Category Archives: Recent Posts

Deployed US Navy Has A Pregnancy Problem,

And It’s Getting Worse!
Come on folks, it doesn’t take a genius to have foreseen this problem, you need not even have served. Anybody should be able to understand the problem here. We can thank the idiots pictured here for this disaster. Navy ships at sea MUST be combat ready at all times, capable of going to battle stations at a moments notice, they are essentially in harm’s way once they leave port. You ask why is the defense budget so high, yet we are lacking spare parts, ammunition, and flyable ready air craft? Wake up Americans, as much as I hate to say it that also includes Democrats like Pelosi, et al. This, along with all the many other social experiments imposed by these folks need to be stopped if we are going to be able to cut taxes and institute President Trumps promises. I really dislike picking on our Navy, but they are the ones that are always in harm’s way and they are being degraded by these idiotic policies.
     
Richard Pollock
Reporter
9:28 PM 03/01/2017
 
5504487
A record 16 out of 100 Navy women are reassigned from ships to shore duty due to pregnancy, according to data obtained under the Freedom of Information Act by The Daily Caller News Foundation’s Investigative Group.
 
That number is up 2 percent from 2015, representing hundreds more who have to cut their deployments short, taxing both their unit’s manpower, military budgets and combat readiness.  Further, such increases cast a shadow over the lofty gender integration goals set by former President Barack Obama.
 
Overall, women unexpectedly leave their stations on Navy ships as much as 50% more frequently to return to land duty, according to documents obtained from the Navy.  The statistics were compiled by the Navy Personnel Command at the request of TheDCNF, covering the period from January 2015 to September 2016.
 
The evacuation of pregnant women is costly for the Navy.  Jude Eden, a nationally known author about women in the military who served in 2004 as a Marine deployed to Iraq said a single transfer can cost the Navy up to $30,000 for each woman trained for a specific task, then evacuated from an active duty ship and sent to land.  That figure translates into $115 million in expenses for 2016 alone.
 
 
“This is an avoidable cost and expense, leaving a gap for other people to pick up the work slack,” Eden said.
 
“A pregnancy takes you out of action for about two years. And there’s no replacement,’ said Elaine Donnelly, president of the Center for Military Readiness, a nonpartisan public policy organization. “So everybody else has to work all that harder,” adding that on small ships and on submarines, “you really have a potential crew disaster.”
 
Navy Lt. Cmdr. Nathan Christensen told TheDCNF the Navy tries to plan for the unplanned.
 
“Just as we deal with other unplanned manning losses due to injury or other hardships, we work to ensure that pregnant service members are taken care of and that commands are equipped to fulfill their missions when an unexpected loss occurs,” he said.
 
In January 2015, 3,335 women were pregnant aboard military vessels, representing about 14 percent of the 23,735 women then serving such duty, according to the data.
 
But by August 2016 that number reached nearly 16 percent, an all-time high. The Navy reported 3,840 of the 24,259 women sailors who were aboard Navy ships were pregnant.
 
The Obama administration understated the pregnancy problem throughout its eight years and even suppressed some data about the impact of its “gender-neutral” policies on the Navy.
 
For decades, for instance, the Navy published results from exhaustive surveys of 25,000 men and women in a document called the “Navy Pregnancy and Parenthood Survey.”
 
The reports once were 75 to 100 pages long and disclosed attitudes among men and women and their behavior.  However, the Obama administration published only brief two to three-page summaries from 2012 onward.
 
A civilian attached to the Navy Personnel, Research, Studies and Technology group, which researched and published the surveys, told TheDCNF full reports were completed regularly even though it’s detailed findings were not released to the public. The individual requested anonymity.
 
“The military has been tight lipped over the years about these numbers.  They don’t like to publicize them,” Eden told TheDCNF.
 
The Navy has been dogged for years by lingering claims that some women get pregnant simply to avoid deployment.
 
“We all know that happens. Women do it to avoid deployment,” Eden told TheDCNF.
 
There do seem to be coincidences,” said Donnelly. “There is a lot of anecdotal evidence.”
 
“This information is considered so sensitive. You just don’t talk about it. And you don’t ask. It’s just something that everybody knows occurs. Don’t ask, don’t tell,” Donnelly said. She served on the Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Services and on the Presidential Commission on the Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces.
 
The sudden departure of pregnant women aboard military vessels severely hurts military readiness and morale for those left behind and who must pick up the slack. The expecting sailors must be transferred from a ship after the 20th week of pregnancy.
 
The Navy officially considered pregnancy incompatible with military service and women who became pregnant were automatically discharged, according to The Alliance for National Defense.
 
However, with the introduction of the all-volunteer military, the Navy provided many lucrative incentives to men and women — including free housing, medical care, recreation and educational opportunities.
 
But women got additional benefits, including free prenatal care, daycare, counseling, and special education for toddlers and children with disabilities or for other “special needs.”
 
“Since benefits offered to recruits who are women are so very generous, it almost becomes an incentive,” said Donnelly.  “One feminist advocate many years ago referred to the military as a ‘Mecca for single moms.’”
 
“I think there are so many carrots.  The military has become a modern-day jobs program,” Eden said.
 
Obama during his eight years in office sought to increase dramatically the number of women on ships.
 
In May 2015, Admiral Michelle Howard announced a quota of 25% women on all ships. “We’re going back and looking at the ships — all of them — and what percentage of women are on the ships. Over time, we’ll modernize them to make sure we get to about 25 percent on each ship,” she said.
 
Former Navy Secretary Ray Mabus in September 2015 pushed the new policy, stating that the Navy SEALs and all other combat jobs in the Navy should be open to women, with no exemptions as part of the Pentagon’s new “gender-neutral” employment policy.
 
Eden believes the policy of increasing women on ships results in failure. “It’s bad policy when you think of ships that have to be battle-ready and then have to transfer women off for pregnancy — something that has to do with controlled behavior or voluntary behavior,” she said.
 

It is unclear how President Donald Trump’s Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis will handle women in the military.  He has been a skeptic, but also said during his confirmation hearing he would support a combat role for women.

Originally posted 2017-03-04 12:47:15.

Climategate II

A taxpayer-funded organization said no to congress? Are you kidding me?  Another action on the part of the Globalists in the last administration to unite the world in everything.

To paraphrase the immortal words of Britney Spears, “Oops, climate scientists did it again!”

The award-winning scientist responsible for creating, collecting, and maintaining the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) data archive, John Bates, recently disclosed leading NOAA’s climate scientists violated the agency’s rules, rushing to publication data which had yet to be tested and confirmed in order to influence the outcome of the Paris climate negotiations in 2015.

In a second breach of agency protocol, the scientists involved, led by Tom Karl, failed to properly archive and store their datasets for testing and public disclosure.

Subsequently, some of the original datasets were lost when the computer used to process the data suffered a complete failure. 

Karl, et al.’s 2015 “pause busting” research purported to show, contrary to every temperature dataset in existence at the time, Earth had not experienced an 18-year pause in rising temperatures, claiming instead everyone else’s data had been wrong and temperatures had continued to rise at an alarming rate right along with carbon-dioxide levels. As Bates put it, Karl’s team put their “thumb on the scale” to produce the results they wanted.

Much of the climate science community became suspicious of Karl’s claims over the months after the study was released, when it was discovered in the words of David Rose in the Daily Mail, “[Karl, et al.] took reliable readings from buoys but then ‘adjusted’ them upwards – using readings from seawater intakes on ships that act as weather stations … even though readings from the ships have long been known to be too hot.” As a result, the ocean temperature dataset used by Karl exaggerated the warming.

When you take good data and mix it with bad data and then average it, you no more produce reliable results than adding muddy river water to purified bottle water produces safe drinking water.

Karl’s actions show climate scientists wedded to the theory humans are causing catastrophic climate change learned nothing from the Climategate scandal of 2009. In Climategate, hacked e-mail exchanges between prominent climate scientists advising world leaders on climate policy exposed the scientists behaving badly. 

The scientists involved used a “trick” to remove inconvenient data from their datasets to “hide the decline,” in a critical set of proxy temperatures. In addition, the e-mails showed they collaborated to persecute and have fired an editor of a prominent climate science journal who allowed articles questioning the extent of humanity’s role in global warming to be published. 

The e-mails also showed the scientists actively sought to avoid releasing their taxpayer-funded data to other researchers and government bodies with oversight responsibility for testing and confirmation.

In the aftermath of the Climategate scandal, in order to ensure scientific integrity and regain the public’s trust, scientific bodies called on scientists to allow access to their raw data, assumptions, methodologies, and software and to promptly and completely respond to all Freedom of Information Act and government requests for information. 

Karl and his team not only violated NOAA’s own protocols, they also ignored all the suggestions made by the scientific community to improve transparency and accountability for research. When the U.S. House of Representatives’ House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, the committee with oversight over federally funded research, requested and eventually subpoenaed NOAA’s documentation for its pause-busting claims, NOAA refused to turn over all the materials requested, citing concerns about confidentiality and the integrity of the scientific process. New investigations are being launched into NOAA’s research in light of Bates’ disclosures.

Transparency is a paramount virtue in science since scientists can only produce discoveries that expand human knowledge and further human welfare when different teams of researchers collaborate by sharing data, assumptions, and methodologies; exchange theories and ideas; and review and test each other’s work. For NOAA, sound science took a backseat to scoring a political victory.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, yet world leaders ignored this fact when they pointed to NOAA’s claims the world was warming, despite other research showing no warming for 18 years. Disturbingly, this research of dubious merit provided impetus for producing the climate change treaty agreed to by leaders of more than 190 nations in Paris in December 2015.

These are dark times for climate science, and it has nothing to do with Donald Trump being in the White House. Let’s hope future climate charlatans are exposed to the light of day before they do further damage.

H. Sterling Burnett, Ph.D. (hburnett@heartland.org) is a research fellow on energy and the environment at The Heartland Institute, a nonpartisan, nonprofit research center headquartered in Arlington Heights, Illinois.

Originally posted 2017-03-03 13:52:07.

What a shameful performance!

No comment necessary here.
Matt Walsh: Democrats, that shameful performance proves why normal Americans despise your party.  Members of congress wear white to honor the women’s suffrage movement and support women’s rights as U.S. President Donald Trump addresses a joint session of the U.S. Congress on February 28, 2017 in the House chamber of the U.S. Capitol in Washington, DC.
 Trump’s first address to Congress focused on national security, tax and regulatory reform, the economy, and healthcare.  President Trump delivered an impressive speech to a joint session of Congress on Tuesday night. He hammered on a lot of familiar Trump themes but did so in a more effective way than we’ve seen before. People will say it was a “presidential” speech, but of course any speech given by a president is, by definition, presidential. Better to say that it was a successful speech. Successful in communicating Trump’s core message in a clear, concise, and even eloquent way.
 On the other hand, while Trump’s messaging was on point, Democrat messaging was somewhat less inspiring. Of course, we’re all familiar with how the Clapping Game is played during these speeches: The president’s party gives a standing ovation after every third syllable while the opposition party chooses its applause spots more carefully, usually electing to clap only when bipartisan platitudes are offered.
 But that changed last night. Democrats remained seated with their hands in their laps even as Trump uttered the most noncontroversial and universal of sentiments. They refused to applaud when Trump said we should put Americans first. The refused to applaud when Trump talked about fighting drug addiction in the inner city and corruption in Washington. They refused to applaud when Trump discussed the need to make sure certain blue collar Americans, like coal miners, still have jobs. They refused to applaud Trump’s vow to fight Islamic terrorism. They refused to applaud when Trump movingly stated that “we all salute the same flag and are made by the same God.”
 When the president highlighted the victims of illegal immigrant crime, many Democrats let out audible groans of disgust. And, most shameful of all, a number of top Democrats refused to stand and clap as the president honored the widow of a fallen Navy SEAL. Disgusting. Truly disgusting. If we were to judge their positions by the things they declined to applaud, we must arrive at the conclusion that Democrats are staunchly opposed to the flag, God, the law, job creation, and military widows, and enthusiastically in favor of drug addiction, terrorism, crime, unemployment, and murder.
 To those who’ve been paying attention, this is not much of revelation. They’ve given us a lot more than a lack of applause to indicate their positions on these topics. But it’s still somewhat surprising that Democrats are so eager to advertise the fact. Mostly, this absurd performance on the part of Democrats tells us two things. First, they have a bunch of maniacs in their base and they’re fully aware of it. Democrat politicians know they’ll get in trouble with their liberal constituency if they appear to be even vaguely opposed to illegal immigration, Muslim terrorism, and the impoverishment of coal miners, or even slightly in favor of the rule of law, prosperity, freedom, and God.
 Second, their hatred for Trump, and their base’s hatred for Trump, is pushing them ever further into the extreme fringes. Democrats have been booing God, defending radical Islam, and explicitly encouraging illegal immigrants to break the law for years now, but giving such an icy reception to a concept like “creating jobs,” and publicly giving the cold shoulder to a military widow, is a new step. That’s something they’re doing purely to spite Trump. But, in the process, they only make Trump look dignified and themselves look like monsters.
 It’s clear that Democrats will automatically oppose anything Trump says simply because it’s Trump saying it, and for no other reason. Personally, I’d love for him to exploit this power. For instance, he could give a speech forcefully opposing puppy murder, head lice, and diabetes, just so that Democrats will feel required to come out in favor of all three. Perhaps Trump could even get them to abandon their support for gay marriage and abortion by announcing his support for both. Well, maybe they’d draw the line there.
 Or maybe not. Who knows anymore? But what’s clear, in any case, is that the Democrat Party has no interest in, or love for, normal Americans, and has now given up even pretending otherwise. They are the party of anti-Americanism, elitism, and lawlessness, and have been for quite some time. Last night they simply made it official. The rest of us have taken note.

Originally posted 2017-03-02 15:37:38.

How much of this are we going to tolerate?

A U.S. Navy veteran was brutally beaten and killed outside his own home in McAllen, Texas—while being carjacked by an illegal immigrant.

Jose Luis Oviedo, 56, served in the U.S. Navy for 15 years: from 1981 to 1996.

Oviedo was apparently home alone when he heard a noise from outside—where he found Andres Roberto Ortiz, 32, attempting to steal his car. Ortiz turned on Oviedo, severely beating the Navy veteran unconscious.

Several hours later, local police found Oviedo’s SUV abandoned in a ditch. Upon visiting his home to report the vehicle, they found him unconscious in the backyard.
Oviedo was rushed to the hospital, but never regained consciousness. After spending a month in a coma, he died last Friday.

Ortiz was taken into a custody ten days after the attack. Ortiz is a Honduran who is in the United States illegally—and had been deported multiple times by the U.S. government. (my bold added)

Ortiz was initially charged with aggravated assault and robbery. After Oviedo’s death, the county district attorney is seeking to upgrade his charges to capital murder. Oviedo’s son, Victor, 29, spoke briefly to the media about how his outlook had changed, after his father’s death at the hands of an illegal immigrant:

“I had no real opinion as far as the immigration stance goes, but now I believe that something like this could have been prevented had the right steps been taken,” he said.

Source: American Action News
Read more at http://americanactionnews.com/articles/breaking-illegal-immigrant-brutally-kills-navy-veteran#jQb9ke4Z02ZEU5Jf.99

Originally posted 2017-03-02 10:47:59.

The Brit Talks to the Scum

I just love “The Brit.” He can never be accused of mincing his words. This is one of his best! I can’t find one word that’s incorrect. This one even caused me to chuckle loudly several times. I just love Pat. My question is how many body guards does he have? LOL I LOVE IT!!!

 

Originally posted 2017-03-01 14:42:44.