Tuesday, September 4, 2018

Amber Lee's Low Pressure Weather Forecast

It's been somewhat overcast and mild.

Here's the lovely Ms. Amber, for CBS News 2 Los Angeles:



Petulant Toddler Democrats Launch Campaign of Pandemonium to Protest Brett Kavanaugh Confirmation (VIDEO)

I worked today, teaching classes. I had no time to tune into the Senate hearings on the Kavanaugh confirmation, although I would have liked to. But then I would have been disappointed and disgusted at the literal circus that Democrats created to somehow --- anyhow --- defeat the nomination? I'll tell you, this isn't going to do a thing. It's kabuki theater, as Michelle Malkin always points out. But whatever it is, it's despicable.

On Twitter and YouTube:




Monday, September 3, 2018

Brett Kavanaugh Confirmation Hearings

Confirmation hearings begin tomorrow.

I've been seeing a lot of tweets on Kavanaugh, especially from that crazy leftist wench Lauren Duca.

Here's some stuff online:


Emily Chang, Brotopia

At Amazon, Emily Chang, Brotopia: Breaking Up the Boys' Club of Silicon Valley.



Kelly Brook 2019 Calendar

At the Sun U.K., "KEL'S ANGEL: Topless Kelly Brook has a cheeky glance over her shoulder in exclusive snaps from her 2019 calendar. The Brit model, 38, covered her boobs as she showed off her sand-covered floral bikini bottoms in a sexy pose."


Plus, flashback to 2013: "Phenomenal New Kelly Brook Sunbathing Pics From Cancun."


Twitter Struggles to Police Bad Actors

If there were a decent alternative I'd use it.

But that alternative is not Gab.ai, which is the home to white supremacists mostly (AFAICT).

Twitter is so bad, though, I doubt it can continue to grow and maintain viability. It's too partisan and hideously biased against conservatives.

It's a joke frankly.

But like I said, it's the place for politics on social media until a genuine alternative emerges.

At WSJ, "Inside Twitter’s Long, Slow Struggle to Police Bad Actors":


When Twitter Inc. Chief Executive Jack Dorsey testifies before Congress this week, he’ll likely be asked about an issue that has been hovering over the company: Just who decides whether a user gets kicked off the site?

To some Twitter users—and even some employees—it is a mystery.

In policing content on the site and punishing bad actors, Twitter relies primarily on its users to report abuses and has a consistent set of policies so that decisions aren’t made by just one person, its executives say.

Yet, in some cases, Mr. Dorsey has weighed in on content decisions at the last minute or after they were made, sometimes resulting in changes and frustrating other executives and employees, according to people familiar with the matter.

Understanding Mr. Dorsey’s role in making content decisions is crucial, as Twitter tries to become more transparent to its 335 million users, as well as lawmakers about how it polices toxic content on its site.

In a hearing Wednesday morning before the Senate Intelligence Committee, Mr. Dorsey will appear alongside Facebook Inc. Chief Operating Officer Sheryl Sandberg to discuss how foreign actors can use the social-media platforms to spread misinformation and propaganda. Later in the day, the House Commerce Committee will question Mr. Dorsey individually in a Republican-led look at how Twitter treats conservative voices.

The latter hearing “is about pulling back the curtain on Twitter’s algorithms, how the company makes decisions about content, and how those decisions impact Americans,” said Rep. Greg Walden (R., Ore.), the chairman of the House Commerce Committee.

Twitter and rival Facebook are increasingly caught in a Catch-22 situation—criticized by some users for allowing hateful posts, but blasted by others for removing content because it curtails free speech.

Twitter has taken a different approach than Facebook, which has hired thousands of content reviewers in the last couple of years to review posts and built out technology to flag inappropriate content. Twitter has far less staff and typically only investigates harassment and abuse that has been reported by users.

Last month, after Twitter’s controversial decision to allow far-right conspiracy theorist Alex Jones to remain on its platform, Mr. Dorsey told one person that he had overruled a decision by his staff to kick Mr. Jones off, according to a person familiar with the discussion. Twitter disputes that account and says Mr. Dorsey wasn’t involved in those discussions.

Twitter’s initial inaction on Mr. Jones, after several other major tech companies banned or limited his content, drew fierce backlash from the public and Twitter’s own employees, some of whom tweeted in protest.

A similar chain of events unfolded in November 2016, when the firm’s trust and safety team kicked alt-right provocateur Richard Spencer off the platform, saying he was operating too many accounts. Mr. Dorsey, who wasn’t involved in the initial discussions, told his team that Mr. Spencer should be allowed to keep one account and stay on the site, according to a person directly involved in the discussions.

Twitter says Mr. Dorsey doesn’t overrule staffers on content issues. The company declined to make Mr. Dorsey available...
Keep reading.


Progress on New Inglewood Stadium (VIDEO)

It's the future home of the Rams and Chargers.

At LAT, "Rams tour Inglewood Stadium site and like what they see as progress continues."



Alexis Ren Feels Like a Diva (VIDEO)

At Sports Illustrated Swimsuit:



Some Girl and Her Hot Body

At Entensity, "Naked Girl and her Hot Body…"

Hat Tip: Drunken Stepfather, "MORNING HANGOVER DUMP OF THE DAY."

Angie Harmon, 46, Flaunts Fabulous Figure in String Bikini During Beach Vacation

From just last month.

She's got the body of a teenager, dang.

At Women's Health, "Angie Harmon Just Celebrated Her 46th Birthday With an Insane Bikini Abs Pic."

And at People:


Germany is 'Unsettled' by Islamic 'Refugees'

Change is a coming.

Change to Germany. Change for the better, and it's about time.

Sheesh.

At Poltico E.U., "German far right fuels Muslim ‘takeover’ fears: A series of violent crimes committed by refugees is unsettling the nation":


BERLIN — Can Germany survive Islam?

That question is once again at the center of the country’s public discourse amid the violent protests that followed last week’s brutal killing of a German man, allegedly at the hands of two Muslim refugees, and the publication of a new book titled “Hostile Takeover, how Islam halts progress and threatens society.”

On Saturday, about 11,000 people (8,000 right-wing and far-right protesters and about 3,000 anti-Nazis, according to police estimates) took to the streets of the eastern German city of Chemnitz, where the killing occurred. Eighteen people were injured, including a TV reporter who was thrown down a flight of stairs.

There’s nothing new about such clashes, or even the debate over Islam. What the past week reveals, however, is the degree to which the refugee influx since 2015 continues to dominate the country’s politics and fuel support for the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD). The pictures of marauding neo-Nazis in Chemnitz suggest the German government has largely failed to keep the violent extreme right in check, despite decades of trying.

By all rights, Germany should be celebrating a golden era. Unemployment is the lowest it’s been since reunification amid robust economic growth. The country’s public debt is on course to fall below 60 percent of gross domestic product this year, meaning Berlin will fulfill the Maastricht criteria for the first time in almost 20 years.

Despite Germany’s growing prosperity, its society is seething as the negative consequences of taking in more than 1 million asylum seekers since 2015 sink in. “Who should be allowed in?” asked Der Spiegel on its cover last week. This week’s cover, devoted to Saxony, the state where the violence occurred, reads: “When the right grabs power.”

Thilo Sarrazin, the former Bundesbank official and provocateur who wrote “Hostile Takeover,” has tapped into Germany’s unease about the refugee influx with a dystopian prediction of what lies ahead...
Keep reading.

U.S. Officials Cracking Down on Illegal Immigrants Using Fake Documents to Secure Legal Status

The U.S. is seizing documents of so-called "citizens" along the U.S.-Mexico border. It turns out that loads of illegals are claiming dual citizenship --- citizenship in Mexico, where they were born, and citizenship in the U.S. --- where they're using fraudulent papers to scam U.S. taxpayers and help Democrats win office.

The Other McCain has the story, "Fake News, Real Hate":

When President Trump attacks the liberal media as “fake news,” this is treated by the media as a threat to freedom of the press. However, it is the press itself which, by its deliberately one-sided partisan approach to news, is destroying its own credibility. The transparent biases of the media — e.g., CNN’s role as the “Clinton News Network” in 2016 — are not merely harmful to their own journalistic integrity; they are a threat to democracy itself. “Fake news” is bad for America.

Consider the case of a Washington Post article about efforts by U.S. immigration officials to prevent illegal entry into the country by those using fraudulent documents. This article by Kevin Sieff claims that “U.S. citizens are increasingly being swept up by immigration enforcement agencies.” State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert denounced the Post article as “dishonest,” and declared: “This is an irresponsible attempt to create division and stoke fear among American citizens while attempting to inflame tensions over immigration.”

The central claim of Sieff’s article — that there is a “surging” number of people being denied U.S. passports as part of a Trump administration “crackdown” — is false. According to State Department figures, the approval rate for passport applications involving disputed birth certificates has actually increased, from 64.1% in 2014 to 74.2% so far in 2018. Obviously, passport denials cannot be “surging,” if the approval rate is increasing; Seiff’s article is therefore “fake news” — partisan propaganda, an anti-Trump hit job disguised as journalism.

Sieff constructed a textbook example of fraudulent “reporting.” For example, he treats as authoritative the claims of two immigration lawyers in Texas, one of whom says that cases of denied passports are “skyrocketing,” and another who asserts that he is aware of “probably 20 people” who are U.S. citizens that have been sent to “detention centers” by the Trump administration. These anecdotal claims were accepted as fact by Sieff, who nevertheless was unable to identify even one such case by name, so it is impossible to verify if any such cases actually exist.

What is the truth? State Department spokeswoman Nauert explained...
Keep reading.


Expect Big Economic Lift-Off from President Trump's 'Space Force' (VIDEO)

Hey, leftists even like Trump's plan for a "space force."

And while we're at it, perhaps we could launch a few members of the anti-Trump "resistance" into outer space. They'd be good target practice for the all-American intergalactic Air Force, lol.




At LAT, "Trump's 'space force' could propel Southern California's aerospace industry":
One of the big winners from President Trump’s push for a new military service called “space force” may be one of his least favorite places — California.

Once the launchpad of the nation’s aerospace industry, Southern California stands to see a surge in government and industry jobs and billions of dollars in contracts for satellites and other technology if Congress approves the space force when it takes up the proposal next year, industry experts and former military officials said.

“You can’t just go out in the middle of Iowa and try to create a center for space,” said Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Torrance), a retired Air Force officer. “So Southern California is very well situated” to get substantial benefits.

The extent of the benefits would depend on where the headquarters is located, how much is spent on new satellites and other space systems, and how many people and programs now in the Air Force and other existing armed services might be shifted to the new force.

Secretary of Defense James N. Mattis said Tuesday that planners have just begun preparing cost estimates. “We’ve already commenced the effort, but I don’t want to give you an off-the-cuff number,” Mattis told reporters at the Pentagon.

The biggest uncertainty is whether Trump or Congress would try to direct the rewards to other states. The president has visited California only once since taking office, and his administration has warred with Sacramento on fuel efficiency standards, clean air regulations, firefighting techniques and more.

“Southern California remains the largest concentration of space technology, including military space technology, in the United States,” said Loren Thompson, aerospace analyst with the Lexington Institute think tank, which receives money from major industry players, including Boeing Co. and Lockheed Martin Corp.

“But when you set up a new military service, you increase the impact of politics in ways that might not necessarily be good for California,” he added.

Colorado and Florida, which also boast extensive civilian and military aerospace facilities, could be big winners too.

The White House says it will unveil its plan for a space force early next year. For now, the Pentagon is taking interim steps, including creation of a Space Command in the Air Force to centralize planning for war fighting in space.

Congressional approval of Trump’s idea for a futuristic armed force for space is by no means certain. Key lawmakers, some Pentagon officials and senior commanders, especially in the Air Force, fear losing responsibility and budgetary authority for space...
More.

Jennifer Delacruz's Labor Day Forecast

Enjoy your holiday everybody. It's going to be glorious today.

Here's the lovely Ms. Jennifer, for ABC News 10 San Diego:



Meghan McCain's Sneering Contempt

That was my first reaction when I saw this brief video, and my goodness the look on her face is shocking. She's an angry old woman (as someone snarked on Twitter at the time), and she's not even old yet. Bitter and angry.


Sunday, September 2, 2018

Lila Rose on 'Tucker Carlson Tonight' (VIDEO)

She's the sweetest lady.



Selena Zito Under Attack

This is American politics encapsulated.

When you don't like the findings or conclusions, destroy the messenger. And that's what leftists are trying to do to Salena Zito.

This HuffPost hit piece, from scuzzy young leftist (who can't shine Salena's shoes), embeds the anonymous troll twitter attack that got this whole thing going. Ms. Salena was on Face the Nation today and was able respond.


The 'Diversity' Racket at UCLA

At great piece, from Heather Mac Donald, at the Los Angeles Times (surprisingly), "UCLA's infatuation with diversity is a costly diversion from its true mission":


If Albert Einstein applied for a professorship at UCLA today, would he be hired? The answer is not clear. Starting this fall, all faculty applicants to UCLA must document their contributions to “equity, diversity and inclusion.” (Next year, existing UCLA faculty will also have to submit an “equity, diversity and inclusion statement” in order to be considered for promotion, following the lead of five other UC campuses.) The mandatory statements will be credited in the same manner as the rest of an applicant’s portfolio, according to UCLA’s equity, diversity and inclusion office.

A contemporary Einstein may not meet the suggested evaluation criteria. Would his “job talk” — a presentation of one’s scholarly accomplishments — reflect his contributions to equity, diversity and inclusion? Unlikely. Would his research show, in the words of the evaluation template, the “potential to understand the barriers facing women and racial/ethnic minorities?” Also unlikely. Would he have participated in “service that applies up-to-date knowledge to problems, issues and concerns of groups historically underrepresented in higher education?” Sadly, he may have been focusing on the theory of general relativity instead. What about “utilizing pedagogies addressing different learning styles” or demonstrating the ability to “effectively teach and attract students from underrepresented communities”? Again, not at all guaranteed.

As the new mandate suggests, UCLA and the rest of the University of California have been engulfed by the diversity obsession. The campuses are infatuated with group identity and difference. Science and the empirical method, however, transcend just those trivialities of identity that UC now deems so crucial: “race, ethnicity, gender, age, religion, language, abilities/disabilities, sexual orientation, gender identity and socioeconomic status,” to quote from the university’s Diversity Statement. The results of that transcendence speak for themselves: an astounding conquest of disease and an ever-increasing understanding of the physical environment. Unlocking the secrets of nature is challenge enough; scientists (and other faculty) should not also be tasked with a “social justice” mission.

But such a confusion of realms currently pervades American universities, and UC in particular. UCLA’s Intergroup Relations Office offers credit courses and “co-curricular dialogues” that encourage students to, you guessed it, “explore their own social identities (i.e. gender, race, nationality, religion/spirituality, sexual orientation, social class, etc.) and associated positions within the campus community.” Even if exploring your social identity were the purpose of a college education (which it is not), it would be more fruitful to define that identity around accomplishments and intellectual passions — “budding mathematician,” say, or “history fanatic” — rather than gender and race.

Intergroup Relations is just the tip of the bureaucratic diversity iceberg. In 2015, UCLA created a vice chancellorship for equity, diversity and inclusion, funded at $4.3 million, according to figures published by the Millennial Review in 2017. (The EDI vice chancellor’s office did not have its current budget “at the ready,” a UCLA spokesman said, nor did Intergroup Relations.) Over the last two years, according to the Sacramento Bee’s state salary database, the diversity vice chancellor’s total pay, including benefits, has averaged $414,000, more than four times many faculty salaries. Besides his own staff, the vice chancellor for equity, diversity and inclusion presides over the Discrimination Prevention Office; BruinX, the “research and development arm of EDI”; faculty “equity advisors”; UCLA’s Title IX office; and a student advisory board. Various schools at UCLA, including medicine and dentistry, have their own diversity deans, whose job includes making sure that the faculty avoid “implicit bias in the hiring process,” in the words of the engineering school’s diversity dean.

These bureaucratic sinecures are premised on the idea that UCLA is rife with discrimination, from which an ever-growing number of victim groups need protection...
 Keep reading.


Time for Truth

From VDH, at RCP, "The Truth Will Set Us All Free."


Saturday, September 1, 2018