Major Escalation by Hamas in Gaza

In recent days, the news reports have said that Israel and Hamas were extremely close to reaching a cease-fire agreement for the intermittent fighting at Gaza.  Then yesterday afternoon Hamas launched a major rocket attack at Israel from Gaza.  Hundreds of rockets were launched.  Most hit harmlessly in unpopulated areas or were shot down by the Iron Dome system.  A few got through, however.  The result was that about 20 people were injured, including one critically.  In response, the Israelis sent air strikes to hit Hamas targets across Gaza.  The Hamas terrorists knew that the air strikes would come; they evacuated the military posts before the first missile was launched.  Even so, there were a few injuries in Gaza from the strikes.

One has to wonder if this attack by Hamas is a negotiating ploy or an indication that there will be no deal possible.  Is this a threat by Hamas of what could come without a deal or the precursor to all out war at Gaza?  It's not a simple question to answer.

Also interesting is the fact that there have been very little coverage of the exchange of fire.  I checked the CNN website and found the major exchange of fire was not even mentioned.  I also searched the CBS News website and found no mention of this fight.  It's pretty clear that since this exchange shows Hamas as the clear aggressor, the mainstream media does not want to cover it.  It doesn't fit the leftist narrative that Israel is bad and the Palestinians like the Hamas terrorists are just innocent victims.

News You Won't Hear Elsewhere

Here's a bit of news about recent polling.  In the many generic congressional polls taken in the last three weeks, the average is showing the Democrats ahead by 2.3%.  Historically, the Democrats have no chance of winning Congress unless they are about 6% ahead.  That is because there are so many districts where Democrats win by 75% or more, so the GOP has the advantage in the other districts. (and before you buy into the gerrymandering claims of the Dems, remember these heavily Democrat districts are minority districts required by the Voting Rights Act.)  What all this means is that based upon the most recent batch of polls, it looks like the GOP should retain the House.

Using polls in August for the purpose of predicting the outcome in November is silly, of course,  That didn't stop the mainstream media from predicting a blue wave based upon such polls last fall when the elections were almost a year away.  Now, however, when the results have gotten really much better for the Republicans, the media is mostly silent about them.  Think about it.  Have you heard anyone on TV telling you that the polls are showing such a big shift?

The polls right now actually say more about media bias than they do about the outcome in November.  The media does itself no favors when it tries to silence news it doesn't like.

It's Not Who She Is, But What She Is

Here's a crazy bit of news about the mainstream media:  in yesterday's Michigan primary, a Muslim woman became assured of being the first such person in Congress.  You may ask who this woman is or what she supports.  If so, don't bother to read the media.  I checked out the coverage, and each article that I saw ran under a headline about a Muslim woman in Congress or the first such person in Congress.

Think about that.  The media couldn't even be bothered to use her name.  She's nothing more than a member of a religious group of a particular gender to them.

It's as if Bernie Sanders were to win re-election to the senate and the headline read "Old, White Jew re-elected."  Maybe it would make more sense if on winning her next race, Maxine Waters faced headlines that said only "African-American Elderly Woman Re-elected."

It's time that the media stopped focusing on things like this nonsense.

Ohio 12 -- GOP Candidate Wins

In yesterday's super hyped special election in the twelfth district of Ohio, the Republican beat the Democrat.  It was close; the margin was just over 1%, but it was a win nevertheless for the GOP.  The supposedly super-motivated Democrat base was not enough to provide victory. 

That's the actual story, but I think it's more interesting to look at the coverage.  First, there are the mainstream media outlets that still list the race as too close to call.  So far this morning, I read two articles criticizing President Trump for congratulating the Republican on his victory since the race is too close to call.  The problem, of course, is that the results are not close enough to force a recount.  Also, there aren't enough ballots remaining to count to change the result.  Even the provisional ballots won't be enough.  The election is over.

Second, the media is also telling us how this is a moral victory for the Democrats because the result is close.  That's much like the argument that Hillary won the popular vote, so it was a moral victory.  Donald Trump is president, however, and the Republican will hold the seat from Ohio.  If the Dems get a great many moral victories in November while the GOP holds the seats in question, America will still have a GOP majority in both houses of Congress.

Third, there are many media outlets that basically buried coverage of the Ohio race in favor of other stories.  For example, reliably leftist Yahoo News has a featured article about the results of a referendum in Missouri as its top story but put the Ohio loss by the Democrat in a almost a footnote on its main page.

The reality is that the Ohio results really don't mean all that much.  The victory shows that there is no overwhelming Blue Wave at least in Ohio 12.  It also means that victory for the GOP in this same district is more likely in November; yesterday's win will give the Republican a boost in name recognition and the like.  It means also that President Trump's support for the GOP candidate may have put him over the top, something he will be likely to remember when he gets to DC in a few days.  That's about it.

Elizabeth Warren, Comedian

Senator Elizabeth Warren is a strident liberal who is perhaps best known for being called Pocahontas by President Trump in reference to her false claim to being part Native American.  She allegedly used that false claim of being a minority to gain employment at both the University of Pennsylvania and Harvard law schools.  She's also known as proclaiming herself loudly to be anti-Wall Street which drafting legislation that protects the big banks against competition from regional and small banks.  One thing we didn't know, though, is that Warren is quite a comedian.

Here's a good example:  Warren just tweeted the following:  "Together, we [the Democrats] say "no" to the politics of division.."  Think about that.  Here's a short list of Democrats saying no to the politics of division.

1.  Hillary Clinton brought us together by calling everyone voting for Trump "a basket of deplorables".

2.  Maxine Waters, a prominent Democrat congressman, told America to come together by making clear to anyone who works for or who supports the President that they will have no peace.  They will be shunned, confronted if they try to go to a restaurant or church or shopping.  What a marvelous way to say "no to the politics of division."

3.  Just yesterday, a mob of about 40 white members of Antifa, a leftist group, confronted Candace Owen, a prominent black conservative, and threw things at her screaming that she was a "white supremacist" and a "racist".  It brought back the days when other Democrats, namely the KKK, brought the races in America "together".

There are countless more examples of this wonderful "togetherness" fostered by the Democrats.  These of course pale into insignificance compared to the biggest Democrat push for "togetherness" in American history, when the Democrats brought about secession of the South so as to protect slavery.  Gee, the Civil War was the zenith of "togetherness".  Only 700,000 people died then.

Elizabeth Warren has always been a joke.  Now she is telling them as well.

Does Anyone See This As Bizarre?

Candace Owens has become a superstar among conservatives.  She is a young black woman who refuses to accept what she calls residence on the "Democrat plantation".  That makes her about as dangerous as anyone could be to the left.  If many other African Americans decided that the Democrats are not good for them as a group and switch to the GOP, it will mean the end of any chance for national victory for the Dems for a long, long time.  The Democrats need at least 80% of the black vote if they are to win in many states.  With an intelligent and convincing person like Candace Owens out there speaking her mind, the chance of more blacks leaving the Democrats becomes much larger.  The result of all this is that Owens is now a prime target of the far left.

Yesterday, in Philadelphia, Owens was spotted by a liberal activist while she was having breakfast in a restaurant with her co-worker at Talking Point, Charlie Kirk.   The activist quickly gathered a mob of Antifa members who surrounded the restaurant and literally attacked Owens and Kirk as they left.  There was a squad of police who were there and who protected Owens and Kirk, so other than a drink thrown on Kirk and a lot of insults and threats tossed at Owens and Kirk there was no physical damage done.  But here's the strange part.  The police were all black or Hispanic.  Owens is black.  The violent leftist protesters were all white.  So what were they screaming?  One favorite was "F__K the racist police!"  Another favorite of theirs was "Down with white supremacy!"  There was much more, but the spectacle of a white group attacking a black woman protected by black and Hispanic police was more than a little reminiscent of Alabama in the 1960s.  It was what looked like a racist attack made while shouting anti-racist slogans.  It's a tactic that most fascists would be proud of.

Owens, to her credit, was not cowed by this attack.  She tweeted all about it.  Not surprisingly, though, the mainstream media had little or no coverage of this attack.  Last week, CNN went crazy when Jim Acosta appeared at a Trump rally and was loudly booed.  He was never actually threatened with violence, although CNN made the attack out to be something akin to a lynching.  When a black woman actually gets attack by a white mob, however, CNN chose not to bother even covering the story.

My guess is that everyone who hears about these events will be more than a little shocked.  The true nature of Antifa, the left and CNN could not be clearer.

UPDATE:  Just to be thorough, I searched the website used by the Philadelphia Inquirer and the Philadelphia Daily News, the two papers in the city, to see how they covered what happened with Owens and Kirk.  As of noon today, there are no articles or other reports regarding the attack on these two by the Antifa thugs.  Given the slant of the Philly papers, this is no surprise, but it is still disgusting that they think they can just ignore actual news that they don't like.

Unbelievable Crazxiness Over Nothing Much

I've been out of the country and have arrived home to various networks of the mainstream media having a meltdown because of a tweet the President Trump sent out over the weekend.  That new storyline is that Trump "admitted" that he was a conspirator with regard to the Trump Tower meeting with some Russians during the campaign in 2016.  Trump says in the tweet that the meeting was about getting some dirt on Hillary and that he knew nothing about it.  TRUMP ADMITS MEETING INTENDED TO GET DIRT ON CLINTON is an actual headline today.

This is crazy.  When the subject of the meeting first became public, the emails of Don Jr. were all released.  These made clear that Don Jr. took the meeting because he was promised dirt on Hillary.  That means that the President's tweets say nothing new. Don Jr. also said at the time that the meeting turned out to be about adoptions and the Magnitsky Act not about dirt on Hillary.  In fact, everyone at the meeting says the same thing.  The meeting lasted for about 20 minutes or less and achieved nothing.  President Trump previously said that the meeting was about adoption.  That aligns totally with what Don Jr. and the others said.  Now, again in alignment with Don Jr. and the others, he says that the meeting was set up to get dirt on Hillary.  That's nothing new.

It's bizarre that the media is going so ape about all this.  This is no admission of anything.  Why must we go through these periodic attempts by the media to create phony story lines through lies and misrepresentations?