Connect with us


Burger King: Cow Farts and Burps Are No Laughing Matter. LOL



Screen Shot 2020 07 14 at 9.36.01 AM

Burger King’s old saying ‘where’s the beef’ is now in the annals or (anus) of history. The company, whose charbroiled hamburgers, are famous throughout the world is now promising to reduce cow farts in an effort to save the planet from global warming.

“Cow farts & burps are no laughing matter,” stated Burger King in a Tweet. “They release methane, contributing to climate change. That’s whey we’re working to change our cows’ diet by adding lemongrass to reduce their emissions by approximately 33 % learn about our ongoing study.”

In a recent interview on “The Sara Carter Show” podcast Michael Shellenberger, an environmentalist who recently published ‘Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All’ explained how the movement is doing more damage than good for the planet. He was once a believer in climate change, he said, until he took a good hard look at the data.

He said he recently came to the realization that the hysteria surrounding climate change has become more of a religion than a movement based on scientific fact. There is no looming apocalypse based on global warming. He’s the father of a young daughter and he realized many young people are terrified of the planets future. The fear, Shellenberger told “The Sara Carter Show” Monday, is doing more harm than good. He also disagreed with the notion that cow farts are dangerous.

So will this new bold lemongrass feed change by Burger King make a difference? How will it change the taste of our beef?

If it works, should we be eating lemongrass to reduce our own emissions?

I personally think that would be great for elevator rides and any social situations where people aren’t social distancing. If you don’t think this is strange already, watch the young children in this Burger King ad dancing for lemongrass below. It will blow your mind.

Continue Reading


TX farmers fight to block USDA from using race in distributing farm aid



GettyImages 2059551148 scaled

“When natural disasters strike, they don’t discriminate based on race and sex. Neither should the Department of Agriculture.” That’s the message from a group of farmers written in a court filing made public Monday.

Just The News reports on a group of white farmers in Texas who are asking a federal judge to block the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) from using race, gender or other “socially disadvantaged” traits to determine who gets disaster and pandemic farm aid and how much, arguing the agency’s current administration of eight emergency funding programs is unconstitutionally discriminatory.

According to Just the News, the USDA’s program appears to be rooted in an executive order that President Joe Biden signed. The lawsuit names the USDA and Biden Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack. The farmers bringing the action include Rusty Strickland, Alan and Amy West and Bryan Baker, all of Texas.

The farmers, represented by the nonprofit legal firm called the Southeastern Legal Foundation, asked a judge to issue an emergency injunction from the U.S. District Court in Amarillo, Texas, to stop any additional awards from being made on the basis of race and gender or other liberal standards.

“Enjoining USDA from using race, sex, or progressive factoring when administering the programs is warranted because Plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits of their claims that: (1) the programs, as currently administered, are unconstitutional; (2) USDA lacks statutory authority to run the programs in their current form; and (3) USDA failed to adequately explain changes in calculating payments when implementing progressive factoring,” the motion stated.

The farmers said the Biden administration has taken roughly $25 billion in disaster and pandemic aid approved by Congress for farmers in eight programs and devised a system to make awards based on race, gender or other “socially disadvantaged” traits. Such decision-making violates the Constitution’s Fifth Amendment and the Administrative Procedures Act.

“The Constitution promises equal treatment to all Americans regardless of their race or sex,” the court filing also reads. “It also promises the separation of powers. USDA broke both promises through the disaster and pandemic relief programs challenged here.”

The farmers said they can prove that “USDA gives more money to some farmers based on” race, gender or other factors never approved by Congress.

“USDA does this by first defining farmers who are black/African-American, American Indian, Alaskan native, Hispanic, Asian-American, Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islander, or a woman as ‘socially disadvantaged,’” the court filing said. “Then, it provides farmers who qualify as socially disadvantaged more money for the same loss than those it deems non-underserved, along with other preferential treatment”

Just the News explains the request for an injunction relies in part of the Supreme Court’s landmark decision last year banning racial preferences in college admissions. It even quoted from the high court’s declaration that “eliminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it.”.

“Disasters don’t discriminate and neither should USDA. In fact, the Constitution prohibits it,” the lawyers said in a statement. “That is why our brave clients – a group of Texas farmers that includes three white men who received significantly less money in disaster relief funds from USDA than if they had been of a different race or sex – filed this case and are asking the court to stop USDA’s blatant discrimination.”

Continue Reading