inflation

Trillions in Debt and We’re Just Scratching the Surface by Antony Davies and James R. Harrigan

As the federal debt has gone from astounding to unbelievable to incomprehensible, a new problem has emerged: The US government is actually running out of places to borrow.

How Many Zeros Are in a Trillion?

The $20 trillion debt is already twice the annual revenues collected by all the world’s governments combined. Counting unfunded liabilities, which include promised Social Security, Medicare, and government pension payments that Washington will not have the money to pay, the federal government actually owes somewhere between $100 trillion and $200 trillion. The numbers are so ridiculously large that even the uncertainty in the figures exceeds the annual economic output of the entire planet.

Since 2000, the federal debt has grown at an average annual rate of 8.2%, doubling from $10 trillion to $20 trillion in the past eight years alone. Who loaned the government this money? Four groups: foreigners, Americans, the Federal Reserve, and government trust funds. But over the past decade, three of these groups have cut back significantly on their lending.

Foreign investors have slowed the growth in their lending from over 20% per year in the early 2000s to less than 3% per year today. Excluding the Great Recession years, American investors have been cutting back on how much they lend the federal government by an average of 2% each year.

Social Security, though, presents an even bigger problem. The federal government borrowed all the Social Security surpluses of the past 80 years. But starting this year, and continuing either forever or until Congress overhauls the program (which may be the same thing), Social Security will only generate deficits. Not only is the government no longer able to borrow from Social Security, it will have to start paying back what it owes – assuming the government plans on making good on its obligations.

With federal borrowing growing at more than 6% per year, with foreign and American investors becoming more reluctant to lend, and with the Social Security trust fund drying up, the Fed is the only game left in town. Since 2001, the Fed has increased its lending to the federal government by over 11% each year, on average. Expect that trend to continue.

Inflation to Make You Cry

For decades, often in word but always in deed, politicians have told voters that government debt didn’t matter. We, and many economists, disagree. Yet even if the politicians were right, the absence of available creditors would be an insurmountable problem—were it not for the Federal Reserve. But when the Federal Reserve acts as the lender of last resort, unpleasant realities follow. Because, as everyone should be keenly aware, the Fed simply prints the money it loans.

A Fed loan devalues every dollar already in circulation, from those in people’s savings accounts to those in their pockets. The result is inflation, which is, in essence, a tax on frugal savers to fund a spendthrift government.

Since the end of World War II, inflation in the US has averaged less than 4% per year. When the Fed starts printing money in earnest because the government can’t obtain loans elsewhere, inflation will rise dramatically. How far is difficult to say, but we have some recent examples of countries that tried to finance runaway government spending by printing money.

From 1975 to 1990, the Greek people suffered 15% annual inflation as their government printed money to finance stimulus spending. Following the breakup of the Soviet Union in the 1990s, Russia printed money to keep its government running. The result was five years over which inflation averaged 750%. Today, Venezuela’s government prints money to pay its bills, causing 200% inflation which the International Monetary Fund expects to skyrocket to 1,600% this year.

For nearly a century, politicians have treated deficit spending as a magic wand. In a recession? We need jobs, so government must spend more money! In an expansion? There’s more tax revenue, so government can spend more money! Always and everywhere, politicians argued only about how much to increase spending, never whether to increase spending. A century of this has left us with a debt so large that it dwarfs the annual economic output of the planet. And now we are coming to the point at which there will be no one left from whom to borrow. When creditors finally disappear completely, all that will remain is a reckoning.

This article first appeared in InsideSources.

Antony Davies

Antony Davies

Antony Davies is an associate professor of economics at Duquesne University in Pittsburg.

He is a member of the FEE Faculty Network.


James R. Harrigan

James R. Harrigan

James R. Harrigan is the Senior Research Fellow at Strata, in Logan, Utah.

montana-protest-against-refugees

Tennessee files suit against federal government over cost to state of refugee program

It’s been a  long time coming, but yesterday, the State of Tennessee filed its Tenth Amendment case against the US Department of State and the Department of Health and Human Services over the issue of cost-shifting of the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program to the states.

Readers, this is big news!

Here is Michael Patrick Leahy at Breitbart yesterday (I see that Drudge featured the story last night and Fox News has picked it up as well):

The Thomas More Law Center filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of the Tennessee General Assembly and the State of Tennessee in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee on Monday challenging the federal refugee resettlement program for violating the state’s sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

The lawsuit places Tennessee at the center of the national debate concerning the operation of the federal refugee resettlement program.

President Trump will be holding a rally in Nashville on Wednesday to garner public support for his agenda. His revised Executive Order 13780 temporarily halting the federal refugee resettlement program and temporarily banning travel from six Middle Eastern countries goes into effect on Thursday.

[….]

The Refugee Act specified that 100 percent of each state’s cost of Medicaid and cash welfare benefits provided to each resettled refugee during their first 36 months in the United State would be reimbursed to each state by the federal government. However, within five years of having created the federal program, Congress failed to appropriate sufficient funding and instead, costs of the federal program began shifting to state governments.

Within ten years of passing the Refugee Act, the federal government eliminated all reimbursement of state costs, a huge financial cost to the states that was, in effect, yet another unfunded federal mandate.

[….]

The lawsuit seeks to define Tennessee’s rights in light of the forced expenditure of state funds in support of a federal program from which the state has formally withdrawn.

Continue here and see below the full text of the press release from the Thomas More Law Center.

For all of you in states that have withdrawn from the program***, you must push your governor and legislators to join this case.

If your state has not withdrawn and is willing to sue on states’ rights grounds, this is the direction you should be following: withdraw and then sue when the feds assign a non-profit to run the program!

To further your understanding, here (and below) is the full press release from the Thomas More Law Center, yesterday:

First in the Nation — Tennessee Files Lawsuit Challenging Constitutionality of the Federal Refugee Resettlement Program

ANN ARBOR, MI – The Thomas More Law Center, a national nonprofit public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, MI, today filed a federal lawsuit on behalf of the State of Tennessee, the Tennessee General Assembly, and two State legislators, challenging the constitutionality of the federal refugee resettlement program as a violation of the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and the principles of State sovereignty.

Defendants in the lawsuit include the U.S Departments of State and Health and Human Services, and their respective Secretaries.

Assisting the Thomas More Law Center, pro bono, is attorney B. Tyler Brooks with the law firm of Millberg Gordon Stewart PLLC located in Raleigh, North Carolina.

Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, noted, “Supreme Court Chief Justice Roberts has observed, ‘The States are separate and independent sovereigns. Sometimes they have to act like it.’ We intend to follow that advice in our lawsuit on behalf of the State of Tennessee and its citizens. We are asking the Court to stop the bleeding out of millions of Tennessee taxpayer dollars each year to fund a federal program from which the State officially withdrew in 2007.”

Thompson added, “Although there are compelling policy reasons to dismantle the existing refugee resettlement program in favor of resettling refugees in Middle East safe- zones as President Trump has suggested, this lawsuit focuses solely on the unconstitutional way the federal program is currently operating in the State of Tennessee.”

The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee. The purpose of the lawsuit is not to inflict harm on refugees, but to preserve the balanced constitutional relationship between the federal government and the States. It seeks a court declaration that the federal government has violated the Tenth Amendment and an order permanently enjoining the federal government from forcing the State of Tennessee to pay money out of its treasury to finance the federal refugee resettlement program.

The Tennessee General Assembly, by overwhelming majorities in both the House and Senate, passed Senate Joint Resolution 467 (“SJR 467”) during the 2016 legislative session, which authorized legal action to stop the federal government from unconstitutionally commandeering State funds to finance the federal refugee resettlement program.

State Senator John Stevens and State Representative Terri Lynn Weaver are the two legislators who joined the lawsuit as individual plaintiffs. Senator Stevens is First Vice-Chair of the Senate’s Standing Committee on Finance, Ways and Means, which is responsible for all measures relating to taxes and oversight of public monies in the State’s treasury. Representative Terri Lynn Weaver is the Chairman of the House Transportation Subcommittee which is charged with oversight of the budget relating to transportation.

Senator Stevens stated, “Through federal economic dragooning of our State’s budget, past Presidents and Congresses have quieted my vote and thereby my constituents’ voices. President Trump through executive action has reversed the overreaches of the Obama Administration in numerous ways. I trust President Trump in this regard. However, he needs our help.”

Continued Stevens, “The Constitution does not allow the Federal Government to force me as the elected representative of the 24th Senate District to implement federal programs while they sit in Washington insulated from the consequences.”

Representative Weaver, who played an instrumental role in mobilizing legislative support for passage of SJR 467, commented, “Of all the legislation that I have worked on, this by far is the most important. The only way we can get back to our constitutional beginnings and the intent birthed by our Founding Fathers is to go and take it back. We are looking forward to linking arms with the Thomas More Law Center for the long haul to regain sovereignty for our great State.”

Senate Majority Leader Mark Norris, another strong advocate for the lawsuit, emphasized the point that the lawsuit should not be taken as a criticism of the Trump Administration, “We want to convey to the President that we support his efforts concerning immigration and refugee resettlement and believe this suit for declaratory relief is consistent with what would likely be his position regarding states like Tennessee which have withdrawn from the refugee resettlement program but are forced to continue paying costs associated with it.”

When Congress enacted the Refugee Resettlement Act of 1980, the explicit intent was to assure full federal reimbursement of the costs for each refugee resettled and participating in benefit programs provided by the states. Eventually, however, federal reimbursements to the states for these benefit programs were reduced and, by 1991, eliminated entirely. The states thereby became responsible for the costs of the programs originally covered by the federal government.

Tennessee officially withdrew from participation in the refugee resettlement program in 2007. However, instead of honoring Tennessee’s decision to withdraw from the program, the federal government merely bypassed the State and appointed Catholic Charities of Tennessee, a private, non-governmental organization to administer the program. Catholic Charities receives revenue based upon the number of refugees it brings into the State.

Currently, Tennessee State revenues that could otherwise be used for State programs to help Tennesseans are, in effect, appropriated by the federal government to support the federal refugee resettlement program. This arrangement displaces Tennessee’s constitutionally mandated funding prerogatives and appropriations process.

The Complaint is here.

The Thomas More Law Center defends and promotes America’s Judeo-Christian heritage and moral values, including the religious freedom of Christians, time-honored family values, and the sanctity of human life. It supports a strong national defense and an independent and sovereign United States of America. The Law Center accomplishes its mission through litigation, education, and related activities. It does not charge for its services. The Law Center is supported by contributions from individuals, corporations and foundations, and is recognized by the IRS as a section 501(c)(3) organization. You may reach the Thomas More Law Center at (734) 827-2001 or visit our website at http://www.thomasmore.org.

NOTE: These are the so-called Wilson-Fish states that have withdrawn from the program over the years.

In addition to these below, several states have withdrawn in the last year and those include: Texas, Kansas, New Jersey and Maine. Florida is considering it right now.

Texas citizen activists must press your governor. He has already shown a willingness to sue the feds, but this is a much stronger case!

To the right of the state (and one county) is the federal NGO running the program in the state (I don’t know who has been assigned in the 4 recent withdrawals mentioned above):

Alabama: USCCB – Catholic Social Services
Alaska: USCCB – Catholic Social Services
Colorado: Colorado Department of Human Services
Idaho: Janus Inc. (formerly Mountain States Group), Idaho Office for Refugees
Kentucky: USCCB – Catholic Charities of Louisville, Kentucky Office for Refugees
Louisiana: USCCB – Catholic Charities Diocese of Baton Rouge, Louisiana Office for Refugees
Massachusetts: Office for Refugees and Immigrants
Nevada: USCCB – Catholic Charities of Southern Nevada
North Dakota: LIRS – Lutheran Social Services of North Dakota
San Diego County, CA: USCCB – Catholic Charities Diocese of San Diego
South Dakota: LIRS – Lutheran Social Services of South Dakota
Tennessee: USCCB – Catholic Charities of Tennessee, Tennessee Office for Refugees
Vermont: USCRI – Vermont Refugee Resettlement Program

RELATED ARTICLES:

Tennessee became the first state in the nation on Monday to sue the federal government over refugee resettlement

Hawaii teacher says he will not teach illegal immigrant students – Story | WFLD

th_intelligence

Democrats and the Science of ‘Thintelligence’

Michael Crichton is a man, author, filmmaker, doctor, teacher and visionary. Crichton is the author of The Andromeda Strain and Jurassic Park.

Crichton in Jurassic Park wrote, “They don’t have intelligence. They have what I call ‘thintelligence.’ They see the immediate situation. They think narrowly and they call it ‘being focused.’ They don’t see the surround. They don’t see the consequences.”

Democrats suffer from “thintelligence.”

An example of Democrat’s thintelligence is climate change. In an March 9th, 2017 article titled 30 New (2017) Scientific Papers Crush The Hockey Stick Graph And ‘Global’-Scale Warming Claims Kenneth Richard writes:

There were at least 60 peer-reviewed scientific papers published in 2016 demonstrating that  Today’s Warming Isn’t Global, Unprecedented, Or Remarkable.

As of the end of January, another 17 papers had already been published in 201717 New (2017) Scientific Papers Affirm Today’s Warming Is Not Global, Unprecedented, Or Remarkable

Within the last month, another 14 papers have been published that continue to cast doubt on the popularized conception of an especially unusual global-scale warming during modern times.

Yes, some regions of the Earth have been warming in recent decades or at some point in the last 100 years.  Some regions have been cooling for decades at a time.  And many regions have shown no significant net changes or trends in either direction relative to the last few hundred to thousands of years.  In other words, there is nothing historically unprecedented or remarkable about today’s climate when viewed in the context of natural variability.

Read more…

What natural variability deniers fail to see is “the surround.” By not seeing the surround they don’t see the consequences of their actions to try to halt the natural variability of the climate. Blinded by thintelligence they push forward an agenda to reduce CO2 emissions (CO2 being necessary for plant growth), regulate water use, impose CAFE standards on all motor vehicles and worst of all use food (corn) for fuel (ethanol).

There are three indisputable facts about the climate:

  1. The climate (weather) changes. If you don’t believe this just look out your window.
  2. These changes are cyclical that adhere to nature and nature’s laws (natural variability). If you don’t believe this then why does the earth have a summer, fall, winter and spring seasons?
  3. There is nothing that mankind can do change nature and nature’s laws. Man cannot control the weather (climate) by his own actions or inaction.

Crichton observed, “You know what’s wrong with scientific power? It’s a form of inherited wealth. And you know what assholes congenitally rich people are.”

Crichton warned, “In the information society, nobody thinks. We expected to banish paper, but we actually banished thought.”

We agree with Dr. Crichton.

RELATED ARTICLE: Axing Wasteful EPA Program that Gave Leftist Groups Millions Called “Racist” – Judicial Watch

californication-wallpaper-7

16 Reasons Why You Shouldn’t Live In California

I was privileged to attend high school at a military academy in Carlsbad, California from 1965-1969, at which time I returned to Arizona to attend Northern Arizona University.  My years in southern California were terrific for many reasons one being the magic which was the California of yesteryear.  The beach (the academy had its own private 200 yard long beach) the weather, the life-style of the late 60s’ all contributed to a vision which is still etched into my memory.  Over the decades, I would travel for various events back to the academy, and you could see the not-so-good changes occurring in California.  For reasons that escape me, “California Dreamin” as the Beach Boys would sing, began to morph into a society almost separate from the rest of America; sort of like the individual style setting California which had been became even more stand alone, and even third-world-like as more third-world people slipped in and filled every nook and cranny of the once Golden State.

The brightness that California once was known for (among beaches, mammoth freeways, laid back life styles, fertile farm lands and mountains, and of course Home of Mickey Mouse) was being altered by gangs, poor populations requiring almost full subsidies from the State just to live, multiple cultures that no longer respected American culture, schools that no longer prepared students to become productive members of society; heck schools that barely teach reading, writing, arithmetic, steadily creeping higher costs of everything, closures of many things that use to be landmarks thereby further dulling the brightness that helped make California the Golden State.  But I chose to push all of that aside in my mind (hindsight bias is what this type of selective thinking is named), and I would still travel to the beach of Carlsbad or Oceanside remaining in small pockets next to those beaches, and recall a kinder and gentler era, as I walked up and down those beaches I had become so acquainted with during my youth.

At one time, California seemed to be the epicenter of the American Dream.  From “WolfMan Jack” on the radio to the movie American Graffiti depicting cruising up and down main streets talking to those walking, whistling to those simply sitting on sidewalk benches, and laughing all the while the “WolfMan” was talking and howling over the radio, Beach Boy music everywhere along with Jan and Dean, “California Dreamin” was a reality, a way of life – even for kids in other states.  But something happened sadly.  Of course times change, but have they changed really for the better?

The following article sheds light on the California Dream that has become very dull, without much brightness like the famous California coastal haze that burns off around noon, but now seems not to burn off revealing a clear and clean image like once.  Where did California go?  Where is California going??  I wish I knew.  I wish I could pull this once unique state back in time, or at least pull it away from what appears to be certain self-destruction.  Hard to believe I know thinking California will not always be there.  The below article by Nwo Report peeks behind the “California here I come curtain,” and reveals a once Great State in great need of new leadership; a return to principles that were simpler, but more honest and in keeping with American values than what is unraveling before our eyes.


16 Reasons Why You Shouldn’t Live In California

by Nwo Report

At one time, California seemed to be the epicenter of the American Dream

It has been said that “as California goes, so goes the nation”.  That is why it is such a shame what is happening to that once great state.

At one time, California seemed to be the epicenter of the American Dream.  Featuring some of the most beautiful natural landscapes in the entire world, the gorgeous weather and booming economy of the state inspired people from all over the world to move to the state.  But now people are moving out of the state by the millions, because life in California has literally become a nightmare for so many people.

I certainly don’t have anything against the state personally.  My brother and sister were both born there, and I spent a number of my childhood years in stunning northern California.  When I was younger I would sometimes dream of getting a place on the coast eventually, but for reasons I will discuss below I no longer think that would be advisable.

In fact, if I was living in California today I would be immediately looking for a way to move out of the state unless I specifically felt called to stay.  The following are 16 reasons why you shouldn’t live in California…

#1 The entire California coastline is part of the “Ring of Fire” seismic zone that roughly encircles the Pacific Ocean.  The San Andreas Fault has been described as a “time bomb“, and at some point there will be a catastrophic earthquake that absolutely devastates the entire region.  In fact, a study that was just released says that a “major earthquake” on the San Andreas Fault “is way overdue” …

A recently published study reveals new evidence that a major earthquake is way overdue on a 100 mile stretch of the San Andreas Fault from the Antelope Valley to the Tejon Pass and beyond.

Researchers with the U.S. Geological Survey released the results of the years-long study warning a major earthquake could strike soon.

#2 Out of all 50 states, the state of California has been ranked as the worst state for business for 12 years in a row

In what is sounding like a broken record, California once again ranked dead last in Chief Executive magazine’s annual Best and Worst States for Business survey of CEOs – as it has all 12 years the survey has been conducted. Texas, meanwhile, earned the top spot for the 12th straight year.

Among the survey’s subcategories, the 513 CEOs from across the nation ranked California 50th in taxation and regulation, 35th in workforce quality and 26th in living environment, which includes cost of living, the education system and state and local attitudes toward business. Notably, California placed worst among the nine states in the Western region in all three categories.

#3 California has the highest state income tax rates in the entire nation.  For many Americans, the difference between what you would have to pay if you lived in California and what you would have to pay if you lived in Texas could literally buy a car every single year.

#4 The state government in Sacramento seems to go a little bit more insane with each passing session.  This time around, they are talking about going to a single-payer healthcare system for the entire state that would cost California taxpayers 40 billion dollars a year

On Friday, State Senator Ricardo Lara introduced legislation that would transition California’s healthcare into a single-payer system. (RELATED: Read what a retired colonel said about the real purpose of Obamacare). The system would be very similar to the healthcare system currently in place in Canada and would cost California taxpayers roughly $40 billion for the first year alone. Given the poor economic climate California has already created for itself, this will no doubt be just one more burden on the people of California, and one step closer towards total bankruptcy.

Micah Weinberg, the president of the Economic Institute at the Bay Area Council, raised concerns over the financial consequences of the proposed legislation. “Where are they going to come up with the $40 billion?” he asked. He went on to suggest that adopting a state level single-payer system is “just not feasible to do as a state.”

#5 The traffic in the major cities just keeps getting worse and worse.  According to USA Today, Los Angeles now has the worst traffic in the entire world, and San Francisco is not far behind.

#6 A lot of money is being made in Silicon Valley these days (at least for now), but poverty is also exploding in the state.  In desperation, homeless people are banding together to create large tent cities all over the state, and the L.A. City Council recently asked Governor Jerry Brown “to declare homelessness a statewide emergency“.

#7 Thanks to unchecked illegal immigration, crime is on the rise in many California cities.  The drug war that has been raging for years in Mexico is increasingly spilling over the border, and many families have moved out of the state for this reason alone.

#8 California is one of the most litigious states in the entire nation.  According to the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform, the “lawsuit climate” in California is ranked 47th out of all 50 states.

#9 Every year wildfires and mudslides wreak havoc in the state.  Erosion is particularly bad along the coast, and I have previously written about how some portions of the California coastline are literally falling into the ocean.

#10 California has some of the most ridiculous housing prices in the entire country.  Due to a lack of affordable housing rents have soared to wild extremes in San Francisco, where one poor engineer was actually paying $1,400 a month to live in a closet.

#11 All over the state, key infrastructure is literally falling to pieces.  Governor Jerry Brown recently issued a list of key projects that needed to be done as soon as possible, and the total price tag for that list was 100 billion dollars.  Of course that list didn’t even include the Oroville Dam, and we all saw what happened there.

#12 Radiation from the ongoing Fukushima nuclear disaster continues to cross the ocean and wash up along the California coastline.  The impact of this crisis on the health of those living along the west coast could potentially be felt for generations.

#13 Illegal drug use in the state is on the rise again, and emergency rooms are being flooded by heroin overdose victims.

#14 On top of everything else, it is being reported that Russia is “quietly ‘seeding’ the U.S. shoreline with nuclear ‘mole’ missiles”.  The following comes from retired colonel and former Russian defense ministry spokesman Viktor Baranetz

“What are these mysterious ‘asymmetrical responses’ that our politicians and generals speak about so often? Maybe it’s a myth or a pretty turn of phrase? No! Our asymmetrical response is nuclear warheads that can modify their course and height so that no computer can calculate their trajectory. Or, for example, the Americans are deploying their tanks, airplanes and special forces battalions along the Russian border. And we are quietly ‘seeding’ the U.S. shoreline with nuclear ‘mole’ missiles (they dig themselves in and ‘sleep’ until they are given the command)[…]

“Oh, it seems I’ve said too much. I should hold my tongue.”

Hopefully what Baranetz is claiming is not accurate, because if it is even partly true the implications are absolutely staggering.

#15 North Korea is a major nuclear threat as well.  It is being reported that the North Koreans are developing an ICBM that could potentially reach the west coast of the United States…

Defense officials have warned that North Korea is on the brink of producing an ICBM that could target the United States. North Korean leader Kim Jong Un announced in January during his New Year’s address that Pyongyang had “entered the final stage of preparations to test-launch” an ICBM that could reach parts of the United States.

#16 Someday a very large earthquake will produce a major tsunami on the west coast.  According to the Los Angeles Times, one study found that a magnitude 9.0 earthquake along the Cascadia fault could potentially produce a massive tsunami that would “wash away coastal towns”…

If a 9.0 earthquake were to strike along California’s sparsely populated North Coast, it would have a catastrophic ripple effect.

A giant tsunami created by the quake would wash away coastal towns, destroy U.S. 101 and cause $70 billion in damage over a large swath of the Pacific coast. More than 100 bridges would be lost, power lines toppled and coastal towns isolated. Residents would have as few as 15 minutes notice to flee to higher ground, and as many as 10,000 would perish.

Scientists last year published this grim scenario for a massive rupture along the Cascadia fault system, which runs 700 miles off shore from Northern California to Vancouver Island.

Over the past decade, approximately five million people have moved away from California.

After reading this article, perhaps you have a better understanding why so many people are getting out while they still can.

To me, one of the greatest concerns is the rise in seismic activity that we are seeing all over the world.  In my latest book I express my belief that the United States will be greatly affected by this increase in seismic activity, and California is going to get hit harder than just about anywhere else.

Once again, I don’t have anything against California or the people that live there.  It is such a beautiful place, and it once held so much promise.

Unfortunately that promise has been shattered, and there is a mass exodus out of the state as families flee the horrific nightmare that California is in the process of becoming.

headstart program

Head Start Programs Are Setting Kids Up for Failure by Annie Holmquist

In recent years, support for preschool education has grown by leaps and bounds. After all, who wouldn’t want to help adorable little kids get an early jump on success?

But the enthusiasm for Pre-K dampened a bit with the release of two studies, one from 2012 which studied children in a Head Start program and another from 2016 which studied children in Tennessee’s statewide preschool program. The Head Start study found that its children were more inclined to behavioral problems than those who did not participate. The Tennessee study, on the other hand, found that participants did worse academically several years into school than those who had not participated.We need to study the effects of preschool education more before we wholeheartedly commit to public Pre-K programs.

The news that these Pre-K programs may hurt rather than help was not received favorably by preschool advocates. And according to a recent Brookings Institute article by scholars Dale Farran and Mark Lipsey, Pre-K advocates have done their best to discredit these studies.

But as Farran and Lipsey explain, the attempts to dismiss these findings “are based on incorrect and misleading characterizations of each study.”

For starters, the Head Start study is dismissed on the grounds that some participants ended up in the wrong study group. But according to Farran and Lipsey, such occurrences happen in many scientific studies, and as such, are controlled for in the final statistics. The authors caution that this does not change the fact that children who participated in the Head Start program exhibited more aggressive behavior, the most concerning factor of the study.

Secondly, Farran and Lipsey explain that the Tennessee study is dismissed on the grounds that it is not a “high-quality” program such as those in major cities like Boston and Tulsa. However, when sample sizes are taken from each of these programs, Farran and Lipsey note that there is no major difference between the academic outcomes of each program. In other words, because of the similarity in the outcomes, those who dismiss the Tennessee preschool program as being low quality must also dismiss the programs they hold up as models.

Given this information, does it seem we need to study the effects of preschool education more before we wholeheartedly commit to public Pre-K programs? Is it possible that young children would learn more and have greater long-term success if they weren’t subjected to the classroom at such early ages?

Republished from Intellectual Takeout.

wikileaks-796x398

VIDEO: The ‘TOP 5’ Under Reported Scariest Facts About the Vault 7 WikiLeaks Release

In this video, we go over the latest news collected from the WikiLeaks Vault 7 release about the CIA. We go over scariest revelations from this release giving you some context on Donald Trump, The Russia Hysteria and the vast amount of accountable power the CIA actually has.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Who is Attorney General Loretta Lynch? FISA court handled two requests to wiretap Donald Trump

WikiLeaks: CIA Uses ‘Stolen’ Malware to ‘Attribute’ Cyberattacks to Nations Like Russia

Phished Wiretap Scandal Implodes by Dennis G. Hurst

Non-Denial “Denial” Demands Criminal Investigation Into Obama’s Silent Coup

Freedom Watch offers to represent President Trump and White House over illegal Obama wiretapping

Obama & FISA: Trump Wiretap May Have Been Sought | National Review

Obama spox says Obama never wiretapped a US citizen — immediately receives harsh history lesson – TheBlaze

DOJ seized phone records for Fox News numbers, reporter’s parents | Fox News

migrantsshahada

US Catholic Bishops [who are paid millions to bring Muslims to U.S.] assail Trump Migrant Slowdown

Actually it is over a half billion the US Conference of Catholic Bishops received from U.S. taxpayers since 2008!

(By the way, I just heard Raymond Arroyo on Fox and Friends say that the USCCB gets millions of tax dollars annually from the federal treasury, but I couldn’t find the clip.  Yeh! Finally that information is getting in to the mainstream media!)

Here is the latest from Catholic News Agency (CNA):

Bishop Vasquez

Washington D.C., Mar 6, 2017 / 03:50 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- With people fleeing humanitarian crises around the world, President Donald Trump’s new executive order halting refugee admissions is wrong, Catholic bishop and aid groups maintain.

Bishop Vasquez chairs the U.S. bishops’ committee on migration. Last time we looked we reported that 97% of the Bishop’s Migration funds money comes from you—the taxpayers!

“We remain deeply troubled by the human consequences of the revised executive order on refugee admissions and the travel ban. While we note the Administration’s efforts to modify the Executive Order in light of various legal concerns, the revised Order still leaves many innocent lives at risk,” Bishop Joe Vasquez of Austin stated March 6. Bishop Vasquez chairs the U.S. bishops’ committee on migration.

“The U.S. Catholic Bishops have long recognized the importance of ensuring public safety and would welcome reasonable and necessary steps to accomplish that goal,” he said.

“However, based on the knowledge that refugees are already subjected to the most vigorous vetting process of anyone who enters the United States, there is no merit to pausing the refugee resettlement program while considering further improvement to that vetting process.”

Here comes the big lie that Trump is reducing the number  of refugees dramatically!  Contractors, like the US Bishops, did just fine on less than 50,000 refugees during 4 of Bush’s years.

But, for only one year did Obama propose the astronomical number of 110,000 (for most of the year he would not be in office!) and that becomes the standard that the ignorant, gullible media goes with!  For the many new readers we get every day, the resettlement contractors, including the USCCB, gets paid by the head to place refugees in your towns. More refugees=more money!

“Resettling only 50,000 refugees a year, down from 110,000, does not reflect the need, our compassion, and our capacity as a nation,” Bishop Vasquez stated. “We have the ability to continue to assist the most vulnerable among us without sacrificing our values as Americans or the safety and security of our nation.”

He goes on to oppose any religious test (like the prioritization of Christians in the first EO) for admission to the US.

Now, here comes a major truth! And, this is why Christians are not prioritized from Muslim countries!

Refugees must first register with the UNHCR to be eligible for resettlement.

Trump should immediately sever our ties with the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, save us millions of dollars, and put in place a program where we, the US, chooses our refugees without the UNHCR middle men!

CNA continues……

“The Obama administration policy was to prioritize these groups, but despite this they remain severely underrepresented in U.S. refugee admissions, so it’s clear that a fair outcome is even more important than a stated priority,” he said. [Andrew Walther, vice president of communications and strategic planning at the Knights of Columbus.]

Syriac Patriarch Ignatius Joseph III Younan of Antioch has warned that Christians hoping to be resettled in the U.S. or Canada have never even had the chance.

“I personally heard on several occasions from many of our Christian refugees in Lebanon and Jordan, that their applications for refugee visas, either to the USA or Canada, are without any response, if not refused by the consulates of the USA and Canada,” he stated.

Never mentioned at CNA News is the financial reason the USCCB does not want to slow the flow for even a short period of time—$$$$$!

Here (below) is just one page of the income the USCCB is getting from you (from 2008-2016).  This does not include the millions and millions of tax payer dollars received separately by individual Catholic Charities around the country.

My screenshot from USASpending.gov captures only 7 of 227 transactions.

For those of you interested in the USAID funding be sure to scroll through the pages and see how much of that money the USCCB gets!

By the way, since the Bishops are exempt from filing Form 990’s we can’t get at their salaries.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Nearly a third of FBI domestic terrorism cases involve Muslim refugees

Call the White House to support President Trump’s plan to keep us safe!

Church World Service announced yesterday that it is launching anti-Trump campaign (to raise $$$)

Breitbart: Federally-funded refugee resettlement contractor, HIAS, organized NY rally against Trump

Trump travel ban could help Canada

Rutland, VT mayoral contest focuses on candidates who could best heal rift over refugees

Magic March 3rd was yesterday, refugee flow should now be shutting down

Only Malta and Finland on target to take allocated migrants from Italy and Greece under EU ‘sharing’ scheme

Panic button as refugee contracting agencies begin to downsize as they lose federal $$$

Syrian refugee files federal lawsuit against Trump EO, wants wife and child in America with him

trump tower

La fin justifie t-elle les moyens? [Does the end justify the means?]

By Wallace Bruschweiler and William Palumbo…

Political sabotage will continue to threaten President Trump until he finally acts decisively.

Another week passes, another slew of devious political attacks on President Donald J. Trump by political operatives inside the government.  Regardless of legalities, politically motivated leaks are being routinely and systematically fed to the hostile news media.  The illegal leaking of damaging and/or embarrassing information puts President Trump’s administration perpetually on the defensive, therefore unable to really focus on their agenda and enacting the policies that were promised on the campaign trail.

This behavior by government insiders (saboteurs) demonstrates the attitude of those who served in the Obama administration: the end justifies the means.  Niccolo Machiavelli would be very proud.

The latest leak emanates from the Department of Homeland Security.  A source within DHS passed an intelligence assessment memo to MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow.  In it, the memo claims that citizenship is not a determining factor in likelihood of radicalization.  Implied from this memo is that the administration’s travel ban, which Maddow erroneously calls a “Muslim ban,” is an ineffective strategy to prevent further terrorist attacks.

Furthermore, this weekend we learned that the Obama administration ordered the wiretapping of Trump Tower and Donald Trump’s cell phone.  In order to wiretap a U.S. citizen, such a request requires authorization from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance (i.e., FISA) court.  Indeed, the permission was seemingly granted on the second request by the FISA court, likely under the pretense of monitoring communication between the Trump campaign staff and certain Russian nationals.  While news continues to break with respect to this developing story, Trump’s former campaign manager Corey Lewandowski alleged that then-Senator Jeff Sessions was also wiretapped by the Obama administration.

You don’t need a doctorate in European history to recognize that politically motivated eavesdropping is a tactic of totalitarian states.

In light of the latest revelations, we would like to submit a few pointed questions to the Trump administration:

  • If the surveillance was in place to detect interference by the Russian government in our election, and no evidence as yet has been presented to the public, can the public then assume that the wiretapping was strictly to gain a political advantage for Hillary Clinton’s camp?
  • Who ordered the wiretapping? A spokesman for former President Obama categorically denied it was issued by Obama’s White House.  Could it have been ordered by then-Attorney General Loretta Lynch?  Or, possibly, by Valerie Jarrett, who is reportedly moving in with the Obama couple in their new Washington, D.C. home?
  • Why are there still any Obama-era political appointees in key positions? What level of damage would finally convince the new administration to thoroughly “clean house?”
  • What is preventing the Trump administration from going on the offensive against the previous administration and its corrupt officials?

It is evident, plainly, that the former administration – including Barack Hussein Obama, Valerie Jarrett, Loretta Lynch, George Soros, etc. – hold Machiavelli’s dictum in high regard.  The end justifies the means.  By providing the media with fodder that militates public opinion against Trump and his cabinet, they are in effect paralyzing him as President.

The Ends Justify the Means

  • President, you and your administration have the power and the prerogative to dispense with all political appointees. The American people gave you this power when they elected you.
  • Why not sit down with your advisers and produce a list of all political appointees in the following agencies: the White House, Department of State, CIA, Justice Department, FBI, Department of Homeland Security, and more.
  • Then, fire them all in one fell swoop. “Everybody, out of the pool!”  Remove their credentials overnight and revoke their security clearances.  Send them packing, far away from our government and the halls of power.
  • Finally, for good measure and as a vital insurance policy, direct Attorney General Jeff Sessions to investigate malfeasance and corruption of the previous administration, e.g. the Clinton Foundation, etc. Let the other side scramble and “lawyer up.”

In this case, the end rightly justifies the means.

RELATED ARTICLES:

NSA Whistleblower Backs Trump Up on Wiretap Claims -US News & World Report

No One Mentions That The Russian Trail Leads To Democratic Lobbyists

Did Obama spy on Trump? Glenn Reynolds

TOWERGATE: Obama uses secret court and FBI to spy on Trump Campaign

‘The LIES and DECEPTION of the media for WEEKS!’ Mark Levin comes roaring back Monday evening

So Stelter wants me to independently corroborate what multiple media outlets reported about FISA applications?

bloomberg_trump_signs_executive_order_dodd_frank_1600px

Trump Hits Reset on Obama’s Land-Grabbing Water Rule

President Donald Trump’s campaign to roll back the regulatory state continues.

Today, he ordered EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers to review and potentially withdraw their 2015 Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule. This could bring relief to farmers, ranchers, builders, and businesses, along with state and local governments.

Under the guise of “clarifying” federal rules, the Obama administration tried to expand the jurisdiction of federally-regulated waters to include ditches, canals, collection ponds, and isolated wetlands, often far away from a traditional “navigable water.” According to the federal government’s own findings, this jurisdictional expansion amounted to “the vast majority of the nation’s water features” under federal authority.

“The 2015 Waters of the United States rule was essentially a federal land grab,” said U.S. Chamber Senior Vice President of Environment, Technology, & Regulatory Affairs William Kovacs in a statement. “America’s businesses, farmers, and other land owners and managers will be happy to see it reconsidered and properly withdrawn under President Trump.”

WOTUS would force businesses who wanted to build or make modifications on this land to require federal permits, and they don’t come cheap. Hiring experts and lawyers to go through the process of getting these permits can cost $155,000 or more, plus the substantial cost of “mitigation” requirements to offset the “damage” that development caused. That’s a tremendous burden on businesses, especially small ones. And that doesn’t cover the cost of any delays.

The U.S. Chamber is leading the legal fight against the rule [read here and here], which led to a nationwide hold on the rule in October 2015. EPA and the Army Corps will now reconsider the appropriate scope of federal control over waters and determine where the limits of that jurisdiction should be under the Clean Water Act.

President Trump ordering a review of WOTUS is welcome, but more can be done to prevent future runaway regulations from coming down the pipe. The Regulatory Accountability Act (RAA) would require federal agencies to employ more thorough analysis and transparency on the most-expensive regulations.

As I explained earlier this year:

If the RAA had been law, small businesses, and state and local governments who would be affected by the regulation could have petitioned the agency for an on-the-record hearing on the scientific and economic analysis of the rule and challenged EPA’s and the Corps’ claims about the scope of the rule, and why they didn’t consider more reasonable alternatives.  The agencies would have to defend why they didn’t properly assess the true effects of WOTUS.

“If regulatory reform legislation like the Regulatory Accountability Act becomes law, poorly written rules like WOTUS would be subject to greater analysis and transparency. We urge the U.S. Senate to take action to make regulatory reform a reality this year,” Kovacs added.

MORE ARTICLES ON: 

ENVIRONMENT and REGULATORY REFORM

EDITORS NOTE: The featured images is of President Donald Trump signing an executive order. Photo credit: Aude Guerrucci/Pool via Bloomberg.

obama wire tappin composit

Obama’s Denial of Trump Wiretaps Not Credible!

Here’s the list of proven victims of Obama’s many wiretaps according to WikiLeaks, who released the list on February 23rd (see link here) of Obama administration wire taps:

  1. The US National Security Agency bugged a private climate change strategy meeting; between UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon and German Chancellor Angela Merkel in Berlin;
  2. Obama bugged Chief of Staff of UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) for long term interception targetting his Swiss phone;
  3. Obama singled out the Director of the Rules Division of the World Trade Organisation (WTO), Johann Human, and targetted his Swiss phone for long term interception;
  4. Obama stole sensitive Italian diplomatic cables detailing how Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu implored Italy’s Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi to help patch up his relationship with US President Barack Obama, who was refusing to talk to Netanyahu;
  5. Obama intercepted top EU and Japanese trade ministers discussing their secret strategy and red lines to stop the US “extort[ing]” them at the WTO Doha arounds (the talks subsequently collapsed);
  6. Obama explicitly targeted five other top EU economic officials for long term interception, including their French, Austrian and Belgium phone numbers;
  7. Obama explicitly targetted the phones of Italy’s ambassador to NATO and other top Italian officials for long term interception; and
  8. Obama intercepted details of a critical private meeting between then French president Nicolas Sarkozy, Merkel and Berluscon, where the latter was told the Italian banking system was ready to “pop like a cork”.

In addition to the above list we also know now that Obama wire tapped various individuals in the US media that were reporting information not flattering to the Obama Administration.  It is widely known that Obama’s Justice Department targeted journalists with wiretaps in 2013:

  1. In 2013 the liberal Washington Post expressed outrage after the revelation that the Justice Department had investigated the newsgathering activities of a Fox News reporter as a potential crime in a probe of classified leaks.  The reporter, Fox News’ James Rosen and his family, were part of an investigation into government officials anonymously leaking information to journalists. Rosen was not charged but his movements and actions were tracked.
  2. Also in 2013, members of the Associated Press were also a target of the surveillance.  The ultra liberal New Yorker even noted that “In moderate and liberal circles, at least, the phone-records scandal, partly because it involves the dear old A.P. and partly because it raises anew the specter of Big Brother, may well present the most serious threat to Obama’s reputation.”
  3. Reporter Sharyl Attkisson said in 2014 that her personal computer and CBS laptop were hacked after she began filing stories about Benghazi that were unflattering to the Obama administration.  A source who checked her laptop said the hacker used spyware “proprietary to a government agency,” according to an article in the New York Post.
Larry Klayman, Chairman and General Counsel of Freedom Watch published a column on the wiretaps of the Trump campaign. Klayman wrote:

The newest revelations that the Obama administration wiretapped, that is “bugged,” the president and all of his men in the lead up and after the November 8, 2016, elections are not surprising. In this regard, for over 2 years the highest levels of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) have been secretly investigating the “harvesting” of highly confidential information including financial records of the chief justice of the Supreme Court, other justices, over 156 judges, prominent businessmen like Donald Trump, and public activists like me.

In this regard, a whistleblower named Dennis Montgomery, a former NSA/CIA contractor, came forward to FBI Director Comey with 47 hard drives and over 600 million pages of largely classified information, under grants of use and derivative use immunity, which I obtained for him with the U.S Attorney for the District of Columbia. Later, Montgomery, who suffers from a potentially fatal brain aneurism, testified under oath, for over 2 1/2 hours before FBI Special Agents Walter Giardina and William Barnett in a secure room at the FBI’s field office in Washington, D.C. The testimony was under oath and videotaped and I have reminded the FBI recently to preserve this evidence.

I have also met on several occasions with the staff of Chairman Bob Goodlatte of the House Judiciary Committee, since judges have been illegally surveilled, and asked them to inquire of FBI Director Comey and his General Counsel James Baker why their Montgomery investigation has appeared to have been “buried” for the last few years. They have done so, but as yet have not received, to the best of my knowledge, a clear response.

[ … ]

Judge Leon, in the course of my cases before him (see www.freedomwatchusa.org), has already issued two preliminary injunction rulings ordering that the illegal mass surveillance cease and desist. He termed this unconstitutional violation of our Fourth Amendment, “almost Orwellian,” a reference to George Orwell’s prophetic book “1984” about “Big Brother.” Judge Leon’s rulings then prompted Congress to amend the Patriot Act and call them the USA Freedom Act, which sought to leave telephonic metadata in the hands of the telephone providers, like Verizon, Sprint, and AT&T, until a warrant was obtained showing probable cause that a target or subjects communications with terrorists or a crime was being committed.

It now appears that the Obama intelligence agencies, as I predicted to Judge Leon, have again ignored and flouted the law, and at the direction of the former president Obama and/or his men like Clapper illegally spied on targets or subjects like Mr. Trump and his associates, including Gen. Michael Flynn, the former national security adviser.

Read more…

In an article titled “TOWERGATE: Trump Accuses Obama Of Wiretapping Him. Here’s Everything You Need To Know” Ben Shapiro points out:

This [Trump] tweetstorm raises a few questions: first, did the Obama administration have Trump’s wires tapped in Trump Tower? Second, did President Obama himself have Donald Trump’s wires tapped in Trump Tower? Third, does Trump know what the hell he’s talking about? Fourth, if not, does it matter? Finally, how will this little conflagration play out politically?

1. The Obama Administration Did Monitor Communications Of People/Sources Surrounding Trump.The New York Timesreported months ago that the intelligence community had recordings of several of Trump’s associates; the Times speculated that such recordings could have been gathered because the Obama intelligence apparatus was wiretapping Russians and caught Trump officials on the other end.

[ … ]

2. There’s No Evidence Obama Himself Had Trump’s Wires Tapped. But It’s Not Impossible. Figures in the Obama administration immediately denied there were any direct orders to the DOJ to pursue a Trump wiretap. “A cardinal rule of the Obama administration was that no White House official ever interfered with any independent investigation led by the Department of Justice,” said Obama spokesman Kevin Lewis. “As part of that practice, neither President Obama nor any White House official ever ordered surveillance on any US citizen.

[ … ]

3. Trump Hasn’t Presented Any New Evidence. Trump hasn’t presented any evidence for his claims.

[ … ]

4. Yes, It Matters That Trump Tweets His Theories Without Evidence. But This Problem Doesn’t Start With Trump. This will raise serious questions about the behavior of the Obama administration in the run-up to the election. It will also raise questions about whether the Obama administration’s FISA requests were legitimate or political hits.

[ … ]

5. Trump’s Supporters Will Point To Obama’s Malfeasance, Obama’s Supporters Will Point To Trump’s Twitter Diarrhea, Both Will Be Right. So, how will this shake out?

Read more…

President Trump is great about speaking directly to the people. When he does the media goes into overload mode. Rather than investigating the facts behind Towergate, the media takes sides.

This is the most interesting administration in my lifetime. Can’t wait to see what President Trump does next.

RELATED ARTICLE: No One Mentions That The Russian Trail Leads To Democratic Lobbyists

Ylva_Johansson

Sweden’s Integration Minister admits to lying when she claimed rape rate was ‘going down’

The European political and media elites are doing everything they can to conceal the devastating effects of their suicidal immigration policies. But the truth can’t be covered up forever.

“FAKE NEWS: Sweden’s Integration Minister Admits Lying to BBC About Rape Stats,” by Liam Deacon, Breitbart, March 4, 2017:

Sweden’s ruling liberal party Integration Minister has been forced into an embarrassing U-turn after she falsely told BBC the number of reported rapes in the country was falling.

Ylva Johansson was giving an interview on the BBC News channel when she said there was no connection between crime and immigration and the level of rape in Sweden is “going down, and going  down, and going down.”

“The level of rapes is not actually high in Sweden”, she also said, after attacking former UKIP leader Nigel Farage – who recently said Malmo was the “rape capital of Europe” – claiming he “doesn’t really know what he is talking about.”

However, it appears Ms. Johansson isn’t so well informed herself. The latest figures show a 13 per cent increase in reported sex crimes in Sweden in 2016, and there has been a general increase over the past ten years.

The misleading claims drew sharp criticism from MPs, economists, and criminologists.

“We don’t need more fake news,” Tweeted the Moderate party’s labour policy spokesperson Elisabeth Svantesson. She called on the Ms. Johansson to explain herself, adding: “In what way is the number of sex crimes decreasing?”

The minister was forced to correct herself on Saturday. “I based my answer on information that I had at the time, that the number of reports of rapes went down in 2015,” she told the Dagens Nyheter newspaper.

“It was wrong of me to speak of a development that was only based on one year. The preliminary figures for 2016 unfortunately show that the figures are on the rise. It’s important to be correct, of course,” she added.

According to the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention (Brå) stats, reported by Aftonbladet, there was indeed a dip in the number of rapes in 2015 (down 12 per cent), before rising sharply once more by 13 per cent in 2016.

Over the past decade, meanwhile, the increase has been steady, with the number of reported rapes rising from 4,208 in 2006 to 6,560 in 2016….

RELATED ARTICLES:

“The leader of the SPLC is aware the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) is a Hamas organization”

UK supermarket clerk converts to Islam, gets bomb-making instructions, tries to join jihadis, blames Brexit

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on Jihad Watch.

free speech 1965 to 2017

Democrats and the Deconstruction of Free Speech in America

Growing up in the 1960s I remember a time when Democrats marched for freedom of speech in Berkeley, California. Today Democrats riot to stop free speech in places like Berkeley, California.

As Shelby Steele wrote in a Wall Street Journal article:

The recent flurry of marches, demonstrations and even riots, along with the Democratic Party’s spiteful reaction to the Trump presidency, exposes what modern liberalism has become: a politics shrouded in pathos. Unlike the civil-rights movement of the 1950s and ’60s, when protesters wore their Sunday best and carried themselves with heroic dignity, today’s liberal marches are marked by incoherence and downright lunacy—hats designed to evoke sexual organs, poems that scream in anger yet have no point to make, and an hysterical anti-Americanism.

All this suggests lostness, the end of something rather than the beginning.

Read more…

free speech movement

Nov. 20, 1965 the Free Speech Movement of the University of California, Berkeley.

Picture This: California Perspectives on American History writes:

On Nov. 20, 1965 the Free Speech Movement (FSM) of the University of California, Berkeley, organized a protest of several thousand students outside a meeting of the Regents of the University of California. The regents were gathered to discuss how to deal with the FSM. The movement had grown out of students involved in the Civil Rights movement and became a sign of the power of student activism that would be a trademark of the 1960s.

The FSM had its beginnings with students involved with CORE (Congress on Racial Equality) and the Southern Civil Rights movement. In the summer of 1964 some U.C. Berkeley students had gone south to work with CORE and returned for the new school year in September 1964. The CORE students set up tables on the Berkeley campus asking for donations and new members.

Read more…

Fast forward to the 2017 March4Trump rally in Berkeley, California.

Berkley

Bloodied March4Trump rally member in Berkeley, CA. Photo: iPatriot News

iPatriot News in an article “Radical Liberal Terrorist Bloodies Liberty-Loving Americans at Trump Rally” by Lars Lamonte reports on a March4Trump rally in Berkeley, California. Lamonte reports:

Ten liberal terrorists were arrested in California after physically attacking, bloodying, and in the case of an eldery [sic] gentleman, threatening the life of pro-Trump supporters on Saturday. The liberal thugs attacked the Trump rally in Berkeley, California with metal pipes, bats, 2×4’s, and pieces of wood according to police who arrived at the scene well after violence had gotten out of hand.

“At least two people, with their faces covered up, could be seen on video trying to set fire to an American flag, while a photo on Twitter showed the bloody face of a man who wore a T-shirt that said ‘Trump is My President.’” reported The LA Times.

Typically, the liberal media has barely reported on a story that highlights the thuggery and terrorist actions of the liberal left. Several rally supporters complained about the lack of intervention by police officers despite the violence shown below, a common complaint at pro-Trump rally’s in liberal states like this one in California. Despite the large amount of violence, numerous reports indicate that police officers refused to intervene, and only one suspect was arrested.

Read more…

Freedom of speech has now become “hate speech” if you do not belong to those who support President Donald J. Trump or America. Peaceful protests have turned violent. Those who support the President are bloodied, beaten and harassed, including the Vice President of the United States, whose wife’s email address was made public by the Associated Press.

The so called “resist” movement has the signature of another group known as the Storm Detachment (German Sturmabteilung or SA) the paramilitary wing of the Nazi party.

SA-Logo.svg

Nazi Sturmabteilung logo.

From April 1924 until late February 1925 the SA was reorganized into a front organization known as the Frontbann to circumvent Bavaria‘s ban on the Nazi Party and its organs (instituted after the abortive Beer Hall putsch of November 1923). Members of the SA were, throughout the 1920s and into the 1930s, often involved in street fights called Zusammenstöße (collisions) with members of the Communist Party (KPD).

Fast forward to today and we have the “resist” movement.

According to Discover the Networks:

The Indivisible Team (IT) was established by a group of five former Democratic congressional staffers in the immediate aftermath of Donald Trump’s victory over Hillary Clinton in the November 2016 presidential election. One of the five founders, IT board president Ezra Levin, had previously served as associate director of government affairs at the Corporation for Enterprise Development, and as an AmeriCorpsVISTA employee in the Homeless Services Division of the San Jose Department of Housing. Another key founder, IT board secretary Angel Padilla, had worked as an immigration policy consultant at the National Council of La Raza, and as an adviser to Rep. Luis Gutiérrez (D-Illinois) from 2009-11.

Upon its inception, IT’s first order of business was to launch a website devoted to providing leftists and liberals with strategies for countering the “radical, racist, and sexist” objectives of President Trump. This website features a tool kit for local IT organizers, a daily calendar that lists national events and calls-to-action, and the group’s signature publication, Indivisible: A Practical Guide for Resisting the Trump Agenda. During December 2016 and January 2017, this Guide was downloaded more than 1 million times.

Fear drives the “resist movement” to commit violence. Fear that they have lost power and influence. Former Attorney General Loretta Lynch made an impassioned video plea for more marching, blood and death on the streets – a video that was later posted on the Facebook page of Senate Democrats as “words of inspiration.”

Gird your loins America for more violence, mayhem and destruction. You can thank your Democrat friend for this neo-free speech movement that wants to silence you.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

We Should be Thankful for the Frenzy on the Radical Left

Resist What? The Left’s Resistance Calendar

The Exhaustion of American Liberalism: White guilt gave us a mock politics based on the pretense of moral authority by Shelby Steele WSJ

In day of pro-Trump rallies, California march turns violent | Reuters

DeepStateGate: The Shadow Government Undermining President Trump Theory BACKFIRES!

RELATED VIDEO: In day of pro-Trump rallies, California march turns violent

oscars-fake-news

VIDEO: Qur’an verse read at the Oscars was about the ‘Children of Israel’, not Muslims

The following Qur’an verse was read at the Oscars to indicate that Muslims are peaceful. However, the verse in fact refers to Jews, not the followers of Mohammed.

Tommy Robinson of TheRebel.media looks at the Oscars ceremony and what Hollywood’s favorite Koran verses really mean in the below video.

From the source:  quran.com 5.31-32

Sahih International

Because of that, We decreed upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land – it is as if he had slain mankind entirely. And whoever saves one – it is as if he had saved mankind entirely. And our messengers had certainly come to them with clear proofs. Then indeed many of them, [even] after that, throughout the land, were transgressors.

Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment…

[Emphasis added]

russian-credit-card

Russian Bear Bites Schumer and Pelosi — President Trump calls for Investigation

There are lies, damn lies and politics. In our column “The DNC has been planning to play the Russia Card since April, 2016” we noted:

A leaked Democratic National Committee email shows that this strategy of blame it on Russia was planned and is now being executed with the help of the legacy media.

Here is the email stating, “[T]he pro-Russia stuff ties in pretty well to the idea that Trump is too friendly with Putin/weak on Russia”:

dnc-leaked-email-russia

It seems Democrats have overplayed the Russian card and it has come back to bite them on their collectivist derrieres.

Here is a photo of Sergey Kislyak, Russian Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary, sitting with Democrats during President Trump’s February speech to a joint session of the U.S. Congress:

Sergey Kislyak (center of photo) sitting with Democrats.

Once you use a certain politically motivated tactic, like meeting with any Russian official for any reason, people begin a Google search for stories and photos and found Democrats cozening up to the Russians. Well, citizens have discovered multiple cases in which Democrats are meeting with key Russians including Senator Chuck Schumer enjoying donuts with Russian President Vladimir Putin and Representative Nancy Pelosi dining with the Russian ambassador.

schumer putin 2

schumer putin 3

democrats who met with russians

Missing from this list is Diane Feinstein (D-CA), who Brit Hume saw eating lunch with the Russian Ambassador

Breitbart reports:

A photo published on the Politico website shows House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif) meeting with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak in 2010 — a direct contradiction to her telling reporters at the website she had not met with the diplomat.

After tweeting on Friday morning that Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) should be investigated for meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in 2003, President Donald Trump tweeted that a second investigation into Pelosi’s past should be launched.

I hereby demand a second investigation, after Schumer, of Pelosi for her close ties to Russia, and lying about it.

Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 3, 2017

“I hereby demand a second investigation, after Schumer, of Pelosi for her close ties to Russia, and lying about it,” Trump tweeted on Friday.

“Not with this Russian ambassador, no,” Pelosi told Politico’s Jake Sherman and Anna Palmer during a Playbook interview, when asked if she’d ever met with the Russian envoy.

“But a file photo from Pelosi’s 2010 meeting with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev shows Kislyak at the table across from Pelosi — then House Speaker — and Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-Md.),” Politico reported. “Medvedev had been in the country for a meeting with President Barack Obama a day earlier and stopped in on Capitol Hill to meet with congressional leaders as well.

Read more…

President Trump tweeted:

trump_pelosi_russia

But it gets worse. It appears that 30 Democrat members of Congress met with Russian operatives. Topic of discussion? The Iran nuclear deal.

Kerry Picket from The Daily Caller reports:

The Huffington Post reported in early August 2015, Senate Democratic staff invited three undecided Democrats on the Iran nuclear deal Democrats along with other members of their caucus to meet with the ambassadors of Russia, England, France, China and Germany in the capitol.

Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin, according to HuffPo, organized the Iran nuclear deal briefings for his Democratic colleagues that included meeting the ambassadors.

The presentations were strong enough to convince the three undecideds to come around and overcome a Republican filibuster of the Iran deal.

“Thirty members, as a matter of fact, of this body met with the Russian Ambassador and ambassadors from other nations in 2015 for a sales pitch on President Obama’s deal with Iran. Many of them — including the senior senator from Missouri [Claire McCaskill] — were open supporters at that time of candidates in the presidential race,” he [Senator David Perdue (R-GA)] said.

Read more…

There are lies, damn lies and then there is fakestream news.

Fakestream news is the new propaganda spewed by the media for a political end, in this case to discredit the Trump administration.

So much for working together and giving Mr. Trump a chance to govern.

RELATED ARTICLES:

The Basic Formula For Every Shocking Russia/Trump Revelation

BOMBSHELL: Russian Ambassador Sat With Democrats During President Trump’s Joint Address

President Trump Demands Investigation After Nancy Pelosi Lies About 2010 Meeting With Russian Ambassador

Photo contradicts Pelosi’s statement about not meeting Kislyak: The Democratic House leader sat with the Russian ambassador and other officials in 2010 – Politico

HA: Look who Russian ambassador met TWENTY-TWO times…

Russian Ambassador gala held on October 7th, 2013: Guests Bill and Hillary Clinton, Senator Chuck Schumer

LIAR: Nancy Pelosi Met with Russian Ambassador and Russian President

RELATED VIDEO: U.S. Senator David Perdue (R-GA) calls out fellow Senator Claire McCaskill (D-MO) for lying about meeting with the Russians twice.

charity

True Charity and Bureaucracy Don’t Mix by Elizabeth Melton

“A bureaucracy never dismantles itself.”—Daniel Hannan, British MP

When Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans in 2005, over $2.5 billion was donated to the Red Cross by private donors. It was a record-breaking relief response, but not the only notable example of humanity to take place.

Along with all of the people who wrote a check or made an online donation, there were countless others who helped on a more human level.

Spontaneous Charity 

People opened their homes to complete strangers who now found themselves homeless. Others loaded up trucks with water and groceries and drove to the outskirts of the devastation to directly contribute to those in need.

These spontaneous outpourings of goodness were a bright spot in the darkness of the time, particularly so when compared to the grim results provided by Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and other government agencies.

In a community, a person is an individual; in a bureaucracy, a person is a number. 

Those who possess a mindset of freedom have a horrible reputation with social progressives when it comes to matters of compassion. “A voluntary society would never work!” they exclaim. “What about the poor, the weak, the sick, the disadvantaged?” They then proceed to describe a dystopian society where all but the smartest and strongest languish in abject poverty, misery, and enslavement–think, Dickens, meets Lord of the Flies, meets Pinocchio’s Paradise Island.

This wasteland of a society is where we would certainly all find ourselves if not for the “benevolent” hand of government—which reaches out to pamper and protect our most vulnerable.

This melodramatic way of looking at liberty is uninformed, to say the least. I would go as far as to suggest that not only could a voluntary society care for its needy, but that it would, in fact, do a much better job than our current government-run system.

Community Service 

In a community, a person in need is an individual; in a bureaucracy, a person in need is a number.

A community recognizes the needs of its members without investigation. There is no need to fill out forms or sign paperwork that threatens incarceration should any of the facts not fall within the rigid parameters required for eligibility.

The rules within a community are flexible and take into account the changing circumstances of those in need. Everyone knows when Mr. Jones is back on his feet again and no longer needs his grass cut or when Mrs. Smith has gone back to work and no longer needs casseroles.

The current system, good intentions or not, has done nothing but create a caste system of societal outcasts and relieved individuals of any feeling of responsibility for their fellow man.

Families are ripped out of what should be economically diverse communities and herded into “housing projects.” The residents of these “projects” then tend to view themselves as disadvantaged, rather than as an essential part of a broader community.

This creates an atmosphere of “us” versus “them,” rather than an atmosphere of community and mutual cooperation.

The situation is worsened by the fact that any efforts to improve oneself through meaningful work or by building a more stable family structure are punished by losing the housing upon which one has now come to depend.

Lack of meaningful work can lead to frustration, anger, and depression which, in turn, can lead to violence. Lack of a stable family structure deprives those individuals of much-needed support.

The current system damages those outside of the “projects” as well. These individuals no longer feel a responsibility to personally reach out to the needy as now there are “programs for that.”

In the same way that the residents have lives empty of meaningful work, the non-residents have lives empty of meaningful altruism. Most people want to give and need to give. The very people who advocate for this type of system in the name of humanity are robbing our society of humanity.

When elderly school bus monitor Karen Klein was bullied by four middle school boys, the viral video which captured it inspired gifts of over $700,000.00 to send her on vacation. She, in turn, used a portion of that money to start an anti-bullying foundation. If people would come together in this way for her, I hardly believe they wouldn’t come together to help other people in need.

There are so many examples of this kind of generosity. Animal shelters are left entire estates by generous benefactors. Certainly, people would come through for their fellow human beings as well were there not the perception that government was already meeting those needs.

“But this is so random and spontaneous!” the naysayers cry. “Wouldn’t people fall through the cracks?” Of course they would, just as they do now. One need only walk down a downtown sidewalk or peek under an interstate bridge to find countless examples of those who have “fallen through the cracks.” Such is the quality of life—bad things will always happen and there will always be suffering in the world.

Perhaps if we did not have this bureaucracy, churches would get back to the business of caring for the poor and downtrodden, rather than building mega-churches.

There was a time when there was an extensive network of Catholic hospitals that turned no one away regardless of their religious affiliation, or lack of one. Mutual aid societies created a safety net within communities and a traveler who belonged to an organization could find assistance among members in other towns and cities, should they find themselves in need.

Won’t You Be My Neighbor?

Last, but most important, was that building block of society known as “the neighborhood” where neighbors looked out for one another and worked out problems among themselves. A helping hand from a neighbor was not considered charity but part of a cycle of caring for others or being cared for.

The beauty of the community is that one does not have to change anything politically to make it viable. Anyone can go knock on the doors of their neighbors and get to know them. No one needs government permission to mentor a student that needs help but can’t afford it. A group of citizens can start a community garden to provide fresh produce in the midst of a food desert.

Do you have rental property? Any rental property owner who is concerned with fair and affordable housing can offer fair and affordable rent. Any physician who is concerned with equal access to quality health care can opt out of bureaucratic insurance plans and start charging a simple, reasonable fee. The money saved in paperwork filing would certainly help to make up the difference.

If we want to change the culture of our society to one which truly cares for all of its members, we can all start doing it today. There is no need to tear down the cold and uncaring bureaucracy that currently holds sway. A bureaucracy cannot remain if there is no one there to use it. By strengthening the village (the true village, not the government-constructed one) the bureaucracy might crumble and cease to exist.

Elizabeth Melton

Elizabeth Melton

Elizabeth “Roxy” Melton is a writer and farmer with a passion for freedom.