Non-white voters have abandoned President Joe Biden in such large numbers that even the establishment media has begun to notice. Monday morning on "CNN News Central" with co-anchor John Berman, CNN Senior Political Data Reporter Harry Enten reacted to polling data from 2020 and 2024 that showed a 20-point swing...

June 11, 2024

A mob of rowdy Jew-hating protesters chanted “Long Live the Intifada” and “Israel Go to Hell” during a depraved celebration Monday night outside a downtown Manhattan exhibit that memorializes the murder and rape victims of the Oct. 7th Nova Music Festival where 364 people were slaughtered by Hamas terrorists. NY Post (h/t Nita) The deranged […]

Can this get worse than Biden's $6 billion Iran hostage deal? The post What Will Biden Offer Hamas in Hostage Deal? appeared first on Frontpage Mag.

At some point, people will stop eating and learn to love Bidenomics. The post Biden Allies: Why Won’t Americans Stop Complaining About the Cost of Food appeared first on Frontpage Mag.

Vermont became the first state in the United States to enact legislation mandating fossil fuel companies to pay for climate change-related losses. This unprecedented legislation comes after a string of disastrous weather disasters, including severe floods last summer, that wreaked havoc on the state’s infrastructure and communities. Despite his reservations, Republican Governor Phil Scott permitted the bill to pass without his signature. In a letter to lawmakers, Scott emphasized his concerns about the financial and legal repercussions of this enormous project. “I understand the desire to seek funding to mitigate the effects of climate change that has hurt our state in so many ways,” Scott wrote, emphasizing the need to address climate change’s rising toll on Vermont. A state suffering from natural disasters Vermont’s recent experiences with harsh weather highlight the importance of this new law. Last July, torrential rains caused major flooding in Montpelier, Barre, and other southern municipalities, resulting in significant damage to homes, businesses, and infrastructure. The catastrophe was compared to the state’s biggest natural disaster since a 1927 flood that killed hundreds and caused enormous destruction. The rebuilding effort has been slow and costly, with many businesses just now reopening and homeowners still dealing with flood-damaged houses as winter approaches. Legislation: a polluter-pays model The new law requires Vermont’s state treasurer, in collaboration with the Agency of Natural Resources, to report by January 15, 2026, on the overall expenditures incurred by Vermonters and the state as a result of greenhouse gas emissions from January 1, 1995, to December 31, 2024. This comprehensive study will look at the effects on public health, natural resources, agriculture, economic development, housing, and other areas. Federal data will be utilized to assign the covered greenhouse gas emissions to specific fossil fuel firms. The law uses a polluter-pays model, focusing on corporations that extract fossil fuels or refine crude oil and are accountable for more than one billion metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions over the stipulated period. These corporations’ cash could be used for a variety of initiatives, such as updating stormwater drainage systems, strengthening infrastructure, retrofitting sewage treatment plants, and increasing building energy efficiency. This concept was inspired by the federal Superfund program, which is aimed at cleaning up pollutants. “For too long, giant fossil fuel companies have knowingly lit the match of climate disruption without being required to do a thing to put out the fire,” said Paul Burns, executive director of the Vermont Public Interest Research Group. “Finally, maybe for the first time anywhere, Vermont is going to hold the companies most responsible for climate-driven floods, fires, and heat waves financially accountable for a fair share of the damages they’ve caused.” Opposition in the oil industry The oil and gas industry has strongly opposed the proposal. The American Petroleum Institute (API), the industry’s major lobbying group, has expressed significant opposition, claiming that the law imposes unjustified retroactive costs and obligations. “This punitive new fee represents yet another step in a coordinated campaign to undermine America’s energy advantage and the economic and national security benefits it provides,” said API spokesman Scott Lauermann. Legal challenges and future implications Vermont lawmakers are bracing for the inevitable legal fights that will follow. Governor Scott has raised concerns about the financial cost and potential implications if Vermont’s efforts are unsuccessful. Nonetheless, bill supporters, including State Representative Martin LaLonde, believe the law has a solid legal foundation. “Most importantly, the stakes are too high – and the costs too steep for Vermonters – to release corporations that caused the mess from their obligation to help clean it up,” LaLonde emphasized. A model for other states Vermont’s trailblazing approach may motivate other states to take similar steps. Already, states such as Maryland, Massachusetts, and New York are exploring similar laws. As the effects of climate change worsen, the call for accountability from large polluters is gaining traction. Vermont’s new law is a big step toward holding fossil fuel companies accountable for their role in climate change. By addressing the financial burden of climate-related harm, the state hopes to reduce future risks and establish a precedent for environmental responsibility. The success of this daring program may pave the way for larger efforts across the country to confront the climate catastrophe full-on.The post Big Oil to pay for climate change damages in Vermont first appeared on The Optimist Daily: Making Solutions the News.

Think of the happiest people you know. Do you find yourself often wondering what they are doing to maintain a general level of joy? There has been a lot of discussion in the scientific world about whether our overall levels of happiness are the result of a genetic lottery that leads to a “set point” that people tend to default to. If that’s the case, then is there any way that you can “level up” in the happiness game? There is significant evidence that suggests that some people are simply happier than others due to certain mechanisms that they tend to employ which keeps their baseline happiness relatively constant. However, don’t despair, some habits can affect how happy people are, so just because some people are more genetically disposed towards happiness doesn’t mean that your happiness is out of your hands. Here are three habits of especially happy people. Set the right type of goals The kinds of goals you pursue certainly affect your long-term happiness. The happiest people tend to pursue goals that connect them to others. For example, those who see their careers as part of a broader purpose that involves helping other people are often happier in their professional lives, which generally lifts your overall happiness. To get more specific, happy people set goals that are cooperative rather than competitive or comparative. A comparative goal is one where you want to see yourself do better in comparison with others, whereas a cooperative goal is one where you strive for the success of your friends, family, neighborhood, and community. This allows those who engage in cooperative goals to celebrate their own success, as well as the success of those around them. Accentuate the positive As the saying goes, life isn’t black and white. Most experiences have pros and cons. Happier people will choose to focus on the more positive aspects of any given situation, making the negative aspects less noticeable as they fade into the background. Focusing on the positive has two benefits for well-being. Firstly, the perception of each experience is more enjoyable because the focus is on the good. Secondly, focusing on the good parts of any experience at the moment will translate into your memories (because the information that you focus on is what stays in the memory), so when you look back on the experience, you’ll perceive it as a happy memory, which in turn will boost your overall happiness. Forgive others No one is perfect, which means that even the people you hold most dear will likely do something to offend you. Happy people forgive others well, which enables them to forget the irksome details of what people have done to upset them in the first place. As a result, you won’t be reminded of those negative things when you see or think about the offender in the future. On the other hand, those who do not forgive others end up holding on to negative feelings and perceptions of those who have wronged them. Social pain tends to stick around longer than physical pain because simply remembering an event or experience can regenerate feelings of anger, shame, or embarrassment. Forgiving someone doesn’t mean that you’re letting them off the hook, or that you must continue spending time with them—forgiveness simply lets you move past unpleasant interactions without holding on to negative feelings that will drag down your mood and ultimately mess with your happiness.The post 3 habits of the happiest people first appeared on The Optimist Daily: Making Solutions the News.

Our knowledge concerning human evolution is apt to be limited and general. We’re unlikely to know the specifics about how our various body parts—eyes, nose, ears, tongue, hands, feet, knees, spine, and genitals—originated. We’re also probably curious about these matters; the need to know is basic to all of us, after all. This list will […] The post 10 Amazing Origins of Human Body Parts appeared first on Listverse.

How do you think you will die? It’s a morbid question, sure. But one thing is for certain about this life: we’ll all leave it at one point or another. And for most of us, we’ll not only have very little control over how we die but also where and when. Sure, we’d love to […] The post 10 of the Most Unusual Deaths Ever Recorded in History appeared first on Listverse.

The European Union may have just taken a big step to the political right, and the Biden administration should take note, Nile Gardiner says.  “I think that the Biden White House is going to be very nervous, looking at the results in Europe, because European voters have overwhelmingly turned against a lot of the left-wing dogma and agenda, not only [that] Europe leads, but the same agenda that is pursued by the Biden administration,” says Gardiner, director of the Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom at The Heritage Foundation.  The European Parliament held elections Thursday through Sunday, in which millions of Europeans cast their ballots across 27 countries, and Europe’s conservatives won big.  “I would describe the election results over the weekend as nothing short of a political revolution within Europe—a firm rejection of socialist ruling elites,” says Gardiner, who prior to joining Heritage in 2002 was foreign policy researcher for former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. In response to this “political revolution,” French President Emmanuel Macron has called for snap legislative elections at the end of June and beginning of July. According to Gardiner, this is a very risky move for Macron, as he is giving the French electorate the chance to further embrace a conservative government.  Gardiner joins “The Daily Signal Podcast” to explain the implications of the European elections on the U.S.  Listen to the podcast below or read the lightly edited transcript: Virginia Allen: It is my privilege to welcome to the show today Nile Gardiner. He serves as the director for the Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom at The Heritage Foundation. Nile, lots of news to jump in today. Thank you so much for being here. Nile Gardiner: It’s my pleasure. Great to be here. Thank you. Allen: The European Parliament is the legislative body for the European Union, and there are 720 seats in the European Parliament. And after 185 million votes were cast in Europe across 27 countries, Europe’s conservatives won. Big, Nile. Were conservatives expected to have so much success in this parliamentary election in Europe? Gardiner: Well, I think that the expectation in advance was that conservative parties would make significant gains, but the sheer scale of the victories that we’ve seen by parties on the Right across Europe exceeded expectations. And I would describe the election results over the weekend as nothing short of a political revolution within Europe, a firm rejection of socialist ruling elites. And I think that millions upon millions of European voters were saying that they wanted to have a voice in Europe, that they were against a lot of the policies being advanced by European leaders. And I think that in many respects the overwhelming rejection of socialist policies in Europe is the shape of things to come really for the future of Europe. I do think that we are looking at the rolling back of socialist, big government power in Europe. And that’s a very good thing for Europe. It’s a good thing for the United States as well to see that happening. Allen: And I’m excited to talk in just a moment a little bit about what this does mean for the United States, but what are Europeans embracing? What is the platform that the Conservative Party really advocates for in Europe? And by saying, “Yes, we want to elect leaders who represent that platform,” what are Europeans signaling? Gardiner: Well, we have a very wide range of parties on the Right in Europe and there is tremendous variation from country to country. But I think some common themes emerged from these election results. Firstly, I think that European voters emphatically rejected mass migration, illegal migration, the open borders mindset that has been dominant in Europe for so many decades. And voters said, “Enough is enough.” They’re concerned about rising crime. They’re concerned about the Islamification of their countries and huge issue in countries such as France, Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, for example, Italy—concerns over large-scale migration from Islamic countries and the Islamification of Europe. I do think the issue of migration was front and center in this election and probably the most important issue for European voters. I think, secondly, the election results were a rejection of net-zero policies, the far-left’s environmental agenda, the green agenda—which many in Europe view as fundamentally destructive in terms of economic growth, in terms of job creation. And millions of European voters view net-zero policies as incredibly expensive, at the expense of European people. So, I think that we saw sort of the net-zero elites being humbled in this election. So, environmental issues very important and European voters do not want to see the huge costs associated with net-zero policies. I think, thirdly, we saw a success for a wide range of Euroskeptic political parties across Europe parties that believe that there should not be a federal Europe. Many of these political parties believe there’s too much power in Brussels. Some of the political parties in Europe believe that European government should follow the example of Brexit and should go down the path of restoring sovereignty and self-determination. Brexit, I think, has been a tremendous game-changer for Europe. The Brexit vote was 2016, but here we are in 2024 and the shock waves of Brexit are still spreading across Europe in a major way. And that’s a good thing because Brexit is all about sovereignty, self-determination, taking power away from unelected elites. Brexit is fundamentally democratic. And I do think that we’re seeing the rise of Euroskeptic parties who do not believe in the creation of a federal Europe, who want to see power restored to nation-states. So, I think a rejection of European socialist elites was a big part of this vote over the weekend. Allen: There will now be many conservatives in the European Parliament. How is that going to change the EU as a whole? Gardiner: Well, there’ll be several hundred conservatives of the European Parliament spread across multiple different political parties and also political groupings. And I do think this will result in a European Parliament that’s going to push back a lot more against the centralized power of Brussels, pushing back against the European Commission, the executive branch of the EU. And this is a big positive. In terms of what this means for the United States, I think that the Biden White House is going to be very nervous looking at the results in Europe, because European voters have overwhelmingly turned against a lot of the left-wing dogma and agenda not only of European leads, but the same agenda that is pursued by the Biden administration. Here in the United States, you’ve seen over 10 million illegal migrants cross the U.S. border under the Biden presidency. You’ve seen the Biden administration advancing an extreme left-wing environmentalist agenda, which is hugely costly to the U.S. economy. And European electors have rejected this agenda. I think also in Europe, as well, millions of voters have rejected far-left woke ideology that left-wing elites have pushed in Europe for the last couple of decades. And so, all of this actually bodes very badly, I think, for the Biden presidency because European voters have the same issues, the same concerns that American voters have and voters across Europe have said a firm “no” to woke left-wing ideology. And they’re calling for strong border controls. They are calling for the restoration of national sovereignty. They are calling for an agenda that is culturally conservative. And all of this, I think, is problematic for the left-wing Biden administration. And I imagine a lot of the Biden advisers around the president are nervous, horrified by what’s happening. And that’s a very good thing, isn’t it? Really. And it’s a good thing when European voters turn against far-left domination. And American voters, of course, have exactly the same concerns about what is the most left-wing presidency in American history that is causing immense damage to the United States at home and abroad. So, what happens in Europe I think will have an impact in the United States. What happens in Europe matters and the developments across the Atlantic should be closely watched here in the U.S. Allen: We’ve seen that play out time and time again on various issues that often Europe forwards into something and then the United States follows. And so, it’s going to be fascinating to see how this does play out in American—specifically, what cues the Biden administration takes from this. Now, before we let you go, I do want to get your thoughts on France’s response. French President Emmanuel Macron, in response to this election, made an announcement that he’s going to hold snap parliamentary elections in France. Is this common? Explain what’s going on here. Gardiner: It’s a very rare move, actually, by the French president. This has only happened on a few occasions in French history where Parliament has been dissolved. It’s a very dangerous move, of course, for Macron. He was absolutely humiliated in these elections. His party received only around 14% to 15% of the vote. And they were absolutely trounced by right-wing French parties. And so, I think that this is a huge gamble by the French president because parliamentary elections in France could deliver a resounding victory for the opposition National Rally party, who made huge inroads in the European parliamentary elections. They pulled in over 30% of the vote and Emmanuel Macron could end up potentially as a lame-duck president ahead of the next presidential elections in France, which are, actually, in 2027. So, a high-risk move by Emmanuel Macron. This is a president who’s in real trouble. He is one of the most unpopular presidents in French history. And the French people are very, very upset on multiple fronts—everything from soaring mass migration to rising crime, unrest in French cities, social disorder. This is a country in real crisis in so many respects. And at the ballot box last week, French voters said they had enough of Emmanuel Macron. So, let’s see what happens with the parliamentary elections that are coming up at the end of June and also into July. And we’ll see whether Macron ends up as a lame-duck president. There’s a strong possibility of that. Allen: But yet he seemed to feel that it was worth the risk. Gardiner: Yeah. You know, for some reason, Macron felt emboldened to hold a parliamentary election. I think it could be disastrous for him. We’ll have to see what the French voters decide, but Macron is an incredibly unpopular figure in France. And I think that French voters are angry and many want to see him out of office. So, the parliamentary elections probably will not go very well for him. Allen: Nile, any final thoughts on issues that Americans should be aware of as we continue to see the fallout from this election in the EU? Gardiner: Yeah. That’s a great question. In my view, it’s in the interest of the United States to support a Europe that believes in national sovereignty, self-determination, strong borders. It’s in America’s interests for Europe to move in the direction it’s moving right now. And I think that the American people should welcome the results in Europe this past weekend. These are positive results for the United States. And it’s a demonstration of the fact that European voters are, in many respects, actually like their American counterparts. And they don’t believe in being ruled by far left-wing elites. They’ve had enough and they’ve spoken out at the ballot box over the last few days. I think what we’re seeing in Europe should be greatly welcomed here in the United States, is a very positive development moving forward. The post European Parliament Elections Likely to Make Biden ‘Very Nervous’ appeared first on The Daily Signal.