Friday, March 24, 2017

The Freedom Caucus Kills the Health Care Bill

Fred Barnes at the Weekly Standard  "Before Republicans captured Washington, the conservatives in the House Freedom Caucus were a nuisance. Then, with the GOP in control of the House, Senate, and White House, they became a roadblock. Now, in single-handedly killing the legislation to repeal and replace Obamacare, they've turned into gang of renegades running amok inside the House GOP. Neither President Trump nor House speaker Paul Ryan can sway the 30 or so Freedom Caucus members, much less control them. Trump, the supposed closer, was unable to forge a deal with them. Ryan offered changes in the bill, but that only egged on the Freedom Caucus to demand more.

"The political damage from this stinging defeat could be enormous. Any effect it has on Trump's first-year agenda won't be good. Recall that the president started with repeal and replace of Obamacare partly because that would clear the way for a bigger tax cut. Its downfall now "makes tax reform more difficult," Ryan said. "We're going to be living with Obamacare for the foreseeable future."

Meanwhile Democrats taunt and mock those of us who voted for Trump and the Republicans.

'They own Obamacare!' Furious Trump lashes out at Democrats after House Republicans' health care vote fiasco

UK Daily Mail  "President Donald Trump blamed Democrats in Congress on Friday after House Republicans were forced to cancel a vote on their health care bill – warning the opposition party that they will continue to 'own Obamacare' as it spins in a death spiral.
The stunning uppercut came on the day he failed to deliver – for now, at least – on the promise he made in hundreds of campaign appearances, to 'repeal and replace Obamacare.' 
"Shortly after the vote was called off, a resigned House Speaker Paul Ryan told reporters that Obamacare was still 'the law of the land. It's going to remain the law of the land until it's replaced.'
"Although it was GOP infighting that caused the legislative crisis, the president predicted that Obamacare will ultimately crash and burn – forcing Democrats to come crawling to the White House for his help in crafting a workable replacement 'when it explodes – which it will soon.' 
" 'The losers are Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer,' Trump claimed, naming the Democratic Party's leaders in the House and Senate, 'because now they own Obamacare. They own it. One hundred per cent own it.'
" 'They have Obamacare for a little while longer until it ceases to exist, which it will at some point in the near future.'
" 'And just remember,' Trump warned: 'This is not our bill. This is their bill. Now when they all become civilized and get together and try to work out a great health care bill for the people of this country, we're open to it.'  . . .

Democrats have taunted Republicans and TEA Partiers for years as here, on the first passage of Obamacare. They mocked and taunted half the American population.




Reboot  . . . "Republicans more or less fell into a losing strategy. They began by thinking they could quickly repeal Obamacare and then replace it at leisure. To their credit, they substantially modified their plan in response to criticism, attempting to do portions of both repeal and replace in one bill. But this new approach was a bad fit for the old schedule. A viable repeal-and-replace plan could not be slapped together as fast as Republicans wanted to move. Compounding the problems were Speaker Ryan’s high-handedness and President Trump’s erratic leadership.
"This week’s embarrassments make it hard to see the opening that remains for Republicans. The fact is that Republicans reached a fair degree of consensus during this process."
. . . 
"They have spent seven years saying they were going to replace Obamacare. They didn’t say they were going to spend a few weeks on a half-baked plan and then give up. Back to work, ladies and gentlemen."  Full National Review article

Professor Hypocrite, Tear Down This Door!

Mike Adams


Professor Hypocrite, Tear Down This Door!

"One of my conservative friends recently suggested that leftist professors should be prohibited from putting political posters and bumper stickers on their office doors. I strongly disagreed and told him I would defend the leftists if he ever tried to interfere with their political speech. But I wouldn’t do it for reasons of principle. I would do it because I enjoy the wealth of good writing material supplied by my more extreme left wing colleagues – most of them self-described feminists. A case in point is the recent MoveOn.org poster that is making its way onto so many faculty office doors on campuses across America. In case you haven’t seen one, here is the exact wording of the poster: [see photo above]."

"It’s hard to comprehend so much idiocy crammed into such a small space. So just in case you missed some of the more intellectually herniated nuances, let me break them down for you. In just five lines, the leftist professor sporting this sign manages to call attention to five distinct things about her character, her professionalism, and her worldview. They follow in no particular order of importance:" . . .

Some of her bullet points discussed in more detail in the article:
  • She really isn’t looking to bring refugees and immigrants into her office; she is looking to bring like-minded disciples into her classes. . . .
  • There is no Muslim ban but the professor is too misinformed to know it (or ms-informed if she is a feminist) . . .
  • She locks her doors instead of adopting an open borders practice in her day-to-day living . . .
  • She works in a profession lacking diversity.  . . .
  • She is a mouthpiece for Marxist propaganda. . . .

Remember Ken Starr? His plane just disappeared on his way to DC to testify.

Fake News Update: Fake News: Ken Starr NOT Killed In Plane Crash On The Way To DC To Testify

kenstarr.jpg
Several fake news websites have copied an article from satirical fake news site The Resistance: The Last Line of Defense which was titled: "Remember Ken Starr? His Plane Just Disappeared On His Way To DC To Tesitify". Various other sites have relabeled it as "BREAKING: Ken Starr's Plane Just Disappeared On His Way To DC To Testify Against Hillary", probably to fix the spelling error. The original article begins:
Ken Starr, the lead prosecutor who helped congress impeach Bill Clinton, was on his way to Washington DC this morning when his plane disappeared from radar. A plume of smoke in the area the plane was seen after the plane was spotted just outside of Wilkershire, Maryland.
The NTSB says the tower in Philadelphia lost contact with the plane about ten minutes before the explosion and that without a significant development, it appears all five people on board were killed.

As of 1:12 CST, this is the only source reporting this event other than one other linking to this as did I. TD . . .

The original story:
Open Magazines  "Ken Starr, the lead prosecutor who helped congress impeach Bill Clinton, was on his way to Washington DC this morning when his plane disappeared from radar. A plume of smoke in the area the plane was seen after the plane was spotted just outside of Wilkershire, Maryland. 
As Elaine once told Jerry Seinfeld, "Fake, fake, fake, fake."

In Defense of Devin Nunes


Bloomberg  "One of the strangest turns in the story of Russia and the Trump campaign has been the recent outrage from Democrats over politicization of the investigation. 
"This all centers on Chairman Devin Nunes, the Republican who is leading the House Intelligence Committee's investigation. He was an adviser to the Trump presidential transition. The White House asked him last month to talk to a reporter to rebut news stories that alleged Trump associates had many contacts with Russian intelligence officers. On Wednesday, Nunes briefed the president about new information he had regarding dozens of widely disseminated intelligence reports on the Trump transition. "He did this before he briefed his committee's Democrats.

All of this has prompted an outbreak of high dudgeon from the party of Clinton. Representative Adam Schiff, the ranking Democrat on the committee, says Nunes must choose whether he wants to lead a credible investigation or be a surrogate of the Trump White House. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi says Nunes is a "stooge.' " . . .
Via Lucianne:
Benghazi Liar Adam Schiff Slimes Devin Nunes  . . . "Schiff has had no problem in himself acting as a surrogate for Team Obama or Team Hillary. That deafening silence you hear is the 
outrage he has expressed over the leaking of classified information to the press designed to fatally wound the Trump transition. Schiff had no problem repeating claims without evidence that Team Trump was colluding with the Russians. Now he is troubled by Nunes citing reports proving President Trump was right about his team being monitored." . . .

Did Obama Surveil Trump? Sure Looks That Way  . . . " 'I recently confirmed that on numerous occasions the intelligence community ... collected information about U.S. citizens involved in the Trump transition," Nunes told reporters.
"Nunes immediately came under intense criticism from congressional Democrats for his revelations. What's both hilarious and sad is that these are the very same Democrats who have been nearly silent as a series of illegal leaks from the intelligence bureaucracy have made their way into the mainstream media, in a transparent attempt by unnamed intelligence officials to damage Trump's presidency." . . .

Freedom Watch Notifies Congress of “Deep State” Intelligence Whistle-Blower – full pdf…

The Last Refuge  "Freedom Watch notifies congress of a “Deep State” intelligence community whistle blower, Dennis Montgomery, with hundreds of millions of documents showing CIA and FBI and Intelligence Committees were spying on, and conducting surveillance on, American citizens for political purposes.
"Mr. Montgomery is trying to use a legal “whistle-blower” process and not follow the same approach as Edward Snowden." . . .
Page one of eleven:

K-12: No Joy In Reading. That's the Plan.

Bruce Deitrick Price  . . . "To start with, Sight-words are the worst way to start.  Instead of learning letters and the sounds they represent, children memorize graphic designs.  Rudolf Flesch (Chapter V of Why Johnny Can't Read) said that as of 1948, eleven studies had been conducted; all found that phonics is superior.  (So the Education Establishment has always known that if you want a society to have low literacy, you will promote Sight-words.  And that is what they relentlessly do.) 
Children who rely entirely on Sight-words will invariably end up semi-literate (aka functionally illiterate).  However, it's also true that the more verbal children will in time figure out that Sight-words are not efficient.  These children will notice that certain letter-shapes represent certain sounds.  And by the third grade, many children will be reading phonetically even though they were never taught to do so!" . . .
Bruce Deitrick Price explains educational theories and methods on his site, Improve-Education.org. For info about his four new books, see his literary site, Lit4u.com.

The Reading Wars; Phonics versus Whole Language  . . . "Phonics proponents led by Rudolph Flesh in his 1955 book Why Johnny Can't Read attacked the whole word  
approach because it did not get students into reading children's stories that did not have carefully controlled vocabularies. Phonics advocates focus their efforts on the primary grades and emphasize the importance of students being able to sound out (read) words based on how they are spelled. A problem with English is that it does not have a one-to-one sound symbol relationship that would make reading much easier. The many homonyms in English such as to, too, and two create difficulties for students, even at the university level in regard to spelling.

"While knowing basic phonetic rules helps students sound out words, other very common "outlaw words" still need to be memorized as sight words because they don't follow any but the most complicated rules. It is estimated about half the words in the English language cannot be pronounced correctly using commonly taught phonic rules. Other problems with phonics include the differing size of students' vocabularies and differing dialects of English that vary in their pronunciation rules


"Phonics is considered a "bottom up" approach where students "decode" the meaning of a text. The advantage of phonics, especially for students who come to schools with large vocabularies, is that once students get the basics down, they can go to the library and read a wide variety of children's literature." . . .

Image result for cartoons teaching reading

UK Guardian: Fabulous Phonics: a creative approach to teaching reading and writing
"Last week, I spent a fascinating afternoon at John Donne primary school with 24 early years and foundation stage (EYFS) teachers listening to deputy head and early years specialist Ruth Moyler share her creative approach to teaching phonics." . . .
Her resources:
Phase 2 of Fabulous Phonics for reception teachers: 'SAT' 'PIN' 'MDG'Phase 2 Fabulous Phonics for reception teachers: 'OCK' 'CK' E U 'RHB'Phase 3 of Fabulous Phonics for reception teachersFunny phrases for phase 3 phonicsPhase 2 phonics suggestions for real 'sound' objectsPhase 3 phonics suggestions for real 'sound' objects
Whole Language: What It Is, What It Isn't  This author prefers phonics.

Whole language "describes a literacy philosophy which emphasizes that children should focus on meaning and strategy instruction. It is often contrasted with phonics-based methods of teaching reading and writing which emphasize instruction for decoding and spelling. However, from whole language practitioners' perspective, this view is erroneous and sets up a false dichotomy. Whole language practitioners teach to develop a knowledge of language including the graphophonic, syntactic, semantic and pragmatic aspects of language. Within a whole language perspective, language is treated as a complete meaning-making system, the parts of which function in relational ways. It has drawn criticism by those who advocate "back to basicspedagogy or reading instruction because whole language is based on a limited body of scientific research."

Defending Whole Language: The Limits of Phonics Instruction and the
Efficacy of Whole Language Instruction
  pdf


Today's media: Tokyo Rose by another name

Image result for tokyo rose picturesMason Weaver  "If you were a lonely soldier on a Pacific island during World War ll and you only got your news about the war from Tokyo Rose, you would be depressed, disheartened, confused, angry and scared. You would feel like your values had been abandoned and your fight had no value. The G.I. listened to Tokyo Rose because she played American music and had news from home, but they knew she was against them. The Tokyo Rose phenomena is still alive and has taken over the American press. From the New York Times bureau of Tokyo Rose to the L.A. Times bureau of a Tokyo Rose, the mainstream press constantly blankets the public with inaccurate, slanted hit pieces portrayed as news. They have become no more that the propaganda wing of the left.
"When you read a story that is rich in describing motives, you can be suspicious of its honesty. When the story has the description of someone’s unmeasurable state of mind, like racist, mean-spirited, attacker, viciousness, homophobic or the new one, anti-Muslim, you can be sure it is a biased story. How can you measure “racism”? Who determines if you are “mean-spirited”? What are the journalistic standards used to label someone “hateful”? There are no such standards; these are just trigger words designed to guide your opinion or shame you because of your opinion. What it is not is journalism.
"Do you find yourself turning off the TV news, completely avoiding the news section of your paper or change the station on the radio when the news comes on? We are all suffering from the obvious attempt of the press to persuade instead of inform, attack instead of research and to ignore the truth as often as possible.
"We don’t want “fair and balanced”; we want the truth. Would you prepare a great meal and add garbage to achieve balance? We have grown skeptical of our press because the press is a dishonest organization. We have made up our minds. We don’t need to be told why our culture is wrong. We do not need to hear from “the other side.” We just want the truth." . . .