24 thoughts on “News/Politics 2-7-17

  1. Now this is interesting: vertical forests that clean the air in the cities! It would be cool to see some of these sprout up in NYC, Chicago, St. Louis and other areas.

    China has pollution problems, and one Italian architect could have some answers.

    The Chinese city of Nanjing is getting a Vertical Forest, a set of two buildings stylised with around 1,100 trees and a combination of over 2,500 shrubs and plants.

    But it’s not all about how it looks: The Nanjing Towers will absorb enough carbon dioxide to make around 132 pounds (60 kilograms) of oxygen every day, an official press release claimed. China’s Vertical Forest is scheduled to be completed sometime next year.

    At the time of writing, Nanjing has an air-quality index of 167, which categorises it as “unhealthy.” For reference, Sydney and New York both have “moderate” indexes of around 60, while London sits at about 100, teetering between “moderate” and “unhealthy.”

    It’ll be the third city to get a Vertical Forest, following ones built in Milan, Italy and Lausanne, Switzerland.

    The towers will stand at 354 and 656 feet tall, respectively (that’s 107 and 199 metres), reports Italian publication Living. The shorter tower will house a Hyatt hotel, while the taller one will be home to a museum, offices and an architecture school.

    https://www.cnet.com/news/pollution-fighting-vertical-forest-coming-to-china/

    Like

  2. Hopefully they’re teaching them how to be bulletproof too, or at least make them aware they’re bringing fists to what may turn out to be a gun fight, as many of their targets are big 2nd Amend. people, and many conceal carry.

    And all this time I thought they were against bullying.

    http://www.campusreform.org/?ID=8741

    “e “Knights for Socialism” group at the University of Central Florida (UCF) held a workshop Sunday to teach left-wing students how to “BASH THE FASH” with a “Leftist Fight Club” open to everyone but Republicans.

    “In response to the record number of hate crimes against Latinxs, Immigrants, Muslims, Women, the LGBTQIA+ community, Jews, African Americans and other minorities since the rise of Donald Trump and other Alt-Right Neo-Nazis, Knights for Socialism has decided to host a series of self-defense clinics for anyone that wants to learn how to BASH THE FASH,” asserts the Facebook event page for “Leftist Fight Club: The Rumbles at Lake Claire.”

    The description explains that a local amateur boxer was on hand to teach basic hand-to-hand combat techniques at the self-defense clinic, in order to help the socialist students better protect themselves from potential hate crimes performed by those sympathetic to “Donald Trump and other Alt-Right Neo-Nazis.”

    The event planners specifically urged women to attend because they expect a rise in sexual violence due to the election of President Trump.

    “Ladies: The Commander in thief is a sexual predator and rapist,” the description warns. “He has normalised sexual assault and it is expected that sexual violence against women is going to skyrocket in the next 12 months. Please join us! There will be other women there for you to spar against!””
    —————————-

    Like

  3. And college students aren’t the only ones worried about Trump and all those Trump supporters either.

    http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/nicholas-fondacaro/2017/02/06/msnbcs-tur-suggests-trump-will-be-responsible-suspicious

    “MSNBC took its fear mongering smears of the Donald Trump administration to a dark new low Monday afternoon when reporter Katy Tur suggested the president’s war with the media would start racking up actual casualties. During an interview with Nebraska Senator Deb Fischer, a Republican, Tur suggested Trump would take a page from Russian President Vladimir Putin’s playbook and start targeting journalists for death.

    “As we know, there’s, since 2000, been a couple dozen suspicious deaths of journalists in Russia who came out against the government there,” Tur reminded the Senator before unscrupulously suggesting Trumps distaste for the media would escalate, “Donald Trump has made no secret about going after journalists and his distaste for any news that doesn’t agree with him here. Do you find that this is a dangerous path he is heading down?”

    Like

  4. So why would you need quotas on what you allege is only 3% of your business?

    Because you’re lying.

    And the prize for getting their number of abortions up?

    Pizza. Sad and disgusting.

    http://hotair.com/archives/2017/02/07/former-planned-parenthood-managers-we-had-to-meet-quotas-for-abortions/

    “Does pizza make a great motivator to end a pregnancy? The latest video from Live Action features former Planned Parenthood managers discussing the financial pressure put on clinics to maximize the revenue stream from their core business — abortions. The pressure wasn’t just limited to the managers either, but also to the women who came to the clinic:

    “I trained my staff the way that I was trained, which was to really encourage women to choose abortion; to have it at Planned Parenthood, because it counts towards our goal.”

    “It sounds kind of crazy, but pizza is a motivator [for getting abortion numbers up].”
    Most of this sounds like the kind of sales-management tactics one would see from retail entities or real-estate offices. It’s not quite Glengarry Glen Ross, but it doesn’t sound anything like a health-care entity. The focus in health care is on the patient, not the number of units sold. Yet Planned Parenthood insists that its mission is the former, not the latter.

    One of the two former managers interviewed makes that distinction plain when discussing how Planned Parenthood trains managers to deliver the hard sell to women in crisis:

    “If they’d say, ‘I’m not able to pay [my bill] today,’ then we would say something like, ‘Well, if you can’t pay $10 today, how are you going to take care of a baby? Have you priced diapers? Do you know how much it costs to buy a car seat? Where would you go for help? There’s no place in Storm Lake (or whatever town they were in), you know, where you can get help as a pregnant mom. So really, don’t you think your smartest choice is termination?’

    This points out more clearly what Planned Parenthood actually sells — despair. They want women to panic, to despair, in order to profit off of it. This sales pitch takes a woman at her most vulnerable and heaps the weight of the world on her shoulders … simply to meet a sales goal. At least in Glengarry Glen Ross, no one died.”

    Like

  5. As a real estate agent, I don’t like being compared to an abortionist. We just shed the used car salesman stereotype. 😉

    Here’s a thought. Condoms and prescription birth control are cheaper than babies AND abortions.

    It does remind me of a funeral director I was was acquainted with. He had been to a company convention and they had hounded them about how to get sales up. I cracked up and asked how he was supposed to do that if if the company issued everyone a 9mm

    Liked by 1 person

  6. AJ – That Campus Reform article sounds like they’re talking about self-defense, not bullying. But the fact that they specifically excluded Republicans is suspicious, at the least, & possibly hateful.

    Like

  7. Kizzie,

    So they need protection on campus from attacks that aren’t happening?

    Click the link and check out their propaganda advertising. While that may be their stated purpose, their intent is pretty clear. And anyone who disagrees with them are the Nazis. Their Facebook page is all about resistence, and bashing Trump and his supporters.

    And they used the term “bashing” not me.

    https://www.facebook.com/kfsocialism/

    Like

  8. Tychicus,

    Or more likely, some underling handed her an old script, instead of the new one. Same playbook, but the names have been updated from Bush to Trump. 🙂

    Like

  9. Maybe we should just do what Mexico does and let them pass thru, as long as they all go north.

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/worried-trump-asylum-seekers-walk-cold-road-canada-183626789.html

    ” Refugees in the United States fearing a worsening climate of xenophobia in the wake of a divisive U.S. presidential campaign are flocking to Canada in growing numbers.

    Manitoba’s Welcome Place refugee agency helped 91 claimants between Nov. 1 and Jan. 25 – more than the agency normally sees in a year. Most braved the freezing prairie winter to walk into Canada.

    “We haven’t had something before like this,” said Maggie Yeboah, president of the Ghanaian Union of Manitoba, which has helped refugees get medical attention and housing. “We don’t know what to do.”
    ——-

    “More than 7,000 refugee applicants entered Canada in 2016 through land ports of entry from the United States, up 63 percent from the previous year, according to Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA).

    Over 2,000 more entered “irregularly” during a similar time period, without official authorization, such as across unmonitored fields.”
    ———-

    “Prime Minister Trudeau took office in 2015 on a commitment to admit tens of thousands of Syrian refugees. “While the majority of the world is turning their backs and building walls, the fact that Trudeau took this bold humanitarian goal put [Canada] on the map,” said Chris Friesen, director of settlement services at Immigrant Services Society of British Columbia.

    But this year, Canada plans to take only 7,500 government-assisted refugees – less than half last year’s number. People eager to sponsor refugees find themselves waiting years to do so.”
    —————–

    The boy socialist talks a good game, and loves to bash Trump, but the numbers show it’s just that, talk, but very little action. For someone who runs his mouth and invites them to Canada, you’d think he’d be doing more.

    Like

  10. The Real, Trudeau has never bashed Trump. His recent tweet saying refugees were welcome to Canada whatever their religion didn’t even mention Trump. He may not be the most experienced statesman, but he knows better than to bad mouth another world leader. Hey, Trudeau even congratulated Trump on his election. Our media and private citizens, and even opposition party members may talk all they want about Trump – that is freedom of speech after all, but our federal government doesn’t say that much one way or another about the U.S. administrations. Also, as I’ve said before, we are a small country, only a tenth of the population of the U.S. Therefore, our ability to process refugees is also smaller – smaller population means smaller government agencies with smaller staff. The number of government sponsored refugees is only the number of refugees brought from outside the country that the government will support for a year; and government sponsorship accounts for only about a third of the refugees admitted. The fact that people are waiting years for a refugee family to sponsor bears no relation to the number of government sponsored refugees, since private sponsorship is different – the wait time says more about the fact that the screening protocol can’t keep up with the charitable demand than it does about how many refugees the government is willing to admit. Also, the people coming across the border to Canada will not be counted among the government sponsored refugees, if their claims are approved, as they will be using the In-Canada Asylum Program, rather than the Refugee and Humanitarian Resettlement Program.

    Liked by 2 people

  11. “Trudeau has never bashed Trump”

    With video…..

    http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/justin-trudeau-takes-on-donald-trump/

    “Having acknowledged the importance of keeping his oar out of foreign election campaigns, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau signalled with that word he was dropping the fig leaf of impartiality, and promptly took a swipe at U.S. presidential hopeful Donald Trump.

    “I don’t think it comes as a surprise to anyone that I stand firmly against the politics of division, the politics of fear, the politics of intolerance or hateful rhetoric,” Trudeau said during a live, year-end town hall hosted by Maclean’s. “If we allow politicians to succeed by scaring people, we don’t actually end up any safer. Fear doesn’t make us safer. It makes us weaker.”

    Trudeau was responding to a question from a voter sent by social media, who asked whether the newly elected PM would “stand up to Trump and condemn his hateful rhetoric.” At first, it looked like Trudeau would demur. “It’s going to be important for Canadians, for Canadian jobs, for Canadian prosperity,” he said, “to be able to have a positive relationship with whoever Americans choose as their president.”

    Then came that big “however.”

    Without addressing Trump by name, Trudeau said leaders should respond to recent terrorist attacks by focusing on “keeping our communities united, instead of trying to build walls and scapegoat communities. And I mean to talk directly about the Muslim community. They are the greatest victims of terrorist acts around the world. Painting ISIS and others with a broad brush that extends to all Muslims is not just ignorant, it’s irresponsible.”

    “His spinners will no doubt characterize his remarks as abstract observations. But there was no mistaking where Trudeau was going. By that point of the broadcast, he’d already spoken glowingly of his conversations with current President Barack Obama, whom Trump has set up as a craven weakling whose very credentials as a native-born American are, to Trump, in question.”
    ———————–

    Does it make you dizzy when you spin like that? 🙂

    Like

  12. No, because I’m not spinning. I didn’t watch or listen to every town hall that Trudeau did, and I do not think that what Trudeau said in the town hall could be called Trump bashing either. It was a thoughtful observation in answer to a direct question. As I’ve said before, I didn’t vote for our current Prime Minister and he and I would disagree on much, but I have never heard him bash Trump, not even with that answer.

    Liked by 3 people

  13. Sure Roscuro,

    He was just speaking of an imaginary character, and had no one specific in mind.

    Well at least you characterized it as a “thoughtful observation” instead of the predicted “abstract observation” mentioned above. But let’s face it, there ain’t much difference.

    Like

  14. Good for her. Now on to the slanderers/libelers with deeper pockets.

    http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/melania-trump-reaches-settlement-in-libel-lawsuit-against-maryland-blogger/ar-AAmGpKW?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=U452DHP

    “First lady Melania Trump has settled her defamation lawsuit against a Maryland blogger, who agreed to apologize to the Trump family and pay her a “substantial sum,” her lawyers said in a statement they released Tuesday morning.

    “I posted an article on August 2, 2016 about Melania Trump that was replete with false and defamatory statements about her,” the blogger, Webster Tarpley, said in the statement provided by Trump’s attorneys.

    Tarpley, 71 of Gaithersburg, did not immediately respond to requests for comment. One of his attorneys, Danielle D. Giroux, confirmed that a settlement had been reached.

    The blogger’s article in August, reported about unfounded rumors that Melania Trump once worked as an escort.”
    ——-

    “Melania Trump also has sued the online Daily Mail, which published a similar article in August. A Maryland judge this month tossed out that litigation — which like the Tarpley claims were filed in Montgomery County — based on jurisdictional issues. Trump’s attorneys provided a copy of the refiled lawsuit they said they entered in New York state court.”

    Like

  15. I have to agree with Roscuro, at least about the words that were quoted above. He answered a question, & although it was unfavorable towards Trump, it wasn’t exactly “bashing” him, either.

    Like

  16. You know, I think to “bash” someone, you pretty much have to name him, not just say a general “I’m opposed to this” (even when “this” is fairly well linked to that person). If someone asked me what I felt about Bill Clinton, and I said that I don’t want to pick on any particular person, but in general I think it’s a really bad idea when a president misuses his office for political and sexual advantage, one can see that I am including Clinton in my answer . . . but I’m speaking of the behavior, and making it clear that I disapprove of that specific behavior in a so-called leader and not just in that particular person. (I would in that case be saying I won’t give a “pass” to such behavior even if a Republican president engages in it.)

    Now, if I were to try to be “cute” and say “Any man who has been married three times, has made much of his living from casinos and other businesses that hurt the poor” and gone on and on with specific things that can only apply to one president in history, then it might be disingenuous to say “But I didn’t name him!” But when people say on one hand “Trump isn’t like that” and on the other “He’s obviously bashing Trump when he disapproves of that behavior,” I don’t think the criticism holds up. Of course when a person is speaking of behavior they disapprove in a government leader, the actual vices of the current leader are the ones most likely to come to the fore. That isn’t “bashing,” but reality. If someone were to ask me what makes a good husband, I’m immediately going to defer to a “standard,” and I’m either going to think of a passage of Scripture or I’m going to think of traits my husband has. Likewise, if I’m asked, “What kind of behavior might warn a girl that this man won’t make a good husband?” I’m likely to think of actual people as I give my reply. If I’ve never had a good friend with an alcoholic husband (as in fact I have not), I might not think to mention that one. When Ronald Reagan was president, it’s unlikely anyone would have thought to say “A president shouldn’t be a womanizer.” Reagan wasn’t, and the presidents in recent memory weren’t known for that behavior, either. Today, with two in very recent memory, that trait is likely to be mentioned.

    Liked by 1 person

  17. OK ladies,

    If he wasn’t talking about Trump, who was he talking about? The question he was asked and answered was specifically about Trump.

    “Trudeau was responding to a question from a voter sent by social media, who asked whether the newly elected PM would “stand up to Trump and condemn his hateful rhetoric.””
    ——————–

    It’s quite clear who he meant. The question was about Trump, so who else would he be speaking of? Even the writer saw it. Yet it escapes 3 ladies as smart as yourselves? Please. Forgive me, but you’re spinning.

    Like

  18. AJ, there is a difference between saying something that includes a specific person and “bashing” that person. If I say, “Men tend to be whiners when they get sick,” you might assume that I’m including my husband in that statement–but it would be a real stretch to say I’m bashing my husband.

    To say that something is “irresponsible” without naming a person who has done that act is not “bashing”; it’s separating oneself from a specific action without bashing. You have to admit, a leader of Canada has to walk a very fine line when dealing with America–it seems to me he has done so.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s