Month: October 2015

World’s top 5 haunted hotels

Enjoy a spooky stay this Halloween season at one of our favorite haunted hotels. From former prisons to medieval mansions to the property that inspired “The Shining,” these terrifying retreats offer adventurous vacationers an up-close encounter with the spirit world. While some play down the paranormal connection, others take pride in their haunted history, offering ghost tours and sharing stories of ghastly guests — including ancient Roman emperors, murdered French aristocrats and executed criminals. Make sure to pack a nightlight before taking off for one of these otherworldly accommodations.

To see this ghastly list, click on the text above. Muhahahahahaha!! 🙂

Stanford class on police from ‘slave patrols to Ferguson’ named most biased course

Stanford University won Campus Reform’s first annual Biased Course Contest on Friday for a class entitled, “History of the Police in the United States: Slave Patrols to Ferguson.” The five-unit history class explores the question, “How did the police come to have the power to use violence?” according to the course description, and fulfills a humanities requirement. “The historical relationship between race and the administration of policing is a central question,” says the description. “Students will hone the methodology necessary to examine primary sources such as police memoirs, court records, police files, detective novels, music videos and photographs.” The instructor, Branden Ames, declined to comment in an email to the Washington Times. The conservative website Campus Reform reported receiving 37 submissions for the award, which focuses on classes “currently being offered at U.S. colleges that present a skewed perspective on major political issues.” The winning entry was submitted by Stanford student Nick Sovich, who received $500. The runners-up were “Taking Marx Seriously,” an advanced political-science seminar at Amherst College submitted by student Avery Riggs, and “The Refusal to Work,” a communications elective at Cornell University submitted by student Casey Breznick.

You really can’t make this stuff up, folks..

RNC pulls out of NBC debate set for February

Responding to the blowback against CNBC’s handling of the third GOP debate, the head of the Republican National Committee announced Friday that it was “suspending” its plans to partner with NBC News for a presidential debate next year. In a letter to Andrew Lack, the head of NBC News, RNC Chair Reince Priebus said the CNBC network, which is owned by NBCUniversal News Group, conducted the GOP debate Wednesday in “bad faith.” “I write to inform you that pending further discussion between the Republican National Committee (RNC) and our presidential campaigns, we are suspending the partnership with NBC News for the Republican primary debate at the University of Houston on February 26, 2016,” Mr. Priebus wrote. “The RNC’s sole role in the primary debate process is to ensure that our candidates are given a full and fair opportunity to lay out their vision for America’s future. We simply cannot continue with NBC without full consultation with our campaigns. “We understand that NBC does not exercise full editorial control over CNBC’s journalistic approach,” he said. “However, the network is an arm of your organization, and we need to ensure there is not a repeat performance.” Ali Zelenko, spokesperson for NBC News, called it “a disappointing development.” “However, along with our debate broadcast partners at Telemundo we will work in good faith to resolve this matter with the Republican Party,” Ms. Zelenko said in a statement. The debate in Colorado was the third of the GOP nomination contest, which the RNC hoped to have more control over following the unruly 2012 race. But the moderators in prime-time debate Wednesday lost control of the event, coming under fire from the candidates, who panned their questions as inaccurate and shallow. CNBC has since faced a barrage of criticism. “While debates are meant to include tough questions and contrast candidates’ visions and policies for the future of America, CNBC’s moderators engaged in a series of ‘gotcha’ questions, petty and mean-spirited in tone, and designed to embarrass our candidates,” Mr. Priebus said in the letter. “What took place Wednesday night was not an attempt to give the American people a greater understanding of our candidates’ policies and ideas,” he said.

Kudos to Reince!! This is a HUGE public rebuke of the dominantly liberal mainstream media…and it is a principled rebuke. I heard Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) say last night that what the RNC oughtta do for the next debate is have Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin, and Sean Hannity be the moderators. Hmmm… I’d probably agree with the first two, but not Sean. Sean is a good guy and all. But, that’s a little outside his league. Rush is, well, Rush. Nuff said. And, Mark Levin is an attorney who knows the Constitution and Bill of Rights like no other…and has written books on the subject, literally. But, big picture.. I think the good Senator from the great state of Texas is on to something here.. I’d say, have FoxNews sponsor it, and have Rush and Mark be two of the moderators…along with someone like Brit Hume. That would be a VERY small nod to the establishment media as Brit is more or less retired, and came from ABC News once upon a time. He is VERY respected and measured, and would be able to balance/off-set some of the roughness from Mark.

Budget buster: Senate passes debt and spending hike in dead of night – 144-page bill amounts to $558 million in new spending per page

Senate Republicans managed to wrangle enough of their troops to overcome a filibuster early Friday morning and pass the new budget deal, granting President Obama yet another debt holiday, busting the budget caps and boosting spending some $80 billion over the next two years. Democrats, who are far more thrilled with the deal, did the heavy lifting, providing most of the votes as they won some $40 billion in new domestic spending in 2016 and 2017. They also forced the GOP to retreat on the hard-fought 2011 budget agreement that had helped bring deficits back under control. Conservative Republicans were irate at their leaders and at defense hawks within the GOP who forced the deal by saying it was worth busting the caps in order to get the Pentagon more money at a time when the U.S. is fighting the war on terror. “This deal represents the worst of Washington culture,” said Rep. Rand Paul, a Kentucky Republican and presidential candidate who’d vowed to lead the filibuster, but who saw his efforts fall short to what he called an “unholy compromise between right and left.” The bill cleared on a 64-35 vote, with just 18 Republicans joining all Democrats in backing the bill. President Obama said the deal will “break the cycle of shutdowns and manufactured crises” that he and Congress have been through the last few years. “This agreement will strengthen the middle class by investing in education, job training and basic research. It will keep us safe by investing in our national security,” he said. Mr. Obama also said those hikes came without any major cuts to entitlement programs, which Republicans had sought. The debt deal had already cleared the House on Wednesday, as part of a rush by Republican leaders to get it done as quickly as possible, leaving little time for scrutiny. The 144-page deal was written late Monday, and the final Senate vote came at 3 a.m. Friday, meaning it was sped through in less than 100 hours. That works out to more than $1 billion in new spending for every hour the bill was available, or some $558 million a page. The debt increase, meanwhile, amounts to far more. Judging by recent borrowing, the 16-month debt holiday would work out to more than $1 trillion in new borrowing — or $13 billion for each hour Congress considered the bill. Friday morning’s votes split the Republican presidential candidates, with Mr. Paul and Sens. Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz opposing it and Sen. Lindsey Graham, a prominent war hawk, backing it. Sen. Bernard Sanders, a Vermont independent who’s running for Democrats’ nomination, also voted for it. After the vote, Democratic National Committee Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz said the GOP candidates who opposed the debt hike had shown they weren’t up to winning the White House. “Raising the debt limit and passing a budget are non-negotiable responsibilities of our leadership,” she said. “Our constituents elect us to be their voice and their vote, not to play politics for political gain. There is nothing presidential about failing to pay your bills and jeopardizing our standing in the world economy.

So… Let’s do a headcount here.. Sen. Bernie Sanders (VT-I), an admitted socialist, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL), the current head of the DNC, and Obama, are FOR this disaster… That alone should tell you just had dreadful this is! So, shame on Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), and every other Republican who voted for this in the dead of night. These federally elected legislators let us down yet again. We should have seen MAJOR cuts in entitlements, which is killing our economy. The defense portion is itty-bitty by comparison, and actually a constitutionally-directed function of the federal government! But, the EPA, HUD, Dept of Ed, and on and on.. THEY need to done away with once and for all.

Rush: Hack Media Meme: Trump Fading

RUSH: So I checked the e-mail during the break, and there was a fairly decent point. “Rush, you’re ripping into Jeb’s campaign people. But don’t you realize, if it weren’t for Trump, Jeb would probably be the guy with 20 points right now and this thing would be over?” Well, there that word is again: “If.” Yeah, well, “if” a lot of things, then things would be different. But that actually kind of buttresses my point. You say, “If it weren’t for Trump…” Well, it is for Trump. Trump is there. You’d better be able to adapt to it and you better be able to figure out why Trump is doing well. And if the only ammo you’ve got with Trump is, “He’s gonna blow it, he’s gonna fade, he’s gonna step in it, he’s not gonna last, he doesn’t really mean it, he’s gonna get out,” and that’s all you can do, then you’re not doing your job. It’s not hard to explain Trump’s success. It’s really rather easy. That’s why when I see The Politico story, “The Incredible Shrinking Trump.” In their dreams. They haven’t the slightest idea what they’re talking about. “The Incredible Shrinking Trump — The usual blustery billionaire offered a downright demure performance at the third GOP debate.” If these hacks in the media were not Democrat Party activists, this story could just as easily be written as, “Donald Trump Shows More Maturity as Campaign Evolves.” But, no, because the Democrat media does not see Republicans and conservatives in any way anywhere near a favorable, fair, even almost human way. It’s not possible for them. Trump is a cartoon character to all of them, not just Harwood. He is a cartoon character to all of who they hate. I got an e-mail question last night during the debate. “Okay, Becky Quick and whatever other women have been moderating: Why do they hate these guys so much?” I said, “Are you kidding? Abortion! What do you mean, ‘Why do these female Democrat hacks hate Republican candidates?’ The answer is easy. And in most cases it’s one word: ‘Abortion.’ Or, another word: ‘Republicans.’ They’re hated.” These people have their minds made up. They’re not interested in having their minds changed. They’re not interested in learning if they’re even right, because, in their minds, it’s inconceivable that they’re wrong. So Trump, who many people might say was behaving a little bit more serious. Less bombast, less personal assault and attack last night. They might say Trump is becoming more serious. Trump is becoming more mature, whatever. But, if you’re not inclined to note anything positive or synonymous with what you would say is growth in a human being or candidate, if all you can see is somebody’s a cartoon character and a buffoon, and if you think the Republican electorate is so stupid — which they do… Remember, you people are a bunch of mind-numbed robots to the Drive-By Media. You are incapable of thinking on your own. Your public opinions are nothing but the result of whoever it is influencing you. Me, Fox News, whoever. You’re incapable of independent thought, critical thought, what have you. You put these two things together and Trump’s where he is precisely because he’s a cartoon character, and you people are so shallow and so dense that that’s what you want in a president. You want reality TV. You want low-rent scum as your leaders. You want this kind of thing, and that’s who you’re supporting, and then when those people, when the buffoons stop acting buffoonish and when the cartoon characters don’t act cartoonish, uh-oh, they’re in trouble. And we get a headline, “The Incredible Shrinking Trump.” They haven’t the slightest idea what they’re talking about. They think Trump is fading. They think Trump may be losing support because he was quieter last night, because less bombastic, ’cause he was less Trump. All this does is show how these hacks fail to understand the bond that exists between a candidate and his audience or voters. Let me give you one little hint, media. Donald Trump cannot be hurt by something he does not say. Donald Trump, nor any other candidate, cannot be hurt by something he does not do. Last night, Trump didn’t do a bunch of stuff. “Wow, he’s fading away!” Wrongo. For you people in the media and in the Republican establishment to boot… For you people waiting for Trump to blow it, waiting for Trump to step in it, whatever you think is gonna happen, it’s typical and traditional from people who think their job is to take people out, and that’s what the media thinks their job with us is, is to take us out. Trump was so low-key, nearly invisible, didn’t light it up. Typical of this way of thinking. The only way Trump’s gonna be taken out is if somebody comes along and is better. The media didn’t make Trump. So, little hint, you media people: You can’t take him out.

Well said, El Rushbo!  To read the rest of Rush’s monologue from his radio show today, click on the text above.

NOAA Attempts To Hide The Pause In Global Warming: The Most Disgraceful Cover-Up Since Climategate

The US government’s main climate research agency has refused a request by House Republicans to release key documents concerning the controversial issue of whether or not there has been a “pause” in global warming. Despite being a public, taxpayer-funded institution, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) insists that it is under no obligation to provide the research papers, as demanded in a subpoena by Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX). Gosh. What vital information of national secrecy importance could NOAA possibly have to hide? That question is entirely rhetorical, by the way. The answer is obvious – well known to every one within the climate change research community. And the whole business stinks. When these documents are released, as eventually they surely must be, what will become evident is that this represents the most disgraceful official cover-up by the politicized science establishment since the release of the Climategate emails. At the root of the issue is the inconvenient truth that there has been no “global warming” since January 1997. This is clearly shown by the most reliable global temperature dataset – the RSS satellite records – and was even grudgingly acknowledged in the most recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Assessment report. While still insisting that there has been a slight warming – an increase, since 1998, of around 0.05 degrees C per decade – the IPCC had in all honesty to admit that this is smaller than the 0.1 degrees C error range for thermometer readings, and consequently statistically insignificant. But if there has been no “global warming” for nearly 19 years how can alarmist proselytisers like President Obama and John Kerry possibly hope to convince an increasingly skeptical public that this apparently non-existent problem yet remains the most pressing concern of our age?” Step forward the Obama administration’s helpful friends at NOAA. It’s not supposed to be a politicized institution: its job is to do science, not propaganda. But the memo must have been missed by NOAA scientists Thomas Karl and Thomas Peterson who, in May this year, published a “study” so favourable to the alarmist cause it might just as well have been scripted by Al Gore and Greenpeace, with a royal foreword by the Prince of Wales, and a blessing from Pope Francis. “Data show no slowdown in recent global warming” declared NOAA’s press release. “The Pause”, in other words, was just the construct of a few warped deniers’ twisted imaginations. Naturally this new “evidence” was seized on with alacrity by the usual media suspects. “No Pause in global warming” crowed Scientific American. “Global warming hasn’t paused, study finds” echoed the Guardian. But as I reported at the time – in a piece titled “‘Hide the Hiatus!’ How the Climate Alarmists Eliminated the Inconvenient ‘Pause’ in Global Warming” – there was precious little hard science in this swiftly-debunked “study”. Rather, it was a case of “getting your excuses in early before the UN climate conference in Paris in December.”

Agreed!  To read the rest of the great op/ed by James Delingpole over at Breitbart, click on the text above.

Sen. Jeff Sessions Attacks Budget Deal With ‘Bricks of Truth’

Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) tore into the congressional budget deal on the Senate floor, arguing it is being jammed through without sufficient acknowledgment of its serious flaws. “Once again, a massive deal, crafted behind closed doors, is being rushed through Congress under a threat of panic,” he said. “The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 serves as a reminder that the most important and controversial legislation is still being drafted in secret, with little or no input from the members of this chamber.” Pointing to what he called “bricks of truth,” Sessions argued his opposition to the bill, calling for more time to consider the legislation and urging that it not be hastily passed. “At its core, this deal with President Obama provides what President Obama has demanded throughout,” Sessions, a former budget committee chairman, said. Namely, he pointed to the increase in federal spending caps for two years and the elimination of the current debt limit until March of 2017. “This is a covert, a clever way of raising the debt ceiling without having to engage in a real discussion of Washington’s runaway spending problem,” he said. “It ensures that no further serious conversation about our debt course or any corresponding action to alter it will take place.” Additionally, Sessions took issue with what he said is the cementing of a precedent to tether increases in defense spending with domestic spending. “How silly is this? What possible logical argument can you make for this?” he said, calling it “deeply troubling.” Sessions also took aim at the accounting “gimmicks” in the bill that he earlier decried in a joint statement with Rep. Mo Brooks (R-AL) Wednesday: The use of “tricks” like double-counting for savings and raiding the Social Security Trust fund to bolster the disability program. “We’re losing momentum,” he said. “Several years ago we were in serious discussions about the dangers we face financially, and that has been eroded.” The Alabamian stressed the need for more time, saying there is no need to pass the bill immediately. “There’s no crisis that requires us to pass it today,” he said. “There are a number of interim steps we could take to allow this bill to be out there for the members to actually study it, to offer amendments on it, and maybe improve it and for the American people to understand just what it is the members of Congress are doing to their Social Security and the fiscal debt of America.” Sessions pointed to the GOPs ability to negotiate spending reforms with Obama in the 2011 debt limit deal even with a smaller majority in the House and no majority in the Senate. “And now there are 54 Republicans in the chamber and the House has a huge majority. So I think we can do better and I don’t think this should be rushed through the Congress and I would object to its passage,” he concluded.

As usual, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) nails it! He is exactly right!