens of the United States.”

Indeed, several leading figures of the founding period, such as Patrick Henry, John Marshall, and Thomas Jefferson, proposed intermarriage between whites and Indians as a way to integrate the natives into the American mainstream. “What they thought impossible with respect to blacks,” political scientist Ralph Lerner writes, “was seen as highly desirable with respect to Indians.”

America’s first president, George Washington, respected the Indians. As a military officer defending the Virginia frontier, he considered the Indian tribes he encountered so formidable in warfare that in his view only other Indians could defeat them. Whenever possible, he did his best to ally with Indians.

As president, Washington was not opposed to trading with Indians or the purchase of Indian land, but he wanted these acquisitions to be secured by treaty, not by conflict. He insisted that white settlements bypass Indian territories, leaving them unmolested. “It was a vision,” historian Joseph Ellis writes, “in which the westward expansion of an American empire coexisted alongside the preservation of the original Americans.”

Source: Hillary’s America. The Secret History of the Democratic Party (2016) by Dinesh ’Souza.

Indiana Jones and the New American Fascists

From Gingrich360:

In his 1989 movie, Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, Steven Spielberg has a remarkable scene of Nazi book burning. The looks of ecstasy as the actors-playing-Germans parade past Hitler and throw inappropriate books on the fire are compelling and convincing. These people are cleansing their society of past and future sins.

Of course, the real Nazis went much further through their attempt to physically cleanse their society of perceived impurities through a holocaust of the Jewish people, murders of minority groups, the selective killing of Germans with genetic defects, and a maniacal sense of righteousness which remains horrifying to this day.

Unfortunately, the Nazi effort to destroy the past in search of a pure future is not an isolated event.

During the Reformation militant Protestants destroyed art in Catholic churches.

During the French Revolution, the calendar itself was replaced by a new French Revolutionary calendar which lasted from 1793 to 1805. The revolutionaries, in their righteousness, guillotined aristocrats, nuns, and ultimately many of their own revolutionaries. The search for purity was paved with violence.

The Soviets sought purity by establishing the secret police, banning books, turning churches into public restrooms, killing aristocrats, starving the middle-class farmers, and establishing their future utopia on a sea of blood.

The Chinese Communists persecuted Christians, Muslims, and Tibetan Buddhists. During Mao Zedong’s cultural revolution, they even went after their own communist leaders as impure.

Now, the spirit of fascistic book burning has entered the American system.

At the University of Notre Dame, the president has decreed that 12 murals depicting Christopher Columbus will be physically covered up to avoid offending Native American and African American students – only to be displayed “on occasion.” Pictures of the mural will be displayed at some undefined area of campus. Ironically, these murals were painted between 1882 and 1884 to help Catholic immigrants better understand their new country. So, now one of the most famous American Catholic universities will hide its own past instead of seeking to better educate people about it.

In San Francisco, the Board of Education has voted to spend $600,000 painting over a 13-panel, 1,600-square-foot mural called “Life of Washington” at George Washington High School (just guess what will eventually happen to the name of the school with the new fascists in charge). [read more]

Yea, what the universities are doing is definitely fascist. Although, they don’t think of themselves that way.

New Army Goggles Will Allow Facial Recognition

From News Max.com (July 18):

A modified gamer headset under development will allow soldiers to see through a drone's eyes, aim around corners, and identify the faces of enemies in their sights, Defense One reported.

And it could be a reality "very soon," the news outlet reported.

Army officials are testing a new headset that will potentially allow soldiers looking through them to recognize the faces of individuals in a crowd — and much more, including translate foreign language street signs into English, see through the eyes of nearby flying bug drones, and train anywhere in a semi-virtual environment.

The latest version of the Integrated Visual Augmentation System, or IVAS, a lightweight set of goggles, was shown off Tuesday, the news outlet reported.

"We're going to demonstrate very, very soon, the ability, on body — if there are persons of interest that you want to look for and you're walking around, it will identify those very quickly," said Col. Chris Schneider, project manager for IVAS, at a U.S. Army Futures Command demonstration in Virginia, Defense One reported.  [read more]

Nice!

More articles about military hardware:

• Brain chip created for US soldiers to take out enemies with their minds
• Drone-killing microwave weapon deployed by US Air Force overseas for first time

Elon Musk says he's tested his brain microchip on monkeys, and it enabled one to control a computer with its mind

From Business Insider.com (July 17):

Elon Musk took his colleagues by surprise with an unplanned announcement at a presentation by his secretive neurotechnology company, Neuralink, on Tuesday.

Musk cofounded Neuralink in 2016. Its goal is to create a chip that could enable a "brain-computer interface." And according to Musk, the company has already had some success — with monkeys.

During the 90-minute event, Musk and various senior staffers at Neuralink presented the company's ambition to design a chip capable of being implanted in the human brain that could receive and transmit signals to the organ.

The near-term goal would be to treat various serious brain disorders, such as Alzheimer's and Parkinson's disease, although ultimately Musk's ambition is to achieve "symbiosis with artificial intelligence."  [read more]

More articles on the subject:

• Elon Musk’s ‘Brain Chip’ Could Be Suicide of the Mind, Says Scientist
• "Scariest Thing You'll Read All Day": Report Sounds Alarm Over Brain-Reading Technology and Neurocapitalism
• Brains are the last frontier of privacy

Here Are 6 Ways a New Report Devastates the $15 Minimum Wage

From The Daily Signal.com (July 11):

Just in time for next week’s likely House vote on a federal $15 minimum wage, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has come out with a caustic report on the consequences of the policy.

The report confirms what even liberal economists caution: A $15 minimum wage would “risk undesirable and unintended consequences” and lead to a survival-of-the-fittest labor market, where only the highest-skilled workers come out on top. 

Democrats are under the illusion that the government can force employers to artificially increase wages with no adverse consequences for American workers. But that’s like saying the government could double families’ mortgage and rent payments without any consequence.

Here are six ways this new report exposes the minimum wage proposal as bad policy.

1. It would be a job-killer.

The Congressional Budget Office report estimated that a $15 minimum wage would lead to 1.3 million lost jobs by the year 2025, with job losses rising over time due to compounding negative impacts.

The exact number of job losses are highly uncertain, but the report says losses would most likely range between zero and 3.7 million, with a not-insignificant chance that losses could exceed 3.7 million.

………….

2. It would create a survival-of-the-fittest labor market.

The report makes clear that a $15 minimum wage would disproportionately harm workers with the least education and experience and those with disabilities because these workers would be the first to be let go—or to never be hired in the first place.

Under a $15 minimum wage, only workers who can produce at least $35,000 of value per year would be employable. That’s a high hurdle for anyone who lacks experience, doesn’t have an advanced education, can’t speak English, or has a disability.

……………..

3. It would expedite the pace of automation.

When workers become more expensive to employ, companies have a greater incentive to invest in machinery to eventually replace employees.

With a $15 minimum wage in addition to an Obamacare penalty for failing to provide workers with insurance, plus federally mandated taxes and benefits, the minimum cost of employing a full-time worker would exceed $38,000.  [read more]

The other three ways are:

1. It would drive up prices.
2. It would shrink the economy, and shrink family incomes.
3. It would drive up deficits, inflation, and interest rates.

The First Democrat: Andrew Jackson Part 4

Thanks to his land-stealing schemes, Jackson went from living in a log cabin to running a huge plantation stretching over a thousand acres. In 1819, he and Rachel moved out of their log house and built a mansion that still stands today, with a spectacular white colonnade front that awed visitors then as it does now. As for the old log cabin, Jackson found another use for it. What good is a plantation if you don’t have slaves? Jackson converted his former dwelling into slave quarters.

……………..

Altogether, Jackson owned some three hundred slaves over the course of his life. The most he owned at any one time was 150 slaves.

This made him a large slave owner by American standards. By contrast with the South American plantations, American plantations were typically quite small, employing fewer than twenty slaves. Jackson was also a slave trader, a practice disparaged by most slave owners. In one telling incident, Jackson purchased an ad in a local paper offering a bounty for one of his runaway slaves. Jackson offered a $50 reward for the return of the slave “and ten dollars extra for every hundred lashes any person will give him to the amount of three hundred.”

Eventually Jackson rode his wealth and popularity all the way to the White House. In 1824, the first time Jackson ran, all the candidates were from a single party, Thomas Jefferson’s Democratic-Republican Party. There was at the time no system of primaries to determine who should get the nomination. Although Jackson won the most votes, he was outmaneuvered by an adversary, Henry Clay, who steered the presidency to John Quincy Adams.

An indignant Jackson and his supporters formed the Democratic Party, while his opponents coalesced into a rival Whig Party. These were the two parties that dominated American politics for the next few decades, until the Whig Party collapsed and the Republican Party was founded. The Whigs, led by the stalwart Henry Clay, provided modest though largely ineffective resistance to Jackson. Until the founding of the Republican Party, however, there was no party in America strong enough to stop the thieving Democrats.

Source: Hillary’s America. The Secret History of the Democratic Party (2016) by Dinesh D’Souza.

DNA Data Storage Is Closer Than You Think

From Scientific American.com (July 1):

Every minute in 2018, Google conducted 3.88 million searches, and people watched 4.33 million videos on YouTube, sent 159,362,760 e-mails, tweeted 473,000 times and posted 49,000 photos on Instagram, according to software company Domo. By 2020 an estimated 1.7 megabytes of data will be created per second per person globally, which translates to about 418 zettabytes in a single year (418 billion one-terabyte hard drive’s worth of information), assuming a world population of 7.8 billion. The magnetic or optical data-storage systems that currently hold this volume of 0s and 1s typically cannot last for more than a century, if that. Further, running data centers takes huge amounts of energy. In short, we are about to have a serious data-storage problem that will only become more severe over time. 

An alternative to hard drives is progressing: DNA-based data storage. DNA—which consists of long chains of the nucleotides A, T, C and G—is life’s information-storage material. Data can be stored in the sequence of these letters, turning DNA into a new form of information technology. It is already routinely sequenced (read), synthesized (written to) and accurately copied with ease. DNA is also incredibly stable, as has been demonstrated by the complete genome sequencing of a fossil horse that lived more than 500,000 years ago. And storing it does not require much energy.

But it is the storage capacity that shines. DNA can accurately stow massive amounts of data at a density far exceeding that of electronic devices. The simple bacterium Escherichia coli, for instance, has a storage density of about 10¹⁹ bits per cubic centimeter, according to calculations published in 2016 in Nature Materials by George Church of Harvard University and his colleagues. At that density, all the world’s current storage needs for a year could be well met by a cube of DNA measuring about one meter on a side. [read more]

Seven inventions from the Apollo space program we still use today

From New York Post.com (July 8):

It’s been nearly 50 years since NASA put a man on the moon but many of the technologies invented for the groundbreaking Apollo space program are still used in our lives on Earth today.

From the tiny cameras in our cellphones to the heat-proof uniforms used by firefighters to protect them from the dangers of the job — here are seven famous inventions from the 1960s moon shot.

The Dustbuster

The Dustbuster was only made possible thanks to Black & Decker’s work with NASA on developing a lightweight and power-efficient tool for the Apollo Lunar Surface Drill. The same motor design used on the 1969 moon landing was then used to create the Dustbuster.

Thermal blankets

The silvery space blanket often worn by marathon runners and emergency patients was also born from the Apollo 11 mission. The lightweight reflective sheet was created by NASA when it needed a material that would insulate astronauts and the spacecraft while taking up little space, according to website Compare The Market.

Advanced cameras

The tiny, highly efficient cameras used in our cellphones and GoPro recorders was made possible by a NASA engineer charged with making a smaller camera for space, according to NASA’s Spinoff magazine. The small CMOS censor made both photos on the moon and our modern-day selfies possible. [read more]

It’s interesting the Dustbuster came out of the space program. The other four inventions are:

1. Fireproof firefighter uniforms
2. Vacuum-sealed food
3. Shock-absorbing sneaker soles
4. Bridge shock absorbers

Another article on the moon race: The Moon Race: Godless Socialism vs. Faithful Americanism

State Department Launches ‘Commission on Unalienable Rights’

From CNS News.com (July 8):

(CNSNews.com) -- Secretary of State Michael R. Pompeo announced today that the U.S. Department of State has created the ‘Commission on Unalienable Rights,’ which is designed to advise the Secretary on “human rights grounded in our nation’s founding principles and the principles of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights,” said Pompeo.

“The commission is composed of human rights experts, philosophers, and activists, Republicans, Democrats, and Independents of varied background and beliefs, who will provide me with advice on human rights grounded in our nation’s founding principles and the principles of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights,” said the secretary at the State Department.

“It’s a sad commentary on our times that more than 70 years after the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, gross violations continue throughout the world, sometimes even in the name of human rights,” he said.  “[T]he time is right for an informed review of the role of human rights in American foreign policy.”

…………..

Secretary Pompeo continued, “I hope that the commission will revisit the most basic of questions: What does it mean to say or claim that something is, in fact, a human right? How do we know or how do we determine whether that claim that this or that is a human right -- is it true, and therefore, ought it to be honored? … Is it, in fact, true, as our Declaration of Independence asserts, that as human beings, we – all of us, every member of our human family – are endowed by our creator with certain unalienable rights?” [read more]