Sunday, November 29, 2015

GLOBAL COOLING: Decade long ice age predicted as sun 'hibernates'

By Frances Rice 
The Earth is cooling

President Barack Obama is using the “religion” of Global Warming/Climate Change as a cynical ploy to make America weak and turn our nation into a Banana Republic by eliminating our fossil fuel production.  Below is an article which exposes the hoax perpetrated by Obama and his fellow Progressives/Socialists. Their aim is to impose an international personal carbon tax on hardworking Americans and, thus, enrich themselves.

In order to fool the public, the Global Warming/Climate Change alarmists have gone to great lengths to hide the truth about the Earth’s climate. For examples, tens of thousands of emails released by hackers show clearly that “Climate Scientists” fabricated their models.

Those who've actually studied the "weather" have found NO increases in the temperature of Earth over the past few years, after comparing what is occurring today with what has happened in the past. To add insult to injury, the alarmists are declaring that "the debate over climate change is settled." Anyone contesting this false conclusion is derided as a “climate denier.” The strategy is to shut down debate and intimidate people with contradictory evidence into silence.

In reality, the Earth's climate has been changing, long before man existed. The primary determinant of the Earth's climate is the caloric output of our sun. Shamefully, this primary cause of climatic changes on Earth is not included in the so-called computer models.

GLOBAL COOLING: Decade long ice age predicted as sun 'hibernates'

SCIENTISTS claim we are in for a decade-long freeze as the sun slows down solar activity by up to 60 per cent.

By Jon Austin

A team of European researchers have unveiled a scientific model showing that the Earth is likely to experience a “mini ice age” from 2030 to 2040 as a result of decreased solar activity.

Their findings will infuriate environmental campaigners who argue by 2030 we could be facing increased sea levels and flooding due to glacial melt at the poles.

However, at the National Astronomy Meeting in Wales, Northumbria University professor Valentina Zharkova said fluctuations an 11-year cycle of solar activity the sun goes through would be responsible for a freeze, the like of which has not been experienced since the 1600s.

From 1645 to 1715 global temperatures dropped due to low solar activity so much that the planet experienced a 70-year ice age known as Maunder Minimum which saw the River Thames in London completely frozen.

The researchers have now developed a "double dynamo "model that can better predict when the next freeze will be.

Based on current cycles, they predict solar activity dwindling for ten years from 2030.

Professor Zharkova said two magnetic waves will cancel each other out in about 2030, leading to a drop in sun spots and solar flares of about 60 per cent.

Sunspots are dark concentrations of magnetic field flux on the surface that reduce surface temperature in that area, while solar flares are burst of radiation and solar energy that fire out across the solar system, but the Earth's atmosphere protects us from the otherwise devastating effects.

She said: "In cycle 26, the two waves exactly mirror each other, peaking at the same time but in opposite hemispheres of the Sun.

"We predict that this will lead to the properties of a ‘Maunder minimum.

"Over the cycle, the waves fluctuate between the Sun’s northern and southern hemispheres. Combining both waves together and comparing to real data for the current solar cycle, we found that our predictions showed an accuracy of 97 per cent."

Research colleagues Simon Shepherd of Bradford University, Helen Popova of Lomonosov Moscow State University and Sergei Zarkhov of the University of Hull used magnetic field observations from 1976 to 2008 at the Wilcox Solar Observatory at Stanford University.

A Royal Astronomical Society spokesman said: "It is 172 years since a scientist first spotted that the Sun’s activity varies over a cycle lasting around 10 to 12 years.

"But every cycle is a little different and none of the models of causes to date have fully explained fluctuations."

The “double dynamo” theory appears to support claims of researchers who argue Earth will soon experience major global cooling due to lower solar activity as the sun goes into a sustained period of hibernation.

Environmentalists meanwhile claim global temperatures will increase over the period unless we drastically reduce carbon emissions.

Saturday, November 28, 2015

Climate Change, the Greatest Issue of the 21st Century


By Frances Rice


Political satirists can use one cartoon to send a message more powerfully than a thousand words.




Posted on November 27, 2015 by John Hinderaker in Climate
Climate Change, the Greatest Issue of the 21st Century

Yeah, right. With the latest U.N. confab scheduled to begin in Paris on Monday, global warming hysteria is being hyped by governments around the world. Reality, though, tends to intrude, as it did in Paris just a week or two ago. Between bullets and bombs on one hand, and the theoretical prospect of a one degree increase in average world temperatures on the other, which would bring us closer to the mean over the last 10,000 years, most people don’t hesitate. Michael Ramirez illustrates the point. Click to enlarge:

Most people understand that government exists to protect us from the actions of criminals and mass murderers like today’s Islamic extremists, not to try (futilely) to fine-tune the weather. Thus, no one expects anything from next week’s Paris conclave other than the enrichment of activists with seemingly unlimited access to government money.

Thursday, November 26, 2015

Turncoat Turkey Goes From White House To ISIS

Duffel TV
November 27, 2014
Pardoned White House Turkey Defects To ISIS


WASHINGTON, D.C. – Senior U.S. officials are literally calling “fowl” after the Thanksgiving turkey pardoned by President Obama publicly defected to the Middle Eastern terrorist group ISIS.

Popcorn the Turkey, now calling himself Babakurn al-Turki, was pardoned from the dinner table only yesterday by President Obama in a public ceremony at the White House. Normally the pardoned bird is sent along with its competitor to live out its remaining days at Morven Park’s Turkey Hill in Leesburg, Virginia.

However, U.S. officials have now admitted that al-Turki instead hijacked an Osprey out of Andrews Air Force Base in nearby Maryland and flew like a bat out of hell to Syria.

A group of senior intelligence officials and ornithologists with birds-eye surveillance of the war-torn country have suggested he is nesting in Raqqah or across the northern border in another neighboring country.

Al-Turki, who was originally raised as an animist before converting to Islam, has already appeared in several propaganda clips and tweets for ISIS, gobbling anti-American rhetoric and leaving furious American officials grousing.

Trey Nahas, a counter-terrorism expert at the Rand Corporation, explained that al-Turki’s defection violated the cardinal rule for anyone receiving a presidential pardon, namely not to commit any further crimes.

Nahas said it was unclear if al-Turki, raised in a bubble of protected affluence in Oakwood, Ohio, became radicalized on internet forums like countless other disaffected foreigners who have flocked to ISIS, or later during his detention in the controversial poultry farm at Guantanamo Bay.

In either case, according to Nahas, the end result was the same: “the U.S. not only released a dangerous terrorist back into the wild, but it has also given ISIS something to crow about on social media.”

Calling it the classic case of the chickens come home to roast, FBI Director James Comey has admitted that al-Turki was already a known flight risk when he received his pardon. He had several suspected handlers known to support radical Islam and ISIS, although al-Turki managed to duck any formal charges.

Comey added that the FBI has launched its own investigation into the government’s handling of al-Turki prior to his release, saying it may be the canary in the coal mine for future detainee defections. However, several investigators privately told Duffel Blog that the findings would be delayed until after Black Friday to avoid ruffling the feathers of any major retailers.

While Comey said U.S. intelligence was still unsure where exactly al-Turki now stood in the ISIS pecking order, he insisted that the turkey would ultimately be more of a burden than an asset to the group.

“He’s too high profile now to operate anywhere clandestinely, he’s always going to be an albatross around their neck,” Comey explained. “I’m not exaggerating when I say his goose is cooked.”

Some critics find that hard to swallow.

Rep. Tammy Duckworth (D-IL) of the House Armed Services Committee has already demanded to know “which birdbrain in the Secret Service” allowed such a dangerous avian to be that close to the president, and said that image “should give all of us goosebumps.”

The Wall Street Journal published its own editorial complaining that Al-Turki’s defection is “just one more feather in the cap of ISIS. Not only did this bird strut around the White House like he was cock of the walk, but as soon as he’s pardoned he flies the coop to join ISIS of all groups. What was our lame duck president thinking?”

Ironically, some news reports are circulating that, after being accused by ISIS of being a double-agent for the Mossad or CIA, al-Turki may end up getting beheaded anyway.

Duffel Blog writer Dark Laughter contributed to this article.

King Kevin Versus Queen Cersei

By Frances Rice
The below article by Maureen Dowd is a rare reflection by a liberal journalist about how the average American views the 2016 presidential candidates.
To all who wish to take note, Americans have a clear-eyed view of the danger posed by Islamic radicals to our nation and the entire western world, as well as the urgent need to defeat ISIS.
Most Americans also understand that Hillary Clinton  -- who is seeking to become President Barack Obama’s third term -- and the rest of the Democratic Party candidates are ill-prepared to fight the war that has been declared on us by the radical Islamists.
According to recent statistics, 66 percent of Americans say President Barack Obama does not have a clear plan to fight ISIS. Hillary Clinton is a prime architect of Obama’s strategy and is now trying to run away from her prior positions.
CBS News reported the following: Just over a week after the terrorist attacks in Paris, only 23 percent of Americans think President Barack Obama has a clear plan for dealing with the militant group ISIS, the lowest number yet recorded in the CBS News Poll. Sixty-six percent do not think he has a clear plan - a new high.
Further, large majorities of Republicans and independents say the President doesn't have a clear plan, and almost half of Democrats (40 percent) agree. More Democrats (45 percent) say he doesn't have a plan than say he does.
In considering military options, 50 percent of Americans now favor sending in U.S. ground troops to fight ISIS militants in Iraq and Syria, up four points from August.
Average Americans get it. Republican candidates get it.  The Democratic Party candidate do not.  It’s interesting to read how Maureen Dowd is admitting the reality of what is happening in this crucial election cycle, using the voice “Kevin,” her apparently alter-ego “brother.”  Wink, wink.
The New York Times 
The Opinion Pages | Op-Ed Columnist
King Kevin Versus Queen Cersei
by Maureen Dowd
NOV. 26, 2015
THE intense interest in the thrill-a-minute, through-the-looking-glass 2016 race, fueled by anger at maladjusted Washington and anxiety after the Paris attacks, has spawned predictions that Thanksgiving political debates will be noisier and nastier than ever. Plenty of turkeys with a bone to pick and plenty of dressing down to go with the dressing. The Democratic National Committee actually issued talking points for the “lively” conversations with Republican uncles, aunts and brothers. Clearly, the people at the D.N.C. don’t have any Republican relatives. It’s never a parley. It’s a lecture. So I decided to let my Republican brother offer his red-state soliloquy now, hoping he’d let me eat my white meat in peace. He-e-e-ere’s Kevin:
While liberals and the mainstream media may regard the myriad Republican presidential candidates as a “house of crazies,” I see an embarrassment of riches. It is the ultimate irony that the Republican field blows the Democrats away on one of their favorite topics — diversity.
Here’s how I see the Republican contest and the Democratic coronation:
Donald Trump: With all his bombast and incivility, Trump has joyfully debunked political correctness for the complete fraud that it is. With his talent for making debate ratings soar, he has allowed all the other candidates to be seen and heard at celestial levels unreachable without him. He has touched a nerve because people are fed up with liberal groups being offended at every slight, real or imagined. (I can assure you none of these people were taught by Jesuits.) Three Ivy League schools are currently under siege, with students at Princeton demanding the removal of Woodrow Wilson’s name from a building. Washington and Jefferson are up next as former slave owners, leaving Al Sharpton as the default “father of our country.” We are tired of apologies for America’s exceptionalism.
Ben Carson: Not since Eisenhower has a complete novice politician been so legitimate a contender. Can he avoid the traps set for him by the media? He presents intriguing possibilities as part of the ticket, forcing African-Americans to choose between him and the wife of the man Toni Morrison called our “first black president.”
Marco Rubio: Young, whip smart and self-assured, he has an encyclopedic knowledge of foreign affairs and is a stunning contrast to Hillary Clinton both in generation and vision. Wait until he starts delivering his speeches in Spanish.
Ted Cruz: The Hispanic heir apparent to Barry Goldwater had the best moment in the third debate, calling out an obscure cable TV host looking for his 10 minutes of fame.
Jeb Bush: I like the Bushes, all of them. Jeb would have been the perfect Republican candidate from 1988 to 2000. In this age of instant gratification, his wonkish grasp of policy does not move the needle. Too bad.
Chris Christie: Trump with better manners. A certain pick for attorney general if this gig does not work out.
Contrast our informed candidates with the Democratic lineup of Queen Cersei, the socialist Doc Brown from “Back to the Future” and the lead singer of O’Malley’s March. I keep waiting for Martin O’Malley during debates to whip out his guitar for a few Irish songs. It would be more entertaining.
Clinton: She’s seeking the highest office in the land even though 60 percent of the country does not trust her and her emails are currently under F.B.I. review for potential national security breaches.
Bernie Sanders: His proposals for free health care, free college and expanded Social Security have a price tag of $18 trillion with no way to pay for it. Not even a candidate for budget director.
O’Malley: Does anyone know his reason for running?
The next president will have to deal with a severely weakened hand, at home and abroad. The bill for “leading from behind” has come due. After the Radical Islam (dare I say thy name?) attack on France, the president who called ISIS “contained” was left to issue his familiar disclaimer that Islam is a religion of peace. In dealing with foes, Clinton, in a 2014 speech at Georgetown University, called for “trying to understand, and insofar as is psychologically possible, empathize with their perspective.” Note to Hillary: Any enemy with beheading as a menu item does not deserve empathy.
A peeved President Obama lashed out at Republicans for daring to pass a bill asking for a more robust screening process for the Syrian refugees. His adviser, Ben Rhodes — the political hack behind the deceitful Benghazi talking pointsassured us that our screening was airtight even as 47 Democrats voted for the bill. The president has been forced to face the inconvenient truth that others will lead the world in this battle while he continues his lonely quest against the world’s “greatest threat”: climate change.
Our enemies do not fear us, and authority at home is being questioned by a disgraceful campaign since Ferguson to undermine the police. I am the son of a policeman, and a police officer is killed in the line of duty every 60 hours. The thin blue line is the only thing that separates our society from anarchy. There will be awful shootings by police officers like the one in Chicago, but these are exceptions. My dad told me that any job where you can legally carry a gun will occasionally draw the wrong type of person. Police officers certainly do not deserve to see the media turning criminals into celebrated victims. The next time you see a police officer, say thank you.
So, ask yourself three questions: Do you want a president who refuses to name the enemy? Who do you want to appoint the next three Supreme Court justices? And who will protect the homeland and honor the Constitution? Then pray that you got it right.
Happy Thanksgiving.

For Thanksgiving, Is the GOP Down to Three with the Rest Turkeys?

Diary of a Mad Voter
For Thanksgiving, Is the GOP Down to Three with the Rest Turkeys?
By Roger L Simon November 26, 2015 
Happy Thanksgiving, fellow mad... or not so mad... voters...
Here's how I see the Republican presidential derby shaping up at what would normally be an early point in the campaign, but this year is not.  Thanks to the celebrity presence of Donald Trump, the 2016 election has turned into America's favorite reality show. And it feels as if we're on our second or third season already.  Those who haven't been watching are tuned into another channel and would likely only vote if a Kardashian were running.  And even then, one wonders.  We're well into the game, even if the political pros are telling us we're not.  (Who are they anyway?)
So where are we Thanksgiving Day?
You wouldn't know it from the way Jeb Bush is busy vilifying Trump for the billionaire's contention that The Donald saw crowds of "cheering Muslims" on 9/11, but the former governor's campaign was over before it started. It may sound cruel, but it seemed obvious  from the outset to all but the most conventional wings of the Republican Party that the GOP electorate was only marginally more interested in a renewed Bush monarchy than in a Clinton one.  No matter how this "cheering Muslims" business plays out, if indeed it succeeds in piercing Trump's Teflon (unlikely),  it won't be Bush that profits.  He's toast -- or turkey.
Who else is turkey?  Well, there's a long list.  If you look at the Real Clear Politics poll averages (isn't it incredible how those RCP guys have gone from zero to the folks everybody trusts, even lefties, in ten years?), the whole crew following Bush (who never seems to get much higher than 5%) -- Fiorina, Huckabee, Christie, Kasich, Paul, Graham, Pataki down to Santorum at 0.5% -- might as well get ready for the turkey slicer.
What?  No holiday spirit?  Too gruesome?  Okay, we'll pardon them all in the grand presidential tradition, if they'll only get out of the race.  But the question is when.  Many will hang on for Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina, desperately hoping to achieve at least double digits in one of those states.  They won't.  If they  would drop out now, they'd save themselves and their supporters a lot of cash, but the human ego being what it is, we can put the chances of that happening somewhere between the proverbial slim and none.

That doesn't mean that several of these people aren't worthy.  Carly Fiorina especially has shown herself to be ready for an important position in anybody's cabinet.  And I wouldn't mind seeing Chris Christie as attorney general.
But speaking of worthy, I regret to say that perhaps the most worthy person to run for president in our time is finished (or turkey).  I refer, of course, to Dr. Ben Carson, who has done things with his life no politician I can think of ever has.  Maybe if Hippocrates had run for office.  Anyway, sad as it is, Dr. Carson is gone, another victim of ISIS. His candidacy went up in flames in Paris.  As Michael Corleone said to Tom Hagen, "You're not a wartime consigliere, Tom."  Neither is Carson. And more than ever on this Thanksgiving Day we're at war. The public knows that and Carson's poll numbers are headed down.  I doubt they're coming back.
So that leaves three serious candidates -- three wartime consiglieres -- for the Republican nomination, and you know who they areDonald Trump, Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz.

TRIGGER WARNING:  I am going to write something that may get partisans of the latter two really upset.  Despite the fact Cruz and Rubio are engaged in their own food fight (more of that in a moment), there's not a huge difference between the two men about the most important thing -- how they would be as president.  In my estimation, they'd both be pretty damn good.  They are two really smart guys, excellent communicators (far better than anything the GOP has had since Reagan) and relatively similar in their politics.  I've had the pleasure, honor, whatever you want to call it, of meeting both men and we'd be unbelievably lucky to have either -- or both, if they decided to run together.
And now for the food fight:  The rap against Rubio (exploited by Cruz) is that he's weak on immigration because of his participation in the Gang of Eight.  Rubio says he learned a lesson from that and is now for border security first.  Some say he's lying.  I don't at all.  In fact, given the Florida senator's steadfast opinions on the Syrian refugee crisis and similar issues, I'm certain he'd be a staunch border security hawk -- as would Cruz.
The rap against Cruz (exploited by Rubio) is that he is weak on security because he sought to curtail the NSA intelligence operations post-Snowden.  True enough, but here again I don't doubt for a second that Cruz would be as vigilant about our national security as anybody running -- as would Rubio.
My point -- everybody relax.  We've got two good guys here.  Let's hope they don't hurt each other too much because we don't want them wounded for the general election.

As for Donald, that's more mysterious.  It's hard to get a handle of exactly how he'd be as president but in truth -- call me Pollyanna -- I don't fear a Trump presidency, no matter what outlandish things The Donald says (well, almost).  Most of the more extreme stuff is pose and he'd certainly be the most entertaining person we've had in the White House in our lifetimes.  And considering what's been going on lately, we certainly could use it.

But most of all, and here I'm repeating myself from numerous posts,  it's the general election I focus on. This Thanksgiving, and doubtless until Election Day, I am first and foremost a Vince Lombardi voter:  "Winning isn't everything.  It's the only thing."
Donald Trump, a champion of women? His female employees think so.
By Frances Stead Sellers
In this outtake photo from Savvy Woman magazine cover story in 1989, Donald Trump poses with members of his team, Blanche Sprague, left, Susan Heilbron, center, and Barbara Res. (George Lange)
After she joined Donald Trump's real estate business, Louise Sunshine struggled to maintain a steady weight while managing her new career alongside the busy schedules of three young children.
Trump must have noticed, Sun­shine said. She recalled that he kept an unflattering photograph of her in a drawer — a "fat picture," as she called it — that he would pull out when she did something he didn't like.
It was "a reminder that I wasn't perfect," said Sunshine, who worked with Trump for 15 years starting in the mid-1970s when he set about remaking Manhattan's skyline. "He just is that way."
Sunshine said she bears no grudges and instead considers Trump a valued mentor. A political fundraiser with no prior real estate expertise, Sunshine ascended to executive vice president of the Trump Organization, joining a cadre of female executives who have played central roles in Trump's empire.
In the five months that the billionaire businessman has spent on the presidential campaign trail, his inflammatory missiles toward women have prompted charges of sexism, even misogyny. His obsession with physical appearance — such as speculating that Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton was wearing a wig — drew charges of bullying from the candidate vying to be the country's first female president. Polls show Trump suffering from a wider gender gap among American voters overall than other Republican candidates.
But many women who have worked closely with Trump say he was a corporate executive ahead of his time in providing career advancement for women. While some say he could be boorish, his companies nurtured and pro­moted women in an otherwise male-dominated industry. Several women said they appreciated how Trump granted them entry to a new playing field.
"From the standpoint of being a woman, I just thought he was phenomenal," said Sunshine, 74. "So supportive and encouraging. . . . He gave me the ropes, and I could either hang myself or prove myself."
Jennifer Crisafulli-Oberting, 43, a contestant on the Trump reality TV show "The Apprentice" who went on to promote the show in media appearances with Trump, said she felt she was being welcomed into the "boys' club" — but on her terms.
"You were like one of the guys right off the bat, but you didn't have to act or dress like one of the guys," she said.
Trump often told the women he employed and worked with that he valued those he believed would stand their ground on construction sites and in legal battles. He called Barbara Res, whom he put in charge of the construction of his now-iconic Trump Tower in 1980, "a killer," she recalled. And he used to tell her and others that "men are better than women, but a good woman is better than 10 good men."
"He wasn't discriminatory against women that I saw," said Res, now in her 60s and owner of a construction consultancy.
Res said Trump was "brave" to hire her when few women were in the business. But like many men of the era, she said, "he was sexist; he made comments and stuff like that."
In an interview, Trump blamed perceptions of him as sexist on unfair media coverage of his presidential campaign.
"I have been very, very good for women," he said. "I was way ahead of the curve."
Trump highlighted the role of women in his corporate success in his 1987 book "The Art of the Deal," writing that he hired "a lot of women for top jobs, and they're among my best people."
Referring in the interview to his recruitment and promotion of women, he added: "It was a good decision. Good for women and good for me."
Today, according to Trump's attorney, Michael Cohen, there are more women than men holding executive positions in the Trump Organization, heading such departments as human resources, golf and hotel management, and global licensing, even though women make up just 43 percent of the overall workforce. Women who are in similar positions as men, Cohen said, "are compensated at equal and in many cases higher pay rates."
It was not possible to independently verify Cohen's data, and he declined to provide documentation.
The picture many current and former employees paint stands in contrast to the blustering controversies prompted by Trump's comments since he hit the campaign trail. In an interview after the first Republican debate, when Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly grilled Trump about calling women "fat pigs," "dogs," "slobs" and "disgusting animals," Trump said Kelly had "blood coming out of her wherever." He mocked the appearance of his only female rival for the nomination, Carly Fiorina, referring in a Rolling Stone interview to her face and asking, "Would anyone vote for that?" His attempt to make amends by saying of Fiorina, "I think she's got a beautiful face," struck many as demeaning.
Asked in an interview about his comments about Kelly and Fiorina, Trump said: "They can take care of themselves. They are capable of taking care of themselves." He also insisted that he does not discriminate. "I treat men and women in a very similar fashion," he said.
Trump has not reserved his critiques of appearances to women. He said recently that his hair was better than that of rival Marco Rubio. And he achieved a back-handed jab at Rand Paul during a recent debate by saying, "I never attacked him on his look, and believe me, there's plenty of subject matter right there."
At times, it seems Trump can't help himself. Midway through a telephone interview about his treatment of women, he told a Washington Post reporter, "You're a very beautiful woman, as I understand it."
The presence of striking women has played a key role in Trump's relentless quest to boost his brand — in real estate, in entertainment and now in politics.
In 1989, Savvy Woman magazine ran a cover story featuring Trump with Res and two other women on his team with the text "Surprise! Mr. Macho's Inner Circle Isn't An All-Boys' Club." The cover at once burnished the image of an alpha male and suggested the modern sensibilities of a gender-neutral employer.
After "The Apprentice" debuted in 2004, Trump's many ­media appearances with shapely beauties helped goose the show's phenomenal ratings. Crisafulli-Oberting remembered participating in a shoot for People's 2004 Sexiest Man Alive issue in which she and five other women appeared in a barbershop scene combing Trump's hair and shining his shoes. A quote from Trump, then 58, reads, "These are special women, so if they think I'm sexy, that's OK with me."
Now, in his political life, Trump relies on a former model, 27-year-old Hope Hicks, to run his PR.
His glamorous daughter Ivanka — about whom he once said, "If Ivanka weren't my daughter, perhaps, I would be dating her" — introduced Trump when he announced his presidential bid. Ivanka, 34 and pregnant with her third child, navigates a thoroughly modern path between motherhood, real estate development and promoting her line of jewelry and clothing. She is developing a Lean In-style "Women Who Work" initiative and in recent weeks has taken to the airwaves to combat the furor her father's comments provoked.
"I don't think that he's gender-targeted at all," Ivanka Trump told CNN. "I wouldn't be a high-level executive within his organization if he felt that way."
Those who have worked for Trump say looks aren't everything. He is more interested in hiring smart people, regardless of gender, they say, and that has led Trump for decades to rely on strong, assertive women both as gatekeepers and as advisers.
Norma Foerderer, for instance, spent two decades as a personal assistant to Trump, advising him on everything "from what color tie to wear to whether or not he should purchase a building," according to Jim Dowd, who used to represent Trump at his PR company. Foerderer, who rose to vice president, retired in 2006 and died two years ago.
Rhona Graff, Trump's current assistant and a senior vice president, has been with him for more than 25 years. Graff, who regularly appeared in "The Apprentice," gained some notice recently after a super PAC backing Trump used contact information that came from her to solicit a donation, according to an e-mail obtained by The Post. Graff declined to be interviewed for this article, but she sent an e-mail in which she described a stimulating position in which two days were never alike working for a man who is at once demanding and "brilliant, insightful, funny, charismatic and surprisingly down to earth."
Several of Trump's female employees said he fostered a positive work environment.
Deirdre Rosen, 42, vice president of human resources for the Trump Hotel Collection, said that after working for big public companies, the seven years she has spent at the family-run Trump Organization have offered her the flexibility to "be present at soccer games and drama club" with her children.
Jill Martin, 35, assistant general counsel, who joined the Trump Organization five years ago, described a boss who helped her overcome her caution about her abilities and encouraged her to grow. When a case went before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, she said, Trump could have asked a more experienced male lawyer to argue the case. Instead, "He said, 'Jill, you'll do great,' " she recalled. "He pushed me when I needed it."
But several women who are longtime Trump supporters say the provocative outbursts that served Trump well in business and entertainment don't belong in politics. "I don't like the fact the worlds are merging," said Ereka Vetrini, a TV host and lifestyle expert.
Vetrini, who appeared with other female "Apprentice" contestants in a controversial TV Guide cover ("tummies bare, ties on"), said she understood the impetus to boost ratings for Trump's show, but political polls are a different matter.
"Fiorina and Kelly?" she said. "I can't disregard those comments."
Nor can Res, who also disagrees with her former boss's political stance: From his antiabortion position to his opposition to the Affordable Care Act, "his policies, the things he says he believes in, are very anti-women."
"I'm voting for Hillary," Res said.
Despite what she says is outrageous language, Sunshine said she supports Trump in his bid to be president.
And the "fat picture"?
She hasn't forgotten it, Sunshine said. "When I gain weight, I think of that picture," she reflected, evoking a Pavlovian image of her former boss using the photograph as a trigger to condition her behavior.
Looking back, she said, "it was quite a good idea."
Frances Stead Sellers is senior writer at The Washington Post magazine. She joined the magazine in 2014 after spending two years as the editor of the daily Style section, with a focus on profiles, personalities, arts and ideas.

Wednesday, November 25, 2015

NYTimes: The Case Against Woodrow Wilson at Princeton

By Frances Rice 
President Woodrow Wilson
The light of truth is being shed, however slowly, on the racist past of the Democratic Party, even in the liberal media.  Below is an article that was published by the editors of “The New York Times,” acknowledging the truth about their liberal icon, President Woodrow Wilson.
A video on the subject, “The Black-O-Scope Show: The Truth About Progressives,” can be viewed at: 
My quest is to correct the history of civil rights, since liberals have systematically whitewashed the Democratic Party’s history of racism. A key component of this effort is the lawsuit against the Democratic Party.
For details, please view “The Black-O-Scope Show - Democratic Party Sued For Racism” at: 
The Democratic Party was sued for their 200-year history of racism by Wayne Perryman and the case went all the way to the US Supreme Court. In his lawsuit, Perryman describes how the Democratic Party became known as the "Party of White Supremacy" that fought to preserve slavery and enacted discriminatory laws to deny civil rights to blacks.

Perryman also wrote a book “Whites, Blacks and Racist Democrats: The Untold Story of Race & Politics Within the Democratic Party from 1792-2009.”
Notably, the 2006 report of the Commission appointed by the Governor of North Carolina prompted the Democratic Party of North Carolina to pass a unanimous resolution in 2007 apologizing for the Democratic Party’s role in the bloody 1898 Wilmington Race Riots where dozens of black Americans were massacred.
That apology can be viewed on the Internet at: 
In a letter to the North Carolina Democratic Party, North Carolina Lieutenant Governor Richard H. Moore wrote: “We can no longer ignore the fact that many of us grew up being taught a much sanitized – and inaccurate – history….  The truth is ugly.”
The New York Times
The Opinion Pages | Editorial
The Case Against Woodrow Wilson at Princeton
NOV. 24, 2015
Student protesters at Princeton performed a valuable public service last week when they demanded that the administration acknowledge the toxic legacy of Woodrow Wilson, who served as university president and New Jersey governor before being elected to the White House. He was an unapologetic racist whose administration rolled back the gains that African-Americans achieved just after the Civil War, purged black workers from influential jobs and transformed the government into an instrument of white supremacy.
The protesters’ top goal — convincing the university to rename the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs and the residential complex known as Wilson College — has drawn heavy fire from traditionalists. But the fact that racist policies enacted during Wilson’s presidency are still felt in the country today makes it imperative that the university’s board of trustees not be bound by the forces of the status quo.
Wilson, who took office in 1913, inherited a federal government that had been shaped during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, when thousands of African-American men and women passed Civil Service examinations or received political appointments that landed them in well-paying, middle-class government jobs in which they sometimes supervised white workers. This was anathema to Wilson, who believed that black Americans were unworthy of full citizenship and admired the Ku Klux Klan for the role it had in terrorizing African-Americans to restrict their political power.
As the historian Eric Yellin shows in “Racism in the Nation’s Service,” Wilson stocked his government with segregationists who shared his point of view. The man he chose for the postal department, which had the most black employees nationally, had campaigned on the promise that the Democratic Party could be counted on to keep black people out of its own ranks and out of the government affairs of the Southern states. In this way, the administration set about segregating the work force, driving out highly placed black employees and shunting the rest into lower-paying jobs.
For John Abraham Davis, a black midlevel manager in the Government Printing Office with 30 years’ experience, the change came almost overnight. Just months after Wilson was sworn in, Davis was demoted to a succession of menial jobs and ended up as a messenger making half his original salary. As his grandson, Gordon Davis, wrote on the Op-Ed page on Tuesday: “By April 1914, the family farm was auctioned off. John Davis, a self-made black man of achievement and stature in his community at the turn of the 20th century, was, by the end of Wilson’s first term, a broken man. He died in 1928.”
The steady attrition of black white-collar workers like Davis from the federal work force went far deeper than the customary turnover when one party succeeds the other in government. It was a premeditated attempt to impoverish and disempower a small but growing class of black middle-class professionals. This subversion was not limited to Washington. In a few short years, Mr. Yellin writes, the Wilson administration had established federal discrimination as a national norm.
None of this mattered in 1948 when Princeton honored Wilson by giving his name to what is now called the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs. Black Americans were still viewed as nonpersons in the eyes of the state, and even the most strident bigots were held up to public adulation. This is certainly not the case today.

The overwhelming weight of the evidence argues for rescinding the honor that the university bestowed decades ago on an unrepentant racist.
Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter, and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter.