Patterico's Pontifications


President Obama Opens Up A Serious Can Of Whoop Ass On ISIS!

Filed under: General — Dana @ 3:28 pm

[guest post by Dana]

For the first time since the Paris massacre that left 130 dead and hundreds more wounded, and for which ISIS claimed responsibility, President Obama met with France’s President Hollande today at the White House. Showing that steel spine of resolve and the slick strategery we’ve come to expect from President Obama as he steadfastly works to contain, degrade and destroy ISIS, he threw down the gauntlet and reminded ISIS just who it is they are messing with:

Next week, I will be joining President Hollande and world leaders in Paris for the global climate conference. What a powerful rebuke to the terrorists it will be when the world stands as one and shows that we will not be deterred from building a better future for our children.

This is the same world leader who believes there is no challenge that poses a greater threat to future generations than climate change. You might ask, but what about the Barbarians at the Gate??? Meh. What’s a few heads rolling here and there and the destruction of Western civilization compared to fresh, clean air for the future Caliphate of the West living that awesome 7th century lifestyle?


Clock Boy Wants $10 Million, Invitation to White House Rescinded

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 1:24 pm

I . . . might have made up that last bit — but surely the boy wants to be put back to the status quo ante, no?

Ahmed “Clock Boy” Mohammed wants $10 million* from the City of Irving because of the whole clock thing that got him fame and an invitation to the White House. Here’s how his lawyers describe what the young would-be millionaire did:

Ahmed used some spare parts and scrap pieces he had around the house to assemble a digital clock. He routed the circuitry to run through a motherboard and enclosed his creative contraption in a little locking pencil case with the dimensions of approximately 8.5 x 5.75 x 2.5 inches.

Not long after the controversy broke, an electronics enthusiast with an engineering degree wrote a blog post that purported to debunk the notion that the kid’s clock was an original invention:

Ahmed Mohamed did not invent, nor build a clock. He took apart an existing clock, and transplanted the guts into a pencil box, and claimed it was his own creation. It all seems really fishy to me.

If we accept the story about “inventing” an alarm clock is made up, as I think I’ve made a pretty good case for, it’s fair to wonder what other parts of the story might be made up, not reported factually by the media, or at least, exaggerated.

I have never seen this blog post debunked.

If he was truly wronged, give him a few hundred dollars. Think of all the Radio Shack clocks he could buy! But $10 million? Puh-leeze. If anything, this further suggests that this was all a trumped-up hoax.

If that makes me a Clock Boy Truther, so be it.

*I see a bunch of stories online saying he has asked for $15 million but the linked demand letter says $10MM. If they sent a second letter upping the demand by another $5MM, I have not seen it yet.

Bernie Sanders Is Wrong: Part 1: The Bottom 20% Does Not Remain Constant

Filed under: Economics,General — Patterico @ 9:08 am

Lately I have been reading The Thomas Sowell Reader — a collection of essays and passages from across the gamut of Sowell’s writing. One of Sowell’s most valuable contributions comes in the form of hard statistics showing that people like Bernie Sanders are wrong.

Over the next few days, I will present some of the most compelling statistics in different categories, showing Bernie Sanders is wrong. I’ll start with movement between income categories.


Sanders implies that the top 20% of income earners is a block of powerful people, getting rich at the expense of everyone else:

Sanders fails to recognize that income categories are not stagnant, but that most people move in and out of them throughout their lives. When we hear about how “the top 20% is doing better than the bottom 20%” we are not, by and large, talking about the same people. The people in the top 20% do not stay there. Nor do the people in the bottom 20%. Consider:

  • Only 5% of those in the bottom 20% of income earners in 1975 were still there in 1991.
  • More then 3/4 of working Americans with incomes in the bottom 20% in 1975 were in the top 40% of income earners by 1991.
  • 29% of those initially in the bottom 20% of income earners in 1975 had risen to the top 20% by 1991.

Studies in Britain, Canada, New Zealand, and Greece show similar results.

Perhaps the most staggering error comes from measuring income and not wealth. When Sanders says “you have 99 percent of all new income today going to the top 1 percent” (not true, by the way, because it’s a statement about income pre-tax), you would, again, get the impression that the top 1% is this static category of the same people.

So I’ll tuck the next statistic under the fold and make you guess. Among those in the top 1/100 of 1% of income earners in 1996, what percentage do you think were still there in 2005? Is it more or less than 90%?

Answer below the fold.


US Central Command Analysts Who Warned About ISIS Were Told To “Cut It Out”

Filed under: General — Dana @ 7:19 am

[guest post by Dana]

The Pentagon’s IG is investigating claims that US Central Command analysts were told by DOD officials to tone down their reports about ISIS in an apparent effort to line up with the president’s reassurances that the “JV squad” was “contained”. However, in actuality, ISIS continued to increase in strength and gain territory.

Analysts at U.S. Central Command were pressured to ease off negative assessments about the Islamic State threat and were even told in an email to “cut it out,” Fox News has learned – as an investigation expands into whether intelligence reports were altered to present a more positive picture.

Fox News is told by a source close to the CENTCOM analysts that the pressure on them included at least two emails saying they needed to “cut it out” and “toe the line.”

Separately, a former Pentagon official told Fox News there apparently was an attempt to destroy the communications. The Pentagon official said the email warnings were “not well received” by the analysts.

Those emails, among others, are now in the possession of the Pentagon inspector general. The IG’s probe is expanding into whether intelligence assessments were changed to give a more positive picture of the anti-ISIS campaign.

The president discussed the issue of whether his intelligence reports had been altered:

“One of the things I insisted on the day I walked into the Oval Office was that I don’t want intelligence shaded by politics. I don’t want it shaded by the desire to tell a feel-good story,” Obama said Sunday.

“I don’t know what we’ll discover with respect to what was going on in Centcom,” Mr. Obama said. “What I do know is my expectation — which is the highest fidelity to facts, data, the truth.”

[I] have made it repeatedly clear to all my top national security advisers that I never want them to hold back, even if the intelligence or their opinions about the intelligence, their analysis or interpretations of the data contradict current policy.

Because this administration has always been about fidelity to the facts and truth. Just think: Benghazi, IRS, Fast and Furious, the VA, and so on…



Pew Research Poll: 40% of Millennials Support Speech Bans

Filed under: General — JVW @ 10:50 pm

[guest post by JVW]

The Pew Research Center released the results of a poll last week suggesting that 40% of members of the millennial generation (those born between 1981 and 1997) would support allowing government to ban speech deemed offensive to minorities. That is roughly 50% higher than the percentage of Gen Xers (1965-1980), 67% higher than the percentage of Baby Boomers (1946-1964), and, amazingly, 250% higher than the percentage of members of the Silent Generation (pre-1946) who support these restrictions. I guess we have a pretty good idea of when things started going to hell, don’t we?

In addition, the poll indicates that 7 out of 20 Democrats would support speech restrictions (twice the proportion of Republican support), and nearly 2 in 5 non-white respondents would support the speech restrictions. Here are the poll results in a handy infographic:


As JD would say, we are so screwed.


Two Peas In A Pod: Hillary Clinton and Cecile Richards Make Fools Of Themselves

Filed under: General — Dana @ 11:51 am

[guest post by Dana]

Two audacious and calculating shrews tried to convince us that they stand for the plight of the disadvantaged and marginalized, even though we know differently:

Juanita Broaddrick begged to differ .

57,000,000 babies would have cried out at Richards, but were unable to.


In Spite Of President Obama’s Claims, No Refuge In U.S. For 27 Iraqi Christians Fleeing Religious Persecution

Filed under: General — Dana @ 8:33 am

[guest post by Dana]

On the heels of the administration’s plans to fast track the entry of Syrian refugees to the U.S., President Obama said after meeting with a group of Rohingya Muslim refugees from Myanmar:

“As long as I’m president, we’re going to keep on stepping up and making sure that America remains as it has always been, a place where people who, in other parts of the world, are subject to discrimination or violence, that they have in America a friend and a place of refuge,” Mr. Obama said. “We have shown that the we can welcome refugees and ensure our security – that there’s no contradiction.”

“When we talk about American leadership, American leadership is us caring about people who have been forgotten or who have been discriminated against or who’ve been tortured or who’ve been subject to unspeakable violence or who’ve been separated from families at very young ages,” he said Saturday.

“That’s when we’re the shining light on the hill,” he said. “Not when we respond on the basis of fear.”

In spite of the president’s claims, 27 Iraqi Christians, who fled their homeland because of religious persecution and crossed into the U.S. from Mexico to join their families already settled in the San Diego area, are finding America anything but a friend and place of refuge:

A total of 27 Chaldean Christians, driven from their homeland by Al Qaeda and ISIS, entered the country in April and May, hoping to join the thriving Iraqi Christian community in and around San Diego. But the door to America is being slammed on the 17 men and 10 women over what their supporters say are technicalities.

“These are families who were split up because of religious persecution, and now the government – which we love – is preventing them from being reunited,” said Fr. Michael Bazzi, of St. Peter Chaldean Catholic Cathedral, in El Cajon. “We wonder why, for thousands of Muslims, the door is open to America, yet Christians are not allowed to come.”

It is being reported that because two applicants (no confirmation that they were part of this group of 27) were not forthcoming on their applications, the whole group is being denied refuge in the U.S.:

[B]ecause some had first gone to Germany before making their way to the border, and in some cases were deemed to not have been forthcoming about it on their applications for religious asylum, they were held at the Otay Detention Center in San Diego since entering the U.S. while their applications were considered. So far, 22 have been ordered out of the U.S. and the other five are awaiting a likely similar ruling.

“We will continue to seek to remove the ones who have been ordered removed,” Immigration and Customs Enforcement spokeswoman Lauren Mack told

Earlier this year, 60 Minutes did a segment about the persecution of Christians in Iraq. There was this exchange between Lara Logan and Archbishop Nicodemus Sharaf of the Syriac Orthodox Church in Mosul, and one of the 125,000 Christians forced to flee after ISIS overran the city:

Archbishop Nicodemus Sharaf: [T]his is the first time we cannot pray in our churches.

As it seeks to erase Christianity from the landscape, the Islamic state allows no Christian symbols.

Just like the Nazis marked the property of Jews, Christian homes in Mosul have been marked with this red symbol. It’s the Arabic letter N – for Nasara – an early Islamic term for Christians. When ISIS puts it on your home, you either convert to Islam, pay an extortion tax or face the sword.

It has become a convert to Islam or die choice for the Christian in Iraq:

Issah Al Qurain is one of tens of thousands who had to make that choice. He was at home with his family in the Christian village where he’d lived all his life, when ISIS fighters came looking for him. He told us the fighters first took all his money – then his wife and children.

Lara Logan: They were telling you convert, convert, convert?

Issah Al Qurain (translated): Yes, convert. In the beginning, I refused. I told them I was Christian and I had my religion and they had their religion. But they told me, if you don’t convert, we will kill you and take your wife and children.

An Iraqi Christian now residing in Australia, was unhesitating in his assessment about the future of Christians in Iraq:

Lara Logan: What do you think the Islamic State intends to do with the Christians here?

Khamis: To wipe them out. To be nothing. No place left that bears the name of Christian or Christianity.

NRO’s Andy McCarthy noted about the Christian refugees:

“If the particular security threat you are concerned about is jihadist terror, there are no Christian jihadist terrorists[.]

Christians in Iraq are now estimated to number less than 200,000 compared to 1,500,000 just 12 years ago.


University Cancels Yoga Class Because of the Oppression

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:51 am

Washington Post (not the Onion): University yoga class canceled because of ‘oppression, cultural genocide’:

In studios across the nation, as many as 20 million Americans practice yoga every day. Few worry that their downward dogs or warrior poses disrespect other cultures.

But yoga comes from India, once a British colony. And now, at one Canadian university, a yoga class designed to include disabled students has been canceled after concerns the practice was taken from a culture that “experienced oppression, cultural genocide and diasporas due to colonialism and western supremacy,” according to the group that once sponsored it.

In a telephone interview with The Washington Post, Jennifer Scharf, who taught the class for up to 60 people at the University of Ottawa, said she was unhappy about the decision, but accepted it.

“This particular class was intro to beginners’ yoga because I’m very sensitive to this issue,” she said. “I would never want anyone to think I was making some sort of spiritual claim other than the pure joy of being human that belongs to everyone free of religion.”

Those crazy Canadians. Nothing like that could ever happen at the bastions of sanity that are universities in the United States.

Vox Helps You Respond to Your Relatives at Thanksgiving

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 7:42 am

The helpful Voxsplainers at have this wonderful resource that helps young, sophisticated progressives address the backwards yammering of their relatives at Thanksgiving:

Screen Shot 2015-11-23 at 7.20.05 AM

Thoroughly researched and immaculately proofread, the resource gives you powerful arguments to counter (for example) foolish things said by “you niece” about Syrian refugees:

Screen Shot 2015-11-23 at 7.20.58 AM

What naturally occurs to most people reading this is: how do I survive a young punk at my Thanksgiving table quoting Vox’s “How to Survive Your Family’s Thanksgiving Arguments”? I can’t help you there . . . or can I? The article on Bernie Sanders suggests that, in response to your cousin who says “Bernie Sanders doesn’t care about black people,” Vox readers should respond as follows:

Realistically, the correct response to this debate is to stand up, exit the room, go out the front door, drive to an airstrip, rent a small propeller plane, fly to the nearest mountain range, parachute over the highest cliff, and build a new life for yourself up there in the snow.

So: repeat after me: “Bernie Sanders doesn’t care about black people.”

It might help to have pre-printed directions to the nearest airstrip handy.


Trump: I Won’t Rule Out an Independent Run Even Though I Already Did

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 9:55 am

Donald Trump won’t rule out an independent run.

Of course, he already did rule out an independent run.

But of course he is a gigantic liar whose word is worthless, so nobody believed him which makes the lying OK.

Republican presidential frontrunner Donald Trump would not rule out making a run for president as an Independent despite signing a pledge in September saying he would support the eventual GOP nominee instead of running a third-party bid.

“I’m going to have to see what happens. I will see what happens. I have to be treated fairly,” Trump said Sunday on ABC’s “This Week” when asked about a new guerrilla effort by operatives within the Republican Party to derail Trump’s candidacy. “When I did this, I said I have to be treated fairly. If I’m treated fairly, I’m fine. All I want to do is [have] a level playing field.”

Verdict: this is a scandal manufactured by the media and selective editing and how DARE you make something of it?! Trump supporters will of course be unfazed — just as they would be unfazed if Trump announced that he was going to sacrifice the first-born of every household to The Great God Clarence. Just as they would be unfazed if Trump knocked at their door and took a drunken swing at them for not buying local. “I deserved that,” Trump supporters would say, rubbing their sore jaw. “Honey, go get our firstborn.”

UPDATE: Here’s Trump, saying about a Black Lives Matter protestor who was apparently punched while trying to disrupt Trump’s speech, “maybe he should have been roughed up.” While I support using force if necessary to remove a disruption, I see that as different from saying a protestor “maybe should have been roughed up” — which strikes me as a leftist response (“I don’t like that guy’s views! Let’s get him!”) But never mind that. What I find more interesting about the clip is that Trump’s knock on Hillary is not that she is dishonest or power-hungry but that she lacks “stamina.” Is that the issue? She would be great if only she had more stamina?


UPDATE x3: The good thing about Trump’s circus of a candidacy is that it allows Ted Cruz to portray himself as the sane, electable guy.

Next Page »

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1775 secs.