PODCAST: Tulsi’s Last Stand? Dem Candidates Call For More Than $200 Trillion in Spending!

GUESTS

W. James Antle III, editor of The American Conservative. A former Senior Writer at TAC, Antle also previously served as managing editor of the Daily Caller, editor of the Daily Caller News Foundation, and associate editor of the American Spectator. He is the author of Devouring Freedom: Can Big Government Ever Be Stopped? Antle has appeared on Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, and NPR, among other outlets, and has written for a wide variety of publications, including the Wall Street Journal, Politico, the Week, the Los Angeles Times, the Boston Globe, the Daily Beast, the Guardian, Reason, the Spectator of London, The National Interest, and National Review Online. He is also senior advisor to Defense Priorities.

TOPIC…Tulsi’s Last Stand?

Charles Lehman is a staff writer for the Washington Free Beacon. He writes about policy, covering crime, law, drugs, immigration, and social issues.

TOPIC…Dem Candidates Call For More Than $200 Trillion in Spending.

Faith Riders and Veterans

Military veterans are killing themselves in alarming numbers. Faith Riders is a Christian motorcycle ministry for American veterans who need a new brotherhood.

How the 2020 Democratic Primary has turned into a Socialist Circus

Americans have now had four nights of debates from those 20+ candidates seeking the Democratic nomination for president. The Democrats during the July 31st debate began eating one another based upon their records. They began calling each other racists.

Watch this Kamala Harris, Joe Biden and Tulsi Gabbard exchange:

What have the people learned from these debates?

Perhaps it is useful to look back at what David Axelrod said on CNN after the first round of debates:

It does seem as if you’re running for president that you ought to take into consideration what the country wants. And the fact is large numbers of people oppose the Medicare for All proposal if it replaces private insurance. We’ve seen it in poll after poll, a large number of people in this country do not believe the border should be decriminalized. A large number of people in did country don’t believe that undocumented immigrants should qualify for public [aid]…

What Doesn’t America Want?

What America doesn’t want is what has now become a Socialist Circus of policies which include:

  1. Giving free stuff to illegals,
  2. Calling everyone a racist who disagrees with you,
  3. Open borders,
  4. Higher taxes,
  5. Fewer jobs,
  6. More and more government control,
  7. No more fossil fuels?!
  8. Socialist Kool-Aid

What Do Americans Want?

Conservative Review reported the following:

On Monday, Heritage Action for America released the results of three different polls conducted by two different research firms in March and June. What do the numbers say? Nothing any Democrat charged with actually winning a general election after this far-left purity contest of a primary will want to hear.

The first poll, conducted among 1,200 likely voters in June with a margin of error of 2.83 percent, found:

  • 70 percent of voters, including 65 percent of swing-state voters, oppose the creation of a government run health care system like Medicare for All.
  • Independent voters think skills are are more important factor for legal immigration than family ties.
  • A plurality of Democrats, Republicans, and independents think the overuse of social services is the biggest challenge associated with illegal immigration (which is really bad news for the people who raised their hands to pay for illegal aliens’ health care).
  • 79 percent of respondents (including a majority of Democrats) said they believe that political correctness is a problem.
  • A 45 percent plurality of Democrats, Republicans, and independents think that abortion should be “illegal in most cases” with “some exceptions.”
  • 76 percent of voters said that doctors should be required to provide health care to abortion survivors.
  • 62 percent of respondents don’t think biological males should be allowed to identify as female to play on sports teams at school.
  • 30 percent of Democrats and 56 percent of independents surveyed think that the Democratic party has become too extreme, with 57 percent of respondents overall agreeing.

A separate “swing state survey,” which was conducted among 1,800 likely voters across the battleground states of Arizona, Florida, Iowa, Maine, and Pennsylvania later in June with a margin of error of 2.31 percent, found:

  • 63 percent of respondents said the border crisis is a national emergency.
  • 65 percent of respondents oppose getting rid of private health insurance to create a government-run system, including 40 percent of Democrats.
  • 65 percent of respondents in those states agree that “Socialism is a bad economic system that leads to bigger government, less freedom, worse economic conditions, and more welfare dependency.”
  • A majority of independents agreed that they “can no longer support the national Democratic Party because they have become too liberal in recent years by supporting radical ideas.”

The candidates for the Democratic nomination will have to change their tune or lose big in 2020.

As former President Bill Clinton said, “It’s the economy stupid.” As David Axelrod said, “It does seem as if you’re running for president that you ought to take into consideration what the country wants.”

President Trump simply needs to sit back and watch. He will continue to tweet, he will continue to listen to what the people want, he will continue to grow the American economy, he will continue to put American interests first and he will continue to lead the nation into prosperity for all.

Can’t wait to see the first debate between President Trump and the Democratic Party nominee.

© All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Trump, Baltimore, and the Diminishing Potency of the ‘Race Card’

Two Nights of Three-Ring Debates

‘Fixing’ Our Democracy Would Only Make Matters Worse

Candidates Sell Socialist-Flavored Kool-Aid at Debate

Joe Biden Becomes The Left’s Punching Bag During Second CNN Debate

Protesters Interrupt Booker, De Blasio At CNN Debate To Call For NYC Cop To Be Fired

Biden And Castro Spar Over Border Decriminalization

RELATED PODCAST: CNS News’s Terry Jeffrey Provides Analysis of the Democratic Presidential Debate

Virginia: Muslim lawmaker who disrupted Trump speech had Hamas financiers as donors, wrote anti-Semitic posts

Those who are celebrated by the Left today for hating Trump more vociferously and obnoxiously than the next Leftist don’t have clean hands themselves.

Virginia Lawmaker Connected to Anti-Semitic Groups,” by Mikhael Smits, Washington Free Beacon, May 21, 2019:

A member of the Virginia legislature and former volunteer for Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D., Mich.) is connected to multiple anti-Semitic organizations and is the son of a Hamas fundraiser.

Del. Ibraheem Samirah (D.)—who received sympathetic national coverage this week after alleging harassment for his Muslim faith at a town hall—has supported multiple virulently anti-Semitic and anti-Israel organizations, once speaking at a Hamas-affiliated conference.

Samirah is a vocal supporter of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement, which seeks to use economic and political pressure against Israel. In a 2014 Facebook post, Samirah urged friends to support the BDS movement while Israel was “most exposed.”

As a student at American University and then Boston University, Samirah was an active member of Students for Justice in Palestine. He credits the organization with helping convince students that “Israel REALLY sucks.”

SJP relies heavily on American Muslims for Palestine, of which Samirah is also a part, for funds and logistics. According to 2016 testimony from Jonathan Schanzer of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, “AMP is arguably the most important sponsor and organizer for Students for Justice in Palestine.”…

“Ibraheem Samirah’s Donors Are Named In Israeli Government’s Report ‘Terrorists In Suits’ For Hamas Financing,” by Patrick Howley, Big League Politics, February 12, 2019:

RICHMOND — Democrat Virginia 86th district delegate candidate Ibraheem Samirah accepted campaign contributions from Osama Abuirshaid and Rafeeq Jaber.

Osama Abuirshaid and Rafeeq Jaber are listed as donors to Samirah’s delegate campaign, according to the Virginia Department of Elections. Samirah is up for delegate on February 19th, running against Republican Air Force veteran Gregg Nelson. Samirah erased his state senator Jennifer Boysko’s endorsement after his anti-Semitic posts came to light.

Both of these men — Abuirshaid and Jaber — were named by the Israeli government in a February 3 report on the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement’s links to terrorism. Both of these men, Osama Abuirshad and Rafael Jaber, are top-ranking officials of the American Muslims for Palestine (AMP).

The AMP is spun off from a group that was found guilty by a federal court of providing financial aid to Hamas. Abuirshaid and Jaber were also part of that parent group.

Samirah was the featured speaker at this past November 22-24 conference for the American Muslims for Palestine (AMP), which is named in the Israeli government’s report “Terrorists In Suits.” The AMP is alternately based in Falls Church, Virginia or Illinois, according to differing official addresses. Linda Sarsour was also a featured speaker at this conference….

Muslim lawmaker protests at Trump event: ‘You can’t send us back!,’” by Erick Ortiz, NBC News, July 30, 2019:

A Virginia lawmaker, who is Muslim, shouted “you can’t send us back!” briefly interrupting President Donald Trump during an event Tuesday commemorating the 400th anniversary of Virginia’s first legislative assembly.

Ibraheem Samirah, a Democrat elected this year to the state House of Delegates, halted Trump’s speech with a one-man demonstration as he held a sign that read “deport hate,” “reunite my family” and “go back to your corrupted home.”

Video from the Jamestown event showed Samirah being led out as some in the audience clapped at his removal while chanting Trump’s name.

In a statement later posted to Twitter, Samirah defended his actions, writing that “nobody’s racism and bigotry should be excused for the sake of being polite.” He added that while he was born in Chicago, his family came to the United States as Palestinian refugees and that his father in 2002 was “forced to literally ‘go back’” after he was denied re-entry following a visit to Jordan….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Del. Ibraheem Samirah escorted out of ceremony amid boos.

Rashida Tlaib, Marc Lamont Hill, other Leftists celebrate “Palestinian” teen from murderous jihadi family

Ilhan Omar endorses violence against Senator Rand Paul

Florida: Muslim attacks man with scissors, screams “We are coming for you Trump. We are coming for you with knives.”

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

Has Ilhan Omar imported the ideology of a Somali dictator into the heart of American politics?

Studying the politics of Ilhan Omar I am struck by how similar they are to that of the brutal dictator, Siad Barre, who governed Somalia with an iron fist when she was young girl in that country.

When Barre seized power in a coup d’etat in 1969, following the assassination of the president, Ali Shermarke, he built a new political order, a one-party regime built on a mix of Communism and a local form of political Islam.

He abrogated the constitution within hours of his coup, and ruled the country by decree until he had time to redraft a new constitution.

Are we not hearing calls to repeal parts of the US Constitution by members of the new left in American politics?

The United Nations profile of Siad Barre explained, “The theoretical underpinning of the state ideology combined aspects of the Qur’an with the influence of Marx, Lenin, Mao, and Mussolini, but Siad Barre was pragmatic in its application. ‘Socialism is not a religion,’ Barre explained, ‘It is a political principle to organize government and manage production.’”

An organized Socialist government managing production is the underpinning of the new left of the Democratic party being promoted by Ilhan Omar.

When Barre grabbed power, Marxist sympathies were not deep-rooted in Somalia. In order to achieve his political goal, the dictator denigrated the opposition, did away with the previous governments law enforcement, replacing it with his own tough enforcement police and military rule.

Sound like the tactics of the radical left today in America.

We hear calls of the radicals within the Democratic Party to abolish ICE. We see the deliberate demoralization of the police force in major cities controlled by the Democratic Party as part of that process.

Ilhan Omar never explained what she meant when she described her father, a central influence in her life, as the Somali “teacher of teachers.”

It was a telling remark.

In Somalia, Siad Barre introduced a nationwide indoctrination campaign. He appointed teacher trainers whose job it was to indoctrinate the government-run education system into the dictator’s Koranic-Marxist-Leninist ideology.

This radical Red-Green political agenda can be found both in Britain with Jeremy Corbyn’s associations with Islamist forces, including the IHRC in Britain, Hamas, Hezbollah and Palestinian terrorists abroad.

We see it with Ilhan Omar who goes on fund-raising junkets not for the Democratic Party but for CAIR, the American branch of the Muslim Brotherhood and a co-conspirator for Hamas.

In Somalia, Barre moved from rule control to thought control. Civil servants were required to attend reorientation courses that combined professional training with the regime’s political indoctrination. Anyone found incompetent or politically resistance was fired.

The propaganda ministry reached into national broadcasting and local communities with loudspeaker announcements blasting the dictator’s political ideology in town squares. The regime’s brainwashing continued as they raped, robbed and ruined their country which descended into civil war.

Ilhan Omar may blame America for the turmoil in Somalia but it was the Barre regime with his accolade of apparatchiks that brought about the destruction of that country.

The regime set out to destroy traditional social structures and reduce the opposition to powerlessness by imposing its central control over the country. They depended on a compliant media.

Human Rights Watch issued a report entitled, “Somalia. A Government at war with its own People.”

The United Nations Development Programme declared,

“The 21-year regime of Siad Barre had one of the worst human rights records in Africa.”

The UN report on Somalia stated,

“The newly formed Ministry of Information and National Guidance set up local political education bureaus to execute the government’s message to the people and used Somalia’s print and broadcasting media for the ‘success of the socialist, revolutionary road.’”

These bureaus required teacher trainers to retrain teachers into the ideology of the regime.

It is legitimate to ask, was Ilhan Omar’s father, the teacher of teachers, part of, perhaps a leader in, the political education system in the service of a brutal genocidal dictator?

Was he the Josef Goebbels of the Somali regime? The opposition certainly did not have teacher trainers.

The slogan of the Somali Revolutionary Socialist Party was “social justice” and “scientific socialism” as they delivered an intolerant national injustice.

There was a mass dismissal of non-compliant civil servants in 1974. Ilhan Omar’s father apparently kept his job.

And what was the connection between Nur Said Elmi and Mohammed Omar in Somalia?

Ilhan Omar’s remark that her “very privileged life suddenly came to a halt” in Somalia reveals something significant.

As the civil war raged in Somalia, including torture, mass murder and the genocide of the opposition Isaaq tribe, no one in the people’s opposition to Siad Barre lived “privileged lives” in secure compounds.

Was it a coincidence that the Said Elmi family did not flee from their “privileged lives” in their sheltered compound in Mogadishu until just before the fall of the Barre regime?

Did Ilhan Omar’s father actively side with the war criminal Barre, or did he side with the people?

To me, at least, the answer is clear.

Another slip of the tongue, this time by Ilhan’s sister, Sahra, is telling. Following Ilhan’s election to Congress, Sahra celebrated by congratulating their father who, she claimed, was a “great political strategist and fundraiser,” and that Ilhan Omar’s victory “would not have been possible without him.”

One wonders where this talent and aptitude came from. Could it have derived from his professional experience in Somalia and his contacts with the Somali community in America, many of whom may have been on the side of the war criminal, Barre?

Is America turning a blind eye to people who entered the United States illegally and who aided and abetted a murderous regime?

Would it be disqualifying to have someone sit on the US Foreign Affairs Committee who is under the paternal political and ideological guidance of someone who could have been close to the top of a Marxist-Islamist dictatorship?

Why hasn’t the genocide committed by the Siad Barre regime, and all those culpable in the human rights and war crimes committed in Somalia, ever come before the International Court of Justice?

Ilhan Omar and her father can produce evidence of his role in the Somali civil war? Why have they been totally silent about the burning issue?

There may be no there three, but surely an investigation is warranted into the roles played by the senior members of the Said Elmi-Omar families in Somalia under Barre? She talks about her grandfather, but not of her father. Why? Especially if he is such a great political strategist.

It is clear that the political ideology of Ilhan Omar is not too far removed from that of the Siad Barre in Somalia. There are signs of a Red-Green alliance emerging out of Democratic politics. Perhaps a part of that derives from Somali politics.

Ilhan Omar hails from a country that never saw a Jew yet was steeped in anti-Semitism.

Omar never met a Jew in Somalia, nor in Kenya. She barely met a Jew in her Somali-community in Minnesota. Yet, she is a virile anti-Semite. It is a well-known cultural affliction throughout the Middle East.

Is Ilhan Omar the second generation of a family attempting to subvert the democratic system of their respective countries?

Does America really want that inflicted on the greatest democracy in the world in which the opposition party is increasingly tilting radically left?

EDITORS NOTE: This The View from Israel column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

President Donald J. Trump: A master at making opponents defend the indefensible

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”Joseph Goebbels, Reich Minister of Propaganda of Nazi Germany from 1933 to 1945.


In the American Greatness article Donald Trump at the Overton Window  wrote:

Donald Trump is an equal opportunity scourge. He doesn’t care if you are black or white, male or female, if you behave badly and violate the public trust, he will call you out, baldly. And note this above all: If you attack him, he will attack you back.

[ … ]

Beyond the elements of political calculation and polemical style, however, Donald Trump’s recent tweet fests suggest that he may be on the threshold of shifting the Overton Window on race. [Emphasis added]

The MacKinac Center for Public Policy defines the Overton window:

The Overton Window is a model for understanding how ideas in society change over time and influence politics. The core concept is that politicians are limited in what policy ideas they can support — they generally only pursue policies that are widely accepted throughout society as legitimate policy options. These policies lie inside the Overton Window. Other policy ideas exist, but politicians risk losing popular support if they champion these ideas. These policies lie outside the Overton Window.

But the Overton Window can both shift and expand, either increasing or shrinking the number of ideas politicians can support without unduly risking their electoral support. Sometimes politicians can move the Overton Window themselves by courageously endorsing a policy lying outside the window, but this is rare. More often, the window moves based on a much more complex and dynamic phenomenon, one that is not easily controlled from on high: the slow evolution of societal values and norms. [Emphasis added]

The Big Lie: Your a Racist!

To paraphrase 1 Corinthians 15:55:

O racism, where is thy sting? O racism, where is thy victory?

Since the 2016 election of President Donald J. Trump Democrats have been put is a position of telling big lies over and over again. Among these lies are:

  • Trump/Russian collusion.
  • Trump’s obstruction of justice.
  • Trump Muslim ban.
  • Trump’s mental health.
  • Trump is a racist.

Each has been pushed by Democrats in order to keep the people from learning “the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie.” The major consequence would be the re-election of President Trump in 2020.

The Democrats know that “the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” The truth about Baltimore, for example, is that the local, state and federal governments have failed miserably to give the people a chance to succeed for themselves.

The truth about Socialism is that it has never succeeded, ever. Socialism has, in fact, caused the death of tens of millions of people in Nazi Germany, the former Soviet Union, Communist China, Communist North Korea, Cambodia, Cuba and Venezuela.

President Trump forces Democrats to defend the indefensible.

President Trump is speaking the truth in times of universal deceit and by doing so he is masterminding a revolutionary movement first to make and now to keep America great.

The Democratic Party and its members have lost the full trust and confidence of the American voter. The “D” in Democrat stands for deceit.

In a July 31, 2019 email titled “The antidote to Trumpism” Rep. Joe Kennedy III (D-MA) states:

Funneling resources from the most marginalized to the most privileged? That’s the opposite of what our economy needs to be doing.

That’s why our movement is fighting for an economy that’s judged not by how much it produces, but how broadly it empowers its people — an economy backed by a government that’s unafraid to set the conditions for fair and just markets. [Emphasis added]

Rep. Kennedy III calls this new Democratic Party economy “moral capitalism.” Moral capitalism is code for big government Socialism. Barry Shaw, in a recent column on Ilan Omar, notes, “The slogan of the Somali Revolutionary Socialist Party was ‘social justice’ and ‘scientific socialism’ as they delivered an intolerant national injustice.” Do the Democrats want to make America like Somalia using another”Big Lie?”

concludes, “It is a rotten, and a deeply un-American, spirit that has risen up among us. Donald Trump will not vanquish it single-handedly. But simply by tearing the scab off this festering infection, revealing it to all in its hideous profusion, he has earned the gratitude of everyone who values liberty and the boundless opportunities of what we used to be able to call, without embarrassment, the American way.”

President Donald J. Trump is clearly shifting the Overton Window on racism, Medicare for all, abortion/infanticide, immigration, giving illegal aliens public benefits, big government Socialism and taxation. His opponents are now outside of the Overton Window and are increasingly losing support among the American electorate.

© All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

You Can’t Blame Trump for Baltimore’s Failure, Ineffective and dishonest politicians have used racism as a shield from criticism for half a century.

Elijah Cummings’ Baltimore Home Burglarized, Looks Like Trump Was Right

Being a Racist Is Easy Today

Menacing Invective Against Trump Lowers Bar for Violence

Trump Says The Things You Can’t Say

RELATED VIDEO: MSNBC Analyst Exposes The 2020 Democratic Agenda As A Total Dumpster Fire.

The Deadly Sin of Anger on Display

America has an anger problem. There was another random shooting—this time in a city east of Santa Cruz in California.

The Mercury News (7/28/19) reports: “At least four people were dead, including a suspect, and 15 people injured after a gunman cut through a security fence and opened fire on a crowd Sunday evening near the end of the Gilroy Garlic Festival, sending panicked festival goers running for their lives.”

The gunman was reported to have opened fire on the crowd with an assault-style rifle. Witnesses heard someone shout, “Why are you doing this?” and the gunman replied, “Because I’m really angry.”

Before his death, the gunman posted on Instagram,“Read Might is Right by Ragnar Redbeard,” according to NBC News. That 1890 anti-Christian, racist screed is subtitled, “Or, Survival of the Fittest,” and it promotes Social Darwinism. After all, if humanity is just glorified apes, then why should we be surprised when someone acts like one?—with apologies to apes. Indeed, ideas have consequences.

According to police, officers on the scene shot and killed the suspect within one minute of the shooting.

We are becoming jaded as a society because of all these types of shootings. These angry people, usually men, kill a number of strangers and often themselves, as if that ends their problems. They will discover that their real problems have only just begun.

The left says it is all the guns’ fault, and they demand we turn the rest of the country into Chicago. There, strict gun control laws take away guns from the law-abiding citizens, while the criminals have all the guns. Four people killed one weekend night is commonplace in Chicago because of the strict gun control laws.

No, it all gets back to our loss of Judeo-Christian morality. We have forgotten God—that’s why these things have happened and continue to happen. I wrote a book about how this country suffers from what I call “American Amnesia.” We have forgotten the Lord who made us, who told us what is right and wrong—and murder is certainly wrong—who will one day hold us accountable.

Jesus said that it is not only wrong to murder people, but also even to hold anger in your heart. It is anger in the heart that bubbles over that can lead to these things.

The first man born of a woman was Cain, and he got so angry at his brother because God accepted the latter’s sacrifice, but not his—that he murdered Abel in cold blood.

Because of unchecked anger, there are potentially dangerous places in America…

  • Public places, like malls, movie theatres, outdoor festivals,
  • The workplace,
  • Public school campuses,
  • The highway (with the rising cases of road rage)

It’s hard to believe that human life is becoming so cheap that sometimes a person would literally take the life of another human being because they cut them off in traffic.

There is wisdom through the ages on anger:

  • Publicus Syrus said, “An angry man is angry with himself when he returns to reason.”
  • Ben Franklin said, “Whatever is begun in anger ends in shame.”
  • Will Rogers warned, “People who fly into a rage always make a bad landing.”

Anger is even listed as one of the Seven Deadly Sins—a classic list of key sins which lay at the root of many other sins.

Anger is not always sin. The Bible has much advice about handling anger, but nowhere does it forbid us to get angry per se. Indeed, God made us in His image. In addition to being a God of love, He is a God of wrath. God is angry with the wicked every day. God’s anger is not petty, nor whimsically vindictive, but always in keeping with His eternal plan.

There is righteous anger. Anger over sin. Jesus showed that. He sometimes became angry—because of sin. For example, in the Gospels, He cleansed the temple because they had changed a place of worship into just a marketplace.

In His anger, He did not sin. However, the rest of us have a sin nature—which severely limits our ability to be righteously angry. We are more likely to import our own selfishness and own sense of entitlement in our anger.

Ironically, it was the violation of the commandment to do no murder, that salvation was made possible in the first place. Sinful men crucified Jesus Christ, the only perfect Person who ever lived, who was fully God and fully man, and who died on behalf of sinners so that those who believe in Him will experience forgiveness for their sins.

Alas, we need to control our anger. As Solomon noted, “A man who controls his temper is better than one who takes a city.”

The Biggest Threat to Black Folks

The biggest threat to the Black community is by far and away drugs.  No, not the drugs you might think; but the drug of liberalism!

The biggest drug dealers in America are radical liberal quasi journalists like Roland Martin, Joy Reid, Don Lemon, and Richard Princess.  And the biggest institutional drug dealers are radical liberal groups like the NAACP, The National Urban League, and the Congressional Black Caucus.

Martin, Reid, and Lemon have their own TV shows that rabidly promote the radical liberal talking points of the Democrat Party.  Princess is like the crazy old uncle that writes and says crazy things that no one pays attention to; but many Black journalists seem to revere him and his radical thoughts on racism that seem to have no end.

They all claim to be journalists; but are in daily violation of the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) code of ethics.  SPJ’s code of ethics are supposed to be the Bible for all journalists; they lay out the dos and don’ts of journalistic conduct.

The SPJ’s preamble states,

Members of the Society of Professional Journalists believe that public enlightenment is the forerunner of justice and the foundation of democracy. Ethical journalism strives to ensure the free exchange of information that is accurate, fair and thorough [emphasis added]. An ethical journalist acts with integrity.”

They go on to state that the foundation of ethical journalism is: seek truth and report it, minimize harm, act independently, be accountable and transparent.  You can read the details on SPJ’s website.

Can anyone with any shred of integrity prove these quasi journalists live up to their own industry’s code of conduct?

They all claim to be registered “independents,” but they all are liberal Democrats, notwithstanding their clams to the contrary.

On a daily basis they serve as unpaid surrogates for the Democratic National Committee (DNC).  They constantly assert their opinions into their quasi coverage of news and are afraid to engage with “real” Blacks who are “real” Republicans.

They either go out and find millennial Republicans who don’t know their butt from a hole in the ground or find a Black who will criticize the Republican Party and the Trump administration.

They want weak, Black Republicans that they can embarrass on national TV in order to create the perception that all Black Republicans are ill-informed, have no connection to the Black community, and are buffoons.

On the institutional side, the NAACP, The National Urban League, and the Congressional Black Caucus are just as bad as these quasi radical liberal journalists, if not worse.

They represent their membership, not the Black community.  There is a big difference.

Each of these groups, without evidence, claim to be non-partisan.  They all are dependent on the expansion of government programs and the continued intrusion of government into the lives of Blacks.

They all aggressively advocate for radical liberal policies that are indistinguishable from the Democrat Party.  I was once told that the sign of a great teacher is one who makes himself increasingly unnecessary.

These group’s very existence is contingent upon the constant dependency of Blacks on government programs; i.e., the governmental drug of liberalism.

It is estimated that the federal government has spent over $ 22 trillion on the War on Poverty since the sixties.  Yet, the problem has not been solved and one can argue that it has gotten worse.

These radical liberal quasi journalists and institutions have continued to get yet another generation of Blacks hooked on the drug of liberalism.

They cause more damage to and in the Black community than anyone with a white sheet over their face.

Herein lies my frustration with my Republican Party and my current president.  We have a great story to tell to the Black community; but the story is not being told.

These radical liberal quasi journalists and institutions would lead you to believe that they speak for and represent the mainstream of the Black community.  THEY DO NOT!  But a lie that is repeated enough times becomes the truth.

The Black community is sold a bunch of lies daily from these sellouts to our community and because Republicans are totally disengaged in the debate, the narrative is deemed to be true.

The Republican Party and the Trump administration would be wise to engage with respected Black Republicans like former Florida Lt. Gov. Jennifer Carroll, businessman and civil rights legend Richard Finley of Birmingham, businessman and economic genius, John Burnett of New York City, to name a few.

Blacks are totally fed up with liberalism and do not consider Maxine Waters or Al Sharpton their leaders.  They are “media” appointed leaders.

I am a graduate of Oral Roberts University and Oral would always tell me, “Go into every man’s world and meet them at the point of their need.”

When will the Republican Party and the Trump administration take our message of “traditional values” to the marketplace of ideas within the Black community?

We don’t need to be persuaded, because we already believe; we don’t need to be convinced because we have no doubt that liberalism has failed us; we need only be invited to be “part of the team”.

Judges Seated by Trump Begin to Transform ‘9th Circus’

The Trump administration gained a rare victory this summer in the most unlikely of venues—the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which is widely viewed as the most liberal federal appeals court.

One big reason: President Donald Trump’s appointments to the 9th Circuit have moved it closer to ideological balance.

The court, long known for being both liberal and among the most overturned circuits, has been a thorn in Trump’s side, ruling against the president multiple times, mostly on immigration policies.

The confirmation of Trump nominee Daniel Bress in July gave the president his seventh judge on the court. It also brought the once lopsided appeals court to 16 Democrat appointees and 12 Republican appointees, with one remaining vacancy.

The administration won a 3-0 victory in June regarding a Department of Health and Human Services policy to restrict funding for family planning clinics that perform abortions.

While Trump hasn’t flipped the majority on the entire 9th Circuit, his progress increases the likelihood that randomly drawn three-judge panels will have more originalists, said Travis Weber, vice president for government affairs at the Family Research Council.

“The new judges will increase the credibility of this court,” Weber told The Daily Signal, noting that it long has been derided by conservatives as the “9th Circus.”

“We should have judges that interpret the Constitution rather than activists trying to legislate from the bench, which we’ve seen from the 9th Circuit,” he said.

Weber noted that most recently, the 9th Circuit has been the go-to venue for liberal activists seeking to block the agenda of the Trump administration.

This includes policies denying federal funds to “sanctuary cities,” which are local jurisdictions that refuse to assist federal immigration agents.

The court also has thwarted the administration’s “extreme vetting” policy designed to prevent migrants from failed states, including several majority Muslim countries, from coming to the United States.

The California-based 9th Circuit is the nation’s largest appeals court, encompassing California, Alaska, Arizona, Montana, Nevada, Hawaii, and Oregon. It now has more Trump-appointed judges than any other appeals court, according to Bloomberg News.

The 9th Circuit is responsible for about 40% of the United States and 30% of all appeals, says Sen. Steve Daines, R-Mont., who wants to split up the circuit to produce more fair hearings for Montana residents.

Senate Judiciary Chairman Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., commented in January: “I’m very supportive of the nominees submitted by President Trump to serve on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. … These nominations continue a trend by the Trump administration of selecting highly qualified men and women to serve on the federal bench.”

Judicial nominees have been one of Trump’s crowning achievements, as he has named more than 40 appeals court judges as well as two Supreme Court justices. While not having as much success at the district court level, the president has secured some 80 confirmations.

“It would take a long time, if it ever happens, before the full 9th Circuit has enough constitutional judges for a pattern to take effect,” Thomas Jipping, deputy director of the Edwin Meese Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at The Heritage Foundation, told The Daily Signal.

Because of Trump’s prolific filling of circuit court vacancies, currently only five of the 179 appeals court judgeships are vacant, Jipping said. But, of those, four seats were held by Republican-appointed jurists, he added.

To flip a court, Trump would have to replace Democratic nominees with Republican nominees. Even then, it’s not a sure thing to secure originalist interpretations, Jipping said.

“We tend to focus on the president who appoints the judge as a proxy of who the judges are,” Jipping said. “Republican presidents are more likely to appoint constitutionalists. Democratic presidents are more likely to appoint activists.”

“But every case is different,” he said. “Judges don’t make widgets.”

COLUMN BY

Fred Lucas

Fred Lucas is the White House correspondent for The Daily Signal and co-host of “The Right Side of History” podcast. Lucas is also the author of “Tainted by Suspicion: The Secret Deals and Electoral Chaos of Disputed Presidential Elections.”Send an email to Fred. Twitter: @FredLucasWH.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Senate Ups Judicial Confirmations Despite Democrats’ Obstruction

The NAACP’s Hateful Call to Impeach the President

Purple States on the Big Issues

Civil Rights Panel Wants to Bring Back Obama’s Race-Based School Discipline Policies. Bad Idea.


Dear Readers:

With the recent conservative victories related to tax cuts, the Supreme Court, and other major issues, it is easy to become complacent.

However, the liberal Left is not backing down. They are rallying supporters to advance their agenda, moving this nation further from the vision of our founding fathers.

If we are to continue to bring this nation back to our founding principles of limited government and fiscal conservatism, we need to come together as a group of likeminded conservatives.

This is the mission of The Heritage Foundation. We want to continue to develop and present conservative solutions to the nation’s toughest problems. And we cannot do this alone.

We are looking for a select few conservatives to become a Heritage Foundation member. With your membership, you’ll qualify for all associated benefits and you’ll help keep our nation great for future generations.

ACTIVATE YOUR MEMBERSHIP TODAY


EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

MEN AND ABORTION: The Paternal Paradox

“No uterus, no opinion? Not so fast. Men’s roles in abortion are varied, and society’s standards for fathers and men’s voices are contradictory and complex. To understand their involvement in abortion, and the repercussions that result, we need to examine the paternal paradox…” Sarah Quale


No uterus, no opinion

It isn’t too often that men get a say. Not in the deaths of their own children, unless of course, they support the mother’s decision to abort them. Not in the case of Ryan Magers, the father in Alabama who is suing the abortion facility and pharmaceutical company in the wrongful death of his aborted child, who Alabama law and the Alabama Supreme Court declare is a person with rights. Just yesterday, Judge Chris Comer heard arguments for and against dismissal of Ryan’s case, which he declined to throw out.

Over the past several years, the abortion industry and its feminist allies have run an aggressive campaign against fathers like Ryan, to bring more men into their movement, right alongside the “no uterus, no opinion” mantra. While this seems like a contradiction on the surface, there is a consistent, underlying criterion for membership in the #BroChoice in-crowd. You must unequivocally and unabashedly champion legal abortion.

On Twitter in May, feminist author and Vox media host Liz Plank called for men to respond with stories of how legal abortion benefits them. Responses to her controversial tweet varied.

According to #BroChoice men, who reflect an oversexualized culture that discourages chivalry and responsibility, women have the absolute right to “do whatever they want with their own body.” But there are rules.

  1. Bodily autonomy especially applies to a woman who enters an abortion facility.
  2. Bodily autonomy doesn’t apply to a woman in a dorm room, at a party, or in Hollywood.

Why is that?

Because abortion frees men, not women.

Abortion frees men from responsibility and commitment. It frees them to be totally unaccountable to a woman’s heart and to any life that’s created from his sexual relationship with her. But there is a cold truth that remains.

Every aborted child has a father.

The six roles men typically play

When it comes to abortion, the father is typically involved in one of six ways:

  1. He supports the abortion and usually brings her to the appointment and/or pays for it.
  2. He pressures her into having the abortion, sometimes threatening harm or loss of support.
  3. He abandons her and the decision altogether.
  4. He passively leaves the decision to her, often because he is confused or feels voiceless.
  5. He fights for the life of his child, but fails to convince her not to abort.
  6. He doesn’t even know about the pregnancy or the abortion until later, or possibly never.

Out of this complexity of roles springs the paternal paradox, described in brief by another response to Liz Plank’s tweet.

Here’s what this paradox looks like a little more broadly:

  • When women have an abortion, it’s viewed as an exclamation of their “reproductive rights” and freedom from male oppression.
  • When men pressure women to abort, they are labeled controlling, abusive, and oppressive.
  • When women ignore a man’s objection to an abortion, men have no legal recourse for the death of their own children.
  • But when women allow their children to be born, men are legally obligated to take financial responsibility.

To further understand this paradox, we must also consider what research shows about how men’s involvement, or lack thereof, impacts an abortion decision.

The father’s impact on decision making and outcomes

Ever since Roe v Wade, academic journals and research institutes have published studies on the reasons women have abortions. More recently, inquiries have focused on how lack of support and coercion impact the abortion decision and the effect coercion has on post-abortive emotional outcomes. Here is a small glimpse into this ever-growing body of research:

Sources of pressure from the father of the child can range from threats of abandonment to domestic abuse, and even homicide, which is one of the leading causes of death of pregnant women.  Other sources of pressure come from:

  • Parents of minor children that fear a pregnancy will bring shame on the family
  • A shame-based or secretive environment within a woman’s church
  • Counseling that’s rushed and driven by abortion profits
  • Doctors who insist women abort pre-born children with poor or terminal diagnoses
  • Traffickers in their attempts to control or punish their victims
  • Situations in which children are conceived in rape or incest, as Jennifer Christie, a mother from rape, can attest.

Aside from coercion, several surveys report that single motherhood and concerns about current relationships also contribute significantly to the decision to abort.

We can reasonably conclude that, in playing the roles of abortion supporter, coercer, abandoner, and passive bystander, men contribute directly to the confusion, fear, and uncertainty that often accompany a woman’s unexpected pregnancy and impact her decision to abort.  So much for “no uterus, no opinion.”

A shift in our understanding

Up until recently, the pro-life answer to “no uterus, no opinion” has been a simple historical reminder that one doesn’t have to be a victim of an injustice to stand up against it. The South’s argument for slavery was essentially “no slaves/no opinion,” yet scores of white abolitionists stood against the horrors perpetrated against those of African descent.

Similarly, the fight for women’s suffrage surged forward to obliterate the “no property/no say” argument. Yet there is a rich history of “suffragents” who helped make the right to vote (and own property) a reality for women.

But the time has come to move beyond this historical rebuttal, as empirical evidence is beginning to show that men are directly and deeply impacted by abortion, even though they aren’t the ones on the abortion table. Here are a few of the organizations that showcase this work:

  • The Alliance for Post-Abortion Research and Training (APART) houses current research papers, literature reviews, clinical reports, and academic publications on this subject. On the Fact Sheets page of their website, select the Men and Abortion tab.
  • The Life Issues Institute’s Men & Abortion Network (MAN) initiative provides studies on the effects of abortion on men and links to counseling and mentoring services.
  • The Abortion and Men area of the Elliot Institute’s website includes peer-reviewed research, academic articles, and post-abortive healing resources for men.

Anecdotal evidence is also growing and inspiring new ministries to help men work through the deaths of the children they couldn’t or wouldn’t protect. For example:

Lost fatherhood and God’s design

Every person who reports feelings of regret after abortion experiences his or her grief in different ways, yet a growing body of evidence here, too, suggests common behavior patterns and psychological symptomsassociated with post-abortion trauma. What’s not often considered, however, is post-abortion trauma in the context of God-designed gender.

Men are created by God to be leaders (Exodus 18:21, 1 Corinthians 11:3), and they are called by God to be honorable (1 Peter 3:7) and sacrificial (Ephesians 5:25-27). Deep in the spirit of a man is an innate need to be respected; to protect his loved ones from harm. To deny a man this core need and fundamental design is to strip him of his natural, God-ordained purpose. The result is a drifting powerlessness that can take its toll on a man’s self-image, causing a profound sense of loss and hopelessness. It can also bring excessive guilt and shame, fear, depression, sexual dysfunction, alcohol and drug abuse, significant damage to his peer relationships, and even suicide.

Men suffer greatly, but differently, from abortion. Yet our society continues to deny there is any suffering or regret from anyone at all.

If you or someone you know is experiencing emotional and spiritual trauma as the father of an aborted child, please reach out using the resources provided above. Men, like women, deserve to replace the death connection abortion creates with a life connection that forgiveness and healing through Jesus Christ brings.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Authorities Find More Bodies of Aborted Babies on Property of Abortionist Who Kept 2,246 as Trophies

Elizabeth Warren Repeatedly Lies About Getting Fired for Being Pregnant, Liberal Media Ignores It

Beto O’Rourke Unveils Plan to Force Americans to Fund Abortions, Make Abortion Up to Birth National Law

RELATED VIDEO: Pro-Abortion Mob Punching, Kicking and Spitting on Pro-Lifers

EDITORS NOTE: This Personhood.org column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

BDS advocate Ilhan Omar uses an Israeli company to power her website

She doesn’t have to worry, of course: the establishment media will never call her out on this hypocrisy.

Whoops: BDS Proponent Ilhan Omar uses Israeli company to Power Website,” by David Sidman, Breaking Israel News, July 23, 2019:

Congresswoman Ilhan Omar (D, MN), who introduced legislation that seeks to protect those who want to boycott, divest and sanction (BDS) Israel, uses an Israeli company to power her own website.

Reddit user ‘EthanB111’, noticed that the site ‘IlhanOmar.com’ is powered by WIX, a company that allows its customers to easily build websites using simple drag and drop tools. WIX does not hide the fact that they are based in Tel Aviv, Israel.

Before the freshman congresswoman was elected, she actually told Jewish voters that she opposed the BDS movement saying: “I believe right now with the BDS movement, it’s not helpful”.

But the CAIR affiliated candidate quickly changed her stripes when she introduced House Resolution 496, which states: “that all Americans have the right to participate in boycotts in pursuit of civil and human rights,” US Rep. Ilhan Omar invoked several previous examples where she says that “boycotts have been effectively used” in the United States and around the world. She also caused a controversy when she compared boycotting Israel to the boycott of Nazi Germany.

In a statement, Omar said: “Americans of conscience have a proud history of participating in boycotts to advocate for human rights abroad including … boycotting Nazi Germany from March 1933 to October 1941 in response to the dehumanization of the Jewish people in the lead-up to the Holocaust”.

RELATED ARTICLES:

“Bronx man” removed from Qatar Airways plane when it was discovered he was going to join the Taliban

Another Jew-hater at CNN: Muslim host of digital tech show tweeted “I love you Hitler”

France: Muslim city official celebrates his birthday with a Nazi swastika cake

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

I wasted 3 hours watching ‘Once Upon a Time in Hollywood’ — Quentin Tarantino’s Theatre of the Absurd

I wasted nearly 3 hours watching this absurd and pointless film. The film belittles the memories of Sharon Tate and the legendary martial arts film actor Bruce Lee. To understand the film one must understand history.

Let me explain what actually happened once upon a time in Hollywood

History Lesson #1: Roman Polanski

“Once Upon a Time in Hollywood” glorifies Roman Polanski, who was accused of having sex with a 13-year old girl. Tarantino defended Polanski’s actions. In a Variety article titled “Quentin Tarantino Defends Polanski in Resurfaced Interview: 13-Year-Old Girl ‘Wanted to Have It’” Maane Khatchatourian reported:

Tarantino said Polanski’s 13-year-old victim “wanted to have it and dated the guy.” Polanski was arrested in 1977 for five offenses following the alleged assault, including rape by use of drugs, perversion, sodomy, and lewd and lascivious acts upon a child under 14. He fled the country after pleading guilty to unlawful sex with a minor.

“He didn’t rape a 13-year-old,” Tarantino said in the unearthed interview when asked by Stern why Hollywood embraces Polanski. “It was statutory rape. That’s not quite the same thing. … He had sex with a minor. That’s not rape. To me, when you use the word ‘rape,’ you’re talking about violent, throwing them down; it’s like one of the most violent crimes in the world. Throwing the word ‘rape’ around is like throwing the word ‘racist’ around. It doesn’t apply to everything that people use it for. He was guilty of having sex with a minor.”

Read more.

Keep the above in mind as you read my review.

History Lesson #2: Bruce Lee

In a July 2019 The Wrap article titled “Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, Roman Polanski Blamed Bruce Lee for Sharon Tate’s MurderTim Molloy reported:

For a brief time after the murders of his pregnant wife, Sharon Tate, and some of their closest friends, director Roman Polanski believed that Bruce Lee may have killed them.

[ … ]

Like many Hollywood men, including Steve McQueen, Polanski trained with Bruce Lee, a fiercely efficient fighter trying to break into the movies. Bruce Lee had also given Tate martial arts training for the 1968 film “The Wrecking Crew.

One day, after Tate’s murder, Polanski was deep in grief. The LAPD had no leads on who had murdered his wife and their unborn child.

Then Lee mentioned to Polanski that he had lost his glasses.

Polanski paid close attention, because someone had left a pair of glasses in his home, and detectives believed they might belong to the killer.

Polanski also knew Bruce Lee was one of the few people who might have been physically capable of killing a house full of people, all by himself.

Read more.

Tarantino portrays the well known Asian martial arts actor Bruce Lee as arrogant, stupid and a bully. Bruce Lee said, “Showing off is the fool’s idea of glory.” Tarantino portrays Lee as someone who is showing off.

On July 20, 1973, just one month before the premiere of Enter the Dragon, Bruce Lee died in Hong Kong, China, at the young age of 32. Tarantino, like Polanski, denigrates the life of this Asian martial arts master.

How I wasted 3 hours

Once Upon a Time in Hollywood takes place in 1969. A time when films were transitioning from the good guys always get the bad guys to what we see today, there are no good guys or bad guys. Or guys are always bad. At the 41st Academy Awards in April 1969, Polanski’s 1968 film Rosemary’s Baby won an Oscar for best supporting actress played by Ruth Gordon.  In a July 1968 review of Rosemary’s Baby Roger Ebert wrote, “Roman Polanski’s ‘Rosemary’s Baby’ is a brooding, macabre film, filled with the sense of unthinkable danger.’

You could use some of these same words for Tarantino’s Once Upon a Time in Hollywood. Actually, Hollywood has become brooding, macabre and filled with dangerous propaganda. Films like the profanity laced Good Boys is all about using 12-year old children to push kinky sex and drugs. Get the picture?

One person has taken action to call out the hypocrisy of Hollywood and Quentin Tarantino. His name is Sabo. The Hollywood Reporter article “Tarantino Billboards Hijacked in L.A. to Slam Epstein, Polanski and ‘Pedowood’” explains:

Brad Pitt and Leonardo DiCaprio no longer appear on several ads in Hollywood for Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, as a conservative street artist has swapped their images with those of convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and film director Roman Polanski.

The giant billboard at Pico and La Cienega had been rented by Sony to advertise the Quentin Tarantino movie that opened Thursday night, but Friday morning not only have the photos of the actors been altered, but also the film’s title, which now reads: “Once Upon a Time in Pedowood.”

[ … ]

Epstein wasn’t as well-known among the public as Polanski until his recent arrest, but he was a frequent guest at entertainment industry events on both coasts, even throwing dinner parties at his New York mansion attended by the likes of Katie Couric, Charlie Rose, Chelsea Handler and George Stephanopoulos.

Read more.

Tarantino’s profanity lased film is all about the deep underbelly of 1969 Hollywood. Sex, alcohol, drugs and rock and roll. Oh, how far Hollywood has fallen since the days of great western movies like High Noon or the 1969 Academy Awarded Best Picture Oliver!.

Don’t bother to go see it. It is Tarantino’s theatre of the absurd.

© All rights reserved.

Is Ilhan Omar a ‘Failed American Experiment?’ Here Are Your Comments

Amidst the media furor over President Trump’s suggestion that Omar, due to her anti-Americanism, should go back to her home country of Somalia, we wrote an article titled “Is Ilhan Omar a ‘Failed American Experiment?’”

The words “failed American experiment” were those used by Clarion’s National Correspondent Shireen Qudosi on a recent appearance alongside Candice Owens on The Ingraham Angle, Fox’s popular news magazine with Laura Ingraham.

Qudosi, who herself is a Muslim, also noted that, based on Omar’s own rhetoric against America, “send her back” was not a racist statement but rather a “common sense message.”

At the end of the article, we asked for your opinion if Omar was a failed American experiment. Here are some of the many responses we received:

Identity politics always seems to lead to bind people in perpetual states of victimhood until some vague utopian leveling of all things is achieved. But it never is achieved and never will be. So unless identity politics is called what it is — an ill-conceived and dangerous strategy to right perceived wrongs — we will continue to descend into a dark, hopeless, roiling pit of rage and anger that has no happy ending.

This question is complex considering the different factions that exists in the U.S. today. There are organizations that consider the U.S. Constitution an out-lived document. So they teach children from the time they can understand how to hate America. … People like Omar are part of the problems we have and they will always be around to fulfill their hatred and disregard for our Constitution.

The American-Muslim woman in the article who spoke about Omar being a failed American experiment [Clarion’s National Correspondant Shireen Qudosi] I view as an example of what the attitude and perspective of a true American is and ought to be. She is what Omar should’ve become. She is the success story!

The West had been fortunate that early immigration brought in people who were politically benign and motivated to assimilate into Western society. But with the politically active global jihadist movement and “Caliphatism” seeking to capitalize on the liberties in the West to undermine and usurp political power, the system has simply broken down.

I understand the temptation to refer to Ilhan Omar as a failed experiment, though I think that is inaccurate. Ilhan is the product of her Somali culture, grossly amplified by the progressive’s victimhood culture, which taught her ever since she arrived in America. She has excelled at utilizing it to advance into the political/media-driven melange as a “new face of the Left.”

Her outright anti-Semitism in various statements, tweets and comments over the years would be enough to force the resignation of any white Republican congresswoman. Why the double standard? Because she is “insulated” by her race, religion, and gender all in the name of “diversity” — of the type that only leftists can wear. So, no ,she isn’t a failed “experiment” at all . She is a disaster of unparalleled proportion demonstrating the failure of American immigration screening, educational institutes and one political party that embraces the “hate America culture” as politically correct. 

Yes, and there are many others like her. For example, the Dutch immigrant that fire bombed the ICE facility in Washington state last week and the individuals who took down the American flag at the ICE facility in Colorado and raised a Mexican flag in its place. This is a problem that is more common then we often want to acknowledge.

Unlike Miss Omar, I live in a country I love (Zimbabwe), though it be very difficult at times. Without judging Omar, there seems to be a lack of appreciation of what she has in the USA. A visit to her original country of Somalia would certainly help her lack of appreciation and may even bring a little humility to what would seem like a very self-important and very entitled person. How sad …

Yes, Congresswoman Ilhan Omar is a failed American experiment. She is anti-American and anti-Semitic. Her behavior is an embarrassment to our country as well as a violation of the U.S. Constitution. A motion should be made within Congress to have her removed. Such hatred has no place in a democratic society.

Omar is the one who has failed miserably.

The failed experiment is a concept called multiculturalism. It has inflicted deep harm in every society that has implemented it.

Failed American Experiment is the best description I have heard to date. [In the words of Clarion’s National Correspondent Shireen Qudosi, herself a Muslim:] “… Omar still carries the broken value systems of all Third-World Muslim countries…”

Simultaneously, Rep. Ilhan Omar represents both the best and the worst of our immigration policy. Arriving as a poor, teenage refugee from Somalia, in short order, she was able to learn English, get a college education and pursue a career. By the age of 36, she was elected as the first female Muslim to Congress. Yet, in spite of her success, she denigrates the United States as hypocritical, unjust, and racist. She even refers to the Army Rangers who fought to save starving citizens (of the country she abandoned) from an unrelenting tide of warlords as warmongers. Thus, for someone who has been given so much by our country and has achieved the American Dream in a very short time, she is incredibly bitter and ungrateful. Ultimately, she has a toxic effect on our politics, something both ISIS and the Muslim Brotherhood can exploit to further their own narratives against us.

I believe everyone deserves a chance to prove themselves. Omar on numerous occasions has shown how truly anti-Semitic she is. Also the company she keeps disturbs me. She was photographed hobnobbing with Erdogan of Turkey.

A Trojan horse.

It is not an experiment but another way to help the progressives destroy the U.S. Islam’s laws are incompatible with our Constitution. 

What it seems like most people don’t understand about Omar’s position is that her attitude is no different than having a racist in Congress! I find it utterly hypocritical of Democrats in general to condemn President Donald Trump for being racist while they happily support the racists in their own party.

Clearly there is something terribly wrong with the way many Americans view things, especially among elected politicians. I mean how despicably self-centered a human being must be to be so one-sided, bias or partial to see the evil of others and yet at the same time to be completely blind of those same evils among those of your own party.

RELATED STORIES:

Is Ilhan Omar a ‘Failed American Experiment?’

Ilhan Omar Slams US on Fourth of July 

Ilhan Omar Controversy: Where Does She Get Her Views?

Rashida and Ilhan’s Excellent Adventure in The Land of Israel by Hugh Fitzgerald

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has wisely decided to permit Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar to visit Israel. Now Israel must make the most of this trip, which the two Congresswomen plan to use to further their anti-Israel agenda. The Israelis should suggest, in the most respectful possible way, that while Rashida and Ilhan will be giving most of their attention to the “Palestinians,” “we would be pleased to show certain places of significance in Jewish and Israeli history.” If the Congresswomen accept, those sites will tell a tale, not just to them, but through the members of the media accompanying them on their visit, to the American public. And if they refuse to visit these sites, they will be put in a bad light, seen as unwilling to consider the visible evidence of the Jewish connection to the land.

At the airport in Tel Aviv, the Israeli officials welcoming them should include Jews from Arab lands, as well as Indian Jews, Yemeni Jews, and Ethiopian Jews (far darker than Ilhan Omar or Rashida), reminding the world that Israel’s Jews come from all over, and that Israel is not a “colonial-settler project” of “racist” white European Jews imposed on the Middle East. Many of those journalists covering the brief airport ceremony, and their cameramen, will note this multiracial aspect of the welcoming committee.

Then the Israelis should take Rashida and Ilhan on their excellent adventure to “places that we hope you will want to learn about, places that provide you with more than 2000 years of Jewish history.” What can Rashida and Ilhan say? “Sorry, no. We came here to visit only the Palestinians, who get so little attention,” a palpably absurd remark about the most-reported-on minority in the world. And were they to reply “We are not here for a history lesson,” that wouldn’t go over well; what are they afraid of learning? So I’m betting they would have to agree to see at least some of the  things the Israelis wish to show them.

What places would one wish to show them? Here are ten suggestions:

1. The Dead Sea Scrolls at the Israel Museum, a visible reminder that Jews were already living in the Land of Israel in 150 B.C., when the first scrolls were written. What better evidence of the Jewish presence, 800 years before any Muslim Arabs arrived?

2. Masada, a UNESCO World Heritage Site, where Jews — survivors of the Jewish Revolt against the Romans — held out against far larger Roman forces that besieged them, until the last fighters, with their families, decided to commit suicide rather than surrender to the Romans in 73 A.D. Again, a reminder of the early Jewish presence, and Jewish tenacity, early on.

The tour guide might also explain to Rashida and Ilhan, and their media entourage, that it was the Roman king Hadrian who, in the Second Century A.D., determined to wipe out the Jewish identity of Israel-Judah-Judea, imposed the name “Palastina” or “Palestine.”  At the same time, he changed the name of Jerusalem to Aelia Capitolina. Another important history lesson, one which explains the use of the toponym “Palestine” to deny the Jewish connection to the Land of Israel.

3. The Western  Wall, the holiest site in Judaism, built about 20 B.C., is part of the retaining wall of the Temple Mount. Their visit should include the briefest of commentaries, in which they — and the reporters accompanying them — are reminded that Jews had always been allowed to pray at the Western Wall, except from 1949 to 1967, when the Jordanians  held the Old City.

4. A walk  through the Old City. The visitors — and accompanying cameras — will see for themselves that the Jewish Quarter looks quite different from the Muslim, Christian, and Armenian Quarters. Their buildings are all old stone, while — the guide explains –“the Jewish Quarter, as you can see, looks positively brand new. And that’s because it is. So much of it was destroyed by the Jordanians, including 58 synagogues that were demolished, that it had to be largely rebuilt after 1967. That’s why it looks so new.” What can Ilhan and Rashida respond?

5. The Jewish Cemetery on the Mount of Olives. This is the oldest and most important Jewish cemetery in Israel. Burial on the Mount of Olives started some 3,000 years ago in the days of the First Temple, and continues to this day. The cemetery contains anywhere between 70,000 and 150,000 tombs. Here Rashida and Ilhan should be shown the oldest of tombstones, testifying to the Jewish presence in the Land of Israel dating back to 1000 B.C. They should also be shown the places where 38,000 tombstones had once been, but were uprooted by Arabs during the Jordanian occupation of the Old City, with some of the tombstones used to line the floors of Jordanian army latrines, and others crushed into gravel and used at building sites.

6. Yad Vashem. The well-known photograph that shows the meeting of Haj Amin Al Husseini, the leader of the Palestinian Arabs from the 1920s to the late 1940s, with Adolf Hitler, properly enlarged, should be put up on a wall at Yad Vashem where the visitors cannot avoid seeing it. The guides at Yad Vashem can explain in a few sentences who Al Husseini was and what he did during the war years from 1940 to 1945, when he lived contentedly in Nazi Berlin. Al-Husseini urged Hitler not to let any Jews escape to Palestine; he helped raise three brigades of S.S. troops from among Bosnian Muslims; he became friends with Heinrich Himmler and Adolf Eichmann, in whose company he may have visited Auschwitz. During this time his popularity rose among the Arabs in Palestine; after the war he resumed his role as leader of the Palestine Arabs, with no Arabs objecting to his Nazi connection. It was only after the Arab defeat in the 1948-49 war, for which some Arabs blamed him, that Al-Husseini lost his position as leader of the Palestine Arabs, and went into exile in Cairo.

7. The Knesset. A quick visit to Israel’s parliament, where Ilhan and Rashida — and the reporters accompanying them — will see this raucous institution at work. Among the members of the Knesset are twelve Arab MKs, some of them routinely denouncing Israel, while other Arab MKs — this might surprise Ilhan and Rashida — are members of the Zionist Union and Likud parties. Jewish and Arab MKs can thus be seen on camera expressing themselves to their heart’s content, in the Middle East’s only democracy.

8. Hadassah Hospital, where Jewish and Arab doctors and nurses work side by side, and the patients — again, both Jewish and Arab — receive the highest standard of care in the Middle East. Let Tlaib and Omar meet the Palestinian doctors on staff who have received their medical training in Israel, and Arab patients who are being treated, often for free, thanks to the Peres Center and other charities, in Israeli hospitals. It might make them reconsider their views about those “oppressive” Israelis.

9. The Technion or the Weizmann Institute of Science. Either will do, for both provide a view of Israel as the original start-up nation. Rashida and Ilhan will no doubt be surprised at the astonishing list of Israeli inventions and innovations. In the field of medicine alone, they could learn about Israeli advances in the last few years, including: new ways of treating multiple sclerosis and pancreatic cancer; new aids to coping with loss of limbs (ReWalk), new diagnostic techniques (the Sniffphone), new medical devices (the PillCam, the Flexible Stent). Even if they refuse to be impressed, the members of the media will still have conveyed the information about these Israeli achievements to the American public.

10. Finally, they might briefly visit a startup Israeli company where innovations are brought to market, and where the workforce consists of Jews and Arabs. This ruins the narrative that Tlaib and Omar have been feeding the American public, about cruel Israelis and miserably treated Palestinians.

Summary: The Congresswomen, and the American public, will be given rapid but indelible lessons about  the Jewish presence in the Land of Israel. They will have seen the Dead Sea Scrolls (150 B.C.), the Western Wall (20 B.C.), Masada (73 A.D.), the venerable and vandalized Mt. of Olives Cemetery (the oldest tombs date from 1000 B.C.), each offering a very different kind of mute testimony to the Jews in their land. At Yad Vashem, they — and the American public — will learn about the connection of the man who was leader of the Palestinian Arabs for nearly 30 years, Haj Amin Al-Husseini, to the Nazis and the Holocaust. They will glimpse Israel’s rambunctious democracy at work in the Knesset, a sharp contrast to the authoritarian rule in the Palestine Authority, where the colossally corrupt Mahmoud Abbas, with his 400-million-dollar family fortune, was last “elected” to a four-year-term in 2005, and hasn’t felt the need to hold an election since. Then they will see Israel at work: Jewish and Arab medical personnel together treating Jewish and Arab patients with equal solicitousness; Jews and Arabs working side by side in research, development, and manufacturing, in all sorts of companies, but especially in high tech. One example of such collaboration the Israelis might want to mention is the tech company Mellanox, recently sold to the American company NVIDIA. The Arab engineers at Mellanox are set to share a $3.5 million payout. Not exactly the “oppression” that Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib insist is the real story of Israel.

Let their excellent adventure in the Land of Israel be turned into a teaching moment. Not for them, but for the American and world public, who will be kept informed by the reporters and cameramen who accompany them. It’s not what they wanted or expected, but they weren’t what many of us wanted or expected. So let’s just call it even.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Ilhan Omar: We must make sure “that we as Muslims are not collectively blamed for the actions of terrorists”

Ilhan Omar berates Muslim questioner for asking her to condemn female genital mutilation

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

The Searing of the Conscience Over the Issue of Abortion

Four years ago, citizen journalist David Daleiden shocked the civilized world by releasing a series of undercover videos that documented the trafficking of baby body parts for profit. Planned Parenthood was gearing their abortions—for which they already make lots of money—so that they could also sell the baby body parts for great profit.

On the one hand, Planned Parenthood denies that the unborn babies are human. On the other hand, the baby brains, hearts, kidneys, lungs, etc. bring a handsome price for the researchers that pay for them. Furthermore, to extract those body parts from the unborn babies they killed, Planned Parenthood had to engage in some forms of abortion that are illegal, such as partial birth abortion.

This is all old news. Four years have come and gone. Ironically, it is the citizen journalist who exposed all of this who faces ongoing legal threats. Last week, thankfully, he weathered a major storm in this area.

Conservative Review (7/19/19) notes that a San Francisco judge ruled against the abortion giant and in favor of the First Amendment.

Planned Parenthood was suing David Daleiden and his team at the Center for Medical Progress (CMP), seeking some $20 million in damages because of fallout from his four-year old revelations.

Judge William Orrick III gave a tentative ruling that Daleidin’s First Amendment rights outweighed Planned Parenthood’s claim that some could be incited to violence by witnessing the abortion provider’s behavior. It should be noted that this is not a final ruling.

However, Judge Orrick did note that Daleiden could still be liable for expenses incurred by Planned Parenthood in investigating security and intrusions, since they allege that Daleiden trespassed. For this, Daleiden may be on the hook for $100,000 in damages—a far cry from the $20,000,000 that the abortion giant was seeking.

After last Wednesday’s decision, Daleiden declared, “Now that all the facts, evidence, and testimony are in, even Planned Parenthood’s favorite judge refuses to buy into the abortion giant’s fake news and lies about the honest motives and protected speech of pro-life citizen journalists.”

Meanwhile, Daleiden faces other legal problems as well—such as a fine against him for nearly $200,000 for allegedly violating a judge’s gag order.

It seems to have been like this ever since Daleiden revealed his undercover videos to the world. It has been a case of: Society doesn’t like the message, so it shoots the messenger.

That said, his videos have made a difference. Cheryl Sullenger, Senior Vice President of Operation Rescue, listed for me a few such changes in the last four years:

  • Ongoing FBI investigation into Planned Parenthood.
  • Two medical research companies were heavily fined and ordered to close for trafficking in aborted baby body parts obtained from Planned Parenthood.
  • Defunding of Planned Parenthood by several states.
  • Attempts to pass the Born Alive Infant Protection Act on state and federal levels.
  • Government contract with Advanced Bioscience Resources for fetal remains cancelled.
  • Federal defunding of aborted baby body parts used in NIH-sponsored research.

Thank God for these victories. To me, the sad thing about this overall story is that, while America was initially shocked by CMP’s revelations, after a while, the story of the sale of baby body parts was met with a collective yawn, or so it seems.

Dr. George Grant, an author of a definitive expose on Planned Parenthood, Grand Illusions, told me: “Four years after David Daleiden’s stunning revelations, I am more concerned about the silence of Christians in the face of undeniable evil than I am about the brazen Orwellian collusion of the media and the political establishment in covering up the gruesome business of Planned Parenthood. It is both more dangerous and more disheartening.”

Mother Teresa once said, “Abortion is a crime that kills not only the child but the consciences of all involved.”

While he was president, Ronald Reagan wrote a book, Abortion and the Conscience of the Nation (1984), in which he states, “As an act of ‘raw judicial power’ (to use Justice White’s biting phrase), the decision by the seven-man majority in Roe v. Wade has so far been made to stick. But…Roe v. Wade has become a continuing prod to the conscience of the nation.”

Perhaps, since Roe v. Wade in 1973 and the subsequent killing of more than 60 million preborn children by abortion, we have become jaded. As the saying goes, “Tell me something I don’t know.”

David Daleiden’s work exposed that babies were being aborted so their body parts could be harvested (with or without the consent of the mothers having the abortions). Initially, many shocked people were reminded of the infamous Nazi doctors, e.g., Mengele, and their medical experiments on Holocaust victims.  I fear abortion is allowing our consciences to be seared.