Categories
Biden Cartel Commentary Corruption Lies Links from other news sources. MSM

No VirginiaTrump was talking about the car industry, not getting rid of the seven cats and five dogs.

No VirginiaTrump was talking about the car industry, not getting rid of the seven cats and five dogs. So Trump talks about a bloodbath in the auto industry and the MSM blows it into a great big lie.

Below is what was said at a Saturday rally for Bernie Moreno. And no for my lurker loon, you will be able to keep your seven cats and five dogs. But please change the litter box more than once a month

Former President Donald Trump on Saturday night forecast a financial “bloodbath” awaits the U.S. motor industry if he is not elected and China is enabled to swamp the country with their products.

The comments came at an Ohio rally hosted by the Buckeye Values PAC where he discussed the possibility of an increasing trade war with China over auto manufacturing in general and electric vehicle types in particular. Trump said:

If you’re listening, President Xi — and you and I are friends — but he understands the way I deal. Those big monster car manufacturing plants that you’re building in Mexico right now … you’re going to not hire Americans and you’re going to sell the cars to us, no. We’re going to put a 100% tariff on every single car that comes across the line, and you’re not going to be able to sell those cars if I get elected.

Now if I don’t get elected, it’s going to be a bloodbath for the whole — that’s gonna be the least of it […] It’s going to be a bloodbath for the country. That will be the least of it. But they’re not going to sell those cars. They’re building massive factories.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1769245792831701070

Categories
Biden Cartel Commentary Government Overreach Links from other news sources. Reprints from others.

What say you? Income-based electric bills.

What say you? Income-based electric bills. California average is $.35 cents per kilowatt. National average is $.18. I’m paying $.05.

California residents might find their electric bills looking a little different in the new year.

Typically, electricity bills reflect the amount of electricity a specific household uses. But, after Assembly Bill 205 passed last year, California could see electricity charges based off of income level instead.

The state’s three largest electric utility companies, Southern California Edison Company, Pacific Gas and Electric Company and San Diego Gas & Electric Company, all proposed the plan, saying that low-income customers could save approximately $300 a year under this new law.

Alternatively, California households earning more than $180,000 a year would end up paying an average of $500 more a year on their electricity bills, according to the proposal.

PREVIOUS COVERAGECalifornia electric bills may soon be income-based

Here’s a breakdown of the proposed rate restructuring for SoCal Edison customers, based on income:

  • Above $180,000: $85/month
  • $69,000 – $180,000: $51/month
  • $28,000 – $69,000: $20/month
  • Less than $28,000: $15/month

The plan will break down monthly bills into a fixed rate, plus a reduced usage charge based on consumption, according to officials.

Supporters of the bill believe it to be a possible solution to many moderate and low-income families getting priced out of California by rising housing costs. Opponents worry the law could weaken incentives to conserve electricity or raise costs for customers using solar energy.

The California Public Utilities Commission’s deadline for deciding on the suggested changes is July 1, 2024, although officials said implementing it will still take some time before California residents see any changes to their electricity bills.

Categories
Biden Cartel Commentary Corruption Crime Government Overreach January 6 Links from other news sources.

House May Refer January 6 Committee Members for Prosecution.

House May Refer January 6 Committee Members for Prosecution. After all the phony claims, destroying evidence and not adding evidence to the report, it’s time for charges to be filed.

House Oversight Committee chairman Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-GA) said Wednesday that he may refer members of the January 6 Committee to the Department of Justice for criminal prosecution for hiding and destroying documents.

 

Categories
Biden Cartel Commentary Drugs How funny is this? How sick is this? Leftist Virtue(!) Links from other news sources. Medicine

WOW!.Now we know where all the Adderall went. Joe Biden.

WOW!.Now we know where all the Adderall went. Joe Biden. You must have heard about the Adderall shortage. Well, a doctor in Beverly Hills explains it.

Dr. Carole Lieberman, a Beverly Hills forensic psychiatrist, suggested that Biden may have been on Adderall or another stimulant during his speech, as reported by The Washington Times. Lieberman said the volume and speed of Biden’s voice and his use of hand gestures were indicative of stimulant use.

 

Categories
Biden Cartel Commentary Corruption Links from other news sources.

Eric Swalwell’s lover Fang Fang shows up in Beijing.

Eric Swalwell’s lover Fang Fang shows up in Beijing. Remember her? The love of his life. Well, she was spotted hanging out in the progressive’s favorite city. Beijing.

In what is now a well-known story, Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA), was allegedly honey-potted by a Chinese spy by the name of Christine Fang, or Fang Fang, from 2011-2015.  During this time, Fang Fang “took part in fundraising activity for Swalwell’s 2014 re-election campaign”  and helped place at least one intern into Swalwell’s office, as reported by Axios in December 2020.

The location of Fang Fang was a mystery to the public.  But a shocking post from Hu Xijin on X alleges that not only is she still alive and well.

The resurfacing of Fang Fang by Hu coincides with Congress introducing a bill to force the sale of Tik-Tok, which was the focus of Hu’s most recent X postings.

Categories
Biden Cartel Commentary Government Overreach Links from other news sources. Politics Uncategorized

Schumer goes on Senate floor and declares his support for the progrssive Hama terrorists.

Schumer goes on Senate floor and declares his support for the progrssive Hama terrorists. Today Schumer went on the Senate floor and declared his loyalty for Hamas.

Schumer is calling for another country to ignore the elected leader and have another election hoping that the winner would be more sympothetic to Hamas.

What’s unbelieveable is that Schumer said that we would get involved with shaping Israel’s policy if he doesn’t get his way.

Schumer, the highest-ranking Jewish official in the U.S., said Netanyahu has “lost his way” and accused the prime minister of being “too willing to tolerate the civilian toll in Gaza.” Netanyahu, he went on, “no longer fits the needs of Israel after Oct. 7,” when Hamas terrorists slaughtered more than 1,200 Israelis, including women, children and infants.

Categories
Back Door Power Grab Biden Cartel Commentary Leftist Virtue(!) Links from other news sources.

Hunter caught lying.

Hunter caught lying. Who can forget the press conference outside the Capitol where Hunter demanded a open public hearing? Well he got his wish. Hunter’s former associates Devon Archer, Tony Bobulinski and Jason Galanis were also invited to testify on March 20.

Hunter Biden for months stated he wanted a public hearing, but now that one has been offered alongside his business associates that he worked with for years, he is refusing to come,” the House Oversight Committee said.

“During our deposition and interview phase of our investigation, Hunter Biden confirmed key evidence, including evidence that his father, President Joe Biden, lied to the American people about his family’s business dealings and in fact attended meetings, spoke on speakerphone, and had coffee with his foreign business associates who collectively funneled millions to the Bidens. However, parts of Hunter Biden’s testimony contradict the testimonies of Devon Archer, Jason Galanis, and Tony Bobulinski,” Republicans said.

“Next week’s hearing with Hunter Biden and his associates is moving forward and we fully expect Hunter Biden to participate. The American people demand the truth and accountability for the Bidens’ corruption,” the GOP Oversight said.

 

 

Categories
Commentary Elections Links from other news sources. Politics

Stories we missed. Republicans control all major offices in Louisiana.

Stories we missed. Republicans control all major offices in Louisiana. Something changed this past January. Republicans had a clean sweep. They took the Governor, Secretary of State, Treasure, and Attorneys offices. And some thought it may turn purple or blue. I see Red.

The result gives the GOP a 100 percent lock on all the state’s top offices as well as control of the state Senate and House of Representatives. The GOP is back after only having full control of the top positions between 2011 and 2015, before losing the governor’s office between 2016 and 2023.

The GOP also controls the second tier of state offices including, Agriculture Commissioner Mike Strain, and Insurance Commissioner Tim Temple. Strain also became the first Republican in state history to win the AG office.

 

 

Categories
Biden Biden Cartel Commentary Corruption Links from other news sources. Politics The Courts The Law

Georgia Judge Dismisses Some Charges Against Trump, Beginning of the end?

Georgia Judge Dismisses Some Charges Against Trump, Beginning of the end? Could this be the start of the cases against Trump are starting to fall apart?

Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee wrote in an order that six of the counts in the indictment must be quashed, including three against Trump, the presumptive 2024 Republican presidential nominee.

The six charges in question have to do with soliciting elected officials to violate their oaths of office. That includes two charges related to the phone call Trump made to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, a fellow Republican, on Jan. 2, 2021.

Categories
Commentary Journalism. Life Links from other news sources. Opinion Reprints from others. Uncategorized

The downside to diversity.

The downside to diversity.

This is an old article, and I remember when this came out the left lost it. Long read, but a good read.

IT HAS BECOME increasingly popular to speak of racial and ethnic diversity as a civic strength. From multicultural festivals to pronouncements from political leaders, the message is the same: our differences make us stronger.

But a massive new study, based on detailed interviews of nearly 30,000 people across America, has concluded just the opposite. Harvard political scientist Robert Putnam — famous for “Bowling Alone,” his 2000 book on declining civic engagement — has found that the greater the diversity in a community, the fewer people vote and the less they volunteer, the less they give to charity and work on community projects. In the most diverse communities, neighbors trust one another about half as much as they do in the most homogenous settings. The study, the largest ever on civic engagement in America, found that virtually all measures of civic health are lower in more diverse settings.

“The extent of the effect is shocking,” says Scott Page, a University of Michigan political scientist.

The study comes at a time when the future of the American melting pot is the focus of intense political debate, from immigration to race-based admissions to schools, and it poses challenges to advocates on all sides of the issues. The study is already being cited by some conservatives as proof of the harm large-scale immigration causes to the nation’s social fabric. But with demographic trends already pushing the nation inexorably toward greater diversity, the real question may yet lie ahead: how to handle the unsettling social changes that Putnam’s research predicts.

 

“We can’t ignore the findings,” says Ali Noorani, executive director of the Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition. “The big question we have to ask ourselves is, what do we do about it; what are the next steps?”

The study is part of a fascinating new portrait of diversity emerging from recent scholarship. Diversity, it shows, makes us uncomfortable — but discomfort, it turns out, isn’t always a bad thing. Unease with differences helps explain why teams of engineers from different cultures may be ideally suited to solve a vexing problem. Culture clashes can produce a dynamic give-and-take, generating a solution that may have eluded a group of people with more similar backgrounds and approaches. At the same time, though, Putnam’s work adds to a growing body of research indicating that more diverse populations seem to extend themselves less on behalf of collective needs and goals.

His findings on the downsides of diversity have also posed a challenge for Putnam, a liberal academic whose own values put him squarely in the pro-diversity camp. Suddenly finding himself the bearer of bad news, Putnam has struggled with how to present his work. He gathered the initial raw data in 2000 and issued a press release the following year outlining the results. He then spent several years testing other possible explanations

When he finally published a detailed scholarly analysis in June in the journal Scandinavian Political Studies, he faced criticism for straying from data into advocacy. His paper argues strongly that the negative effects of diversity can be remedied, and says history suggests that ethnic diversity may eventually fade as a sharp line of social demarcation.

“Having aligned himself with the central planners intent on sustaining such social engineering, Putnam concludes the facts with a stern pep talk,” wrote conservative commentator Ilana Mercer, in a recent Orange County Register op-ed titled “Greater diversity equals more misery.”

Putnam has long staked out ground as both a researcher and a civic player, someone willing to describe social problems and then have a hand in addressing them. He says social science should be “simultaneously rigorous and relevant,” meeting high research standards while also “speaking to concerns of our fellow citizens.” But on a topic as charged as ethnicity and race, Putnam worries that many people hear only what they want to.

“It would be unfortunate if a politically correct progressivism were to deny the reality of the challenge to social solidarity posed by diversity,” he writes in the new report. “It would be equally unfortunate if an ahistorical and ethnocentric conservatism were to deny that addressing that challenge is both feasible and desirable.”

Putnam is the nation’s premier guru of civic engagement. After studying civic life in Italy in the 1970s and 1980s, Putnam turned his attention to the US, publishing an influential journal article on civic engagement in 1995 that he expanded five years later into the best-selling “Bowling Alone.” The book sounded a national wake-up call on what Putnam called a sharp drop in civic connections among Americans. It won him audiences with presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, and made him one of the country’s best known social scientists.

Putnam claims the US has experienced a pronounced decline in “social capital,” a term he helped popularize. Social capital refers to the social networks — whether friendships or religious congregations or neighborhood associations — that he says are key indicators of civic well-being. When social capital is high, says Putnam, communities are better places to live. Neighborhoods are safer; people are healthier; and more citizens vote.

 

The results of his new study come from a survey Putnam directed among residents in 41 US communities, including Boston. Residents were sorted into the four principal categories used by the US Census: black, white, Hispanic, and Asian. They were asked how much they trusted their neighbors and those of each racial category, and questioned about a long list of civic attitudes and practices, including their views on local government, their involvement in community projects, and their friendships. What emerged in more diverse communities was a bleak picture of civic desolation, affecting everything from political engagement to the state of social ties.

Putnam knew he had provocative findings on his hands. He worried about coming under some of the same liberal attacks that greeted Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s landmark 1965 report on the social costs associated with the breakdown of the black family. There is always the risk of being pilloried as the bearer of “an inconvenient truth,” says Putnam.

After releasing the initial results in 2001, Putnam says he spent time “kicking the tires really hard” to be sure the study had it right. Putnam realized, for instance, that more diverse communities tended to be larger, have greater income ranges, higher crime rates, and more mobility among their residents — all factors that could depress social capital independent of any impact ethnic diversity might have.

“People would say, ‘I bet you forgot about X,'” Putnam says of the string of suggestions from colleagues. “There were 20 or 30 X’s.”

But even after statistically taking them all into account, the connection remained strong: Higher diversity meant lower social capital. In his findings, Putnam writes that those in more diverse communities tend to “distrust their neighbors, regardless of the color of their skin, to withdraw even from close friends, to expect the worst from their community and its leaders, to volunteer less, give less to charity and work on community projects less often, to register to vote less, to agitate for social reform more but have less faith that they can actually make a difference, and to huddle unhappily in front of the television.”

“People living in ethnically diverse settings appear to ‘hunker down’ — that is, to pull in like a turtle,” Putnam writes.

In documenting that hunkering down, Putnam challenged the two dominant schools of thought on ethnic and racial diversity, the “contact” theory and the “conflict” theory. Under the contact theory, more time spent with those of other backgrounds leads to greater understanding and harmony between groups. Under the conflict theory, that proximity produces tension and discord.

Putnam’s findings reject both theories. In more diverse communities, he says, there were neither great bonds formed across group lines nor heightened ethnic tensions, but a general civic malaise. And in perhaps the most surprising result of all, levels of trust were not only lower between groups in more diverse settings, but even among members of the same group.

“Diversity, at least in the short run,” he writes, “seems to bring out the turtle in all of us.”

The overall findings may be jarring during a time when it’s become commonplace to sing the praises of diverse communities, but researchers in the field say they shouldn’t be.

“It’s an important addition to a growing body of evidence on the challenges created by diversity,” says Harvard economist Edward Glaeser

In a recent study, Glaeser and colleague Alberto Alesina demonstrated that roughly half the difference in social welfare spending between the US and Europe — Europe spends far more — can be attributed to the greater ethnic diversity of the US population. Glaeser says lower national social welfare spending in the US is a “macro” version of the decreased civic engagement Putnam found in more diverse communities within the country.

Economists Matthew Kahn of UCLA and Dora Costa of MIT reviewed 15 recent studies in a 2003 paper, all of which linked diversity with lower levels of social capital. Greater ethnic diversity was linked, for example, to lower school funding, census response rates, and trust in others. Kahn and Costa’s own research documented higher desertion rates in the Civil War among Union Army soldiers serving in companies whose soldiers varied more by age, occupation, and birthplace.

Birds of different feathers may sometimes flock together, but they are also less likely to look out for one another. “Everyone is a little self-conscious that this is not politically correct stuff,” says Kahn.

So how to explain New York, London, Rio de Janiero, Los Angeles — the great melting-pot cities that drive the world’s creative and financial economies?

The image of civic lassitude dragging down more diverse communities is at odds with the vigor often associated with urban centers, where ethnic diversity is greatest. It turns out there is a flip side to the discomfort diversity can cause. If ethnic diversity, at least in the short run, is a liability for social connectedness, a parallel line of emerging research suggests it can be a big asset when it comes to driving productivity and innovation. In high-skill workplace settings, says Scott Page, the University of Michigan political scientist, the different ways of thinking among people from different cultures can be a boon.

“Because they see the world and think about the world differently than you, that’s challenging,” says Page, author of “The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies.” “But by hanging out with people different than you, you’re likely to get more insights. Diverse teams tend to be more productive.”

In other words, those in more diverse communities may do more bowling alone, but the creative tensions unleashed by those differences in the workplace may vault those same places to the cutting edge of the economy and of creative culture.

Page calls it the “diversity paradox.” He thinks the contrasting positive and negative effects of diversity can coexist in communities, but “there’s got to be a limit.” If civic engagement falls off too far, he says, it’s easy to imagine the positive effects of diversity beginning to wane as well. “That’s what’s unsettling about his findings,” Page says of Putnam’s new work.

Meanwhile, by drawing a portrait of civic engagement in which more homogeneous communities seem much healthier, some of Putnam’s worst fears about how his results could be used have been realized. A stream of conservative commentary has begun — from places like the Manhattan Institute and “The American Conservative” — highlighting the harm the study suggests will come from large-scale immigration. But Putnam says he’s also received hundreds of complimentary emails laced with bigoted language. “It certainly is not pleasant when David Duke’s website hails me as the guy who found out racism is good,” he says.

In the final quarter of his paper, Putnam puts the diversity challenge in a broader context by describing how social identity can change over time. Experience shows that social divisions can eventually give way to “more encompassing identities” that create a “new, more capacious sense of ‘we,'” he writes.

Growing up in the 1950s in small Midwestern town, Putnam knew the religion of virtually every member of his high school graduating class because, he says, such information was crucial to the question of “who was a possible mate or date.” The importance of marrying within one’s faith, he says, has largely faded since then, at least among many mainline Protestants, Catholics, and Jews.

While acknowledging that racial and ethnic divisions may prove more stubborn, Putnam argues that such examples bode well for the long-term prospects for social capital in a multiethnic America.

In his paper, Putnam cites the work done by Page and others, and uses it to help frame his conclusion that increasing diversity in America is not only inevitable, but ultimately valuable and enriching. As for smoothing over the divisions that hinder civic engagement, Putnam argues that Americans can help that process along through targeted efforts. He suggests expanding support for English-language instruction and investing in community centers and other places that allow for “meaningful interaction across ethnic lines.”

Some critics have found his prescriptions underwhelming. And in offering ideas for mitigating his findings, Putnam has drawn scorn for stepping out of the role of dispassionate researcher. “You’re just supposed to tell your peers what you found,” says John Leo, senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, a conservative think tank. “I don’t expect academics to fret about these matters.”

But fretting about the state of American civic health is exactly what Putnam has spent more than a decade doing. While continuing to research questions involving social capital, he has directed the Saguaro Seminar, a project he started at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government that promotes efforts throughout the country to increase civic connections in communities.

“Social scientists are both scientists and citizens,” says Alan Wolfe, director of the Boisi Center for Religion and American Public Life at Boston College, who sees nothing wrong in Putnam’s efforts to affect some of the phenomena he studies.

Wolfe says what is unusual is that Putnam has published findings as a social scientist that are not the ones he would have wished for as a civic leader. There are plenty of social scientists, says Wolfe, who never produce research results at odds with their own worldview.

“The problem too often,” says Wolfe, “is people are never uncomfortable about their findings.”

Michael Jonas is acting editor of CommonWealth magazine, published by MassINC, a nonpartisan public-policy think tank in Boston.