Monthly Archives: March 2017

Fake news alert: Trump gutting Meals on Wheels revealed a media lie

MSM caught lying about Meals on Wheels. (Wiki)
MSM caught lying about Meals on Wheels. (Wiki)

Time and The Hill magazines breathlessly reported the Meals on Wheels program has been slashed of all federal funding in the proposed budget on submitted to Congress by President Trump.

As Walter Olson of the none-too-Trump-friendly National Review objectively noted, the rush to judgement against Trump certainly “made for great copy — irresistibly clickable and compulsively shareable.”

Only one problem — none of it was true.

With a Time headline of “Trump Proposed Budget Eliminates Funds for Meals on Wheels” and The Hill garnering 26,000 shares online from their fake reporting, the Left-leaning media certainly thought they’d snagged the president on a rather large gotchya moment.

As reported;

But it was false. And it wouldn’t have taken long for reporters to find and provide some needed context to the relationship between federal block grant programs, specifically Community Development Block Grants (CDBG), and the popular Meals on Wheels program.

I started on the organization’s own website. From Thursday’s conversation in the press, it was easy to assume that block grant programs — CDBG and similar block grants for community services and social services — are the main source of federal funding for Meals on Wheels. Not so.

Instead, as the national site explains, the major source of federal funding for the programs, accounting for 35 percent of overall local budgets, comes through the Sixties-era Older Americans Act. (Local programs also obtain support from state and county governments, private donors, and so on.)

According to the website, cuts have not been announced in Older Americans Act funding, although the group fears that they may lie ahead.

Notice the key word in the last sentence is “may,” not “will.”

But I digress. Yet another screaming example of the MSM’s is the schizophrenic excuse of reporting, Gregory Korte of USA Today  has as the caption of the article’s main photograph;

Meals on Wheels, the popular service that provides food to the elderly, faces a sharp funding cut under President Donald Trump’s budget proposal.

Curiously, the very first sentence in the article proper is;

President Trump’s first budget proposal to Congress last week specifically identified steep cuts to hundreds of domestic programs, but Meals on Wheels wasn’t one of them.

‘Hey, Huma. What’s up?’ – Kellyanne recalls the Team Hillary concession call

Kellyanne Conway retells election night phone call. (Twitter)
Kellyanne Conway retells election night phone call. (Twitter)

In what presidential advisor Kellyanne Conway describes as “like a movie,” she retells what happened leading up to and at the moment Hillary Clinton’s campaign staff called to concede on election night.

But not before Clinton’s Clinton’s campaign manager, Robby Mook, arrogantly contacted Kellyanne the evening prior to election day to orchestrate what he thought was going to be Trump’s concession call to Hillary.

Yet fortunately for Mook, it was Clinton’s trusted aide and confidant Huma Abedin who was tasked with eating a rather large helping of humble pie election night.

As reported by Ashley Collman of London’s The Daily Mail;

Kellyanne Conway reminisced about the moment Hillary Clinton called to concede to Donald Trump the night of the presidential election.

The president’s campaign-manager-turned-advisor recalled the historic moment in a talk at the National Review Institute’s Ideas Summit in Washington, DC Friday morning.

The night before the election, Conway said she and Clinton’s team spoke over email about when the concession call would happen.

‘Robby Mook (Clinton’s campaign manager) had agreed the night before through an email to me that within 15 minutes of the AP calling the race for Secretary Clinton, they would wait 15 minutes and then she would take to the podium and declare victory.

‘So he was basically saying that you have 15 minutes for Mr Trump to get out there [and give a concession speech] or she’s going to declare victory either way.

‘And then he said in the event that Mr Trump wins, Secretary Clinton will call him within 15 minutes of the AP,’ Conway said with a wink, implying that Clinton staffers were confident their boss would win.

But Clinton’s camp held up their end of the deal. Conway said that she looked down to see her phone was ringing.

‘I look down – literally it was like a movie – my phone is ringing and it said “Huma Abedin” [Clinton’s longtime aide]. And I said, “Hey, Huma. What’s up?”

‘And she’s absolutely lovely, she really is. And she’s like ‘Hi Kellyanne, Secretary Clinton would like to speak to Mr. Trump.” And I said, “Now?” And she said, “Is he available?” And I said, “We’re very available!”

‘And I handed [Mr Trump]  the phone. My husband took a screenshot of that – the 2:30am. I handed him the phone and he and Vice President Pence and their wives were there and the rest is history.

‘So that was just really a remarkable moment and I think it was a remarkable moment for anybody, any David fighting a Goliath, frankly,’ Conway recalled.

Following the call, President Trump gave his victory speech – marking a break with tradition since the loser of the race usually gives a concession speech first. Clinton gave her concession speech later in the day.

Indentured servitude: The white slavery you were never taught in school

Indentured servant under the lash. (Wiki)
Indentured servant under the lash. (Wiki)

A slave by any other name is still a slave, even if they go by the innocuous name of “indentured servant.” Continue reading Indentured servitude: The white slavery you were never taught in school

NBC start date for Megyn Kelly still stuck on hold

Megyn Kelly throws softballs to liberal heart throb Michael Moore. (Youtube)
Megyn Kelly throws softballs to liberal heart throb Michael Moore. (Youtube)

Megyn Kelly was once the crown jewel of the Fox News empire. But that was then, this is now.

The Washington Examiner is reporting that despite her plans on better days at the Peacock Network, things aren’t exactly going the way Megyn Kelly might have planned.

NBC still has no start date for Megyn Kelly, even though her last day at Fox News was in January and the network has already announced that she will host a daily morning show as well as a separate Sunday evening show.

At issue is confusion over Kelly’s contract at Fox and whether she has officially been released from it, according to a report in the Wall Street Journal.

Fox said it officially released Kelly on March 9, but her agent told the Journal that “the terms of the termination are still being negotiated.”

Citing an anonymous source, the Journal also reported that Kelly does not have an official start date and the format of her programs with NBC still have not been settled.

Kelly’s primetime slot at Fox was filled by “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” which has been a ratings success.

Speaking of Tucker Carlson, if there was any notion that Kelly’s departure would hurt ratings, guess again.

In a separate article from the Washington Examiner, Carlson has been crushing it in Kelly’s abandoned time slot;

In losing Megyn Kelly, Fox News appears to have fallen upward to higher ratings at a lower price.

“Fox News’s Tucker Carlson is nearly doubling the ratings of his predecessor, Megyn Kelly, when compared to the same time period last year, according to Nielsen Media Research,” reports The Hill. “‘Tucker Carlson Tonight’ is up 95 percent in the 25- to 54-year-old demographic that advertisers covet most compared with the same period in 2016, when ‘The Kelly File’ occupied the 9 p.m. ET time slot. Carlson has averaged 775,000 viewers per night in the category, while Kelly averaged 398,000 during the same time period, Jan. 11–22.”

That Kelly can be so easily eclipsed is a bad omen for NBC. It is a testimony to the effectiveness of Carlson, but it also hints at the hollowness of the buzz around her. Much of that buzz derived from her status as a subversive at a conservative-leaning network, talk that will dissipate once she’s at NBC. Plus, Fox News viewers don’t appear to miss her too terribly, and there is little reason to believe they’ll follow her to NBC.

As Jack Shafer notes, stars who leave the networks that made them stars often fail away from them: “One lesson [Barbara] Walters and [Katie] Couric — and the other high-profile network defectors (Harry Reasoner, Diane Sawyer, Roger Mudd, et al.) — teach is of the non-transferability of TV star power. TV stars struggle to survive outside of the context in which they were nurtured. The current network anchors — Scott Pelley, David Muir and Lester Holt — all benefited from the fact that they ripened their talents at their respective networks before they got their evening chairs. Viewers grew accustomed to their faces and their styles.”

Kelly’s decision to leave was supposed to weaken Fox News and bolster its competitors. But so far it appears to have saved Rupert Murdoch a ton of money (he was offering her a reported $100 million to stay) while eliminating a growing problem: a star, more popular with chattering-class pundits than conservative viewers, who was increasingly showboating at the expense of the network.

According to Shafer, “Television talent raids — like the one NBC News chairman Andrew Lack has just pulled off — are almost never a simple matter of improving your own roster. As the history of broadcasting shows us, a single major defection by a popular anchor rarely improves that acquiring network’s ratings or public appeal. The primary aim of such larceny: Weaken your TV opponent’s line-up by making off with one of their visible stars. Anything else accomplished is just gravy.”

By that standard, NBC has already failed. In switching from Kelly to Carlson, Fox has gained a new star and freed itself from an overrated one.

‘In wine there is wisdom, in beer there is freedom, in water there is bacteria’ ~ Benjamin Franklin

More than just water and chlorine in the pool. (Twitter)
More than just water and chlorine in the pool. (Twitter)

We were warned in the 1975 blockbuster “Jaws” not to go into the water. But with a recent study released from Canada’s University of Alberta at Edmonton, that admonition very well could pertain to public swimming pools.

And what do you make of that peculiar extra-strong smell of chlorine at some public pools? Do you feel safer because you assume that some Good Samaritan dumped a little extra of the liquid element into the water? Guess again.

As reported by the good folks at Britain’s The Guardian, the standard large-sized public swimming pool contains roughly 20 gallons of human urine.

As reported;

It is an antisocial act that normally goes under the radar, but many swimmers have long suspected the truth: people are peeing in the pool.

Now scientists have been able to confirm the full extent of offending for the first time, after developing a test designed to estimate how much urine has been covertly added to a large volume of water. Regular swimmers with a keen sense of hygiene may wish to stop reading now.

The test works by measuring the concentration of an artificial sweetener, acesulfame potassium (ACE), that is commonly found in processed food and passes through the body unaltered.

After tracking the levels of the sweetener in two public pools in Canada over a three-week period they calculated that swimmers had released 75 litres [20 gallons] of urine – enough to fill a medium-sized dustbin – into a large pool (about 830,000 litres [220,000 gallons], one-third the size of an Olympic pool) and 30 litres into a second pool, around half the size of the first.

As if that wasn’t gross enough, America’s taxpayer subsidized National Public Radio (NPR) informs the world that the extra-strong chlorine smell wafting from some pools isn’t what it seems;

You know that sharp odor of chlorine from the swimming pool you can recall from earliest childhood? It turns out it’s not just chlorine, but a potent brew of chemicals that form when chlorine meets sweat, body oils, and urine.

The same report from NPR also cites, “In a residential pool (20-by-40-foot, five-feet deep), that would translate to about two gallons of pee.”

Joint Congressional speech: Trump refers to himself 60% less than Obama

Serious Trump, angry Obama. (Youtube)
Serious Trump, pouty Obama. (Youtube)

Despite the narrative from the Establishment Press that President Trump is the world’s premier egotist, what happened at the Commander-in-Chief’s first address to a joint session of the U.S. Congress displays something quite different.

Washington Examiner reporter Emily Jashinsky notes that there really is someone whose ego eclipses even that of The Donald.

In his first presidential speech to a joint session of Congress in 2009, Barack Obama referenced himself roughly 84 times (that number is approximate). By contrast, President Trump made only 53 such references in his address to the joint session on Tuesday night.

In 2010, Obama actually referenced himself approximately 117 times per Vocativ’s count.

Trump, who’s often accused of being self-absorbed, used his remarks to the joint session of Congress convened Tuesday to focus significant time on promoting national unity.

Vanity Fair published an article in November 2015 entitled, “Is Donald Trump Actually a Narcissist? Therapists weight in!”

Yet in his remarks Tuesday night, President Trump used the word “we” more than 100 times.

As it turns out, social media has weighed in on Trump’s speech to the Legislative Branch. As posted by Great Britain’s notoriously liberal The Guardian’s Ben Jacobs;

The ever blunt Ann Coulter added;

And in a bit of a lighthearted vein, The Onion tweeted the response from Green Party never-was Jill Stein;