There are a few girls on social media – who have a bunch of followers on social media…mainly because they are showing off their tits on social media…but unlike every single other girl with her tits out…they have these massive disproportionate tits…that spill out of even the largest bathing suit top….all while living on a small frame…and it excites me…More.
California plans to ban sales of internal combustion cars by 2035, outlaw them completely by 2050; assuming anyone will still be living there https://t.co/m0ERMMdZuP— David Burge (@iowahawkblog) September 12, 2018
from my cold dead hands, motherf***ers pic.twitter.com/rfbt7rk4ZS— David Burge (@iowahawkblog) September 12, 2018
The political leaders coming from around the world for Gov. Jerry Brown’s climate action summit this week will grapple with a lot of urgent deadlines to drive down emissions, but one date is especially exasperating.Still more, if you can stomach the idiocy.
It is 2035 — the year advocates aim to kill off production of gasoline- and diesel-powered vehicles.
Keeping global warming to levels society can tolerate could hinge on meeting that target. But even clean-tech-nology capital California has no clear path for getting there.
The question of whether drivers should be gently persuaded or forced out of their internal combustion engine cars and trucks over the next 17 years will weigh heavily on the landmark summit, which runs from Wednesday through Friday in San Francisco.
States, cities and companies will try to chart a course to carry the country and the world toward meeting the goals in the 2015 Paris agreement on climate change, which President Trump has disavowed.
Transportation is the most vexing problem the summit will confront. The sector sends more greenhouse gases into the air than any other, recently outpacing power plants, which are getting cleaner every year. Internal combustion engine cars need to be off the roads altogether by 2050 to meet the Paris goals. Dealers would need to stop selling new models 15 years earlier.
“Even during the Obama administration, when the country was pushing as hard and fast as it could onclimate policy, it still wasn’t enough” to meet the goals on auto emissions, said Kate Larsen, a director at Rhodium Group, a Bay Area research firm.
Rhodium’s modeling shows that just 8% of U.S. drivers will be in zero-emission cars, pickups or SUVs by 2025, a depressing projection for the climate movement.
The urgency is not lost on Brown. Last year, he directed the state’s chief air regulator, Mary Nichols, to look into stepping up the state’s timetable to phase out gas and diesel vehicles. It gnaws at him that other nations are already catapulting ahead.
Electric vehicles account for 5% of cars sold in California and 1% nationwide. In Norway, they make up 40%. Bans on the sales of new gasoline- and diesel-powered cars are scheduled to take effect there and in several other countries as soon as 2025. China has put automakers on notice that a ban is on the horizon.
But it is a much tougher sell in America, even in California. A state legislative proposal this year to ban the sale of new gas-powered cars and trucks by 2040 went nowhere.
“You want me to issue a press release saying, ‘No more combustion engines’?” Brown said in an interview Monday. “There are 32 million in California. It doesn’t work that way. We have to provide an alternative…. We have to get that in place.”
The shift toward electric vehicles in parts of Europe and Asia is bolstered by government subsidies and tax structures that few American politicians would consider. They include tough gas-guzzler penalties for those who drive high-horsepower, climate-unfriendly pickups and SUVs, and large cash grants and tax breaks for those who buy electric.
The U.S. approach is grounded in requiring automakers to meet steadily more ambitious mileage-per-gallon targets, a process that has gone a long way in cutting carbon emissions...
Democrat Antonio Delgado is a Rhodes Scholar and attorney with a Harvard Law degree running in one of the country’s most hotly contested congressional races.Still more.
But Republicans want to instill a different image in the minds of voters in New York’s 19th Congressional District. Their latest ad, released Wednesday, features grainy clips of Delgado, who is African American and made a 2007 rap album. His censored explicit lyrics dominate the ad, along with the album cover, which shows a glaring Delgado in a hoodie.
Raw tensions over race, gender and personal identity are shaping battleground contests from Upstate New York to the Deep South, reflecting the marked schism in the country during the Trump era and the increasingly stark demographic divide between the two political parties.
With just one primary day left, on Thursday, Democrats have set or essentially matched records for the number of female, black and LGBT nominees, a Washington Post analysis shows. Republicans’ diversity statistics have either remained static or declined in each category, leading to a heavily white, male slate of nominees.
Republicans are aggressively trying to cast Democratic candidates as scary, threatening figures with unfamiliar values. A super PAC linked to House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) has aired an ad in Ohio tenuously connecting a candidate of Tibetan and Indian descent to Libyan interests and asking if he is “selling out Americans.” In Kentucky, a GOP incumbent released an ad showing his female Democratic opponent declaring that she is a feminist.
Democrats are increasingly calling out the GOP, saying these are sexist, racist attacks that remind them of the divisive tactics that Donald Trump used as a candidate and has reprised as president. Even some Republicans are troubled by the tone.
“The difference between the past and the present is that you have a political actor like the president who makes it okay, who gives license to it, said Michael Steele, who was the first black chairman of the Republican National Committee. “If you don’t speak to that and call it out, it will germinate, it will become an infection and will create the kind of disease in our politics, which I think to some degree, we are already seeing.”
Republicans behind the attacks are making no apologies. They argue that they are informing voters about their rivals...
.@normmacdonald is right: the new #MeToo morality needs to offer a path to forgiveness. My latest at @ricochet. https://t.co/mR8oCEIcBs— jon gabriel (@exjon) September 12, 2018
The ancient Hebrews confessed the community’s sin, placed it onto a scapegoat, and restored the flawed people. Early Christians confessed to their priest or bishop, perhaps did some acts of penance, and were redeemed in the eyes of the church. For especially egregious and public sins, the process could be quite involved. But the model held across time and faith: confess to wrongdoing, repent, and be forgiven.RTWT.
The new secular church enforces the first and second steps with a vengeance but offers no mechanism for the third and most important step. Louis and Roseanne both confessed and repented. And then … nothing. Perhaps both could have done more. Donating millions to a well-regarded charity. Crawl on their knees to the Hollywood sign and sacrifice an Emmy.
Even if they did, forgiveness, redemption, and restoration were not possible. Instead, they were cast out into weeping and gnashing of teeth with no way to make things right.
This latest faux outrage will be soon forgotten as the Twitter mob lurches after another celebrity’s career tomorrow. As for me, I’ll watch “Norm MacDonald Has a Show” on Netflix and continue to chill. Life’s too short for outrage.
What Democrats Still Don't Get https://t.co/py4yb6eSC9— Townhall.com (@townhallcom) September 11, 2018
Since the election, there has been ample speculation about how Trump “happened.” Last week, Obama offered his hypothesis: resentment and paranoia on the right. He lamented the destruction of the Republican Party and the ensuing demise of America because of the divisiveness and bigotry propagated by the president and those who support him.More.
It seems that most on the left agree with Obama’s view. Progressives purport that enthusiasm for Trump is bolstered by “white fragility”— an insecurity that white voices, once dominant, are now being drowned out by increasingly influential minority groups bolstered by demographic changes. Trump is their “white knight,” ushered in to defend their right to power and superiority.
While it may be easy for Trump’s opposition to dismiss him as the personification of white supremacy, it is also ignorant of the meaningful concerns of the Americans who voted for him. Real, significant changes in American culture and morality that have occurred over the past decade have varied the priorities of the populace, and it is unproductive to discount these in favor of blanket accusations of racism and resentment.
As America has moved quickly and drastically to the left, it has abandoned a portion of its citizenry who still hold to what are now considered “traditional” mores. So, while many who voted for Trump may have indeed done so out of insecurity and fear, these feelings were primarily instigated not by changes in demographics but by changes in values.
The progressive revolution has taken on many forms since the turn of the century, successfully shifting opinion on issues like sexuality, gender, race, immigration and welfare. Take gay marriage: In 2001, 31% of Americans favored same-sex unions. In 2009, the percentage had only increased to 37%. By 2017, that number had surged to 62%. In only eight years, public opinion changed by 25 percentage points—more than four times than it had during the previous eight years.
Regarding racism, in 2009, only 26% of Americans viewed it as a “big problem.” By 2017, that number had more than doubled to 58%. Along party lines, 32% of Democrats and 18% of Republicans saw racism as a major issue in 2009. During the eight years of Obama’s presidency, those numbers shot up to 76% for Democrats and 37% for Republicans.
A month after Trump’s election victory, Issie Lapowsky of Wired noted that, despite a Republican win, the country is indeed moving to the left:
“Over the eight years Barack Obama has served as president, public opinion in the United States has shifted decisively leftward. Think about it. When Obama came to office, he still hadn’t publicly supported same sex marriage. Last year, the White House was lit up in rainbow colors to celebrate the Supreme Court’s decision to legalize same-sex marriage. Over the last year, bottom line-driven businesses have boycotted entire states over discriminatory policies against LGBT people. A law prohibiting transgender people from using the bathroom of their choice just cost North Carolina’s Pat McCrory the governorship. Undocumented immigrants have come out of hiding, banding together online to discuss their struggles. And in November, California, Maine, Massachusetts, and Nevada all voted to make recreational marijuana legal.”She’s right: the majority of Americans are becoming more progressive, particularly on social issues. This isn’t surprising. Evolving views on things like sexuality, race and immigration are to be expected after eight years of the most progressive presidency in history. Plus, millennials, soon-to-be the largest generation in existence, are extremely left-leaning, and, now in their 20s and 30s, have an influential voice in civic discourse. By nature, progressivism continually advances, conquering new moral, cultural, social and political territory with every step. In recent years, the movement has been extremely successful in gaining ground. Those left behind have barely had time to take it in.
Yes—there is real fear, and, to Obama’s point, perhaps some resentment amongst those who are not on board the progressive train. But, despite what many on the left claim, this has more to do with the changing moral, social landscape than it does racial identity and so-called bigotry. And it is not only the changes themselves that have caused anxiety, it is the attitude of those who promote these changes...
Australian newspaper is defending a cartoon of Serena Williams that has been widely condemned as a racist depiction. https://t.co/Br6QP3XY8Y— USA TODAY (@USATODAY) September 12, 2018
'Welcome to PC World': Australian newspaper doubles down, reprints controversial cartoon of Serena Williams https://t.co/QR03sgsgsl pic.twitter.com/Zk7Qcx7kHZ— National Post (@nationalpost) September 12, 2018
The Circus of Resistance https://t.co/nQzNqcfkou pic.twitter.com/iIVABXq5Uo— American Greatness (@theamgreatness) September 10, 2018
The resistance to Donald Trump was warring on all fronts last week.Keep reading.
Democratic senators vied with pop-up protestors in the U.S. Senate gallery to disrupt and, if possible, to derail the confirmation hearings of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. U.S. Senator Cory Booker (D-N.J.) played Spartacus, but could not even get the script right as he claimed to be bravely releasing classified information that was already declassified. I cannot remember another example of a senator who wanted to break the law but could not figure out how to do it.
Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), former Harvard Law Professor who still insists she is of Native American heritage, called for the president to be removed by invoking the 25th Amendment. Apparently fabricating an ethnic identity is sane, and getting out of the Iran deal or the Paris Climate Accord is insanity and grounds for removal.
Barack Obama decided that ex-presidents should attack current presidents, and thereby reminded the country why Trump was elected. The author of the Russian “reset” and the hot-mic collusionary offer criticized Trump for being soft on Putin. The president who never achieved annualized 3 percent GDP growth (and is the first president since 1933 who can claim this “distinction”) also claimed Trump’s roaring economy was due to Obama-era policies (e.g., raising taxes, Obamacare, more regulations, and “you didn’t build that” commentaries). Fresh from trashing his successor in a funeral speech, the ever audacious Obama called for more decorum.
Bruce Ohr, once number four at the Department of Justice, and whose wife was working with Christopher Steele on the Fusion GPS file (a fact he has never disclosed willingly), now more or less has made a mockery of the FBI narrative of when, why, and how it began surveilling American citizens and infiltrating the Trump campaign. Ohr apparently has testified that well before the election, and well before the application of FISA warrants, he was working with the FBI, the already discredited Christopher Steele, and a Russian oligarch either to smear candidate Trump, or to facilitate the entry into the United States of a once barred and questionable Russian grandee, or both.
Nike hired NFL renegade Colin Kaepernick to peddle its sports products. For all its billion-dollar market research, it apparently did not know what Donald Trump’s animal cunning had almost immediately surmised: a majority of Americans do not appreciate the pampered multimillionaire Kaepernick sanctioning violence against the police by wearing “pig” socks, or mocking the National Anthem by taking a knee. Nike could just as well have hired Bowe Bergdahl to push its sneakers.
The Deep State Emerges
Then we come to an insurrectionary “resistance” op-ed in the New York Times, an insider scoop about a collective “undercover” effort to nullify the current presidency...
More.
I had known some of these leftists for years, and after the fall of the Soviet empire in 1989–91 many of them bitterly lamented to me that the “alternative to capitalism” was now gone. A significant number of them retreated into a silent and sullen shell.
Then came 9/11.
Almost overnight, these individuals underwent a miraculous transformation. A bright sparkle could once again be detected in their eyes, as their revolutionary selves came out of a deep slumber. Never had I seen them so happy, so hopeful, and ready for another attempt at creating a glorious and revolutionary future. Without doubt, September 11 represented a personal -- and morbid -- vindication for them.
The images of the innocent people jumping to their deaths from the Twin Towers evoked no sympathy from these individuals. Instead, they saw only poetic justice in American commercial airplanes plunging into American buildings packed with people. For my leftist acquaintances, the jihadist terror war gave promise of succeeding in a project in which Communism had failed: to obliterate the capitalist system itself. “The U.S. brought this on itself,” they stated repeatedly -- and with scornful self-satisfaction.
These disturbing personal encounters I had were a microcosm of the Left’s behavior on the U.S. national scene. In the blink of an eye after the Twin Towers went down, leftists were beating their breasts with eerie repentance for their own government’s supposed crimes and characterizing the tragedy that their nation had just suffered to be some form of karmic justice.
Immediately following the 9/11 attack, leftist academics led with a drum roll. The very next day after the terrorist strike, the Left's intellectual guru, Noam Chomsky, exonerated the terrorists, stating that the Clinton administration’s bombing of the pharmaceutical plant in Sudan constituted a far more serious terrorist act and warning that 9/11 would be exploited by the United States as an excuse to destroy Afghanistan.
Leftist academics across the country regurgitated Chomsky’s themes, cheering the 9/11 terrorist acts, which they deemed a just retribution for America’s transgressions...
— David M. Drucker (@DavidMDrucker) September 10, 2018
At this stage of the game, losing the House is the most likely proposition. It’s just a matter of how bad it gets,” said a disconsolate Republican strategist with clients on the ballot, describing the final, desperate scramble to rescue the G.O.P.’s 23-seat majority from an impeachment-happy opposition. In Washington, a familiar sort of fatalism has taken hold. Just weeks until early voting kicks off, a spate of fresh public-opinion polls show Democrats on the precipice of a resounding victory. Time is short; resources are dwindling, and the singular figure with the power to make or break the party—Donald Trump—seems pathologically incapable of standing down and letting a booming job market do the talking. “You have people imploring the president not to put them in a position that will harm them—and therefore harm him,” a veteran G.O.P. operative said of Republican congressional leaders.More.
The pendulum of political power, which historically swings against the White House during the midterms, could be especially savage this year, given the sharp dissatisfaction with Trump in America’s usually Republican-leaning suburbs. Washington’s high-powered consulting class is betting on it. The lobby shops and advocacy organizations that play both sides and thrive on proximity to power are preparing for a changing of the gavel and moving to forge connections with Democratic committee chairmen in the House beginning in January of 2019, when the 116th Congress is seated. “Downtown, there is a sense that the House is already lost for Republicans,” a G.O.P. lobbyist and former senior House aide told me. “There is a hiring spree for plugged-in House Democrats who want to lobby. So, downtown is already planning on the Democratic takeover; the bets are on how big the flip will be.
Democratic operatives aren’t being snapped up by K Street at quite the same rate as two years ago. Lobbying shops were chastened by Trump’s victory in 2016 and are awaiting more evidence to confirm what appears to be a surging blue tide. But professional Washington is not unconvinced. They’re privy to much of the same data being poured over by dialed-in Republicans, and believe an end to one-party rule is on the horizon. Whatever bump the Republicans enjoyed earlier this year, during the brief period of normalcy after Trump signed the historic, $1.3 trillion tax overhaul into law, appears long gone. So is the goodwill House Republicans anticipated when they pictured a fall campaign with a national economy growing at an annual clip of 4 percent, and an unemployment rate that had plummeted below 4 percent. “I’m advising clients to start covering their bases with would-be chairs,” said another Republican lobbyist, referring to the Democrats who are likely to take over powerful House committees, such as Energy and Commerce or Ways and Means.
The political forces battering the G.O.P. aren’t hitting the two houses of Congress equally. As I reported for the Washington Examiner and discovered during a summer swing through the Midwest, 2018 is essentially a tale of two campaigns, reflective of the balkanization gripping our politics. As bad as the midterms look for House Republicans, with dozens of seats in danger, their Senate colleagues begin the fall chase better positioned. The party’s 51-49 Senate majority, propped up by a battleground that runs right through the heart of Trump country, could actually expand, if Republicans can navigate a few molehills, and if those molehills don’t grow into mountains. Rep. Beto O’Rourke might upset Sen. Ted Cruz in Texas, granted that has as much to do with the Republican’s own image problems as the Democratic Party’s Senate prospects.
Democrats are on the defensive in a handful of ruby red states a world away from restless, upscale suburbia...
Big sexy cleavage! #boobs #tits @Real_modela pic.twitter.com/4wOyCXs7px
— Big Breast Pics (@BigBreastPics) August 7, 2018
