With the Liberal Media brimming daily with stories about BLTs (Bi-sexuals, Lesbians, Transgenders) you probably wondered - as did the editors at RedStateVT - just how many individuals of each category there are here in America.
Well, wonder no more.
A ground-breaking study using state-of-the-art statistical analysis has recently been completed by RedStateVT which answers this question. The results may surprise you.
RedStateVT developed a proprietary sampling methodology which for competitive reasons we will not disclose. We can say, however, that our approach was to first tabulate the frequency of stories about BLTs in the New York Times and on Rachel Maddow's show on MSNBC and then to compare this number to overall U.S. demographics.
Here are the results:
Bisexuals - 29%
Lesbians - 21%
Transgenders - 12%
Not BLT - 51%
(Note - numbers do not add up to 100% due to rounding and overlap between BLTs, i.e. some Bisexuals are also Lesbians, some Transgenders are also Bisexual.)
Clearly America is at a tipping point. RedStateVT predicts that within 18 months, the "Not BLT" group will be less than 50%.
Other predictions:
Hillary Clinton will be the first bi-sexual president.
Vermont will have a transgender governor before the end of 2015.
Shock and Awe
Coulter, “Outnumbered” and the puckish sections of the Free Beacon all function in similar ways. The provocations they put out into the world are not untethered from real thinking and emotions. But they exist primarily to evoke shock and then to deny that those provocations were in earnest. It is an awfully clever sort of trap, one that lures critics into spending time and emotional energy refuting seemingly outrageous propositions before it’s revealed that the only people really engaging in the exchange were the critics themselves. (Alyssa Rosenberg, Washington Post, 6/26/2014)
Although her by-line does not say so, we assume that Rosenberg is a board-certified psychologist given her pronouncements on the ulterior motivations of Ann Coulter and other conservative thinkers. Per Dr. Rosenberg, Coulter and others just want to be provocative and drive up their click counts. Well, after - what is it eight? ten? New York Times best sellers - we doubt Coulter is overly focused on how many people read her weekly column.
And then there is: "...to deny that those provocations were in earnest." One of the truly wonderful things about the lithesome Coulter is that she never backs down from anything she writes or says. Ever. RedStateVT does not call her the toughest conservative out there for no reason.
The provocations that Dr. Rosenberg attributes to Coulter fall well within the mainstream of conservative thinking. A few examples:
- Abortion is the taking of a life.
- If we don't get control of our borders we will all be speaking Spanish in ten years.
- Ted Kennedy was a drunk who murdered a woman.
- Bill Clinton is a sex pervert.
- Barack Obama is an incompetent buffoon.
Again, well within the mainstream and hardly controversial positions. Finally, Coulter just happens to be hysterically funny, all while she is carving up Liberals. In political commentary, only Rachel Maddow comes close. Although, of course, people are laughing at Maddow, not with her.
Optional
The Obama administration has developed three options for further actions, according to government officials: banning any interactions with some of Russia’s largest banks; cutting off technology transfers to Russian energy and defense firms; and shutting down business with Russian defense companies. (New York Times, 6/25/2014)
A fourth option still under consideration: Obama calls Putin up and expresses his profound disappointment.
Warmly
About 10,000 years ago, temperatures warmed sharply, by eight to 10 degrees Fahrenheit. By that time, the European ice sheets had melted, but the much thicker North American sheets took much longer. While the climate had warmed to today’s levels, allowing mixed oak woodland to grow and humans to recolonize Britain, the sea level remained some 130 feet lower for another 3,000 years.
When it did rise, it would have been traumatic for the population, wiping out whatever settlement there was, and eventually the forest of Borth. The displaced humans of the time, Dr. Bates said, were prehistoric refugees from climate change. (New York Times, 6/24/2014)
Man-made climate change is settled science. Man-made climate change is settled science. Man-made climate change.....
Over Par
On June 14, Sunni rebels threatened Baghdad after seizing much of Iraq — and President Obama fearlessly played a round at the Sunnylands Golf Course in Rancho Mirage, Calif.
The next day, the militants posted pictures of their mass execution of Shiite members of Iraq’s security forces — and Obama boldly teed off again, at Oracle founder Larry Ellison’s Rancho Mirage estate.
These split-screen scenes were reminiscent of the weekend in March when Russia was about to annex Crimea. Obama played golf both Saturday and Sunday at Key Largo, Fla.’s Ocean Reef resort with former NBA star Alonzo Mourning and former NFL player Ahmad Rashad. (Dana Milbank, Washington Post, 6/24/2014)
When Liberals revolt!
Already Against the Next War
If you like the unfolding disaster in Obama-abandoned Iraq, you are going to love Obama-abandoned Afghanistan.
Just two weeks before Iraq descended into chaos, President Obama stepped into the Rose Garden to announce his plan to withdraw all U.S. forces from Afghanistan by the end of 2016. “It’s time to turn the page on more than a decade in which so much of our foreign policy was focused on the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq,” Obama declared. “Americans have learned that it’s harder to end wars than begin them — but this is how wars end in the 21st century.”
If Iraq is how wars end in the 21st century, we’re in big trouble. (Marc A. Thiessen, Washington Post, 6/23/2014)
Obama has squandered the blood and treasure of America. He deserves his eventual fate as the president who lost both Iraq and Afghanistan, who re-energized the Islamic jihad and who put American lives at risk.
Profiles in Stupidity
The Justice Department will significantly expand its definition of racial profiling to prohibit federal agents from considering religion, national origin, gender and sexual orientation in their investigations, a government official said Wednesday.
The move addresses a decade of criticism from civil rights groups that say federal authorities have in particular singled out Muslims in counterterrorism investigations and Latinos for immigration investigations. (New York Times, 1/16/2014)
And so, because terrorism is inextricably tied to radical Islam and illegal immigration to Latinos, profiling is now prohibited. This makes perfect sense if you are a Liberal. We already know, of course, what will happen the very next time an Islamist succeeds in blowing something up and killing Americans. Liberals will demand a Congressional investigation while demanding to know how this could have happened.
Uncivil
More than six years later, the onetime constitutional lawyer is now the commander in chief presiding over a surveillance state that some of his own advisers think has once again gotten out of control. On Friday, he will give another speech, this time at the Justice Department defending government spying even as he adjusts it to address a wave of public concern over civil liberties. (New York Times, 1/16/2014)
Dick Cheney smiles...
Yet it is hard to express indignation at actions of the government after five years of running it, and some involved in surveillance note that it was Mr. Obama who pushed national security agencies to be aggressive in hunting terrorists. “For some, his outrage does ring a little bit hollow,” said a former counterterrorism official. (New York Times, 1/16/2014)
...and smiles again.
The Sting
A stinging report by the Senate Intelligence Committee released Wednesday concluded that the attack 16 months ago that killed four Americans in Benghazi, Libya, could have been prevented, singling out the State Department for criticism for its failure to bolster security in response to intelligence warnings about a growing security crisis around the city. (New York Times, 1/16/2014)
Twenty-eight paragraphs on Benghazi and 2016 Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton's name is mentioned exactly twice. (Those who follow Washington closely may recall that Clinton was Secretary of State at the time of the Benghazi attacks.) One of the citations references a Republican addendum to the report criticizing Clinton. So, of course, that is entirely political.
Meanwhile, studies have shown that the average number of times that Chris Christie's name is mentioned in articles on Conegate is forty-seven.
Uninspired
An accountable democracy doesn’t work without real information, gathered from the ground up, about people in power, everywhere. Be inspired by the beleaguered but unintimidated reporters of Chris Christie’s New Jersey: Whatever your partisan affiliation, or lack thereof, subscribe to your local paper today. It’s an act of civic virtue. (Rachel Maddow, Washington Post, 1/15/2014)
Maddow celebrates the small town Jersey reporters who doggedly pursued the Christie-Conegate scandal shedding a light on political corruption. It is this same dedication and perseverance that Maddow employed in her quest to get at the truth about Benghazi and the IRS targeting of conservative groups.
Or are we remembering that wrong?
