Daily Shaarli
August 26, 2024
On Tuesday, U.S. District Court Judge Terry Doughty, who previously penned a Fourth of July masterpiece of a decision in the Murthy v. Missouri (f/k/a Missouri v. Biden) First Amendment case, issued a ruling declaring that Kennedy and his charity had standing to pursue a claim against the government for violating their First Amendment rights.
Gregory had an eye-opening experience in Kamala Harris’ office that none of us expected. For his sake, the month could not pass quickly enough.
Will America become a majority-childless society? A new Pew Research Center survey suggest that sadly may be the case. Such a direction would have alarming consequences for not just individuals but also for our nation.
When Pew asked Americans younger than 50 if they ever plan to have children, 47 percent—one-half of those polled—said “no.” That’s up 10 percent from just five years before. In fact, of those younger than 50, 57 percent said they never wanted to have children, even if they ended up doing so.
The reasons why? Pew writes: “Not having kids has made it easier for them to afford the things they want, have time for hobbies and interests, and save for the future.” But what kind of future are they saving for? It will quite likely be a lonely one. //
The Social Security Administration saw this coming in 2010, noting trouble ahead in its financial report because “birth rates dropped from three to two children per woman.” Previously, there had been a 4 or 5 to 1 ratio between workers paying into the system and retirees taking money out. That ratio has already dropped to almost two-to-one. With even fewer children in the future, the ratio will decrease further.
Robert F. Kennedy Jr. appeared on "Fox News Sunday" to talk about his plans to partner with Donald Trump to "Make America Healthy Again," and dropped some big truth bombs about the corruption and perverse incentives within the United States' public health agencies. //
"I wouldn't dismantle them. I would change the focus, and I would end the corruption. Right now, 75 percent of FDA’s budget is coming from pharmaceutical companies. That is a perverse incentive.
"In NIH, the - scientists and officials at NIH who work on drug development, incubate drugs for the pharmaceutical company, get to collect lifetime royalties from those products. These are regulators. They’re supposed to be looking for problems in those products.
"We have these agencies that have become sock puppets for the industries they’re supposed to regulate, so they're not really interested in public health.
"The most profitable thing today in America is a sick child. Everybody’s making money - the hospitals are making money, the pharmaceutical companies are making money; even the insurance companies make money.
"We need to end those perverse incentives, we need to get the corruption out of the FDA, out of NIH, out of the CDC, and make them function as they're supposed to function, which is to protect public health and to protect childrens' health.”
While some might have some points of contention when it comes to whether he is truly fostering free speech, it is clear that X is not the same platform it was before he took over. I have my own criticism of some of the changes. But it seems clear that more right-leaning voices are able to make their views known without the rampant censorship that was happening under prior management.
Moreover, as I stated previously, none of the leftists who are whining about Musk allowing more right-leaning content to flourish on X had trouble with supposed “misinformation” when the left was dominating the platform. Very few of them criticized then-Twitter when it suppressed the Hunter Biden laptop story. Almost none took issue with the content moderation team that targeted people with right-wing views.
The author’s criticism of Musk’s conflicts with governments over censorship also reveals the true motivation behind their complaints. These folks have no problem with the United Kingdom, Venezuela, and other countries suppressing content because most of their attacks on free speech go one way: Toward those expressing conservative views.
The notion that Musk is somehow turning X into a haven for right-wingers is silly. But on one level, it is understandable. To those who are accustomed to leftists having supremacy over social media, allowing more speech from both sides might seem like propping up right-wing content. When a playing field is not level, creating more balance might seem as if it is skewed toward the side that was previously suppressed.
The truth is that folks on the left have only themselves to blame for Musk inserting himself into digital media. The left created Musk like the Joker created Batman in the 1989 film starring Michael Keaton. There would have been no need for Musk to take over X if those in charge had not actively suppressed content based on political viewpoints.
August 1, 2019 2:18 am
During Wednesday night’s Democratic primary debate, CNN’s Jake Tapper knew exactly what he was doing when he queued up a question for Tulsi Gabbard about her past criticisms of Kamala Harris’s approach to racial issues and her attack on Joe Biden.
Gabbard went off.
Yet there is no question that California voters were deceived. Ten years later, the state is looking to roll back Proposition 47. //
Harris’s most consequential act in California leadership was her contribution to passing of Proposition 47 in 2014. The law is widely credited with the social collapse of once lovely cities like San Francisco.
Passed with nearly 60% voter support, the initiative reclassified many felonies as misdemeanors, such as, most notoriously, theft of under $950, including repeat offenses. This shift created the now familiar spectacle of thieves leisurely walking into stores and picking up $949 of merchandise — and then doing it again and again, in the plain view of bored security guards.
Proposition 47 decriminalized drug possession, taking away the instrument that allowed law enforcement to pressure addicts to enter rehabs. //
The measure required resentencing of prisoners previously convicted of felonies if under Prop 47 those felonies were reclassified as misdemeanors. What followed was the early release of many so-called justice-involved individuals.
That trend was picked up in 2016 by Proposition 57 that emptied out California prisons further via early parole. The two propositions created the notorious prison to homelessness pipeline of the former inmates, poorly prepared for challenges of everyday life, pouring into the homeless encampments. //
Although it goes without saying that not all of the unhoused are former inmates, California’s homeless population is growing. As reported in 2023, half of the nation’s homeless now live here.
Welker asked Vance: "How do you respond to that charge that Trump's tariffs would hurt the middle class?"
JD was ready with an answer — and more than eager to respond:
If you sit back a little bit, Kristen, there's this whole thing that Kamala Harris did at the convention where she made a bunch of claims about what would happen, and not enough ... reflection on what already happened, because Donald Trump already was president; he used tariffs to bring manufacturing jobs back to our country and I' think he'll do it again. He did it while keeping prices extremely low.
[I]f you go back to the Trump presidency, we had 12,000 factories that were built during Donald Trump's presidency, inflation never really ticked above two percent during his entire administration ... and was about one-have percent, most of the time. So when Kamala Harris says, 'If we do the thing that Trump already did, it's gonna be way worse than it was last time.' I just don't think that makes a lot of sense.
Istandforfreedom
2 hours ago
“What Tim Walz says in that clip and the ignorance he shows…”
Tim Walz is NOT ignorant; he knows exactly what he saying. “Hate speech” and “misinformation” is ANYTHING that displeases Walz, Harrisand their Marxists regime and spells the END of Free Speech and Freedom asa whole.
Clearly, Gabbard had done her homework, and she absolutely dragged Harris for her abysmal record as California attorney general. During her time in office, Harris took draconian stances on issues of criminal justice, enforcing such merciless policies and displaying such ruthless ambition that “Kamala the cop” has become a common criticism of the candidate.
Gabbard attacked Harris for having locked up thousands of people for mere marijuana possession and laughing about it when asked whether she had smoked pot herself.The congresswoman piled onto Harris, adding on a reference to her office’s shameful move to keep people locked up to preserve “cheap labor for the state of California.”
This is all true, and here are the receipts. But Gabbard didn’t stop there.
The Hawaii congresswoman also called out Harris for the fact that while attorney general, she fought to keep people incarcerated despite exonerating evidence and fought to preserve the unfair system of cash bail.
If exposing money behind Arabella-aligned organizations is the price for outing conservative donors, that’s a trade Democrat operatives would gladly make. //
All of this raises a question: If “dark money” is so beneficial to Democrats, why do the party’s leaders consistently push for new and expansive donor disclosure laws?
The answer may be simple: Even when the left outspends the right, the value of silencing conservatives far exceeds the value of spending by left-leaning nonprofits. //
By establishing nonprofit donor databases, the DISCLOSE Act would open the door for Democrats to potentially create target lists of conservative donors and businesses to harass and bully into silence. As Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer infamously put it years ago, the “deterrent effect” of disclosure “should not be underestimated.” //
Even if some left-leaning donors are exposed, leftist ideas would still receive enormous platforms in the media, entertainment industry, academia, and government bodies. Conservatives, despite being outspent by the left in recent election cycles, are uniquely dependent on their donors and nonprofits to support their intellectuals and promote their ideas; disclosure mandates would be akin to declaring open season on these conservative institutions.
In an exclusive interview with DailyMail.com, the former president said he could now get the briefings if he wanted them but sensed a trap.
'I don't want them, because, number one, I know what's happening. It's very easy to see what's happening,' he said... //
'So the best way to handle that situation is, I don't need that briefing. They come in, they give you a briefing, and then two days later, they leak it, and then they say You leaked it.
'So the only way to solve that problem is not to take it, I don't want it, understood. I'll have plenty of them when I get in.' //
But it's a hell of a pass we've come to as a nation, when a presidential candidate, one of the nominees of a major political party, feels he needs to forgo national security briefings because he's worried - justifiably - about Democrats trying to trip him up somehow. //
This kind of irrational hatred began, at least, during the Reagan years, and has grown steadily worse. //
The internet, frankly, has made this a lot more visible, with people being able to hide behind a degree of anonymity. But something about Trump has tossed the left off the deep end. It's not just the internet; it's crap like Nancy Pelosi tearing up Trump's State of the Union speech, like a petulant child having a tantrum. //
DABA13
4 hours ago
Not to quibble too much, but the left has ALWAYS been off the deep end. It's just that Trump has caused them to drop the mask.
I. M. Conservative flatlander
4 hours ago
I think democrats, as a party, has always been this far gone, but they used to hide it. Now I believe they think they have put the work in to change 50.1% of the culture to support Marxism, so they are not hiding it anymore. They have been and always will be Marxists. They want Communism, with themselves, friends and families at the top, of course. They will get the houses, cars, trips, jewelry, fine clothes, etc., while the peasants will (finally) be equal.
JP1 I. M. Conservative
4 hours ago
I think JFK was an exception. He actually stood up to communism. And we all know how that ended.