BREITBART, by Charlie Spiering — December 5, 2019

Excerpt:

Former President Barack Obama’s “body man” Reggie Love endorsed Mayor Pete Buttigieg for president on Thursday.

“A lot of what is said about Pete (HOMOSEXUAL) echoes what critics said about presidential candidate Barack Obama — too young, too different, maybe another time — but I believe there is never a better time to fight for change than right now,” Love said in a statement reported by CNN.

Love worked with Obama for about five years before retiring, even writing a book about his experiences.

“No matter what, he knew he could trust me,” he wrote. “Beyond that, I was the only other brother working on the first floor of the West Wing, in the bubble every day.”

……………………………………….

View the complete article including image, links and comments at:

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/12/05/barack-obamas-body-man-reggie-love-endorses-pete-buttigieg/

Patrick J. Buchanan Official Website, by Patrick J. Buchanan — December 3, 2019

Excerpt:

Xi Jinping is no Mikhail Gorbachev. He is not going to let his people go. He is not going to risk a revolution to overturn the Maoist Revolution he has served his entire life.

At first glance, it would appear that five months of pro-democracy protests in Hong Kong had produced a stunning triumph.

By September, the proposal of city leader Carrie Lam that ignited the protests — to allow criminal suspects to be extradited to China for trial — had been withdrawn.

And though the protesters’ demands escalated along with their tactics, from marches to mass civil disobedience, Molotov cocktails, riots and attacks on police, Chinese troops remained confined to their barracks.

Beijing wanted no reenactment of Tiananmen Square, the midnight massacre in the heart of Beijing that drowned in blood the 1989 uprising for democratic rights.

In Hong Kong, the police have not used lethal force. In five months of clashes, only a few have perished. And when elections came last month, Beijing was stunned by the landslide victory of the protesters.

Finally, last month, Congress passed by huge margins in both houses a Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act that threatens sanctions on Hong Kong authorities should they crush the rebels.

When President Donald Trump signed the bills, the protesters now had the U.S. as an ally, and the Chinese reacted viscerally.

An enraged Foreign Ministry declared: “The US … openly backed violent criminals who rampantly smashed facilities, set fire, assaulted innocent civilians, trampled on the rule of law and jeopardized social order.

“This so-called bill will only make the Chinese people … further understand the sinister intentions and hegemonic nature of the United States. It will only make the Chinese people more united and make the American plot more doomed to failure.”

Thus do the Hong Kong protesters appear victorious, for now.

Sunday, black-clad masked protesters were back in the streets, waving American flags, erecting barricades, issuing new demands — for greater autonomy for Hong Kong, the release of jailed protesters and the punishment of police who used excessive force.

This confrontation is far from over.

Instead, it has escalated, and the U.S. government, having given up its posture of benevolent neutrality in favor of peaceful demonstrators for democracy, has become an open ally of often-violent people who are battling Chinese police inside a Chinese city.

On Monday, China retaliated, suspending visits to Hong Kong by U.S. military planes and Navy ships and declaring sanctions on the National Endowment for Democracy, Freedom House and half a dozen other U.S. agencies that promote democracy for interfering in the internal affairs of China.

And there is another issue here — the matter of face.

China has just celebrated the 70th anniversary of the Revolution where Mao proclaimed, “China has stood up!” after a century of foreign humiliations and occupations.

Can Xi Jinping, already the object of a Maoist cult of personality, accept U.S. intervention in the internal affairs of his country or a city that belongs to China? Not likely. Nor is China likely to accede to demands for greater sovereignty, self-determination or independence for Hong Kong.

This would only raise hopes of the city’s eventual escape from its ordained destiny: direct rule by Beijing when the 50-year China-U.K. treaty regarding the transfer of Hong Kong expires in 2047.

For Xi to capitulate to the demands of Hong Kong’s demonstrators could cause an outbreak of protests in other Chinese cities and bring on a crisis of the regime.

Xi Jinping is no Mikhail Gorbachev. He is not going to let his people go. He is not going to risk a revolution to overturn the Maoist Revolution he has served his entire life.

A ruler committing the atrocities Xi is committing today in the concentration camps in the Uighur regions of China is staying his hand in Hong Kong only so the world and the West cannot see the true face of the ideology in which this true believer believes.

In providing moral support for protesters in Hong Kong who desire the freedoms we enjoy, America is on the right side. But to align the U.S. with the protesters’ cause, and threaten sanctions if their demands are not met, is to lead these demonstrators to make demands that Hong Kong’s rulers cannot meet and China will not allow.

We should ask ourselves some questions before we declare our solidarity with the protesters engaging the Hong Kong police.

If the police crush them, or if China’s army moves in and crushes the demonstrators whose hopes were raised by America’s declared solidarity, then what are we prepared to do to save them and their cause?

Are we willing to impose sanctions on Beijing, such as we have on Venezuela, Iran and Vladimir Putin’s Russia?

Some of us yet recall how the Voice of America broadcast to the Hungarian rebels of 1956 that if they rose up and threw the Russians out, we would be at their side. The Hungarians rose up. We did nothing. And one of the great bloodbaths of the Cold War ensued.

Are we telling the protesters of Hong Kong, “We’ve got your back!” when we really don’t?

View the complete article including image and links at:

https://buchanan.org/blog/in-hong-kong-its-us-vs-china-now-137822

================

The Keene Sentinel (via SentinelSource.com), Opinion, Letter to the Editor Post by Ray Colburn

Excerpt:

To Keene: Explaining things to children is tedious, but here goes:

The president and his economy ensure four more years. Attempts to slash the tires on his presidency are transparent to reasonable minds and the squid-eyed Adam Schiff is regarded by most as more resembling that creepy guy that hangs around school yards than a savior of your favorite political party. Prepare yourselves to contain your disappointment in 2020.

You fell all over yourselves voting for Barack Obama in 2008 and again in 2012. Obama was a concocted academic fraud with a sealed past locked in litigated subterfuge by lawyers and judges long before he ever declared his intentions to run for the presidency. Obama was a perfect “fairy dust” candidate served up to a local population hungry for a Peter Pan of politic correctness. – (bold emphasis added)

Then, like bumpkins rushing a snake-oil wagon, you overran the polls voting for Hillary Clinton, probably the most corrupted candidate ever to run for the office. Despite Clinton’s role in the slaughter of four State Department and CIA employees in Benghazi, your hordes flocked to put her in the White House. You swallowed her video ruse hook, line and sinker. You seemed to have forgotten the gangland-style early retirement of her alleged problematic paramour, Vince Foster. After all, she was going to be the first woman president.

…………………………………..

View the complete post at:

https://www.sentinelsource.com/opinion/letters_to_the_editor/trump-wins-over-corrupt-democrats-by-ray-colburn/article_ee335547-db0d-5eea-8bf8-8e59fb3e78b0.html

SOVEREIGN NATIONS, by Annie Holmquist (posted by Desmond Berg ) — November 13, 2019

Excerpt:

Not long ago, feminist scholar and activist Camille Paglia made waves when she excoriated those who insist on the use of genderless pronouns:

“How dare you, you sniveling little maniac, tell us how we’re going to use pronouns. Go take a hike!” 

Now Paglia is back with some more surprising – and politically incorrect – statements concerning the effects of feminism on the current generation. In a recent interview with The Washington Free Beacon, Paglia first notes where feminism went wrong:

“Second-wave feminism went off the track when it started to demonize men and blame them for all the evils in human history. It’s a neurotic world-view that was formulated in too many cases by women (including Gloria Steinem and Kate Millett) with troubled childhoods in unstable homes. First-wave feminism, in contrast, focused on systemic social problems that kept women in secondary or dependent status.”

……………………………………….

via Intellectual Takeout

…………………………………

View the complete article including image and links at:

https://sovereignnations.com/2019/11/13/camille-paglia-feminism-women-juvenile-condition/

Stilton’s Place, by Stilton Jarlsberg — December 2, 2019

Excerpt:

Help came in a most unexpected form last Friday, when a knife-wielding terrorist on London Bridge was repeatedly jabbed with a five foot narwhal tusk – keeping him busy until police could arrive on scene to end the incident with a highly satisfying use of boomsticks.

……………………………

View the complete post including image, links and comments at:

http://stiltonsplace.blogspot.com/2019/12/the-tooth-hurts.html

TOWLEROAD, by Andy Towle — December 19, 2012

Excerpt:

Writes publisher Luis Venegas:

I especially love the cover story, which for the first time isn’t a super-popular star, but a fabulous, beautiful black transwoman channeling a politician who looks pretty much like Michelle Obama. …

View the complete article including image and links at:

https://www.towleroad.com/2012/12/trans-model-channels-michelle-obama-for-candy/

Additional evidence of an unknown particle from a Hungarian lab gives a new impetus to NA64 searches

CERN, by Ana Lopes — November 27, 2019

Excerpt:

……………………………….

The NA64 collaboration searches for X17 by firing a beam of tens of billions of electrons from the Super Proton Synchrotron accelerator onto a fixed target. If X17 did exist, the interactions between the electrons and nuclei in the target would sometimes produce this particle, which would then transform into an electron–positron pair. The collaboration has so far found no indication that such events took place, but its datasets allowed them to exclude part of the possible values for the strength of the interaction between X17 and an electron. The team is now upgrading their detector for the next round of searches, which are expected to be more challenging but at the same time more exciting, says Gninenko.

Among other experiments that could also hunt for X17 in direct searches is the LHCb experiment. Jesse Thaler, a theoretical physicist from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, says: “By 2023, the LHCb experiment should be able to make a definitive measurement to confirm or refute the interpretation of the Atomki anomalies as arising from a new fundamental force. In the meantime, experiments such as NA64 can continue to chip away at the possible values for the hypothetical particle’s properties, and every new analysis brings with it the possibility (however remote) of discovery.”

View the complete article including image and links at:

https://home.cern/news/news/physics/plot-thickens-hypothetical-x17-particle