Jan 152019


Why does the Media, Hollywood and the education professors hate Trump so much that they brush off the idea that they are acting against the best interests of the voters who voted for him and aainst the best interests of America. Why??

At the midpoint of Donald Trump’s first term, the establishment media’s obvious hostility towards the president of the United States, his wife, children and his success shows no signs of relenting.

The tone of the negative coverage remains overwhelmingly and incessantly hostile: 90% negative, vs. just 10% positive (excluding neutral statements), matching the historically bad press we documented in 2017. Yet despite the media’s obvious disapproval, public opinion of the President actually improved slightly during 2018, from an average 40% approval on January 1 to 42.7% approval on December 31, according to RealClearPolitics.

■ For the second year in a row, the Russia investigation against the president of the United States by the opposition Democrats was the single most-covered topic amid the networks’ Trump coverage, garnering 858 minutes of airtime. Since January 20, 2017, the Russia probe has received 2,092 minutes of coverage on just the three evening newscasts. All of tha coverage is necessarily negative because the cause of the investigation is negative towards the president.

As has been the case since the President took office, the tone of network coverage has been exceptionally hostile, ranging from 82% negative in April 2017 (after Trump was praised for a missile strike punishing Syria for a chemical weapons attack) to 96% negative in February 2018 (when the news agenda focused on the Russia investigation, demands for gun control, and a White House aide accused of domestic abuse).

TV’s Trump agenda: More than half of the Trump coverage on the broadcast evening newscasts in 2018 focused on just five topics: the Russia investigation (858 minutes); immigration policy (643 minutes); the Kavanaugh nomination (435 minutes); dealing with North Korean nukes (410 minutes); and the Michael Cohen/hush money investigation (341 minutes).

As the chart shows, the network spin on all of these topics was fiercely negative, ranging from 80% bad press on North Korea, to 99% negative on the Cohen/hush money story.

What about the shutdown? The partial government shutdown was the top Trump topic in December, garnering 67 minutes of airtime that month, or about one-fifth of the total Trump coverage. (Note that this figure also includes negotiations prior to the start of the shutdown on December 21). And at least in December, nearly 97% of the evaluations of Trump’s handling of the impasse were negative.

In ordinary circumstances, this onslaught of negative publicity would cause the politician on the receiving end of it to reverse course. But the establishment media have been so reliably negative towards this President, for so long, that the effect of their criticism now seems to be virtually nil. As noted above, Trump’s job approval ratings actually rose slightly last year, despite all of the negative coverage.

The media elite have clearly waded into the political fray to wage war against this President. But have they accomplished anything beyond cementing their reputation as political partisans, not objective journalists?

It’s not surprising that National Review is eager to shiv Steve King and stand athwart history crying “We surrender!” “Dump Steve King” which is a new editorial and a new low in the magazine, where the enstupidated Leftie editors plead: “one of the glories of American history is how we finally shed our shameful racist past”. [January 11, 2019]? Really?? Did they miss the pro-black basis of the Civil War fought to really, really eliminate the enslavement of black people contrary to what’s going on in Africa itself where white genocide has been practiced by the locals and supported by the internationals ? What about Affirmative Action, taken up against the basic interests of white Americans??

The rule for the Left is: Lie; Lie; Lie and when you are caught scream “Racist” even when there’s no race involved. Just scream and scream “Racist” and the rest of the Left will scream along with you.. 


Jan 152019

President Obama is a gifted politician. He is gifted with rhetoric virtuosity, with the ability to lie directly to camera without blinking. And he is gifted with some of the most incompetent  opponents in the history of the world.

In 1910 white people were 88.9% of America. After the 2010 census white people were down to 72.4%, a decrease of 18.5% while the number of African Americans rose by 28.6%. That proves America has been systematically causing lower and lower percents of white people which means there’s been an anti-white system operating.  

Jan 152019

Wiki lists 138 dogs by intelligence. The border collie is the most intelligent, the beagle is 131. The Afghan hound is the dumbest. How does that relate to humans? Are the most intelligent as far apart from the dumbest as the dogs?

What about the species of the dog compared to the species of the human? Darwin lists in his origin of species no people. Why or why not? He specifically stayed away from people.

In 2017 the AEI Club at Middlebury college invited Dr. Charles Murray to speak. That’s crucial to understanding what followed. When leftists protest right-wing speakers on campus, they often deny that they are infringing upon free speech. Free speech, they insist, does not require their university to give a platform to people with offensive views. That was the argument of the people who earlier this year tried to prevent ex-Breitbart writer Milo Yiannopoulos from speaking at the University of California at Berkeley. And it was the argument of those who opposed Murray’s lecture at Middlebury. “This is not an issue of freedom of speech,” declared a letter signed by more than 450 Middlebury alums. “Why has such a person been granted a platform at Middlebury?”

The answer is: Middlebury granted Murray a platform because a group of its students invited him. Those students constitute a small ideological minority. They hold views that many of their classmates oppose, even loathe. Are they more beagle than border collie? Of course not. While there are 138 different dog species there are only, ….. there is only one human race….. Right?
Part of the answer is that there is no such right as the right to be obnoxious, …. none. If students didn’t want to hear Murray or Yiannopoulos they can certainly demonstrate and try to keep them from speaking. just as much as others can demonstrate they have the right to invite them. But no one should be forced to listen to views to which they are opposed just as much as those who want to listen can be kept away. The truth doesn’t often enter into it. What about Reparations? Would Reparations solve America’s race problems? Maybe… Perhaps, …. Is it worth a shot? Maybe…

America’s sin, it’s most grievous sin, — was against blacks. Nothing else in American history compares with slavery. Nothing. Affirmative action distorted the issue by favoring equally all “disadvantaged groups.” Some groups are disadvantaged, some not but black America is the only one that for generations was officially singled out for discrimination and worse. Why blur the issue? Why confuse the crime?

Reparations focus the issue most sharply. Reparations acknowledge the crime. They attempt restitution. They seek to repay some of “the bondsman’s 250 years of unrequited toil.” They offer the wronged some tangible means to elevate their condition.

For that very real purpose, reparations should be more than merely symbolic. Say, $500,000 for every family of four. That would cost the country a lot — but hardly, for a $21 trillion dollar economy, a bankrupting sum. (A 10-year 7 cent gas tax, for example would pay the whole bill.)

The savings to the country will be substantial: an end to endless litigations, to the inefficiencies of allocation by group (rather than merit), to the distortion of the American principle of individualism, to the resentments aroused by a system of group preferences, to the sale of drugs in the black neighborhoods, to the crimes committed in the name of slavery, i.e., work without pay, to the ill-treatment of African Americans because of poverty. The fact is, we already have a system of racial compensation. It is called Affirmative Action which is not only inherently unjust but socially demoralizing and inexcusably clumsy and which by most aby measure doesn’t work which proves it cannot work. Far better an honest focused substitute: real, hard, one-time restitution~compensation.

But is not cash-for-suffering demeaning? Perhaps. But we have found no better way to compensate for great crimes. Germans know that the millions they have dispersed to Holocaust survivors cannot begin to compensate for the murder of an entire civilization. Yet for irremediable national crimes, reparations are as dignified a form of redress as one can devise.

Racial preferences, on the other hand, are an even more demeaning form of racial tutelage. Better the dignity of a debt repaid, however impersonally, than the warm glow of condescension that permeates affirmative action.

It is time to reclaim the notion of color blindness before it is too late, A one-time reparation to blacks would help real people in a real way. It would honor the obligation to right the ancient wrongs by our great great great great grandfathers. It would allow everyone a new start. It would remove the basis for the most contentious issue in America, the sin of slavery. America could then dedicate itself to Martin Luther King Jr.’s proposition that Americans be judged by the content of their character, not by the color of their skin.

Would it stop racism, …. which is, after all, human behavior? Probably not. Would it remove the argument that America treated black people, … African Americans – wrongly when it used them as slaves? No but it answers the argument that America never paid black people for their work as slaves…. So send out the checks…..  It’s certainly worth a shot.