BROO YOU AINT GOT 100 MILLION WHY YOU CARE . . . .
(BTW, it took a second to realize that these characters eye blinks were off sync. I thought I was have a stroke! LOL)
BROO YOU AINT GOT 100 MILLION WHY YOU CARE . . . .
(BTW, it took a second to realize that these characters eye blinks were off sync. I thought I was have a stroke! LOL)
‘Fox & Friends Weekend’ hosts discuss Gold Star families defending former President Trump for attending a memorial for fallen service members after Vice President Harris’ criticism.
Senator Tom Cotton Shuts Down The Fake News Arlington Hoax
Democratic National Brat (Language Warning)
We investigated the 2024 DNC in Chicago, and asked hard questions to politicians, delegates, senators, protestors, and your fav progressive stars.
Featuring interviews with Rep. Jerry Nadler, AG Letitia James, Chris Cuomo, Sen. Raphael Warnock, Pete Buttigieg, Michael Cohen, JJ Abrams, Kellyanne Conway, Sen. Ed Markey, Harry Sisson, Vermin Supreme, Crackhead Barney, Nick Shirley, Cornel West, and Hasan Piker.
WHO IS TIM WALZ?
ROUND ONE – MORE HERE
BACKGROUND
RADICAL POSITIONS:
GEORGE FLOYD:
COVID:
IMMIGRATION
CHINA:
INTEREST GROUP RANKINGS:
STATE TAX BURDEN:
MISC SCANDALS
LAST NIGHT OF CONVENTION
ROUND TWO – MORE @LOUDER w/CROWDER
LIVE FACT CHECK
KAMALA THE BORDER CZAR
POLICIES SHE HAS CLARIFIED
POLICIES KAMALA IS HIDING FROM
KAMALA AND WILLIE BROWN
JOBS
INFLATION
IMMIGRATION
CRIME
THE NEW YORK POST has an excellent piece on this issue, of which a large excerpt lies below:
ANN ARBOR, Mich. — The Harris campaign — along with media allies — has made an extraordinary claim, implying Donald Trump’s Tuesday visit to discuss crime and safety in Howell, Mich., is motivated by racism.
And Howell residents are mystified.
[….]
Vice President Kamala Harris’ campaign thinks Trump’s Tuesday event at the Livingston County Sheriff’s Office in Howell, a city of 10,000 near Michigan’s major population centers, is a sign of solidarity with these young men.
“The racists and white supremacists who marched in Trump’s name last month in Howell have all watched him praise Hitler, defend neo-Nazis in Charlottesville, and tell far-right extremists to ‘stand back and stand by,” said Kamala Harris’ Michigan spokeswoman Alyssa Bradley.
“Trump’s actions have encouraged them, and Michiganders can expect more of the same when he comes to town.”
A Washington Post article boosted this narrative: “Howell has long been associated with the Ku Klux Klan because of the rallies Michigan-based Grand Dragon Robert Miles held on a nearby farm in the 1970s and 1980s.”
And Reuters headlined a piece “Trump to campaign in Michigan town with historic links to white extremism.”
Anonymous user Carlstak extensively edited Howell’s Wikipedia page Aug. 17 to emphasize claims of racism after the announcement of Trump’s event.
The user, for example, changed the line “For many decades, Howell had the reputation of being associated with the Ku Klux Klan,” to say “For many decades, Howell has had” that reputation.
Livingston County Sheriff Michael Murphy, who is hosting Trump, rejects any insinuation that a culture of racism attracted the Trump campaign.
“I’ll call 100% bullsh-t on that,” Sheriff Murphy told The Post.
“Frankly, I get a little bit fired up when people bring that up,” he said, “We did have the Grand Dragon that lived here in Livingston County. But we somehow as a result of that got labeled with ‘racist, unwelcoming community,’ which truly couldn’t be further from the truth.”
[….]
Karoline Leavitt, Trump’s national press secretary, said, “Did the media write this same story when Joe Biden visited Howell in 2021, or when Kamala Harris visits cities where racist protests and marches have occurred in the past? No, of course not.”
Trump’s Michigan spokeswoman Victoria LaCivita emailed The Post a list of cities where Kamala Harris has campaigned that have seen racist incidents in the past, including Eau Claire, Wis., Pittsfield, Mass., Philadelphia and Atlanta.
“You should ask the Harris team why she believes all residents of Howell, Michigan, are racists and if that also applies to the cities she has visited with their own divisive histories,” said LaCivita.
The Harris campaign did not reply to a request for comment.
Trump Mic Drops Reporter’s “White Supremacist” Question
RED STATE notes the backfire aspect of Kamala’s campaign strategy here:
HOWELL, Mich. (FOX 2) – About a dozen white supremacists made their mark on Howell with a disruptive demonstration last weekend that reignited the city’s checkered past.
“I saw a few men, teenagers maybe, all covered in black – kind of like ninjas. That was my first thought,” said Howell resident Shannon Harvey.
[….]
Harvey lives a block away from the courthouse where the men were, and could hear them.
“I can sum it up in two words. Their messaging was white power,” Harvey said. “I was very surprised to hear the type of language that they were using downtown. It’s something that you don’t hear here often.”
The men moved from the courthouse, to the library. Eventually, the demonstration was dismantled and they went home.
“Howell Police were able to make contact with several of the demonstrators confirming that all those contacted came from outside of our community, as far away as Saginaw and Macomb Counties,” Ellis stated.
The reason these men chose Howell is believed to be because of Robert Miles, a prominent KKK leader who held cross burnings and rallies nearby in the 1960s. ….
…First, the greedflation story ignores business competition. How could so many firms suddenly command higher profit margins? Corporate concentration didn’t dramatically increase during the pandemic. Firms didn’t magically gain more market power or suddenly become greedier. To believe in greedflation, we’d therefore have to think that businesses across many sectors colluded by using their pricing power to raise prices by limiting their output. But in most industries the urge to undercut rivals and grab market share would undermine this coordination. Moreover, real output actually grew strongly in 2021 and 2022, while inflation surged, thus contradicting the idea that collusive efforts to withhold output was what drove rising prices.
Second, the greedflation tale overlooks consumers. How could customers suddenly afford higher prices across many industries? If businesses in some sectors with price-insensitive customers jacked up prices to puff their profits, those consumers would have less money to spend elsewhere, reducing demand and prices for other goods. This would leave overall inflation largely unchanged. To get a situation in which all prices are rising—a macroeconomic inflation—therefore requires more overall spending, perhaps indicating that there was more money available to spend to begin with.
This points us to the real story: Far from profits driving inflation, inflation and temporarily higher profits were both being driven by a third factor: excessive macroeconomic stimulus.
(CATO | See also CITY JOURNAL)
Supply chains were broken by GOVERNMENT REGULATION AND RULES during covid. It just “didn’t happen” by accident or natural causes. Supply chains were cut by enforcement. As above… long haul video!
JOHN STOSSEL on Greed and Inflation
Inflation is sharply up. Now it’s 7%. What went wrong?
STEVE FORBES for PRAGER U ~ Inflation
Look for the source of a society’s collapse, and you’ll usually find the i-word (inflation) at its core. So what exactly is inflation? How does it work? Why is it so dangerous? And how does it affect your everyday life? Steve Forbes breaks it down.
“GREEDFLATION”
The entire article from REASON is this:
The Misuse of Data Behind the ‘Greedflation’ Narrative
There’s no evidence that greed is causing inflation.
The chairman of the WAYS & MEANS Committee has a wonderful [7-2022] fact check page refuting the Democrats “Greedflation” position. I have been warning of this inflationary cliff for many years in my posts on Quantitative Easing.
Likewise, this is a decent article on the topic of disproving a large portion of the “Greedflation” charge:
As the US economy continues to grapple with persistently high inflation, President Biden has repeatedly blamed “corporate greed” as the primary culprit.
The administration has accused companies of engaging in “greedflation” and “shrinkflation” – raising prices and reducing product sizes to maximize profits at the expense of consumers.
However, a recent report from the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco challenges this narrative, providing a more nuanced and evidence-based understanding of the factors driving the current inflationary pressures.
The Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco’s research shows that while there has been an increase in markups (the difference between a product’s selling price and its production cost) in select industries like motor vehicles, the overall markup rate has remained largely in line with previous economic recoveries. Contrary to Biden’s claims, the data suggests that fluctuations in corporate markups have not been a driving force behind the ups and downs of inflation during the post-pandemic recovery.
The report attributes the current inflationary pressures to other factors, such as the massive government stimulus spending and the Federal Reserve’s low-interest-rate policies during the COVID-19 pandemic. These measures boosted consumer demand at a time when the economy was experiencing supply chain disruptions and shortages, leading to a sharp rise in prices across various sectors.
While corporate profits did spike during the economic recovery, the Fed’s analysis indicates that this is not unusual compared to previous recoveries, such as the Great Recession. The increase in profits is largely attributable to pandemic-era subsidies and lower business taxes, rather than a deliberate effort to exploit consumers through “greedflation.” ….
The CAROLINA JOURNAL has a wonderful article as well.
Price inflation is never caused by greed. It’s always caused by a growing money supply. The money supply has grown big-time since 2020, and now we pay a lot more for food and housing. [RPT: actually, the money supply has been growing since Obama]
A new report claims “resounding evidence” shows that high corporate profits are a main driver of ongoing inflation, and companies continue to keep prices high even as their inflationary costs drop.
The report, compiled by the progressive Groundwork Collaborative think tank, found corporate profits accounted for about 53% of inflation during last year’s second and third quarters. Profits drove just 11% of price growth in the 40 years prior to the pandemic, according to the report.
Is this true? Unraveling this mysterious relationship between corporate profit and inflation is easy once we clearly define what profit and inflation are. This allegation that corporate profits accounted for 53 percent of inflation is a result of using wrong definitions and reasoning by mainstream economics researchers.
First, let us see what inflation is. As Henry Hazlitt explained in his article “Inflation in One Page,” inflation is “an increase in the quantity of money and credit. Its chief consequence is soaring prices. Therefore inflation—if we misuse the term to mean the rising prices themselves—is caused solely by printing more money. For this the government’s monetary policies are entirely responsible.”
Faulty reasoning by mainstream economists occurs because of their faulty way of mistaking the price rise effect of inflation as inflation itself. They are putting the cart before the horse. Rising prices is only one of the chief effects of inflation, not inflation itself.
Another mistake that mainstream economists make is that they use the long disproved Marxist “production cost/labor theory of value” to explain the rise in the prices of consumer goods, as is the case with this research done by the Groundwork Collaborative think tank. Production cost (corporate profit) doesn’t determine the prices of consumer goods. The subjective value of the consumer determines those prices. In this article I do not have the space to discuss this very important subjective value theory. I advise my readers to study the literature of the Austrian School of economics.
They also mistake individual commodity price fluctuation for inflation. In a market economy, prices of various commodities are always changing. Such price fluctuation doesn’t reflect the mythical general price level that mainstream economists use to measure inflation.
Also, if corporate profits explain the rise in prices of consumer goods—what mainstream economists call inflation—then what explains the rise in the prices of producer goods? The same corporate profits? We need to remember here that inflation not only increases the prices of consumer goods but also producer goods. When the supply of money rises due to the Fed’s easy money policies of creating dollars out of thin air, it dilutes the purchasing power (value) of all existing dollars in the economy. And because dollars are legal tender money (a common medium of exchange), they will buy less of both consumer and producer goods (i.e., looking from the goods side it will look as if their prices have gone up). Actually, the dollar is losing its value and so buying less of everything against which it is being used in market exchange. …..
Few people have had as profound an impact on modern economics as economist Milton Friedman. His Nobel Prize-winning ideas on free enterprise resonated throughout the world and continue to do so. Johan Norberg, Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute, tells Friedman’s fascinating story.
With the recent passing of Walter Williams, I watched a video of him [Thomas Sowell’s tribute] that reminded me of a video of Milton Friedman on the Donahue Show. So I wanted to combine them for affect.
Part 2 of Rita Panahi added below.
Rita Panahi
PART ONE >>
Sky News Australia host Rita Panahi has roasted some of Kamala Harris’ most outlandish public moments stating the presumptive Democratic nominee will say “just about anything” to get ahead. “One thing you can say about Kamala Harris is that despite her far-left belief system, she’s willing to say just about anything to get ahead,” Ms Panahi commented. “One minute she’s the defund the police, BLM, bail money raiser, and the next she’s presenting herself as the tough prosecutor that criminals fear.”
PART TWO >>
Sky News host Rita Panahi exposes the media’s attempts to “re-write” Kamala Harris’ history. “Apparently she was never the border czar, she never had the most left-wing voting record in the senate, and she was never considered a liability in the Biden administration,” Ms Panahi said.
BTW, it was because of this awesome SKY NEWS video that I added to that VEEP comparison:
RPT SHITE
Bill Maher notes that Kamala is not liked all that much:
DAVE RUBIN & Bill Maher
Dave Rubin & Mark Levin
Dave Rubin and Mark Levin discuss the most liberal senator and radical Presidential nominee yet.
Jesse Watters
Fox News host Jesse Watters says Americans cannot trust the vice president on ‘Jesse Watters Primetime.’
Michaelah Montgomery brought the …
BOOMSTICK!
FOX INTERVIEW
Conserve the Culture founder Michaelah Montgomery joined ‘Fox & Friends’ to discuss her experience meeting former President Trump at an Atlanta Chick-fil-A and how the media has impacted the perception of Trump support in the Black community.
FULL SPEECH!
Here’s the entire, full speech from Michaelah Montgomery today at the Trump rally in Atlanta. She was absolutely on fire!! ?? Just a killer speech! #Trump2024 #UltraMAGA #SaveAmerica ?? pic.twitter.com/S1hLjp83M8
— El Fuzzo (@NWFuzz) August 3, 2024
(Video of VP via RNC RESEARCH) KAMALA HARRIS: “When we invest in clean energy and electric vehicles and reduce population, more of our children can breath clean air and drink clean water.”
Stu Burguiere says you shouldn’t laugh at all of the mainstream media’s climate change stories. The truth behind China’s emissions and the current “Green Delusion” is debunked by Stu.
UPDATED w/POWERLINE!!
Wind and solar installations produce electricity well under 50 percent of the time, a fact that never will change. So, in a “green” world, how do you keep the lights on? Battery storage, liberals tell us. (The electric grid is not a storage device. Electricity on the grid must be consumed in the moment in which it is produced.) Amazingly, however, no environmentalist or liberal has made any effort to demonstrate that battery storage on the scale needed is possible, let alone affordable. In fact, it is not even remotely possible.
Francis Menton has just published a PAPER on energy storage. He summarizes his findings at HIS WEB SITE:
The main point of the paper is that an electrical grid powered mostly by intermittent generators like wind and sun requires full backup from some source; and if that source is to be stored energy, the amounts of storage required are truly staggering. When you do the simple arithmetic to calculate the storage requirements and the likely costs, it becomes obvious that the entire project is completely impractical and unaffordable. The activists and politicians pushing us toward this new energy system of wind/solar/storage are either being intentionally deceptive or totally incompetent.
Thus, for example:
Consider the case of Germany, the country that has gone the farthest of any in the world down the road to “energy transition.” My Report presents two different calculations of the energy storage requirement for Germany in a world of a wind/solar grid and no fossil fuels allowed…. One of the calculations, by a guy named Roger Andrews, came to a requirement of approximately 25,000 GWh; and the other, by two authors named Ruhnau and Qvist, came to a higher figure of 56,000 GWh. The two use similar but not identical methodology, and somewhat different assumptions. Clearly there is a large range of uncertainty as to the actual requirement; but the two calculations cited give a reasonable range for the scope of the problem.
THIS IS THE PORTION POWERLINE CUT OUT OF THEIR EXCERPT
….To give you an idea of just how much energy storage 25,000 (or 56,000) GWh is, here is a rendering (also from my Report) of a grid-scale battery storage facility under construction in Queensland, Australia by Vena Energy. The facility in the rendering is intended to provide 150 MWh of storage.
Remember that 150 MWh is only 0.15 of one GWh. In other words, it would take about 167,000 of these facilities to provide 25,000 GWh of storage, and about 373,000 of them to get to the 56,000 GWh in the larger estimate…..
And against these projections of a storage requirement in the range of tens of thousands of GWh, what are Germany’s plans as presented in this “20-fold expansion” by 2031? From my Report:
In the case of Germany, Wood Mackenzie states that the planned energy storage capacity for 2031, following the 20-fold expansion, is 8.81GWh.
Rather than tens of thousands of GWh, it’s single digits. How does that stack up in percentage terms against the projected requirements?:
In other words, the amount of energy storage that Germany is planning for 2031 is between 0.016% and 0.036% of what it actually would need. This does not qualify as a serious effort to produce a system that might work.
This absurd situation is duplicated in every other jurisdiction that has purported to mandate wind and solar energy. For example, California:
The Report cites another article from Utility Dive stating that the California Public Utilities Commission has ordered the state’s power providers to collectively procure by 2026 some 10.5 GW (or 42.0 GWh) of lithium-ion batteries for grid-scale storage:
The additional 10.5 GW of lithium-ion storage capacity, translating to at most about 42 GWh, would take California all the way to about 0.17% of the energy storage it would need to fully back up a wind/solar generation system.
This is a joke. There are nowhere near enough batteries in the world to back up the world’s need for electricity, nor will there ever be. My colleague Isaac Orr prepared this simple graph, which shows the entire battery capacity of the world as projected in 2030 against the electricity consumption of a single state, Minnesota:
Is there a single place, anywhere in the world, that has actually satisfied its citizens’ need for electricity through wind or solar energy, plus batteries, as liberals now demand for all of us? No, actually, there isn’t:
Here’s what tells you all you need to know: not only is there no working demonstration project anywhere in the world of the wind/solar/storage energy system, but there is none under construction and none even proposed.
The whole green energy project is a gigantic fraud. A handful of shysters are getting rich, along with some activists and politicians, while the rest of us will be left holding the bag. In the dark.
…When You Have Clowns In Charge. RED STATE has Robin Williams and the Saudi comedy skit mocking Joe Bidens memory loss.
(WESTERN JOURNAL HAS MORE)
This was floating around Facebook, But I wanted to get something a tiny bit more substantial than FB. To wit: THE VERMONT DAILY CHRONICLE:
Tesla said it best in referring to batteries as an Energy Storage System. They do NOT make electricity – they store electricity produced elsewhere, primarily by coal, uranium, natural gas-powered plants, or diesel-fueled generators. So, to say an electric vehicle (EV) is a zero-emission vehicle…not. Also, since forty percent of the electricity generated in the U.S. is from coal-fired plants, it follows that forty percent of the EVs on the road are in fact coal-powered…let that sink in.
Einstein’s formula, E=MC2, tells us it takes the same amount of energy to move a five-thousand-pound gasoline-driven automobile a mile as it does an electric one. The only question again is what produces the power? To reiterate, it does not come from the battery; the battery is only the storage device, like a gas tank in a car.
There are two orders of batteries, rechargeable, and single use. The most common single use batteries are A, AA, AAA, C, D. 9V, and lantern types. Those dry-cell species use zinc, manganese, lithium, silver oxide, or zinc and carbon to store electricity chemically. Please note they all contain toxic, heavy metals. Rechargeable batteries only differ in their internal materials, usually lithium-ion, nickel-metal oxide, and nickel-cadmium. The United States uses three billion of these two battery types a year, and most are not recycled; they end up in landfills. If you throw your small, used batteries in the trash, they will continue to leak like the ooze in a ruined flashlight. All batteries eventually rupture; it just takes rechargeable batteries longer to end up in the landfill.
In addition to dry cell batteries, there are also wet cell ones used in automobiles, boats, and motorcycles. The good thing about these is that ninety percent of them are recycled. Unfortunately, we do not yet know how to recycle single-use ones properly.
But that is not the half of it. For those excited about EV, a closer look at batteries along with windmills and solar panels is highly recommended. These three technologies share environmentally destructive embedded costs.
Everything manufactured has two costs associated with it: embedded costs and operating costs. Embedded costs are those that happen before point of sale such as fuel costs, equipment, labor, transportation, etc. For example, a typical EV battery weighs one thousand pounds, about the size of a travel trunk. It contains twenty-five pounds of lithium, sixty pounds of nickel, 44 pounds of manganese, 30 pounds cobalt, 200 pounds of copper, and 400 pounds of aluminum, steel, and plastic.
Inside are over 6,000 individual lithium-ion cells. This should concern you. All those toxic components come from mining. For instance, to manufacture each EV auto battery, you must process 25,000 pounds of brine for the lithium, 30,000 pounds of ore for the cobalt, 5,000 pounds of ore for the nickel, and 25,000 pounds of ore for copper.
All told, it would take 500,000 pounds of the earth’s crust for just one battery. Sixty-eight percent of the world’s cobalt, a significant part of a battery, comes from the Congo. Their mines have no pollution controls, and they employ children who die from handling this toxic material.
Despite the fact California is the only state which requires batteries be recycled, they are building the largest battery in the world near San Francisco which they intend to power from solar panels and windmills. This construction project is creating an environmental disaster.
The main problem with solar arrays is the chemicals needed to process silicate into the silicon used in the panels. To make pure enough silicon requires processing it with hydrochloric acid, sulfuric acid, nitric acid, hydrogen fluoride, trichloroethane, and acetone. In addition, they also need gallium, arsenide, copper-indium-gallium-diselenide, and cadmium-telluride which are highly toxic. Also, silicone dust is a hazard to the workers, and the panels cannot be recycled.
Windmills are the ultimate in embedded costs and environmental destruction. Each weigh 1688 tons (the equivalent of 23 houses) and contains 1300 tons of concrete, 295 tons of steel, 48 tons of iron, 24 tons of fiberglass, and the hard to extract rare earths neodymium, praseodymium, and dysprosium. Each blade weighs 81,000 pounds and will last only 15 to 20 years. The used blades cannot be recycled. And sadly, both solar arrays and windmills kill birds, bats, sea life, and migratory insects.
There may be a place for these technologies, but looking beyond the myth of zero emissions, it is predicted EVs, solar panels and windmills will be abandoned once the embedded environmental costs of making and replacing them become more apparent.
This is always a favorite of mine… and remember, I have a rather large post detailing ARE ELECTRIC CARS “CLEAN”?.
A Previous Post
Vice President Joe Biden aims to be the most progressive president on the issue of climate change. The man who spent most of 2020 hiding in the basement believes the future of energy is renewable energy like wind and solar. Biden should go back to the basement, watch Michael Moore’s “Planet of the Humans,” and rethink his advocacy for renewable energy. Wind and solar are not the answer, and the idea of converting our fossil fuel-based economy into renewables could be a devastating take-down to society.
Remember when Google joined the common sense era?
We came to the conclusion that even if Google and others had led the way toward a wholesale adoption of renewable energy, that switch would not have resulted in significant reductions of carbon dioxide emissions. Trying to combat climate change exclusively with today’s renewable energy technologies simply won’t work; we need a fundamentally different approach.
[…..]
“Even if one were to electrify all of transport, industry, heating and so on, so much renewable generation and balancing/storage equipment would be needed to power it that astronomical new requirements for steel, concrete, copper, glass, carbon fibre, neodymium, shipping and haulage etc etc would appear. All these things are made using mammoth amounts of energy: far from achieving massive energy savings, which most plans for a renewables future rely on implicitly, we would wind up needing far more energy, which would mean even more vast renewables farms – and even more materials and energy to make and maintain them and so on. The scale of the building would be like nothing ever attempted by the human race.”
Google Joins the Common Sense Crew On Renewable Energies ~ Finally! (RPT)