Saturday, May 23, 2015

M.Joseph Sheppard Post Report 05.23.15;NYTimes Swoons Over Rubio/Gallup Has Obama Best Favorabilty in 20 Months (Yeah Sure)

Gallup has screaming headlines;

Obama Favorable Rating Up, Best Since September 2013"


Which it tempers with 

"A president's favorable ratings (at 53% marks the president's highest score since September 2013 when it was 58%) are distinct from approval of his performance; " which is now 46%"

It is now 42% which makes Gallup's paean look a bit weak at the knees and which just illustrates the hostage to fortune that polling represents (as was seen in the disastrous for the polls UK election.)

What all this means, apart from Gallup trying to make President Obama look good during a terrible foreign policy disaster week is the public can clearly separate Mr.Obama's job performance, which they dislike, from the person, whom they like, albeit with a degree of fluctuation as events come and go.

There would be little doubt that most would view the Obama;s as lovely neighbors (if one had access,as Obama did, to a felon like Tony Rezco who could smooth ones path to buying the neighboring property) and President Obama as a personally charming and warm individual. But, as the two polls clearly show, the majority would prefer it if he wasn't running the country.

Another reason for The President's personal popularity rise is, I have little doubt, that he became effectively a lame duck from the 2014 mid-terms onward.

Since there is little that Obama can do in the legislative world, and even foreign policy has become neutered to a degree as per the Iran nuclear deal now having to get Congressional approval, so there will be less and less he can be involved in that is contentious.

Essentially the president has assumed the "mourner-in-chief" role during disasters that neutered politicians can fall back on to lift his profile now and then, which would of course lift the"feel good" polls further for him. On the other hand, should the economy go into recession again then he would see all his polls, both personal and job-wise plummet.

Prior to becoming a lame duck effectively, President Obama has gifted the Republicans with near unprecedented control over every other legislative grouping in America. This has given him basically a two year period of a faux "Pax Americana" and an easy time compared to his halcyon days, but at a terrible cost to the Democrats. 


"The GOP picked up nine Senate seats and will hold 54 seats in that chamber in the next Congress, to the Democrats’ 46. The Democrats’ Senate loss represented the biggest in the chamber that any president’s party had suffered since 1958, during Dwight Eisenhower’s second term.
In the House, the GOP will hold 247 seats, the largest majority the Republican Party has held since 1931.

Republicans picked up 11 legislative chambers this year and now control 68 of the nation’s 98 partisan chambers on the state level, the highest number in the party’s history. In all, Democrats have lost more than 900 seats in state legislatures during Mr. Obama’s time in office.But the full measure of the Republican gains—and the Democratic collapse—comes from looking down-ballot, where the GOP also made sweeping advances.
After the 2008 election, 28 of the nation’s governors were Democrats. Now, only 17 are. After the 2008 election, 31 state attorneys general were Democrats. Now, the party has 23."
****************************************************

The New York Times Swoons, Swoons, Swoons Over Rubio 

We've been here before of course. The liberal media picks a “safe” Republican candidate-see McCain, John, and treats them with respect during the GOP primaries.


Then, if they get the nomination, it is straight into character assassination of the lowest kind from even the most respected places. Once McCain secured the GOP's nomination and, after the very successful Palin driven post convention surge, The New York Times headlined the most scurrilous article about an alleged affair between McCain and lobbyist which had absolutely no foundation. So much for the above it all New York Times.

But even for the classic scenario being sketched out the praise, or rather Paean to Marco Rubio The Times had dredged, up beats all previous such hymns of praise ever seen. The hyperbole is beyond parody, and the obvious set-up for a fall is so blatant, that any journalist worth their salt would be embarrassed to tears.

Fortunately such a vision looks like it will soon disappear (if it ever existed of course) as the days of political journalists are ending, and their influence is fast disappearing into the realm of social media, who don't give a toss what they think-especially as they are so often wrong. See “Why 2016 Marks The Death of 
The Political Campaign Reporter.”

In an article by Jeremy W. Peters The NYT has this to say about Rubio:

A Hillary Clinton Match-Up With Marco Rubio Is a Scary Thought for Democrats”

They use words like “historic” and “charismatic,” phrases like “great potential” and “million-dollar smile.” They notice audience members moved to tears by an American-dream-come-true success story.

He’s energetic, he’s photogenic, “
Young women swoon, old women pass out, and toilets flush themselves. “

"And Mr. Gelber himself recalled the day in Tallahassee, Fla., in 2008 when he and Mr. Rubio, then the speaker of the State House, gave their farewell speeches. He spoke first, followed by Mr. Rubio, as Mr. Gelber’s wife looked on.

She’s sitting there weeping,”

He should be the one you don’t want to face,”


Of course Rubio is a first term senator of little national exposure and the dirt digging machine hasn't even scratched the surface, but you can bet that if he gets the nomination articles like Mr. Peters will vanish instantly. 

The “Death of the 2016 reporter, and the hypocritical liberal media, can't come soon enough.


*************************************************

Friday, May 22, 2015

Vanity Fair/Wonkette Now Love Them Some Bristol Palin (But Remain Pigs)

Vanity Fair has been at the forefront of the "Destroy Palin at All Costs" leftist machine from the "legacy" media (and what a sad, sad, end to a historic legacy). Some of their hatchet jobs on Palin, especially when "the fear" gripped the left that she might be a threat to their beloved Obama, are some of the worst excesses of their type.

At the other end, the sewer end, of the spectrum the truly horrendous rag "Wonkette' under the ownership of one Rebecca Schoenkopf (who has an impeccable communist heritage) has rolled in the dirt attacking Palin without sparing her family-especially her daughter Bristol. 

The articles, especially those from Wonkette which are too disturbing, especially pictorially, to be reproduced here, but the "Carol Costello syndrome" a mixture of arrogance, sarcasm, and glee at another's misfortune, would best sum them up.

But, what's this? Vanity Fair runs an article (suspiciously under the heading "Broken Engagements"
"A Toast for Bristol Palin on Her Would-Be Wedding Weekend" 
And a text written by a seeming normal person devoid of snark/hate/political agenda; 
"If her Instagram account is any indication, Bristol Palin seems to have a happy and thriving personal life. Anyone can view adorable pictures of Tripp, photos of shoes, or even the image of her making faux gang signs with her mom. I have no idea if she regrets her engagements, but it seems like she definitely doesn’t regret her decision to be a private person. So after I read her post on Facebook, I found myself agreeing with Sarah Palin for the first time, well, maybe ever. I hope that Bristol gets to celebrate this weekend."

Over at Wonkette the nearest one alleged human,  a nobody named Evan Hurst manages to achieve a human response to a young couples personal difficulties as is possible when down in the sewer; 

" sadface Bristol Palin’s Wedding CANCELED, Let’s Make Up Reasons Why"
In a perfect example of juvenile writing, scatological references, hate for conservatives and Governor Palin in particular Hurst blathers 

"We honestly want Bristol to be happy, instead of out shilling for abstinence for cash or being on terrible awful reality shows. She deserves SOMETHING better than those things, in life, because we care about Bristol and want good things for her."

There follows an exhortation for the self described "nasty vile little snark mob" to do their worst with their filthy hateful comments-and of course they fully comply with the most disgusting inferences imaginable. This is of course all in the aid of clicks as the site shamelessly grifts for "moniiez to pay our rent" with morality and honor so far in the distance as to be invisible.

However, even amongst the debauched, this latest column shows a glimpse of humanity, no matter how slight, and is a total change from the usual utter depravity on the site.

So what can this be put down to? My first instinct is to consider that there has been some degree of female solidarity awakened in the breast of the two sites, but both writers appear to be male. On second thought this could well be a part of the "Hillary is running so we must be able to attack the conservatives with "sexism" so we'd better not give them a counter attack re; the Palin's. The odds would be one hundred to one for the latter case to be the reason against the former.

Further, the left has concluded Palin isn't running so there is little reason to expend any more venom towards her as that would be a waste of space where they could attack some of the declared GOP candidates-the Hillary factor also comes into it.

Thus Vanity Fair and Wonkette get zero credit for appearing to almost have human emotions and common decency. The leopard doesn't change its spots and if Palin did declare Bristol and the entire Palin family would be right back under their mud coated hammers again.

Radical Feminist Plan Could See Human Race Extinct In Ten Generations

Radical feminists who see men as utterly hopeless and beyond redemption 'the cause of wars, rape, and all other sorts of violence, paternalism, chauvinism and to many other 'isms" to list here have a simple formula to clear this matter up.

Link:
 "Reduce the male population by 90%"

Quite simply just keep a few (lucky or unlucky depending on your point of view and the extraction methods involved) males around-under close watch presumably-for breeding purposes semen still being, sadly for such feminists, still being required and not artificially replaceable.

Unfortunately for this brave new world scenario there is a fly, or rather a beetle, in the ointment. Researchers have discovered that semen, by  itself, is not only not a guarantee of continual 'breeding" but within seven generations of the insects tested saw the control group go completely extinct.

Worse, the eventually extinct group had a mass of females and a small number of males, thus the entire premise of a Radfem paradise would most likely have a brief flowering (and few deflowerings) until it vanished along with other utopias like communism from which it stems.

In the majority male group, 90 males to 10 females, where there was, naturally (in every sense of the word) intense competition for mating: "after seven years males who had competed for females were fitter and more resistant to disease and inbreeding. In contrast, beetles without sexual selection (where females far outnumbered males) became extinct."

This is of course fairly obvious. In the animal kingdom breeding the season sees constant fights between males for the right to mate, often with a group of females and, obviously, the winner of these battles has better genes than the losers. With birds, those males with the better display, or nest building techniques, also win the mating/genetic race to the benefit of the species.

RadFem's will just have to put up with the current male/female situation whilst enjoying the fruits of the male labor saving inventions and noting that for all the wars and rumors of wars the earth's population keeps increasing and is infinitely wealthier/healthier than a century ago. 

Or they might have to revise their proposed ratio's and find some way of introducing a combat element (and agreeable gladiators) to ensure the best of their breeding stocks genes get passed on-it seems a huge amount of trouble.

The full article is HERE:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/lifestyle/news/article.cfm?c_id=6&objectid=11451364

The M.Joseph Sheppard Post Report 05/22/15: Obama Admits Iran May Get The Bomb/

PRESIDENT OBAMA ADMITS THE POSSIBILITY OF IRAN HAVING NUCLEAR WEAPONS

Look, 20 years from now, I'm still going to be around, God willing. If Iran has a nuclear weapon, it's my name on this"

So with all the posturing and verbal guarantees that the Iran nuclear deal the Obama administration put in place would ensure Iran could not develop an atomic bomb President Obama's own words make it clear the possibility does exist "within 20 years."

Of course that hinges on the definition of what "if" is.

The above sentence makes Israel's Prime Minister Netanyahu's caution and anxiety, over the possibility of Iran having  a weapons program following on from the nuclear energy projects getting the go ahead, both prescient and absolutely valid. Clearly too these anxieties were also felt by the Israeli electorate. 

For Israel, and the civilized world, the protection against the "20 year possibility" hinges on the Republican senate blocking ratification  of the Obama administrations Iran deal until President Obama leaves office. 

Hopefully either the election of a Republican president in 2016, or the GOP holding a senate/House majority after that election, will see an end to the whole scheme. Ideally the House will reject it out of hand
******************************************************
RAMADI A SET BACK "BUT WE ARE NOT LOSING"


And in Iraq; "President Obama says that while the loss of Ramadi to the self-declared Islamic State is a "setback," he doesn't think the U.S. is losing to the militant group.

"No, I don't think we're losing, and I just talked to our CENTCOM commanders and the folks on the ground,"

Change Obama for LBJ, and Vietnam for Ramadi, and the same tragic end-game works especially the being reassured by "the folks on the ground"

But the ever dependable, New York Times has his back

"Calm Down. ISIS Isn’t Winning.There is even a silver lining in the fall of Ramadi"
***************************************************

BECAUSE WHAT COULD POSSIBLY GO WRONG
"Robert M Gates, the president of the Boy Scouts of America and former secretary of defense, called on Thursday to end the Scouts’ blanket ban on gay adult leaders."

******************************************

HARD HITTING JOURNALIST (NO NOT REALLY)
HITS CHRISTIE-MISSES REAL STORY

The Daily Beast's Olivia Nuzzi who seems intent on carving out a career as a hard hitting ballsy take no prisoners etc etc leftist journalist, gets really really stuck into Governor Christie which she has made a sub-career doing.

Sadly, as with so many in this niche, she overdoes the hyperbole in a frantic, repetitive and juvenile style-it's really appalling writing. If you can bear the blather it's at the link above.


There seems little point in hammering Christie at this stage from the left as his chances of getting the GOP nomination are about zero, thus Nuzzi's article seems more of a "look at me can't you see how clever I am at kicking yesterday's man whilst he's down."


The real back story with Christie lies with the utter lack of judgement and frankly vindictiveness of the Romney team in 2012. 


They blocked Governor Palin (whom Nuzzi has a real hate for BTW) from speaking at the GOP convention and made Christie the keynote speaker.

And where did that get Romney and Christie?

I set all this out at 'The Camp of the Saints'

" Will The GOP Make The Same Foolish Mistake About Palin?"

Thursday, May 21, 2015

I Confess: I'm Back On Hard Drugs Again

Back on the subject that is, and I am "hard on hard drugs" again.

I wrote a The Camp of the Saints "Time For Conservatives To Embrace Drug Decriminalization?"
where I set out some of the major points e.g. the libertarian heritage of Milton Friedman and countries where liberalization had been shown successful, why it may be time to embrace ending the "war on drugs."

I have made I clear on many occasions that this issue is one that I have grappled with over the years without making a firm conclusion one way or the other (hence my bio wherein I described myself as "slightly Libertarian."


However, when I wrote the article in April 2015 I had, just about, convinced myself that the decriminalization of drugs is the way to proceed-whilst leaving the question open and asking the conservative reader to judge for themselves based on the empirical evidence.

All the arguments for decriminalization including mine , the appeal to Friedman and John Stuart Mill, and this conclusion from my article can be found at the link above, here is my conclusion to that article:


"These are impressive statistics.We know what the situation is in America under the current legislation. Perhaps it is time for conservatives to consider a new approach. Certainly there is substantial and weighty historical philosophical support for it on the right on a libertarian basis.

I would be confident Friedman and Mill would approve examining this question in that light. 

Certainly the British, Swiss and Dutch system where addicts can register and get heroin free seems sensible. Treating addiction as a serious health problem and not a criminal one has serious merit."

But, predictably wavering once again, what appears to be incontrovertible evidence for the strongest possible "war on drugs" appears and, frankly, I have to agree with the conclusions.

The New Zealand government legalized the sale of "party drugs" in 2013. These were chemical variations of cannabinoids similar to marijuana. Here is an editorial 05/20/15 (emphasis mine) in the New Zealand Herald that sets out what happens with 'liberalization' with the best of intentions:


"A year ago, when the Government reversed a brief legalisation of "party drugs", we heard the prediction that is always heard when law is used in this area. Namely, that prohibition never works, that dealing in the banned substance would simply go underground, suppliers would prosper on an unregulated, untaxed market and users would be afraid to seek professional help before their addiction landed them in hospital emergency rooms.

A year on, the usual prediction appears well astray. Psychiatrist Dr Paul Glue told our health reporter this month the clampdown on synthetic cannabis had virtually stopped the flow of mostly young male patients into mental care suffering toxic effects. "You might see one every two or three months," he said. "It seems there is a very small amount of synthetic cannabis now. The number of people presenting with some sort of toxicity due to it is incredibly rare."
If the trade has gone underground it is not booming there. It was reported last weekend that one of those who made millions from party pills and legal highs, musician Matt Bowden, has had his company, Stargate Operations, put in liquidation. He told 3News his business struggled since the Government's banned synthetic cannabis and could not afford to pay outstanding bills.

So much for the black market. So much for the claim that prohibition never works. It might be futile for a drug as pervasive as alcohol, and it is clearly less effective against plant cannabis, but the lesson of the ban on chemical versions is that liberal policy is not an enlightened response in all cases.

The Government, it turns out, was right to take these drugs off the shelves. It was wrong a year earlier when it was persuaded to give some of them interim legality while it tried to develop safety tests for new psycho-active substances that would permit manufacturers to put them on sale. Some of these so-called "legal highs" had been openly on sale for years.

When it decided to regulate them in 2013, it not only gave interim legality to some of them, it let local councils limit the number and location of outlets. The result was a social and political disaster. Permitted outlets were mainly in less salubrious shopping centres and the trade became highly visible. Residents and other retailers were appalled; drug users hung around playgrounds and other public places.

Distraught mothers of youthful users phoned radio talk shows and went on television programmes, notably Campbell Live, to testify to the damage these drugs were doing. By then it was election year and the Government soon called off its tentative liberalisation.

Now the Government is being urged to legalise plant cannabis for medical purposes. Associate Health Minister Peter Dunne, who was responsible for the party pill experiment, is wary. He has called the advice of his officials "underwhelming" on the medical case for legalisation. Their synthetic cannabis experience has given policy makers new respect for the force of law."
















The M. Joseph Sheppard Post Report 05/21/15 Bigamy Legalized/Policewoman Murdered/"Multi-skilled Palin"

After "Same-Sex Marriage" Bigamy To Be Removed From Statute Books

From a website:

"Local news reporting on a guy who married and left three women in different states without divorcing any of them. He could get 5 years or more in prison for bigamy. "

After the probable legalization of same-sex marriage all the arguments that were set out in favor of such arrangements will have equal validity for multiple marriages and in fact multiple same-sex marriages.

This next step will be, absolutely, on the leftist media/Hollywood agenda in pursuit of the plans for the destruction of middle class society so clearly set out in  "The Communist Manifesto" by Karl Marx.

The guy who has three wives is just early in the piece as "bigamy" will be off the criminal code in due course. If he gets five years he could be out well before that as the crime won't be on the statute books. Whether having three wives is punishment enough for him and them is another matter.

********************************************


In a few days this poor woman will be forgotten by the media as Liquori Tate Benjamin Deen  have been. No Obama adminstration representative will attend her funeral, no Sharpton and others of that ilk will address "Black on White police crime" none will say "white police lives matter" nobody will riot.

No plaques will mark the spots of these three police deaths as they are for
    Michael Brown in Ferguson                           

It's all so terribly sad


An Omaha police officer and a suspect were shot and killed after a confrontation at North 30th Street and Martin Avenue just before 1 p.m. Wednesday.

Embedded image permalink

  • BENJAMIN DEEN LIQUORI TATE
    KERRIE OROZCO  
  • R.I.P


  • **************************************************************************

ETHEL C. FENIG WRITES AT 'AMERICAN THINKER': 

  • "Multi-skilled Sarah can save the USA"
  • A short but to the point article which none, surely, can find fault with. (Ha ha of course they can-a pile of Palin deranged idiots appear in the comment section naturally)

Here is the gist:

"Now, who would be more effective as president of the USA during these uneasy times?  Who would be more effective standing up to Putin, ISIS, Iran, oil-rich Saudi Arabia?  Sarah Palin, who as Tina Fey of SNL accidentally but accurately noted, could see Russia from her house?  Sarah Palin, who drilled, drilled, drilled for oil in Alaska, thus paving the way for our economic independence from the murderous, thieving oil cartel?

Or Hillary Rodham Clinton, who became a wealthy cattle futures trader, senator from New York, secretary of state, and highly paid, in demand speaker all on the coattails – and other assets – of her husband?  And other men.  Could she deal with the strongmen of Russia, the Muslim nations, and other nations on her own?  Choose the right people to do so when she can't even use one modern device safely?


Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2015/05/multi_skilled_sarah_can_save_the_usa.html#ixzz3akz0I1dZ







Fair use notice: This website contains copyrighted material, the use of which may or may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Excerpts of such material is made available for educational purposes, and as such this constitutes ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Act. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this website is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. Original material published on this website may be excerpted and the excerpt reproduced for the purpose of critical reviews. However, such original material may not be reproduced in full on another website or in any manner without prior approval from this website’s owner. In all cases when material from this website is reproduced in full or in part, the author and website must be credited by name and a hyperlink provided to this website.


Wednesday, May 20, 2015

Bibliography:M.Joseph Sheppard's Articles At The Camp Of The Saints 12/02/14-05/19/15

Posts from the ‘M. Joseph Sheppard’ Category

Links are all active-click to be forwarded to the original articles;
comment