Posts

America is Not Racist, According to Millions of Eager African Immigrants

Like any other country that is truly multicultural — and few if any are as diverse as the United States — America has its race-based challenges. Some are real and some are politically ginned up, but they all become hurdles to a more unified country.

However, maybe the best measure of where America really stands in the world comes from the choices of black African immigrants. Native Sub-Saharan Africans, by their actions of free movement, seems to have judged that America is not racist — or is perhaps the least racist country in the world offering the greatest opportunities.

This conclusion stems from one breathtaking fact: America is the most popular immigration destination for Africans. More than European nations, than Asia nations, than South American nations. More than any other country in the world. It’s not even close. Further, America is becoming geometrically more popular with black Africans every decade.

The New York Times did a story on the phenomena, but either missed or ignored the import of what the actually data means. Their angle was how the immigration was affecting the makeup of New York City boroughs, and they ran it in the New York Region section, not nationally. In fact, you rarely see this data as national news. You decide why.

A shocking slavery comparison

However, the Times story did make this jarring and rather astounding number comparison:

“Between 2000 and 2010, the number of legal black African immigrants in the United States about doubled, to around one million. During that single decade, according to the most reliable estimates, more black Africans arrived in this country on their own than were imported directly to North America during the more than three centuries of the slave trade.”

What? Yes. More black Africans voluntarily chose to come to America in one decade than were forced to during 300 years of slavery. That hardly sounds like a nation with terrible race-relations — at least in contrast to the rest of the world.

And that is the important caveat.

America’s race relations definitely need to improve — and it is on all races to make that happen. But throughout history this has been a global problem. So today, according to the people who have choices of where to immigrate, the fact that they choose the United States in increasing droves suggests that compared to all the rest of the world, we may have the best race relations. Certainly the best race relations and economic opportunities combo.

Geometric rise in black immigration to America

According to a new study from the Pew Research Center, as of 2015, there were nearly 2.1 million people living in the U.S. who were born in Africa. That number is up from 880,000 in 2000 and only 80,000 in 1970. By 1970 Jim Crow was completely eliminated in the South and the Civil Rights Acts were passed.

Monica Anderson, a research associate and the author of the study, said the numbers are doubling every decade, and she expects that trend to continue.

“In 1980 only 1 percent of refugees admitted to the U.S. were from an African country and today that share is about 37 percent,” she told Voice of America in an interview. Consider that. The rate of Africans immigrating to the United States as a portion of our immigrant, legal immigrant, population is 37 times higher than it was less than 40 years ago.

Interestingly, guess which state is the top destination for black African immigrants? California? No. New York? No.

Texas.

Why a southern, conservative state like Texas, which is supposedly anti-immigration? Specific reasons were not given in the research. But it does not seem hard to surmise.

Still the land of opportunity

Opportunity matters.

Immigrants, legal immigrants, don’t come here looking for handouts and government benefits. They still see America as the land of opportunity, where they can make a better life for themselves and for their children. And Texas is one of the best states for immigrants who want to work hard to get ahead and seize opportunities.

This is all completely countervailing to the views of many in elite American institutions, such as the media, Hollywood and the federal government in D.C. In those circles — and among those they influence — America continues to to be an ultra racist country that elected Donald Trump based on racism.

You can see such stories on virtually a daily basis in national news, online mainstream media sites and in your local media outlets. But they are at odds with this immigration reality — which they all but ignore.

Seeing America as ultra racist considering the state of the world has long seemed fictitious, a political opportunity for many to pit the races against each other in search of money, power and votes. It worked well for some black “leaders” such as Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, Jr. and new black lives matter leaders such as Deroy Murdock and others. But it is not true. Other causes are driving poverty and violence in many American cities.

And now we can see in black people’s actual life choices from the African continent, it appears even more clearly not to be true.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on The Revolutionary Act. Readers may subscribe to The Revolutionary Act’s YouTube channel by clicking here.

College professors organize national ‘Teach-In’ to challenge ‘Trumpism,’ ‘Islamophobia’

“Islamophobia” is a propaganda term designed to intimidate people into being afraid to resist jihad and Islamic supremacism. But that doesn’t faze today’s enlightened Leftist academics:

“On that day, we intend to organize against the proposed expansion of state violence targeting people of color, undocumented people, queer communities, women, Muslims, and many others. On that day, we intend to resist the institutionalization of ideologies of separation and subordination, including white supremacy, misogyny, homophobia, Islamophobia, and virulent nationalism.”

State violence? Who is proposing any state violence? Why, no one, of course, but the Left is in the midst of a hysterical meltdown of Vesuvian proportions over the prospect of the inauguration of Trump on Friday. Meanwhile, imagine how surprised these professors will be when their Muslim friends start to force their women into hijabs and niqabs and start to throw the members of “queer communities” off the tops of tall buildings.

“College Professors Organize National ‘Teach-In’ to Challenge ‘Trumpism,’” by Susan Berry, Breitbart, January 15, 2017:

Some 25 colleges and universities – many of them public – have answered a call by professors at UCLA to use their regular class time to “teach, organize, and resist” what they view as the discriminatory political agenda of President-elect Donald Trump.

Slated for Wednesday, January 18, the teach-in, dubbed #J18, is taking place between the Martin Luther King, Jr. holiday and Trump’s inauguration. The event’s planners say:

Let it be known that on #J18 and beyond, universities, colleges, and high schools refused to bear silent witness to the politics of hate and fear; that in these times, these places of teaching and learning not only served as a sanctuary for its students and workers but also stood up to proclaim the power of knowledge on the frontlines of social justice.

On January 18, the professors are calling upon their colleagues to “Teach, Organize, Resist,” and “affirm the role of critical thinking and academic knowledge in challenging Trumpism.”

They continue:

On that day, we intend to teach about the agendas and policies of the new administration, be it the proposed dismantling of economic and environmental regulations or the threatened rollback of the hard-won rights that form the fragile scaffolding of American democracy. On that day, we intend to organize against the proposed expansion of state violence targeting people of color, undocumented people, queer communities, women, Muslims, and many others. On that day, we intend to resist the institutionalization of ideologies of separation and subordination, including white supremacy, misogyny, homophobia, Islamophobia, and virulent nationalism.

In addition to UCLA, universities participating in the event to date include: American University, Washington, D.C.; University of California, Berkeley; University of Cincinnati; University of Dayton; University of Minnesota; New York University; Princeton University; Texas State University; University of Kentucky; Vanderbilt University; and University of Washington….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Where are anti-Trump marchers defending women against abuse by Sharia-adherent Muslims?

US professor says journalists must not call jihad attacks on Israeli soldiers “terrorism”

Rex Tillerson is neither a yes man nor will he be boxed in on U.S. foreign policy

In a The Daily Signal article titled “9 Issues Discussed at Rex Tillerson’s Confirmation Hearing to Be Trump’s Secretary of State” Josh Siegel reported on the confirmation hearing of U.S. Secretary of State designate Rex Tillerson.

Reading Siegel’s article I came away with two impressions of Mr. Tillerson, first he will not be boxed in and second he is not a yes man. How refreshing.

First let’s look at Tillerson as a man who will not be boxed in when it comes to U.S. foreign policy. Siegel reported:

Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., who ran for president against Trump, pressed Tillerson on whether he backs the assessment of U.S. intelligence agencies about Russia’s election-year hacking.

“Do you believe during the 2016 presidential campaign that Russian intelligence services directed a campaign of measures involving the hacking of emails, the strategic leak of emails, the use of internet trolls, and dissemination of fake news to denigrate a presidential candidate and undermine faith in our election process?” Rubio asked.

Tillerson described the findings by the intelligence agencies as “clearly troubling,” and called cyber attacks from foreign actors such as Russia “the greatest and most complex threat” facing the country today. He labeled Russia’s annexation of Crimea to be “illegal” and proposed tougher measures to combat the Kremlin’s invasion of eastern Ukraine, vowing that he would advocate providing Ukrainian soldiers with weapons.

But Tillerson expressed hope that he could help improve relations with Russia, potentially seeking to ally with it in areas of common interest even if America “will not likely to be ever friends with the Kremlin.”

“Dialogue is critical so these [issues] don’t spin out of control,” Tillerson said. “We need to move Russia from adversary always to partner at times.”

Read more…

Tillerson clearly understands that Russia, and many other countries, act in their own self interests and against the interests of the United States. His reply was measured in that he understood that cyberwarfare is a national security threat, that invading another country is wrong and both must be punished. However, diplomacy is not just about jumping into a hot or cold war, as Senator’s Marco Rubio, John McCain and Lindsey Graham seem to want. Rather it is about pressuring those who would do us harm using all means available. The above interaction shows the sophistication of Tillerson, a man who thinks outside the box. Tillerson’s statement, “We need to move Russia from adversary always to partner at times” is that of a man who understands Russia more than some members of the U.S. Senate, Republicans and Democrats alike. Again, refreshing.

Tillerson is not a yes man for President-elect Trump either. Siegel noted:

In the presidential campaign, Trump questioned the NATO alliance, and said members need to do more to earn the U.S.’ support.

Tillerson expressed a stronger commitment to NATO, promising to follow Article 5 of the treaty that enshrines the principle that an attack against one member is an attack against all.

“The Article 5 commitment is invaluable and the U.S. will stand by the commitment,” Tillerson said.

He also expressed concern for Baltic states that worry about Russian incursion on their borders.

“Our NATO allies are right to be alarmed about a resurgent Russia,” Tillerson said.

[ … ]

In another contrast with Trump, Tillerson did not say he explicitly opposes the Obama administration’s Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal.

“I do not oppose TPP, but I share some of Trump’s concerns that it doesn’t fully support American interests,” Tillerson said.

[ … ]

Echoing Exxon Mobil’s evolving calculus on climate change, Tillerson said he recognized the threat of a warming planet, and that the U.S. should “be at the table” in coming up with solutions to limit greenhouse gas emissions.

If confirmed, he said he and others in the Trump administration would review the 180-country Paris climate change agreement before deciding whether to remain party to it.

“It’s important that the United States maintain its seat at the table with the conversations around how to deal with the threats of climate change,” he said.

As chief of Exxon Mobil, Tillerson publicly backed a tax on carbon in 2009, and expressed support for the Paris Agreement in 2015.

Yet, late in the hearing, he seemed to downplay the threat of climate change.

“I don’t see [climate change] as the imminent national security threat as perhaps other do,” Tillerson said.

Read more…

Tillerson will, on some issues, present a President Trump with differing views. That is healthy. It shows that President-elect Trump is filling his cabinet with quality people who think differently than him and provide opposing views. Once again, refreshing.

Donald Trump’s selection says as much about the President-elect as it does about Mr. Tillerson. There is a new way of thinking about foreign policy and a fresh approach that is pro-U.S. interests.

After reading Mr. Tillerson’s testimony it is clear he will not be foreign a policy rubber stamp as were former Secretaries Hillary Clinton and John Kerry and that he will think outside the foreign policy box of the Obama administration.

Very refreshing indeed.

RELATED ARTICLE: Secretary of State Nominee Tillerson Criticizes U.S. Decision to Abstain from UN Israel Vote

Iran built on stolen property — Trump should take it back

President-elect Donald Trump was right during the campaign to call the Iran nuclear agreement “the worst deal ever negotiated” by the United States government.

Not only did it reward a terrorist state with $100 billion of frozen oil revenues (some say, $150 billion), it dismantled an extensive armature of international sanctions that had cut Iran’s oil exports in half, banned it from the international financial system, and was beginning to threaten the regime with domestic unrest.

Obama tried to set this bad nuclear deal in concrete by incorporating most of its measures into a United Nations Security Council Resolution.

This will make its undoing more complicated than some analysts imagine. It’s not just a piece of paper President Trump can rip up, as a group of American nuclear scientistsimply. The international sanctions regime Obama destroyed took years to build and cannot be reconstructed in a day.

But the incoming president and Congress have other options for ratcheting up pressure on the Iranian regime, options that can be enacted unilaterally.

A group of conservative leaders released a letter to House Foreign Affairs Committee chairman Ed Royce (R-Calif.) on Thursday, commending him for a resolution he introduced in the final days of the last Congress on the restitution of or compensation for property wrongly confiscated by the Islamic Republic of Iran.

“Totalitarian regimes historically have confiscated property from individuals whose sole ‘crime’ consisted of supporting the previous government,” the letter states.

“When the Islamic regime seized power in 1979, it followed in the footsteps of these earlier totalitarians.”

The letter, and spearheaded by the Foundation for Democracy in Iran, which I chair, recalled Congressional action against previous cases of unjust expropriation, most notably the Helms-Burton Act — also known as the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity Act of 1996 — which penalized foreign companies trafficking in property stolen from Cuban nationals.

“Pro-Castro advocates screamed that Helms-Burton would cause irrevocable harm to the United States with friends and allies around the world. Nothing of the sort occurred,” the letter states.

“We believe the time has come to envisage a similar measure for the victims of the Islamic Republic of Iran, many of whom have become United States citizens, whose properties were unjustly expropriated.”

Signatories to the letter include Colin A. Hanna, President of Let Freedom Ring; Admiral James “Ace” Lyons, Jr, former Pacific Fleet commander; Frank Gaffney, President and CEO of the Center for Security Policy; Judson Phillips, founder of Tea Party Nation; Amy Ridenour, Chairman of the National Center for Public Policy Research; Ellen Sauerbrey, former Assistant Secretary of State for Population, Refugees, and Migration; and myself.

The letter also won support and was signed by Iranian-American human rights advocates and journalists and by leaders of the American Middle East Coalition for Trump.

On July 7, 1979, the new Islamic state in Iran issued a decree seizing the assets of 51 supporters of the previous regime and their families. A few weeks later, a revolutionary Court issued a separate order confiscating the assets of another 209 individuals and their families.

According to court documents the claimants provided to me, the properties seized included major factories and industrial conglomerates, hotels, private residences, real estate, land, stock, and other holdings, which today are worth more than $100 billion.

In all, thousands of Iranians were directly robbed by the Islamic regime, and millions more were terrorized with the threat of confiscations.

Many of these individuals subsequently fled to America and became U.S. citizens. But few were American citizens at the time of the revolution, and thus have been unable to seek restitution through the Iran-U.S. Claims Tribunal in The Hague, or through U.S. courts.

Their assets were turned over to para-state foundations, known as “bonyads,” which are owned or controlled by the Supreme Leader or the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC). Despite the extensive sanctions relief included in the bad Iran deal, the IRGC continues to be subject to United States government sanctions because it kills Americans in state-sponsored terror attacks around the world.

Ordinary Iranians understand that the ruling clerics have plundered their country. How else could a village cleric such as “Supreme Leader” Ali Khamenei personally own a commercial empire the U.S. Treasury has estimated to be worth more than $40 billion? A separate 2013 Reuters investigation found that the property confiscations on behalf of Iran’s clerical leadership were about $95 billion.

A Congressionally-enacted Iran Assets Recovery Plan would be a powerful weapon the ruling clerics in Iran could not ignore.

Not only would it bring justice to some of the many victims of the Islamic state in Iran, it would put the Iranian regime’s foreign partners on notice.

Traffic in stolen property at your peril. A regime founded on theft will end up bankrupt, in jail, or dead.

Celebrating the New Year With Our 100 Day Plan

Here we are as in olden days, happy golden days, of yore …” Christmas was awesome! Since moving to Florida 16 years ago, this was Mary and my first Christmas back to Baltimore for the annual Christmas Eve festivities at my dad’s home. My four younger siblings, their kids and grand-kids were there. The millennial girls prepared a delicious homemade feast. We joined hands in a huge circle for Dad to say grace.

Dad, 89 caught me by surprise. Passing the baton of family leadership, Dad said his time was running out and they should come to me as patriarch of the family.

I’m a mystery to many in my family; the embarrassing traitorous black political activist they see in the media bashing their beloved Obama. So when patriarch Dad said this is my beloved son, hear ye him, that was huge. It is a responsibility I take very seriously.

As Chairman of the Conservative Campaign Committee, I am with our team in a secured underground bunker in an undisclosed location planning our strategy for assisting the implementation of The 100 Day Plan (Donald Trump’s Contract With The American Voter); just kidding about the bunker.

While I did not become a Christian preacher like my dad, politics is my ministry. This battle goes beyond Democrats vs Republicans/Conservatives vs Liberals. We battle not against flesh and blood, but spiritual wickedness in high places; good vs evil. No, I am not saying everything Republican is good. I am saying 99% of the modern Democrat party’s agenda is anti-God, anti-America and anti-traditional wholesome values. If you believe you’re a chicken trapped in a human body, count on the democrats to pass legislation to fund your feather implants and force us to celebrate your Chickenization.

During the debates Trump said partial-birth abortion is wrong. Hillary’s shocking retort was a woman has the right to kill her baby on the day of delivery. Then, she used the Left’s tactic of attempting to brand anyone who thinks otherwise a male Neanderthal who hates women. Evil folks.

Trump’s landslide electoral victory was clearly a repudiation of the Left’s agenda from forcing Americans to allow men to use restrooms with their daughters to dethroning America as the world power.

I am convinced many still do not comprehend the Left’s disdain for us normal Americans, God, traditional family and country. Forcing the Left’s minority agenda down our throats is all that matters; trumping national security and American lives. Therefore, no tactic is too deadly, divisive or evil. This is the arena in which we fight. Some on our side still don’t get it; wanting to bring an olive branch or a knife to a gun fight.

With blood coming out of their eyes from hate and rage, the Left is committed 24/7 to branding Trump’s election illegitimate and blocking our 100 Day Plan.

Leftist actor Charlie Sheen tweeted that he wishes for the death of Trump.

Extreme Leftist, Democrat Rep. Maxine Walters vowed, “I’m going to fight him every inch of the way!”

Make no mistake about it folks, all the Left’s vitriol against Trump is really their hatred for us; every day Americans. CNN’s hate-filled Leftist Van Jones slandered Trump voters calling them angry white racist against a changing country and a black president.

Even Leftist columnist Maureen Dowd had to admit that this election was Americans rejecting Obama’s and the Left’s agenda. Mr. Trump received over 62 million votes, not all of them cast by homophobes, Islamophobes, racists, sexists, misogynists or any other “ists.”

So here we are folks. The Inauguration is weeks away. The Left true to its evil nature is still being obstructive; spewing fear and hate including celebs refusing to perform at the Inauguration. Fine. This is God’s way of providing an opportunity for other deserving artists.

I’m so excited about the new year 2017. However, the Left “ain’t” stoppin’ and they ain’t goin’ away. I cannot express enough how crucially important it is that we stay alert and protective of our 100 Day Plan; doing everything legally possible to push it through.

I feel like singing, “Happy days are here again…The skies above are clear again…So let’s sing a song of cheer again…Happy days are here again!”

Montana is an example of anti-refugee sentiment spilling forth in wake of Trump victory

This is an Associated Press story that ran on Christmas day so not sure how many of you saw it.

sk_rossi

S.K. Rossi

For background, Montana had a small refugee program many years ago, but up until this year it was alone with Wyoming in not having one at all.  That changed in 2016 as Missoula ‘welcomed’ its first African and Middle Eastern refugees. I traveled to the state this summer and can attest to the sentiment outlined in this story.

For new readers you might like to see our Montana archive, here.

S.K. Rossi, advocacy and policy director for the ACLU of Montana: “It’s pretty widely known that this is going to be a hard year…”

From AP at The Seattle Times:

HELENA, Mont. (AP) — The push to restrict refugee resettlements and immigration in the U.S. that figured so prominently in Donald Trump’s election is now headed to states that are preparing to convene their legislative sessions early next year, immigration advocates said.

In Montana, which took in just nine refugee families from January to early December, about a dozen bill requests related to refugees, immigration and terrorism have been filed ahead of next month’s session. The measures include requiring resettlement agencies to carry insurance that would defray the cost of prosecuting refugees who commit violent crimes and allowing towns and cities to request a moratorium on resettlements in their communities.

Refugee rights advocates say those measures are a sign of what is to come as the anti-refugee rhetoric that featured prominently in the presidential election spills over to statehouses and local governments.

“It’s pretty widely known that this is going to be a hard year for those of us who are seeking to protect the rights of refugees and immigrants,” said S.K. Rossi, advocacy and policy director for the ACLU of Montana.

The president-elect campaigned on building a border wall with Mexico to stop illegal immigration, deporting immigrants who are in the nation illegally and halting the resettlement of refugees to strengthen the federal program that vets them.

[….]

“It absolutely does not end with the presidential election,” McKenzie [Michele McKenzie, deputy director of the Minneapolis organization The Advocates for Human Rights] said. “It’s a national strategy by a small but organized group of anti-immigration advocates and anti-refugee advocates.”

[….]

“We need to get serious,” said Nancy Ballance, a Republican state representative from Ravalli County.

Ballance said refugees are a “gigantic issue” in her southwestern Montana county, just south of the liberal college city of Missoula. “People expect to see some legislation brought,” she said.

It is pretty clear that legally state legislators can’t do much to change the US Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP), but here we have the ACLU lobbyist making the crucial point about efforts in the Montana (yours too!) legislature.

“Filing this and making it a public conversation automatically undermines the refugee process,” Rossi said.

“They can’t legally undermine the process, but they can socially undermine the process.”

Continue reading here.

Trickle up!

You have a right to ask questions and demand that your elected officials at all levels of government be transparent, and consider your economic worries and your safety concerns when the federal government targets your communities.

Efforts like these in the Montana legislature are important to help create controversy because the ultimate goal is for the controversy to ‘trickle up’ to Congress and to the new Trump Administration. There is no doubt that the USRAP must be trashed or reformed, but that pressure must come from the states (and local governments) to Washington.  Politicians hate noise and so it is your job as grassroots activists to make political noise!

To that end, since Montana’s lone House member is likely going to the Trump Interior Department, it is critical that you, in Montana, make the selection of his replacement a referendum on the refugee program. See The Hill (scroll down to Rep. Zinke).

Endnote: I am off to jury duty, be back later!

VIDEO: California is Ground Zero for Anti-Trumpers

California, it seems, is becoming the home state for those who want to resist Donald Trump and his administration.

Political leaders in the state are actually gearing and preparing to kick off a massive progressive-minded rebellion against the president-elect. And their hope is their example will resonate to other states, and motivate similar anti-Trump movements on a wider scale.

As the Hill noted: California is where the big Silicon Valley and Hollywood players nest.

Big money, meet big egos, meet big political power-houses.

From the news outlet:

“A powerful group of Democratic politicians call California home, including both of the state’s senators, liberal legend Gov. Jerry Brown and the nation’s first and only female Speaker, Rep. Nancy Pelosi.

“California is also home to a growing Latino population, which means it will be ground zero for Trump’s immigration agenda. About 40 percent of the state’s population is Hispanic.

“‘California can and will continue to lead on policy,” said Alex Padilla, California’s secretary of state.

“He said his state is ready to oppose Trump on federal policies that would hurt California, and on nominees such as Sen. Jeff Sessions, the Alabama Republican and immigration hard-liner nominated to lead the Department of Justice.”

Rep. Xavier Becerra, meanwhile, who is about to assume the state attorney general’s office, is going to lead up California’s fight against Trump’s vowed illegal immigration crackdown.

Rep. Xavier Becerra is planning to lead up a legal charge as California's incoming attorney general to fight off Donald Trump's immigration crack-downs.

Rep. Xavier Becerra (D-CA)

Rep. Xavier Becerra is planning to lead up a legal charge as California’s incoming attorney general to fight off Donald Trump’s immigration crack-downs.

His words, from the Hill:

“‘My sense is we’re not going to stop being California,’ Becerra told The Hill. ‘We’ve got a very progressive group of leaders from Governor Brown, to our state legislative leaders [State Assembly Speaker] Anthony Rendon, to [State Senate President] Kevin de Leon.’”

Meanwhile, mayors around the state have pledged to fight Trump’s immigration policies, as well.

Expect the left to use the legal system to fight Trump policy.

“We’re gonna move, so long as we do things according to the U.S. and California constitutions, we’re gonna move,” Becerra said, in the Hill. “I think what makes it an interesting or changing dynamic is if someone tries to stop us from doing what we’re by law allowed to do.”

RELATED ARTICLE: Anti-Trumpers Put Death Threat to Music and Media Cheers

RELATED VIDEO: “F*ck Trump Anthem”

Another rap video has hit the internet. But this time it’s little more than an open death threat for GOP candidate Donald Trump.

In the video, a group of young black men armed with weapons, including one man holding a dirt-encrusted shovel, threaten to kill Trump.

The song, entitled “F*ck Trump Anthem,” includes several types of violent threats including a threat to cave Trump’s head in with a shovel and warnings that if he goes to Baltimore he will “die.”

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on PamelaGeller.com.

Trump Influenced Egypt to Delay a U.N. Resolution that would have irreparably harmed Israel

A vote was scheduled by the U.N.for this past Thursday concerning Israeli settlements which would have irreparably harmed Israel. In the past the U.S. would have vetoed such a resolution. However it is now reported Obama wasn’t going to veto it.

Fortunately for Israel Donald Trump in an unusual move for a President Elect publicly called for Obama to veto the resolution sending Egypt a clear message of Trump’s position. As a result Egypt has postponed a vote on the resolution. This will give President Trump the opportunity to veto it when it is rescheduled.

From all of us who support Israel, thank-you President Elect Trump.


Trump influenced Egypt’s decision to postpone anti-Israel UN vote, diplomats say

Egypt postponed a vote on an anti-Israel UN resolution it had sponsored shortly after US President-elect Donald Trump called for a veto of the measure, which would have condemned Israeli building in Judea and Samaria.

US President-elect Donald J. Trump has implicitly called for outgoing US President Barack Obama to veto a UN Security Council resolution scheduled for Thursday afternoon, which would have condemned Israeli construction in all areas gained by the Jewish state during the Six-Day War in 1967, when it was threatened with extinction by the surrounding Arab countries.

“The resolution being considered at the United Nations Security Council regarding Israel should be vetoed,” Trump wrote on his Facebook page. “This puts Israel in a very poor negotiating position and is extremely unfair to all Israelis.”

“As the United States has long maintained, peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians will only come through direct negotiations between the parties, and not through the imposition of terms by the United Nations,” Trump added.

Read more…

RELATED ARTICLES:

Israel and the rising new West by Caroline B. Glick

Security Council likely to vote on settlements Friday despite Egyptian reversal

White, heterosexual and proud to be an American

Yes, I voted for Donald J. Trump for President of the United States of America.

I am white, a heterosexual and proud to be an American. My father’s family immigrated from Russia. My grandfather was a physician who received his medical degree in Kiev. He was conscripted by the Czar to serve in the Russian Army. After the Communist revolution he escaped and fled to the United States where his medical degree was not recognized. My grandfather then became a successful Chiropractor and helped thousands of his patients. His medical skills helped him recognize health issues with his patients, who he then referred to a local physician. Because of him my brother and nephew have both become successful Chiropractors in their own right.

My mother’s family came from Poland. They also emigrated to the United States where they became Americans, proud of their heritage, but even prouder to be American.

Democrats and the media hate me because I am white, heterosexual and proud to be an American.

In my birth state of Missouri there will be a White Supremacy Conference (WPC) the last week of April 2017 titled “Deconstructing the Culture of White Supremacy and Privilege: Creating Peace, Equity and Opportunity in the Heartland.

wpc_pg_header_wpc

The mission of the WPC is:

The WPC provides a challenging, collaborative and comprehensive experience. We strive to empower and equip individuals to work for equity and justice through self and social transformation.

The WPC’s goal to discriminate against people who are white, heterosexual and proud to be American.

The WPC wants to “…bring together students, youth, teachers, university faculty, activists, social workers and counselors, healthcare workers, and members of both the spiritual community and corporate arena. Issues of race, addressed from a comprehensive, intersectional perspective, bring in dynamics of gender/gender identity, ethnicity, sexuality, religion, ability and class.” [Emphasis added]

The WPC is targeting our children and schools to turn against whites and find ways to discriminate against them. This idea of “white privilege” was promoted by Obama and most recently in an MTV News video titled “2017 New Years Resolutions for White Guys” The ORIGINAL DESCRIPTION: Hey, white guys: we came up for some New Year’s Resolutions for you, some of which include Black Lives Matter, Beyonce, Kanye West, and more!:

Yes, I am white, heterosexual and voted for Donald J. Trump. Get over it!

RELATED ARTICLES:

North Carolina lawmakers leave ‘bathroom bill’ in place

Conservatism and Progressivism: Two Irreconcilable Worldviews

Advertising agencies ‘confidence high heading into 2017’ — Digital Video gains over TV

CHICAGO, IL /PRNewswire/ — According to a fourth quarter survey of advertising agencies conducted by STRATA, a Comcast company, confidence among agencies heading into 2017 is high. Forty-three percent of agencies report that their business will increase in the first quarter of 2017, while only 11% expect a decrease. Forty-two percent of respondents anticipate the need for additional staff next year, and not a single agency reports plans to reduce staff sizes. This comes in contrast to Q2 this year, which found that the rate of hires was decreasing, and concerns over needing to reduce staff sizes were increasing rapidly.

When asked what the biggest challenges ahead were, 51% stated that their biggest concern was expanding their client roster, followed by determining the right media mix (22%). Only 13% of agencies felt that client retention was their chief concern, reflecting confidence in existing relationships.

The fourth quarter survey found video advertising remains the dominant focus, with 34% of agencies noting their clients’ primary focus was local TV & cable. For the first time the survey’s history, digital video claimed the second spot, with 27% of agencies responding that it was their primary focus, a 79% increase over the previous year. Display advertising, previously in the second spot, fell to third with 15% reporting it as their clients’ main focus.

“At the end of a year that could be defined as turbulent, if nothing else, one of the upsides we’re seeing is the swift reversal in agency outlook and confidence. Earlier this year, we found that agencies had major concerns about budgets and revenue, but we’re now seeing much more optimism heading into 2017,” said Judd Rubin, vice president at Strata. “We’re excited to see how this new confidence impacts advertising strategies next year. Local and cable video continue to be the top focus, but digital video is increasingly coming to the forefront. With mobile advertising and rapidly growing social players like Snapchat also making strides, 2017 could prove to be a very exciting year.”

Though only 6% of agencies report plans to allocate between 26-50% of their budgets to paid social, that’s an increase of 321% compared to the first quarter this year. A majority of agencies report that paid social media accounts for the smallest portion of their budget (0-5%), and 18% percent of agencies noted that it accounted for 11-25% of their budget, an 80% increase over last year.

In terms of which platforms agencies are using in social campaigns, Facebook remains dominant, with 94% planning to use the social network. YouTube, Instagram, and Twitter reclaim their second, third, and fourth spots, respectively. Though Snapchat remains sixth, more than 20% of agencies now plan to use the messaging app, a 58% increase from the second quarter in 2016.

Heading into 2017, responses also indicate increased appetite for programmatic buying options. Thirty-six percent of agencies report that they will be allocating 10-20% of their budgets to programmatic purchasing, a 33% increase over Q2. Another 27% plan to dedicate 20-40% of their budgets to programmatic, up 43% compared to Q2. The percentage of agencies refraining from programmatic buying decreased as 24% of agencies report that they will not devote any of their budget to programmatic, a 39% decrease from Q2.

About STRATA

The solutions that STRATA provides empowers clients to buy and sell all media types including cable, broadcast, newspaper, radio, outdoor and digital advertising mediums. On average, over $50 Billion in advertising dollars flow through STRATA systems per year. As the system of choice for over 1,000 agencies in the United States, STRATA provides media technology that enables organizations to lead rather than react to industry developments.  By transforming the way advertisements are placed and tracked, STRATA adds a new level of transparency to campaigns that is necessary in the ever-evolving media world. STRATA is a Comcast Platform Services company. For more information, visit www.gotostrata.com.

RELATED ARTICLE: Trump Wins Again – Lockheed CEO Gives “Personal Commitment” To Cut F-35 Costs “Aggressively”

Historic Number of ‘Faithless’ Democrat Electors Desert Hillary

Weeks of protests, ballot recounts, media reports about the popular vote versus the Electoral College, endless coverage of Russian hacking, Hollywood actors pleadings and Michael Moore bribing Republican electors to vote Democrat all ended up with Donald J. Trump winning the office of President of these United States.

The Democratic Party, Jill Stein, MoveOn.org and the Hillary Clinton campaign have all failed to stop the voice of America’s voters.

What is most interesting is that the Democratic Party strategy of electing Trump, as a “Pied Piper” candidate who is “unpalatable to a majority of the electorate”, backfired. Note to the DNC: Be careful of what you wish for.

pied-piper-candidates

In a column titled “Donald Trump wins Electoral College – as attempts to cause rebellion turn to farce with DEMOCRATS deserting Hillary” Nikki Schwab, U.S. Political Reporter For Dailymail.com and the Associated Press wrote:

Donald Trump officially crossed the line to 270 electoral votes with electors in Texas casting a ballot for the Republican shortly before 5:30 p.m. EST.

Calls for Trump to be voted down by members of the Electoral College were roundly ignored  on Monday – with only two ‘faithless’ Republican electors rejecting the president-elect and four deserting Democrat Hillary Clinton.

Read more..

The New York Times reported:

In Washington, a state where Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont had strong support in the Democratic primary against Hillary Clinton, three of the state’s 12 electoral votes went to Colin L. Powell, the Republican former secretary of state. One more elector voted for Faith Spotted Eagle, a Native American leader.

Two Texas electors voted for different Republican politicians: Gov. John Kasich of Ohio and former Texas congressman Ron Paul.

In addition, three Democratic electors, in Colorado, Maine and Minnesota, initially declined to vote for Mrs. Clinton. Two were replaced by an alternate, and one ended up changing his vote.

Read more…

The final Electoral College “faithless” tally:

State Pledged to Voted for
Hawaii Clinton Bernie Sanders
Texas Trump Ron Paul
Texas Trump John Kasich
Washington Clinton Colin L. Powell
Washington Clinton Colin L. Powell
Washington Clinton Colin L. Powell
Washington Clinton Faith Spotted Eagle

What will the Democrats in denial do next? Of course, protest at the inauguration of the 45th President of the United States, Donald J. Trump.

As we have written, “If your opponent is committing suicide, don’t interfere.”

RELATED ARTICLE: Outgoing Vice President Joe Biden: Trump’s Victory Over Hillary ‘More a Battle of Personalities than Battle of Ideas’

The DNC has been planning to play the Russia Card since April, 2016

The media has fanned the fake news flames that Russia has stolen the 2016 election and is responsible for electing Donald J. Trump as the 45th President of the United States.

Since then certain establishment Democrats and Republicans have jumped on board the “Russia stole the election from Hillary” bandwagon.

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

In the column “Julian Assange associate: It was a leak, not a hack and the DNC insider is NOT Russian”  from BizPac Review reports:

A hole has been blown in the Democratic Party, and mainstream media’s narrative, that Russia was behind the leak of DNC emails to Wikileaks.

On Sunday, a former British ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray, said he has met the person who gave the DNC emails and it was not the Russians.

“I know who leaked them,” Murray told The Guardian. “I’ve met the person who leaked them, and they are certainly not Russian and it’s an insider. It’s a leak, not a hack; the two are different things.

Murray, who is a close associate of Wikileaks head Julian Assange, explained it further on his website.

Read more…

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

Fake 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: 

Former UK Ambassador Says Source Of Clinton Emails Was “Disgusted” Democratic Whistleblower

Exclusive: Top U.S. spy agency has not embraced CIA assessment on Russia hacking – REUTERS

Key Questions About Russia’s Alleged Hacking of the U.S. Election

Ted Kennedy Made Secret Overtures to Russia to Prevent Ronald Reagan’s Re-Election

The Immorality of Changing the Rules After an Election

Some bad ideas just won’t die. Most recently, the continuing effort by those who lost the Presidential election to retrospectively change the rules continues to plow on — naturally enough courtesy of the friendly mainstream media megaphone.

Electors should not vote for the candidate who won their state, as the rules call for, but for the candidate who won the national vote, argues Harvard Law professor Lawrence Lessig in the Washington Post. “The framers left the electors free to choose. They should exercise that choice by leaving the election as the people decided it: in Clinton’s favor” Lessig wrote.

Essentially, he argues that there is nothing in the Constitution that overtly requires electors to vote for the candidate who won their state. Therefore they are free to, and ought to, vote for the candidate who won the popular vote. Of course, he does not mention electors are required to follow the rules of the various states in which they are elected.

But aside from an attempt to re-write our long-term understanding of elections, this is a deeply disingenuous article.

First on the general merits, he is promulgating a pure democracy — something the Founders cringed at. Pure democracy is often and aptly compared to two wolves and one sheep deciding on what’s for dinner. The Electoral College as a representative balance between the people’s popular vote and states’ rights was brilliant and on purpose by the Founders and is critical to keep. On the other hand, pure democracy has a long and ignoble history, which is precisely why ours is not that.

In the Federalist Papers #10, James Madison wrote: “…Hence it is that such democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security and the rights of property, and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.”

But the professor, and many Democrats today, want pure democracy…now.

It’s the cheating of scoundrels

But the most disingenuous element in this line of thought is to change the rules retrospectively.

Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton both ran their campaigns based on the known rules: Who wins the most electors wins the White House. They created their strategies around winning key states. If it was a popular vote, both campaigns would have been run differently and we do not know what those results would have been. Changing the rules after the outcome to change the outcome is just abhorrent thinking.

If the good professor was not too blinkered by ideology, he would know that.

Let’s drive this home with some strong analogies.

Let’s say a football game finished where one team wins 24-10 — a solid win. But the losing team argues afterwards that the game should be decided by total yards gained, because the losing team had 400 yards compared to 250 yards for the other team — a solid advantage. But those were not the rules by which both teams were playing. Strategies would have changed. That sounds absurd, but insert the Electoral College for the game score, and the popular vote for yards gained, and the analogy is sound. But we rightly would never consider that.

Or again, consider if the loser of a seven-game World Series argues afterwards that the champion should be decided by total runs instead of the number of games won, because the loser scored more total runs — which has happened several times. But those weren’t the rules. Again, strategies would have changed.

Or again, consider if you are driving 45 mph in a 45 mph speed limit zone, but the next day the speed limit is changed to 30 mph and you are retroactively ticketed for speeding. That’s absurd! That’s not fair! You would have driven slower! Exactly. It is absurd.

This is the precise principle that applies to those who want to change the elections rules now, for this past election. If you want to change them going forward, that is a discussion to have (and which I would oppose doing) but changing the rules retrospectively is simply wrong.

RELATED ARTICLES:

On Castro: Turning a Monster into a Martyr

The “Mandates” That Never Were

Thanksgiving to God is Our American Heritage

Replace Obamacare with Free Market Principles

Will the Outcome of the Election Matter as Much as We Think?

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in The Revolutionary Act.

VIDEO: Nigel Farage speech in the United States about Brexit and Trump

Nigel Farage on 2016, the year of political revolution, stating, “Often there are decades where very little happens and occasionally there’s a year where decades happen.”

Watch this analysis of what happened in 2016.

Here’s Donald Trump’s statement regarding British referendum on E.U. membership posted June 24, 2016 on Facebook:

The people of the United Kingdom have exercised the sacred right of all free peoples. They have declared their independence from the European Union, and have voted to reassert control over their own politics, borders and economy. A Trump Administration pledges to strengthen our ties with a free and independent Britain, deepening our bonds in commerce, culture and mutual defense. The whole world is more peaceful and stable when our two countries – and our two peoples – are united together, as they will be under a Trump Administration.

Come November, the American people will have the chance to re-declare their independence. Americans will have a chance to vote for trade, immigration and foreign policies that put our citizens first. They will have the chance to reject today’s rule by the global elite, and to embrace real change that delivers a government of, by and for the people. I hope America is watching, it will soon be time to believe in America again.

Prophetic.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Nigel Farage: “I Fear For My Life”

FARAGE: If Le Pen Wins, The EU Is Over

The Fear of Accountability

“If you’re 25 and you’re not a liberal, you have no heart. If you’re 35 and not a conservative, you have no brain.”

In a world where accountability is becoming increasingly more obsolete, it is far from surprising that people are more outraged by harsh words than they are heinous actions. More likely than not, at one point in your life or another, your parents uttered to you the age old adage, “Sticks and stones may break your bones, but words will never hurt you.” So my question to you is, when did this change? At what point did we begin to care more about the things people said to us rather than what they did to us? If I say I’d like to punch someone square in the mouth and the person next to me actually throws a punch in silence, who should be held accountable? Should I? Or should they? Now, why can’t we apply this simple logic to what is going on in our country today?

I’m not going to sit here and act like I’ve never been hurt or offended by someone’s words before, because I have—everyone has. The difference, however, is the ability to see the bigger picture. I’ll give it to you, if you are on any form of social media today, it is extremely difficult to take a step back and see the big picture. Things get so petty and so twisted as a result of the convenience and ease of the Internet; I am constantly guilty of this. Nevertheless, we have to start taking a step back and examining what really matters for the good of the country rather than winning a pointless argument on a Facebook post. What is the most important issue facing us right now? Is it national security or is it political correctness? Is it immigration or is it political correctness? Is it the economy or is it political correctness? Is it health care or political correctness? Is it ISIS or political correctness? See my point?

I, for the longest time, couldn’t figure out why people opposed Trump so strongly. Yes, I understand, he’s hurt a lot of people’s feelings. But I cannot help but believe that it goes beyond that. I think it comes down to idea of accountability. In the society we live in today, accountability is vanishing faster than a Clinton e-mail. Today, if we don’t want to do something, more likely than not, we don’t have to. People are petrified at the thought of being held accountable for anything and I believe that Donald Trump personifies accountability, which is the antithesis of who we have now and who we’ll have if Hillary wins.

In Obama’s America if you don’t want to work and contribute to society, you don’t have to—you’re not held accountable. In Obama’s America, if a county wants to take advantage of our country and pay nothing for our trade, services, our protection, they can—they’re not held accountable. In Obama’s America, if you want to go out and have sex with whoever you want and you don’t want to have a child, you don’t have to—you’re not held accountable. In Obama’s America, if an immigrant wants to come and live here illegally and take advantage of our education, our healthcare, and our social programs, they can—they’re not held accountable. If a radical Islamic terrorist, practicing a 9th or 10th century form of Islam, want to come here and declare Jihad on our soil, take the lives and sense of security of our citizens, they can—they’re not held accountable so long as they do so in the name of Allah. In Donald Trump’s America, these things will not be so. In Donald Trump’s America, we will be accountable, each and every one of us.

For those of you who are on the fence and are leaning away from Trump because the GOP establishment are distancing themselves from him, remember this: Neither John McCain, nor Paul Ryan, nor Glenn Beck, nor John Kasich got Donald Trump to where he is today. If they had been doing their jobs then not only would there have been no need for Donald Trump to run, but there would have been no way for him to have gotten this far. The establishment is comprised of politicians who are afraid of being held accountable themselves. Donald Trump has them scared to death. What scares them? Accountability. These politicians are wolves in sheep’s clothing and Donald Trump is dangerously close to exposing them for what they are and they are running scared.

We live in a country that invalidates and belittles the importance of a strong male role. Turn on a television at anytime of the day and see how every show or sitcom portrays the father as dumb and incompetent, so much so that it is pouring over into our societal expectations. A society that can no longer recognize the fact that as a leader, Donald Trump is much like a strong and stern father who expects and demands the most of his children, not because he hates them but because he loves them. The worst parents are the ones who let their children run rampant and give them whatever they want, whenever they want it. The best parents say and do the things that their children don’t necessarily like at the time, but are thankful for in the long run—they hold them accountable. A demagogue like Hillary Clinton will, without a doubt, be the nail in the coffin for this country. This November, vote for the long term, for the bigger picture. Vote for accountability, not for what has been disguised to you as cool or accepting or progressive, in order to make you feel good in the moment.