Experience the success of capturing the full Mount Everest climbing route with the DJI Mavic 3 Pro ? UTL COMMENT:- I actually use a DJI drone for work........best thing ever made in China I must admit.... I have never seen such footage of Mt. Everest - phenomenal! Just had to upload this magnificent little beauty to my channel.... shame Bitchute is only ever low res 480 DPI.... And check out so many people climbing the mountain??? WTF??? Equipped with a 4/3 CMOS Hasselblad camera, tri-camera system, and 43-minute flight time, this drone captures stunning 4K footage with amazing detail and vivid colors. Experience the grandeur of nature and the human spirit through this breathtaking journey. ? Video by ‪@liulangCooki‬ With thanks to if you want to see it in high res:- https://www.youtube.com/@DJI #DJIMavic3Pro #everest #dronefootage #nature #trekking #mountains #drone ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Key Features of DJI Mavic 3 Pro: 1. 4/3 CMOS Hasselblad Camera: Captures stunning images with vibrant colors using a larger sensor. 2. Tri-Camera System: Offers versatile shooting options with tele, medium tele, and wide-angle cameras. 3. 43-Minute Flight Time: Extended battery life for capturing more footage. 4. Omnidirectional Obstacle Sensing: Ensures safer flights by detecting obstacles from all directions. 5. Advanced RTH (Return to Home): Automatically plans the best route back to the home point.

Supporters of Vice President Kamala Harris breathed a collective sigh of relief when, for once, she managed to remember her rehearsed lines during the recent presidential debate with former President Trump. Her friends in the Fourth Estate gleefully joined the Democrats in declaring Harris the “winner” and gloated over Trump’s underwhelming performance. These people have forgotten that Hillary Clinton was celebrated as the victor of all her debates with Trump in 2016 and how little that mattered in the end. They would be wise to consider why Harris couldn’t answer the most important question of last week’s debate and what that failure portends for her campaign. They all know the answer to the question Ronald Reagan famously asked the voters … “Are you better off than you were four years ago?” The first question to Harris was asked by moderator David Muir: “When it comes to the economy, do you believe Americans are better off than they were four years ago?” Harris responded with a 330-word shaggy dog memoir consisting of irrelevant stories about being “raised as a middle-class kid,” bromides about “the aspirations of the American people,” and vague promises to build an “opportunity economy.” Conspicuously absent from this oration was a straight answer to Muir’s question. If Harris believes she can avoid this issue she’s delusional. Most voters believe they were better off during Trump’s presidency than they are now. CNN explains why in an unusually candid article: From Trump’s inauguration in 2017 through February 2020, an average of 181,500 jobs were added on a monthly basis. The unemployment rate hovered around 50-year lows of 3.5 percent in the months just before the pandemic began, and the rate for Black Americans hit a record low of 5.3 percent … Before the pandemic, median household income saw the biggest spike in more than four decades, hitting a record high of $68,700 in 2019, according to the U.S. Census Bureau. The poverty rate fell to 10.5 percent, the lowest since records started six decades earlier. All of this progress was made without putting upward pressure on the inflation rate, which stood at 1.4 percent when Trump left the White House. This is why, according to the most recent New York Times/Siena College survey, Trump enjoys a 16-point advantage (56-40) over Harris when registered voters are asked which presidential nominee they trust to do a better job on the economy. Nonetheless, during the only solo interview she has granted since her elevation to the top of the Democratic ticket, Harris couldn’t provide a coherent answer to a simple question about how she planned to make life more affordable for Americans. On Friday Harris submitted to a short interview with the local ABC News affiliate in Philadelphia. She talked to co-anchor Brian Taff, who tossed her a few softball questions including the following: “When we talk about bringing down prices and making life more affordable for people, what are one or two specific things you have in mind for that?” She responded by serving up a salad of non sequiturs about being raised in the middle class, when her family bought their first house and how proud her neighbors were of their lawns. She finally mentioned the “opportunity economy” but once again failed to explain what it means. Veteran GOP strategist Mike Murphy, hardly a Trump apologist, described Harris’ biggest problem during a discussion with Ryan Lizza on Politico’s “Playbook Deep Dive” podcast: The thing everybody’s missing is the country really wants to fire the Biden administration over the economy. And that is hard to find a moment or a campaign thing. But that wall of lava is out there and it can still eat the Democrats. So, can Kamala Harris convince people she’s different enough with an independent plan that they have permission to vote for her and not risk four more years of economic and inflation pain? If she can make that case, I think she will win … If she can’t sell that change deal in a way they’ll believe it … He can still win this thing. Unfortunately for Harris, while she tries to “sell the change deal,” her boss is still making public statements that undermine that very argument. Saturday, during a speech at the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation Dinner, Biden angrily refuted the objective facts: “We went big and we went bold. And, yes, we are better off than we were four years ago.” This is the problem with striking the King without killing him. The people who actually run the White House believed they could force Biden to withdraw from the presidential race and leave him in office without consequences. But, despite his claims to the contrary, the President and his family are very unhappy with this arrangement and they will sabotage her if possible. It’s important to remember that Biden’s entire case for seeking a second term rested on his claim that he was the only Democrat who could defeat Trump. This was an implicit rejection of Harris as a viable leader in the existential battle to save “our democracy” from the Bad Orange Man. (READ MORE: Hiding Candidates Is Now SOP for Democrats) So, we have Harris making the case for “turning the page” while Biden defends his legacy. Meanwhile, the election will be decided by ordinary Americans who couldn’t care less about White House intrigue. They all know the answer to the question Ronald Reagan famously asked the voters on Oct. 28, 1980: “Are you better off than you were four years ago?” (READ MORE from David Catron: Harris Will Lose Unless Her Polls Rise Sharply) The post The Most Important Question Harris Can’t Answer appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Most boys growing into men today — playing their phones instead of reading books — will have a harder time than we Culture War veterans in understanding the real world. Even their interminable superhero movies are basically video games. Consequently, without a foundation in metaphorical literature or drama, they will be easier to deceive by leftwing academia and media. Those of us who read his story know what comes next for Donald Trump. They’ll never enjoy the reward of following Robert E. Howard’s Conan the Barbarian as he carves a violent — often sexually pleasurable — path through a myriad of effete sorcerous tyrants. For if they did, they would appreciate the historic role Donald Trump is playing in the modern political arena and wouldn’t care less about his brash personality. There’s no question Trump’s rough demeanor is repellant to many people, even a few real men my age. This lamentable truth hit close to home last week during my daily bout of Wordle against three buddies in Washington D.C. For those unfamiliar with the game (as I was a year ago), you have six rows to ascertain the five-letter word of the day. The goal is to get the word in the highest row possible. Our average is four rows, and we rarely draw blanks in all six. So, I was surprised to see a total wipeout for one of us the morning after the Harris-Trump debate — till I saw Steve’s filled letter blocks: TRUMP, LOSER, AHOLE, FALSE, ANGRY, TOAST. (READ MORE from Lou Aguilar: Hollywoke Heroes and Movies We’ll Never See) With politics a forbidden, futile subject among the group, I can only ponder what it is about Trump that can trigger such game-blowing derangement from an otherwise cool guy. I can’t ask Steve or my other two friends, Vic and Dave, what Trump ever did to merit their hostility, or which presidential act of his can justify it. Was it securing the border with Mexico? Achieving across-the-board prosperity? Crushing ISIS in two months? The Abraham Accords? Rebuilding the military? The COVID vaccines? Ending Roe v. Wade? They couldn’t answer me — only blast his boorishness, chauvinism, and braggadocio. All would be valid impediments in normal times. But these are not normal times. For America, it could be the End Times. The Perils of Kamala If Kamala Harris and the machine Left controlling her get elected, the following horrors will happen. Twenty million illegal aliens allowed in the last Administration will get the right to vote, ensuring permanent Democratic rule. Opposing speech will be prohibited and free speech platforms crushed — see Brazil. Baby murder will be permitted up to the moment of birth, even after birth — see Tim Walsh’s Minnesota. Children will be taken away from parents who deny their “chosen gender” — see California. And the Supreme Court, newly packed with a liberal majority, will support the State — back to Brazil. But Trump is a jerk, according to my friends. I asked Vic if watching Trump get shot in the head, then rise up bloody but unbowed didn’t impress him as a man. He said no, which made me sad. I can understand celebrity fruitcakes losing their leftist minds over Trump. They live in a fantasy bubble so far removed from regular folks as to be on another planet, Planet Hollywoke. For them, the thought of Trump’s imminent reelection has driven them off the already deep end. Director and permanent TDS sufferer Rob Reiner recently declared he would set himself on fire should Trump get elected. “I can’t live in this country if he becomes president,” Barbra Streisand said on Stephen Colbert’s The Late Show. And Kathy Griffin fears for comedians. “He’s going to pick us off, one by one, like bowling pins,” she told Entertainment Weekly. But if Griffin meant actual comedians, she and every late-night talk show host are safe. The Real Donald Trump The truth is Donald Trump was a great President, who did none of the outrages ascribed to him. Whether he’s a good man or not can only be judged by a Higher Power. Though he did something that convinced me that he is. He sent a heartwarming birthday letter to a little boy suffering from a rare brain disorder and growth hormone deficiency. The letter made the sweet boy cry. And the video of it did the same to me. “Dear Lliam, happy eight birthday,” Trump wrote. “Mrs. Trump and I hope you enjoy this special occasion surrounded by the love of your family and friends. We are so encouraged by the strength and determination you have shown throughout your young life. And send our love and best wishes to you as you continue to fight. Remember that you are never alone, and we are keeping you in our thoughts and prayers for continued care and good health. May God bless you and your family … Sincerely, Donald Trump.” If I thought it would make any difference in their opinion of Trump, I would share the video with my Wordle crew. But I know it wouldn’t, so I won’t. What I also know that they do not is that Donald Trump is all that stands between our country and a disaster from which it would never recover. So, unlike them, I’ll do everything in my power to get him elected. Fortunately, so will most real men and the women who love them and this country. The nation’s enemies know it too, and they’ll do anything to remove him. As I write this article, reports are coming in of another assassination attempt on Trump that took place on his Palm Beach, Florida golf course. Palm Beach County Sheriff Ric Bradshaw said U.S. Secret Service agents fired at a man pointing an AK-style rifle with scope as Trump was on the golf course. The Secret Service removed Trump from the scene. According to Sean Hannity, a friend of his playing with the former President heard him say, “I really wish I could’ve finished that hole.” (READ MORE: Reagan Made Me a Conservative) Trump has now survived several attempts to kill him. As did Conan the Barbarian, who went from warrior to king, defeating the unmasculine power elite along the way. Those of us who read his story know what comes next for Donald Trump. My Wordle friends and former Hollywoke ones ain’t gonna like it. _______ An old-fashioned tough guy detective novel with a modern twist, Friends and book lovers in the D.C. area are cordially invited to attend the signing of my new political thriller detective novel The Washington Trail at Washington’s preeminent bookstore, Politics & Prose, on Saturday September 28th at 3 PM. “An old-fashioned tough-guy detective novel with a modern twist, The Washington Trail will keep you guessing until the very end.” Faith Moore, author of Saving Cinderella and Christmas Karol The post Trump the True Barbarian appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Former president Trump was incorrectly “fact checked” corrected by the ABC moderators in the recent debate. The most easily proved point the ABC team “corrected” was Trump’s claim that violent crime has skyrocketed under the Biden-Harris regime because of crime committed by illegal aliens. Polis isn’t serious about ridding the Denver area of TdA. Residents are being terrorized by the gang. ABC’s David Muir interrupted him to say, “President Trump, as you know, the FBI says overall violent crime is actually coming down.” The FBI’s most recent crime statistics show that Muir was comprehensively wrong. In the Justice Department’s “National Crime Victimization Survey,” which was released last week, DoJ reported that violent crime was up 37 percent from 2020 to 2023, rape is up 42 percent, robbery is up 63 percent, and stranger violence is up 61 percent. (READ MORE from Jed Babbin: Questions for Kamala Harris) The number or percentage of violent crimes committed by illegal aliens is not something that the government publishes for obvious reasons. If those numbers were published, someone might actually demand that the Biden-Harris crew be held accountable for the crime waves that are making our cities, and some areas outside them, damn nearly uninhabitable. Latin American Crime Syndicates We know that violent Central and South American gangs have been operating here for years. MS-13, founded in Los Angeles in the 1980s, grew to its current enormous membership primarily due to members who came to the U.S. illegally from Mexico, El Salvador, Guatemala, and Nicaragua. MS-13 now extends its criminal activities throughout the country. There is  an MS-13 presence here in Northern Virginia where I live. There are other criminal gangs and drug cartels that have taken root in most states. Recently the media has focused on the “Tren de Aragua” gang — literally, the “train to Aragua,” a state in northern Venezuela — which was created by the inmates of a Venezuelan jail. They, like MS-13, are hyperviolent and operate across our country. Mr. Trump’s claim at the debate that Venezuela is seeing a decrease in violent crime went unnoticed. He must have taken that position because that is what the Venezuelan government claims. Mr. Trump shouldn’t believe anything the Maduro government publishes, but he made the point at the debate. In a recent report, the “Observatorio Venezolano de Violencia” stated there was a drop in violent crime of 25 percent. It bases that number on the fact that a great many criminals have emigrated to other countries. The United States is one of those countries. According to a Wall Street Journal report, Tren de Aragua (TdA) is known for dismembering rivals from Chile to Columbia. It is known to be operating in Texas and dozens of criminal cases against it are pending in Miami. Some law enforcement officials refer to TdA as “MS-13 on steroids.” According to that same report, many TdA members have come into the U.S. among the 700,000 Venezuelans that the Biden-Harris crew has allowed into the country. As the WSJ reported, “Tren de Aragua members are suspects in the shooting of two New York police officers, the killing of a former Venezuelan police officer in South Florida, and crimes from Chicago to Texas, law-enforcement authorities said.” The report added, “Tren de Aragua members have found particularly lucrative territory in New York City, authorities said. They are accused of robberies at upscale stores, and moped-riding gang members also have been blamed for snatching phones from unsuspecting pedestrians, said Joseph Kenny, chief of detectives for the New York Police Department. ‘It was like a wave of crime like we had never seen before,’ Kenny said.” Red State vs. Blue State Crime Responses We know about Tren de Aragua because of their activities that have generated media coverage in Colorado and Texas as well. According to recent reports, TdA took over an Aurora, Colorado apartment building, terrorizing residents and forcing the landlord to sell the property. As you’d expect, Colorado Gov. Jared Polis, a Democrat, denied that any such thing was occurring. After making that statement, Polis backed off. He announced on X (formerly Twitter) that “taking over buildings has no place in Colorado,” and that he’d “been in touch” with Aurora officials over the past month and “offered any and all state assistance” to “back up any operation by the Aurora Police Department.” Polis isn’t serious about ridding the Denver area of TdA. Residents are being terrorized by the gang. Truth doesn’t matter to him, but should no one blame him for the mess his party has made? Every Dem politician is to blame because they march in lockstep behind Biden and Harris. (READ MORE: Harris and Walz Are the Radicals) Texas, as you’d also expect, is doing things differently. When TdA members took over a hotel, Texas police closed it down and threw them out. The TdA problem is beyond local law enforcement. It will take a massive federal effort to find and throw its members out of the country. That won’t happen with Biden and Harris in charge. After all, it’s their open border policy that admitted them in the first place. And it’s not just the gangs. Hardly a day goes by that the media doesn’t report more crimes by illegal aliens. Yesterday, one report said that an illegal from the Dominican Republic, Julio Cesar Pimentel-Soriano, was charged with the stabbing murders of a family of four. We know that Vice President Harris will keep our borders open. It’s long past time to throw her and the rest of the Biden bums out of government. The post ABC News Blew It. Crime Is Up. appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Data on the demographic composition of the college freshman class of 2028 are beginning to come in, the first to reflect the changing legal environment since last year’s Students for Fair Admissions vs. Harvard and the related University of North Carolina Supreme Court case that essentially outlawed affirmative action in admission practices.  Arguably, a collegiate War Against Males proceeds apace; will campus men soon seek protection under the Endangered Species Act?  Actually, a few populous states like California, Michigan, and Washington had already outlawed affirmative action in their state universities, providing some insight into what to expect following the Supreme Court decision.  The most watched statistic is the admission of black students. At UCLA and the University of Michigan even before the Supreme Court decision, only about six percent of new freshmen were blacks, a group constituting about 13 percent of the American population. (READ MORE from Richard Vedder: Lies Abound In Higher Education. Now They’ve Lost Our Respect.) Black Admissions Are Mixed Data for the new class entering this fall shows the proportion of black admissions similarly to be in the single digits (five to nine percent) at such prestigious universities as M.I.T., Princeton, and Brown and at highly selective liberal arts colleges like Amherst. That represented a sizable decline from last year’s freshman class; from 15 to 9 percent at Brown, for example, and to 8.9 percent at Princeton. At Washington University in Saint Louis, the black proportion fell by four percentage points. Relative to their share of the American population, blacks seem to be somewhere between 30 and 50 percent underrepresented at these highly competitive schools, which is to be expected given generally weak black high school performance and admission test scores.  At M.I.T., the combined proportion of blacks and Hispanics fell from 25 percent of total freshman admissions in 2023 to 16 percent in 2024. The botched delayed release of the FAFSA form by the Federal government possibly had some effect as well.  But there are two big exceptions to this picture: Harvard and Yale, the oldest of the Ivy League Schools. At Harvard, the proportion of blacks fell — but from an outsized 18 to 14 percent, while at Yale it held constant at 14 percent. Those proportions are dramatically greater than at other peer schools, and even greater than the overall black proportion of the total population. One distinctly uncharitable but reasonable interpretation of Harvard and Yale’s behavior: following Supreme Court decisions is for who Leona Helmsley once called “the little people.” These schools seem to be saying, “Our first adherence is to the Woke Supremacy that rule our institutions. We are going to continue to show preferences based on race towards blacks: what is the Supreme Court going to do about it?” I have read that a similar situation exists regarding black admissions to the University of Virginia. Why are Harvard, Yale, and perhaps UVA so different than their competitors with respect to the changing proportion of black admissions? Similarly, Yale reported a 19 percent Hispanic freshman class, and Harvard 16 percent, nearly double the proportion at Brown or M.I.T. Why? The classifications of students by race and ethnicity varies a good deal, and definitional problems abound. For example, “Hispanic” is not truly a racial classification but rather a geographic-linguistic one, as “Hispanics” are also white or black. Whatever the race, the number of Hispanics identified within elite universities generally showed a decline this year.  Interestingly, at several schools, the number of students reporting no racial data increased significantly (from 4 to 8 percent at Harvard), a healthy trend for those like myself who believe an unhealthy American obsession with race would be reduced if racial data were not even collected. I suspect more students are fearful of giving their race for fear it might reduce admission possibilities. The reporting from the schools is often vague, lacking interesting details, probably designed to mute potential criticism.  For example, Notre Dame noted that 30 percent of its freshmen students were from “historically underrepresented groups,” which for that school might include Protestants. Emory University reported its data in a somewhat convoluted way (as it has two campuses), but appeared to have about 11 percent of its total freshman student body black, but also a double-digit proportion of international students of unknown racial origin (a characteristic at many other schools).  Meanwhile, at schools seemingly showing adherence to the Supreme Court decisions, Asian admissions gained substantially — from 40 to 47 percent at M.I.T. for example, 29 to 33 percent at Brown. There are far more Asians in the M.I.T. freshmen class than whites, probably justifiable based on high school grades and admission test scores. At this writing, I have not seen data for many prominent private schools, such as Northwestern, Univ. of Chicago, and Stanford, as well as most elite public schools. But what is emerging is that many schools, perhaps very reluctantly, seem to be generally adhering to the mandate of not considering race in making admissions decisions. Asian Admissions The very real bias against Asian applicants seems to have eased considerably. Interestingly, given the obsession of the collegiate Woke Supremacy with race, some schools are now simply talking about “students of color,” a category that lumps together Asians and blacks. That proportion has apparently stayed nearly the same at many schools as the decline in the percent of black admissions is offset by the gains by Asians. (READ MORE: College Kids Without Civics and History) A more consequential question than “how many underrepresented’ minority applicants are admitted is how many graduate?” Several noted scholars (e.g. Richard Sander at UCLA, Amy Wax at Penn) have noted that minority students admitted despite lower academic qualifications often encounter very painful troubles later on — law students failing to pass the bar exam, for example. Interestingly, amidst all the obsession about the biological/linguistic categorization of students is one form of student underrepresentation not discussed: enrollment by gender. Arguably, a collegiate War Against Males proceeds apace; will campus men soon seek protection under the Endangered Species Act?   Richard Vedder is Distinguished Professor of Economics Emeritus at Ohio University, Senior Fellow at the Independent Institute, and author of the forthcoming Let Colleges Fail: The Power of Creative Destruction in Higher Education. The post Some Colleges Still Using Race in Admissions appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

The candidate might have asked, in a tone of sincere curiosity: “Why, Madame Vice President, an opportunity economy! What a grand idea!  But — might I ask you, does it bear any relation to the kind of inflation you and your administration have unleashed upon Americans, who ask only to be left alone to pursue their — if I may put it this way — dreams and opportunities? “With all due respect, ma’am, do you not owe your fellow-Americans answers to these questions? You do view them as your fellow-Americans?” I’d be much obliged if you could explain the difference between what you call an opportunity economy and what Americans expect. Why not a hands-off economy — the federals just get out the way and let opportunity grow and freedom ring? Wish he’d asked her. Maybe it was in the subtext and I missed it.  And too, why did not the candidate ask, in a reasonable tone of voice, Ma’am, I am not aware anyone has suggested I or any other Republican associated with my campaign wants to control any — [dramatic pause] any — woman’s body. On the contrary, we consider it our duty to protect and defer to ladies; no one wants to take away their rights, insofar as they concern them as individuals and Americans. Allow me to ask, however: who is to speak up for the rights of the unborn among us? Who is to protect them from a control so drastic that they never have the opportunities they deserve? (The candidate raises his voice above the ensuing protests and scowls to say, in a slightly professorial tone nowise condescending,  that no one, least of all the Supreme Court, is in favor of a “national ban” on abortion; whereas it appears the vice president and Democratic candidate is proposing a “national right” to kill tiny children.) Who will defend them, he asks — who?) (And in the stump speech one hopes he will take to the country over and over in the coming weeks, he might insist abortion is a moral, thus a civic issue; it is not a policy or political issue.) “That, my fellow Americans, is why the Supreme Court overturned Roe v Wade.  This is not a federal, or Constitutional, issue. It is an issue that must be decided by the individuals concerned, their families, their state legislatures. But I’d be grateful, ma’am, if you could speak to us and to our fellow Americans on the gift of life. And America’s gift.  “A threat to democracy?” he might say, “Wanting to restore our way of life threatens our system of democratic representation in a Constitutional republic? Is that what you mean? A threat, Madame Vice President? May I remind you that I was chosen by the primary voters of my party, which, note, generously invites non-Republicans, in some states, to participate in the exercise.  Who chose you, if I may ask with all due respect — backroom shadow government men accountable to no voters, and whose names we do not know? Who gave them permission to choose for them?  To, if I may put it this way, control not only their bodies but their votes and voices?” “Is it democracy to hide three years running from the American people that their duly elected supreme magistrate is senile and non-functional and that in fact we are governed — wouldn’t ruled be the better word? — by a cabal of ideologues, whose love of country we, I say this advisedly, have every right to doubt given the disasters they have brought upon us? [examples according to the audience, e.g. border invasion, spike in crime, foreign threats, etc.] “With all due respect, ma’am, do you not owe your fellow-Americans answers to these questions? You do view them as your fellow-Americans?” [very slight raising of eyebrows] America’s Course Correction Maybe it is true what they say, debates do not matter as much as the hype suggests.  But the medium is the message.  Or something — at any rate, get the message to the people, the people of this great and bountiful and providential land, that the moderate in this year’s contest, the pragmatist, is the man from Queens, not the lady from California. Turning back, indeed, back from nihilism, from evils foreign and domestic, that is what the conservative side wants, for those are the trends the progressives have set in motion and would amplify.  Turn back from the road to wreckage, clear the head and the sights, and move back into the bright morn of the West, where America’s place is, with faith and charity, hope and opportunity, l’chaim. READ MORE from Roger Kaplan: Americans Represent America Well at the US Open Macron Addresses His Subjects The post Stump Speech to America appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

 Making sure that you’re on the right road to get where you want to go is obviously important when you’re headed somewhere. While this is common sense for a good driver, it is rarely so for central planners. As the presidential election nears, discussion of the “Green New Deal” is resurfacing. The Biden administration’s push to “electrify everything” by mandating the production of electric vehicles (EVs) and subsidizing wind and solar power is a wrong turn from the road to a cleaner future. What will result from the government’s aggressive transition mandate? Very little global impact on emissions. Existing battery technology, renewable energy sources, and electrical infrastructure are insufficient to facilitate a rapid transition away from fossil fuels. And, those “solutions” are not “green.” Digging massive holes and covering more land with turbines and solar panels in order to save the earth is counterintuitive. When viewed objectively and holistically, a move to EVs and the use of current-generation renewable energy sources will not accomplish the goal of reducing worldwide carbon output. An astronomical amount of money will be spent to shift output to other parts of the globe, and in the process will reduce consumer choice, punish the automotive industry, and make America highly dependent on an increasingly hostile nation, China.  Consider some of the deleterious factors in the race to replace internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles with EVs. Energy in Short Supply Supply-side problems include the dirty business of mining and refining battery components, sourcing components from China, upgrading our aging electrical infrastructure (which will require enormous amounts of materials), and our current energy-generation capacity which is already strained without the addition of millions of EVs, AI data centers, and other electrical appliances. In addition, as EVs are much heavier than similar ICE vehicles, they significantly reduce the life of tires, roads, bridges and parking garages that were not designed for such loads. States are already considering a per-mile tax for EVs to compensate for this increased wear and tear and concomitant loss of revenue from selling gas. The Costs and Environmental Degradation Consumer-side concerns include the much higher costs of purchasing, insuring, and repairing EVs, dearth of charging stations and resulting range anxiety and long waiting lines, poor performance of EVs in cold weather, inability of traditional mechanics to repair them, limited life of EV batteries (which is less than the average age of ICE vehicles on the road today), prohibitively high cost of replacing degraded batteries, extreme difficulty of extinguishing fires that can occur with EV accidents, and the fact that putting millions of drivers in vehicles with much greater power and acceleration is likely to increase such accidents. Environmental concerns include the negative impact of the aforementioned mining, deforestation needed for new manufacturing plants and energy “farms,” the need to produce (and, more critically, dispose of) millions of toxic EV batteries, solar panels and turbine blades, none of which can be recycled. This is a looming ecological disaster. Wind and solar energy are intermittent sources that require fossil-fuel backup. According to the U. S. Energy Information Administration, their “full capacity” output is roughly half that of natural gas. Large swaths of land and lots of fossil fuels are needed to produce, transport, and maintain wind and solar farms. Nearly all solar panels come from China, which is opening new mines and coal-fired plants to meet demand. Moreover, use of these panels adds to global warming by reflecting heat back into the atmosphere. Wind and solar are not up to the task of supplying our exponentially growing energy needs. And neither source is environmentally friendly in terms of production, operation or disposal. Social Problems of ‘Green’ Energy Social concerns include questionable practices used in the acquisition of materials needed for batteries, such as child labor and unsafe mining in the Democratic Republic of Congo, plus the national security risk of becoming energy reliant on China (while simultaneously pouring billions of dollars into Chinese Communist Party coffers). Electrical grids are already so strained that The Washington Post reported, “[v]ast swaths of the United States are at risk of running out of power as electricity-hungry data centers and clean technology factories proliferate.” Our energy demand will increasingly outstrip supply. Not surprisingly, the cost of electricity is already climbing and will continue to do so.  Energy Consumers vs. The Planners In the courses that I teach at Grove City College in Grove City, Pennsylvania, I define marketing as “finding out what people want and giving it to them.” This is a market-oriented and consumer-focused process. Government, on the other hand, illustrates the diametric approach: “figuring out what we want and forcing it on you.” The mandate to produce only EVs removes freedom of choice for customers to purchase what they want and harshly punishes automakers. If most customers wanted EVs, no mandate would be needed. In reality, EV sales are slowing, and automotive manufacturers are reporting huge financial losses and growing unsold inventories. Car & Driver recently reported that Ford’s EV division lost $130,000 for every EV it sold in the first quarter of this year. Ford is on track to lose $5 billion by year’s end. This is not an isolated case; most major car companies are scaling back EV production due to weak demand. If a customer purchases an EV because he or she likes the styling or performance, that is fine. But buying an EV to “save the planet” is a non sequitur. Even if ICEs were eliminated in the United States, there would be little if any global reduction in carbon emissions. According to the Energy Institute, China’s emissions grew more than twice as much as U. S. emissions decreased in 2023. What will result from the government’s aggressive transition mandate? Very little global impact on emissions, a staggering bill for taxpayers, loss of freedom of choice for consumers, significant harm to the automotive industry, rolling blackouts, and increased American energy dependence and security concerns. Electricity might well be the future of energy, but we are not ready to make a huge leap yet. So, what would put us on the “right road?” The Right Road As for vehicles, increasing miles per gallon (MPG) should be a priority. I recently rented an ICE sedan that got 40+ MPG, roughly twice the average for ICEs. Using existing technology, auto manufacturers could improve mileage and greatly reduce carbon emissions. Hybrid cars (which use gas and smaller batteries than EVs) are another step in the right direction. Toyota and BMW are also exploring the use of hydrogen fuel cells to power vehicles. If the trillions of dollars that the government has committed to pushing EVs, wind, and solar were redirected to these and other alternatives, a better market-driven solution might be found. In terms of generating electricity, nuclear power (the most reliable, true zero-emissions source) should be increased. The Nuclear Energy Institute reports that a solar farm requires 75 times more (a wind farm requires 360 times more) land than a nuclear plant of equivalent output. The Washington Post reports that “America is running out of power” and that “Northern Virginia [alone] needs the equivalent of several large nuclear plants to serve all the new data centers planned and under construction” to avoid running out of power. As for environmental waste, nuclear plants create a small fraction of the volume generated by wind and solar farms. Yet, while hundreds of billions of dollars are being invested annually in renewable energy, nuclear is receiving little attention or funding. In summary, we are not going in the right direction to meet our burgeoning energy needs. Moving forward, we would be wise to consider the wisdom of the oft-heard announcement that emanated from older GPS units when a wrong turn was made: “Rerouting.”  Scott K. Powell, former assistant dean at Grove City College, is professor of marketing at Grove City College in Grove City, Pennsylvania. READ MORE: Democrats’ Approach to Green Energy Is Completely Contradictory Biden’s Green Energy Policies Help China, Not America   The post A Wrong Turn on the Road to ‘Green’ Energy appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Former California state senator Gloria Romero has defected to the Republican Party, telling reporters, “In this Capitol behind me, I served as both Senate Democratic Caucus chair and the Senate majority leader. But today I say goodbye. Adios! I’ve had enough.” The move follows Romero’s memo to her party in 2021. There are no academic or legal arguments against school choice, only political arguments. “I’ll just be blunt,” Romero wrote. “I’ll call it the abject stupidity of the Party elites who have embraced the vilest expressions of woke-ism and an abdication to the promise of education as the key to the American Dream that still matters to so many, particularly Latinos and African Americans, and the commitment to ensuring the public safety for all.” Despite the rhetoric, Romero’s recent defection is more about education than politics. In 2022, Romero joined Ric Grenell of Fix California to endorse the Education Savings Accounts Act of 2022. “As a proud Democrat who has dedicated my life to fighting against an entrenched education bureaucracy so that all California children can have all the opportunities afforded to our ruling class,” Romero proclaimed, “I proudly join with Ric and Fix California to give parents control over their children’s destiny.” The measure failed to qualify for the ballot, not the state’s first setback for school choice. The 1993 Proposition 174 required the state to provide a voucher for every school-age child equal to at least 50 percent of government per-pupil funding for K-12 schools. The vouchers could be redeemed at independent schools and the measure limited regulation of schools accepting vouchers. California’s teacher unions charged that the measure would lead to “witch schools,” Ku Klux Klan schools and such, and take away funding from government schools. Republican governor Pete Wilson opposed the measure, which failed to pass by a 70-30 margin. Students remained the captives of a bloated education establishment, and the problem was not limited to California. Not Just California’s Schools Schools in Washington D.C. are among the most dysfunctional and dangerous in the nation. Politicians such as Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama sent their children to elite private schools such as Sidwell Friends, but for inner city parents the only alternative is the DC Opportunity Scholarship Program, run by Congress. Federal education bureaucrats and teacher unions oppose the program but Obama’s incoming education secretary Arne Duncan did them one better. The Harvard sociology grad rescinded scholarships already awarded to 216 families for the upcoming school year. Like the southern segregationists of old, Duncan stood in the schoolhouse door blocking both escape from dysfunctional government schools and entry to the independent schools the parents wanted. As the Washington Post lamented, “nine out of 10 students who were shut out of the scholarship program this year are assigned to attend failing public schools.” The vast majority of the students are black, so if their parents thought Duncan’s actions were racist it would be hard to blame them. The federal Department of Education Duncan headed dates only to 1978 and was Jimmy Carter’s payoff to teacher unions for endorsing his run for president. The top-heavy department did nothing to improve the quality of education, an outcome confirmed by the 1983 A Nation at Risk report. The failure marked by that report continues, now abetted by the woke junk thinking that Gloria Romero decries. The brave reformer may boast new allies, but she won’t get any help from the federal education department, which Democrats love, and which Republican presidents Reagan, Bush, and Donald Trump failed to eliminate. Government Monopoly on Schools In government monopoly education, taxpayer dollars must trickle down through multiple layers of bureaucratic sediment before they reach the classroom.  The system remains a collective farm of mediocrity and failure. There are no academic or legal arguments against school choice, only political arguments and the powerful teacher unions and politicians who wield them. There is little hope for reform until parents gain the freedom to choose the schools their children attend, government or independent, as a matter of basic civil rights. Lloyd Billingsley is a policy fellow at the Independent Institute in Oakland, Calif. READ MORE from Lloyd Billingsley: Should the People With All the Power Have All the Guns? California Makes Theft a Crime Again The post California Democrat Defects Over School Choice appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

While the Biden-Harris administration just approved $1.3 billion in aid to Egypt, a legacy of the Egypt-Israel peace agreement from 1979, Egypt continues to broadcast hatred against the Jewish state. Rather than finding ways to support Egypt-Israel peace and the Abraham Accords more broadly, Egyptian political figures and state-run media carry water for Hamas in defaming Israel, supporting jihad and genocide against the Jewish state, and opposing normalization with Israel.  State-Run Media Spews Hate Egypt’s media continues to defame Israel. In the government-sponsored Al-Ahram, Egyptian journalist Sa’id Shalash criticized the “slaughter” of Gazans by the “the barbaric Zionist-American-Western aggression,” and claimed that the reason that ISIS or similar organizations did not fight back against Israel is because those groups are created by the U.S. and Israel. “Israel’s continued existence will be a constant threat, so either the Arabs survive or Israel does — there is no other option.” Egyptian journalist Muhammad Hassan Al-Banna from the government-run daily Akhbar Al-Yawm similarly wrote that “[v]iolence and terrorism are an American-Israeli product,” and accused Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of “bloodshed that kills women, children, and elders, destroys homes over people’s heads, banishes over two million Palestinians from their lands to the desert and kills them with starvation and American weapons, ammunition, and bombs.” Praise for Terrorism Egypt’s media also continues to glorify terrorism. Dr. Ibrahim Al-Baha, a columnist for the Egyptian state daily Al-Ahram, wrote warmly of “the heroic Palestinian warrior, who is not afraid of death and fights with determination, thinking only of victory or martyrdom,” while calling the Israeli soldier a “coward” and the Israeli army the “laughingstock of the entire world.” On state-run Al Qahera News TV,  Assistant Secretary-General of the Arab League Hossam Zaki stated that the Arab League no longer considers Hezbollah a terrorist organization. And such praise for terrorism naturally leads into praise for Palestinian statehood and the subsequent genocide of the Jews. Journalist Atef Zaidan of the state-run daily Akhbar Al-Yawm stated that the Al-Aqsa Flood [i.e., the October 7 attack on Israel] will be the most important and influential juncture in the history of the Palestinian struggle.… [for] it has turned the dream of an independent Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital into something much more attainable than it was in the past…As for the Zionist occupation state, its fate is to disintegrate and cease to exist.  Egyptian media also continues to oppose normalization of relations with Israel. Egyptian author and former MP Youssef Al-Qa’id stated on the Egyptian TV show Ten TV  that, In my view, any dealings with Israelis constitute treason … I disdain any cultural or ideological heritage coming from the [Israeli] entity.… They [i.e., Israelis] are the enemies of yesterday, today, and tomorrow, and we should raise our children on this. I believe that the Israeli enemy comes before any other enemy and confronting it should be the primary mission of this generation our generation. This will only be completed with the annihilation of the state of Israel. Farouk Gouida, a columnist for the state-run Al-Ahram daily, similarly opposed normalization with Israel, and that “Israel’s continued existence will be a constant threat, so either the Arabs survive or Israel does — there is no other option.” On state-run CBC TV, host Qaswaa Al-Khalali said: “We should teach all the future generations, all our children, to hate Israel, to hate the Zionist entity, to hate the occupying authority, to hate this enemy, to hate these gangs who turned themselves into a state, into an entity.” Calls to End Israel-Egypt Peace Treaty And Egyptian public figures and media also explicitly call for the ending of the Egypt-Israel peace treaty. Tarek El Khouly, the Deputy Chairman of the Egyptian House of Representatives’ Foreign Relations Committee, in an interview on BBC Arabic, called the Egypt-Israel peace treaty “a strategic choice, as part of its political maneuver to regain Egyptian lands at the time,” and that “[a] downgrading of the level of diplomatic relations is plausible.”  Given the evidence, it is more than reasonable to question Egypt’s commitment to peace in the Middle East. At the very least, the Biden-Harris administration must lean hard on Egypt — including with the threat of withholding aid — to reduce or eliminate Egypt’s hateful rhetoric towards Israel. READ MORE from Steve Postal: UK Parliament Gets Its Own Pro-Palestinian Squad The Palestinian Authority Is Jihadist Too The post Despite $1.3 Billion in US Aid Egypt Endorses Hamas appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

BREAKING: Donald Trump *was* the intended target of the shots fired at Trump International Golf Club according to CNN. Agents opened fire on a man who was at the Trump International Golf Course after they saw what appeared to be a gun according to the NYP. "Officials believe… pic.twitter.com/06JKTXeMO6 — Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) September 15, […]