June is LGBTQ Pride Month: So What Are They Proud of?

/in , , , , /by

I have read on Twitter comments by many who question why we have an annual gay pride month. This is a question deserving of an answer.

Who started the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer (LGBTQ) Pride Month?

According to the Library of Congress website:

Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer (LGBTQ) Pride Month is currently celebrated each year in the month of June to honor the 1969 Stonewall Uprising in Manhattan. The Stonewall Uprising was a tipping point for the Gay Liberation Movement in the United States. In the United States the last Sunday in June was initially celebrated as “Gay Pride Day,” but the actual day was flexible.

The Law Library of Congress has compiled guides to commemorative observations, including a comprehensive inventory of the Public Laws, Presidential Proclamations and congressional resolutions related to Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual Transgender and Queer Pride Month.

Former Presidents Clinton and Obama issued proclamations related to Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Queer Pride Month.

President Trump on May 31st, 2019 tweeted:

As we celebrate LGBT Pride Month and recognize the outstanding contributions LGBT people have made to our great Nation, let us also stand in solidarity with the many LGBT people who live in dozens of countries worldwide that punish, imprison, or even execute individuals….on the basis of their sexual orientation. My Administration has launched a global campaign to decriminalize homosexuality and invite all nations to join us in this effort!

What are gays supposed to be proud OF?

In a June 6, 2011 Scientific American article titled “Why I’m Not Proud of Being Gay” Jessie Bering wonders, “I’m particularly interested in knowing what it is, exactly, that I’m supposed to be proud of.”

What is pride? Bering used the below Oxford English Dictionary definitions:

pride n. A high, esp. an excessively high, opinion of one’s own worth or importance which gives rise to a feeling or attitude of superiority over others; inordinate self-esteem.

pride , n. Arrogant, haughty, or overbearing behaviour, demeanour, or treatment of others, esp. as exhibiting an inordinately high opinion of oneself.

Bering wrote:

In fact, a team of University of British Columbia psychologists led by Jessica Tracy would note that the foregoing definitions of pride are actually referring to a particularly ancient, evolutionarily derived subtype, which they refer to as hubristic pride. Tracy and her colleagues have argued that hubristic pride evolved to promote and sustain dominance, with the emotional engines of conceit and arrogance motivating individuals to scale the social hierarchy, which translates to genetic fitness. Laboratory participants induced to feel hubristic pride display increased aggression, hostility, and manipulation—all tactics of a tooth-and-nail pathway to social dominance that is based primarily on fear rather than respect. It’s not terribly surprising, in this light, that individuals who are more prone to exhibiting hubristic pride tend also to be more disagreeable, neurotic, narcissistic, are less conscientious and have a history of poor relationships and mental health problems. [Emphasis added]

Is the LGBTQ community suffering from hubristic pride?

Bering believes not when he wrote:

After all, these are people that have been “culturally victimized” by an overwhelmingly oppressive heterosexist society, one that has systematically devalued and derided them as deviants for as long as they can remember. Developing in such a society is emotionally crippling and poisonous to one’s self-esteem; it’s not exactly a recipe for creating hubris and an inflated ego.

Bering offhandedly dismisses the beliefs of the three Abrahamic religions, Judaism (Genesis 19:1-7), Christianity (Romans 1:24-28) and Islam (Al-Mustadrak 2/375), concerning sodomy and pride. IslamWeb.net notes this about pride and arrogance:

Pride and Arrogance:

Allah, Almighty, Says (what means): “I will turn away from My Ayaat (verses of the Quran) those who behave arrogantly on the earth, without a right, and (even) if they see all the Ayaat (proofs, evidences, verses, lessons signs, revelations, etc.), they will not believe in them…” [Quran; 7:146] and (what means) “… truly He likes not the proud.” [Quran; 16:23]

Bering stated,

“These definitions clearly sit astride religious notions of pride being one of the Seven Deadly Sins . To many Christians, pride is the worst sin of all because placing oneself above others conflicts with spiritual egalitarianism. From a scientific perspective, at least, we can safely dismiss the God-hewn conjectures of pride being essentially evil, since there is no evil in essence, and there almost certainly is no God .

Are there objective moral values?

In an article published by BeThinking.org titled “Can Moral Objectivism Do Without God?” Peter S. Williams notes:

The most discussed moral argument for God’s existence is currently the argument concerning the ontological basis for objective moral values:

1. If God does not exist, objective moral values do not exist
2. Objective moral values do exist
3. Therefore, God exists.

[ … ]

Francis J. Beckwith observes how “our experience indicates that moral obligation … is deeply connected to our obligations toward other persons.” I have moral obligations, but since I can’t be obligated by anything non-personal (e.g. the evolutionary history of my species), I must be obligated by something personal. Since there are objective moral obligations that transcend all finite persons (or groups thereof), there must therefore be a transcendent personal reality to whom we are most fundamentally obligated.

Read more.

Laws are based upon objective moral values such as: murder is morally wrong and therefore must be punished. So too are the seven deadly sins: lust, gluttony, greed, sloth, wrath, envy and pride. Each leads to breaking the moral values (laws) created by mankind over the millennia to prevent immoral values from becoming cultural norms.

Billions of people have faith and believe there is a monotheistic God. Jews, Christians and Muslims alike hold this faith and belief.

New Questions.

Since 1969 there is growing scientific evidence that homosexuality leads to serious health problems. According to EchoHealthAlliance.org:

That virus, commonly known as HIV, is the defining pandemic of our time. More than 35 million people have been killed by the virus to date.

Seeing what is happening today there are new questions that the LGBTQ community must answer.

  1. Are gays proud of what they have done to the Catholic Church?
  2. Are gays proud of what they have done to the Boy Scouts?
  3. Are gays proud of what they have done to a baker who didn’t bake them a wedding cake?
  4. Are gays proud of the annual march in Boston dressed in revealing clothing and performing sexual acts in public, in front of children?

Given what has happened since 1969, the question: What are gays proud of?, is still relevant.

Conclusion

The LGBTQ community must regain its objective moral obligations to society.

RELATED ARTICLES:

MassResistance mothers expose what really happens to children at LGBT “Youth Pride” events

Vermont Poised to Let Kids, Not Parents, Make Gender Decisions

Transgenderism and Perfect Freedom

Transgender Surgery Isn’t the Solution

The Most Cited Study In The Transgender Athlete Debate Is Bad Science

MassResistance activists help stop reparative therapy bans in state legislatures across the country

Money Can’t Buy You Health

/in , , , , , , /by

Preview:  So how would government-funded primary care have prevented the diseases my patients have had? Heart failure? (Statin drugs probably make it worse.) Heart attacks? (When the patient has one, it is too late to prevent it.) Stroke? (Preventive aspirin is now criticized because of the bleeding it may cause.) Osteoarthritis? (We have great joint replacements but are much better at blocking access to surgery than at curing the arthritis.) Gall bladder disease, cancer, pneumonia, blood clots, thyroid disease, cataracts, arrhythmias such as atrial fibrillation, herniated disks, asthma, endocarditis from drug abuse, on and on. If we put all the doctors to work pretending to keep people healthy, who would treat disease and injury?

Healing the sick is what medicine is about. The politicians who promise to “fix healthcare” can only destroy medicine—while bankrupting the country.

“Healthcare” is supposed to be the big election issue, and politicians promise to give people universal and equal “healthcare,” or prevent the bad guys from taking it away.

Everyone of course wants to be healthy, and a $3 trillion industry wants to keep the money flowing.

So, I have a confession to make as a doctor: I don’t think I have ever kept anybody healthy. If someone comes to me asking for “health maintenance,” I don’t have a shot of “health” to give, or a prescription for “health” to be filled at your neighborhood Walgreens, CVS, or Rite-Aid.

And as a patient, I can’t recall any ways in which doctors kept me healthy, although they did save my life by taking out my appendix, and they treated some illnesses and injuries. I am very grateful to them, and whatever I paid them seemed reasonable and well worth it.

To my mind, a healthy person is one who does not have to see a “healthcare provider” regularly or take medicine every day, and who can go to work, take care of family, and generally lead an active life.

We hear endless complaints about how we spend too much money treating sickness instead of preventing it. If only we had the government take all the money, plus trillions more, and “invest” it in health, we wouldn’t have to spend so much, and everyone would be healthier—so they say.

This was the rationale for the National Health Service in Britain. Once the NHS took care of the backlog of untreated illnesses, much of the need for it would melt away. This did not happen. Expenditures kept rising and were never enough. The backlogs and waiting lists grew. Ambulances circle emergency departments, and patients are crammed into hallways and storage rooms.

Suppose you go for your government-funded, “value-based” health maintenance visit. Details of your once-private life will be entered into a very expensive electronic health record. (For most people, it will be their own data, but occasionally someone else’s will be cut-and-pasted in, causing endless trouble.) You will be checked for diabetes or pre-diabetes, hypertension or pre-hypertension, tobacco use, cholesterol, in many cases gun ownership, body mass index, and other government-mandated items. You will get educated about the evils of tobacco (in case you have been on Mars and hadn’t heard). You’ll be lectured about obesity if your BMI is too high. You’ll very likely get a prescription to lower your blood pressure or cholesterol, and you may get vaccinated for something.

Your provider will likely get a bonus for checking all the right boxes and for “keeping you healthy,” and will get penalized if your “numbers” don’t improve or you get sick. Since I don’t think others are any better than I am at creating health, there is a huge incentive to “manage the case mix” to discourage unhealthy or noncompliant patients from joining the practice.

People on drugs for blood pressure or cholesterol may feel worse rather than better, but are supposed to be less likely to have a heart attack or stroke decades later. Studies with huge numbers of patients, who may be very different from you, have shown a decrease in such events with treatment. So far, a decrease in expenditures has not been shown, in view of the cost of all the drugs and side effects.

Of course, as an internist I treat high blood pressure and diabetes, but I consider this to be disease management. Would better diet prevent these things? Possibly, but what diet? I recommended low-fat diets for years. This government-approved advice is now questioned.

So how would government-funded primary care have prevented the diseases my patients have had? Heart failure? (Statin drugs probably make it worse.) Heart attacks? (When the patient has one, it is too late to prevent it.) Stroke? (Preventive aspirin is now criticized because of the bleeding it may cause.) Osteoarthritis? (We have great joint replacements but are much better at blocking access to surgery than at curing the arthritis.) Gall bladder disease, cancer, pneumonia, blood clots, thyroid disease, cataracts, arrhythmias such as atrial fibrillation, herniated disks, asthma, endocarditis from drug abuse, on and on. If we put all the doctors to work pretending to keep people healthy, who would treat disease and injury?

Healing the sick is what medicine is about. The politicians who promise to “fix healthcare” can only destroy medicine—while bankrupting the country.

President Trump has real support among Hispanic voters!

/in , , , , , /by

The National Association of Latino Elected and Appointed Officials (NALEO) is hosting a presidential candidate forum for Democrats on June 21, 2019 in Miami, Florida. The  NALEO Educational Fund and Latino Decisions conducted a poll and found that Latinos are following Election 2020 very closely.  More than eight in ten (84 percent) Latino voters reported being likely or certain to vote in November 2020.

The NALEO/Latino Decisions Spring 2019 National Poll found the following top issues:

  • Lowering the costs of health care – 37%
  • Improving wages and incomes – 24%
  • Protecting immigrant rights – 19%
  • Creating more jobs – 19%

Twenty-five percent of those polled view President Trump as somewhat (13%) or very (12%) favorable. Only 15% of those polled put as a priority ‘stopping Trump and the Republican agenda.”

The Washington Post in a column titled “Trump’s support among Hispanics and Latinos is real. Don’t assume it will fade” reported:

Recent YouGov, Quinnipiac and Post-ABC News polls put his approval rating among Hispanics at 27 percent, 23 percent and 18 percent, respectively. Those numbers average out to about 23 percent — that’s a substantial chunk, and it’s not so different from his 2016 vote share. According to demographers Ruy Teixeira, Rob Griffin and John Halpin, Trump won 29 percent of the Latino vote against Hillary Clinton in 2016.

That roughly 25-30 percent of figure shows up elsewhere in the data.

President Trump has support in the Hispanic community with his pro-growth and pro-American workers agenda. The President’s recent efforts to lower healthcare costs can only help him.

As WaPo notes:

There’s one obvious reason that the Hispanic and Latino vote splits up and isn’t monolithic: Hispanic and Latino voters aren’t one identity homogeneous group. As with every other large racial and ethnic category (white, black, Asian), there’s a lot of internal diversity when you look under the hood.

[ … ]

It’s true that most Hispanic and Latino voters are Democrats, but some of the same political beliefs and identities that motivate non-Hispanics and non-Latinos to become Republicans, including religion, gender and partisanship also influence Latinos and Hispanics. Roughly 30 percent of them are a consistent Republican base.

The Democrats may be going down the wrong path when it comes to policies like de-funding ICE, raising taxes and pushing the $15 minimum wage, which all hurt job creation and wages. Giving free healthcare to illegal aliens rather than Hispanic citizens may be the deal breaker.

President Trump is kicking off his 2020 campaign in Orlando, Florida. Florida is key to his re-election. The Hispanic vote in the Sunshine state is important to both parties in 2020.

MOVIE REVIEW: Rocketman the Human Tragedy of ‘Looking For Love In All The Wrong Places’

/in , , , /by

Lyrics of Looking For Love In All The Wrong Places 

Well, I’ve spent a lifetime lookin’ for you;
singles bars and good time lovers were never true.
Playin’ a fools game hopin’ to win;
and tellin’ those sweet lies and losin’ again.
I was lookin’ for love in all the wrong places,
Lookin’ for love in too many faces,
searchin’ their eyes and lookin’ for traces
of what I’m dreamin’ of.

Songwriters: Bob Morrison / Patti Ryan / Wanda Mallette

The film Rocketman is a remake of the film Bohemian Rhapsody. Same story about failed lives, sexual addiction (homosexuality), drug and alcohol addiction, betrayal by homosexual lovers and failure to achieve true redemption.

In my column “Bohemian Rhapsody: A Case Study Of The Destructive Gay Lifestyle” I wrote:

I came away with a feeling of deep sadness watching the tragedy of the life of Queen lead singer Freddie Mercury, played brilliantly by Rami Malek. If anything Bohemian Rhapsody is a case study of the decline, fall and untimely death of a bi-sexual individual because of his promiscuous gay lifestyle.

The acting was excellent. The script and images depicted in great detail the path of Freddie from a heterosexual male into the darkest and deepest world of homosexuality.

If anything the lesson of Bohemian Rhapsody is about temptation and the weakness of the flesh.

Rocketman is all about temptation and the weakness of the flesh. Rocketman is also about failed parenting and its consequences. Reginald was never loved in his childhood, portrayed as flashbacks in the film, and is desperately seeking love throughout the film, in all the wrong places. His homosexuality doesn’t bring him love, rather his homosexual partners do just the opposite, they betray his trust and love.

Both Rocketman and Bohemian Rhapsody are sad films, with great music and acting.

There’s no doubt that Reginald Kenneth Dwight (a.k.a. Elton John), played brilliantly by Taron Egerton, and Queen lead singer Freddie Mercury had much in common. Both great talents who failed in their personal lives. Reginald is still alive. Freddie died of HIV/AIDS.

Both films are about how far a human being can fall into the abyss of sex, drugs and rock and roll. After watching Rocketman I began thinking of the the 1980 Country & Western song “Lookin’ for Love in All the Wrong Places” sung by Johnny Lee. The song was the sound track for the film “Urban Cowboy” co-starring John Travolta. “Urban Cowboy” is another tragic story of a man and woman who betray one another during their marriage. What is ironic is the only person who stood by Elton was Bernie Taupin, a straight white guy, played by Jamie Bell. Taupin and Elton were like “brothers.” Taupin wrote the lyrics and Elton put music to the lyrics.

Mankind sins. We all are sinners. Satan, Elton John dressed as the devil, makes his appearance at the beginning of the film. Satan is the central figure in Rocketman. Elton John dresses like Satan because he knows that his life is Satanic.

At the end of Rocketman there are three photos of Elton John.

One of him with a caption stating that Elton has been sober for 28 years. The second with Elton hugging a little girl touting his efforts to raise money to fight HIV/AIDs. The third of Elton with his male spouse, Canadian film maker David Furnish, with their two adopted children. These photos are put in the film to make it appear that Elton has turned a stone in his personal failed life of sex and drug/alcohol abuse.

While these three photos give an impression that Elton has changed and is today all right is misleading at best. Elton is still a homosexual and will remain an alcohol/drug addict for the rest of his life.

What Elton hasn’t done is fully redeem himself and turned fully away from his homosexual lifestyle. Because it was that homosexual lifestyle that led him into the depths of a hell on earth, including a suicide attempt. These three photos ring hallow at best. Doing good deeds is not enough. Being sober is not enough. Adopting children is not enough.

The film is yet another sad commentary of how far into the depths of debauchery one man can go. We hope others learn from the examples of Reginald and Freddie. The path to purgatory is wide. The path to heaven is narrow.

I came away thinking that if I ever met Elton John I would say to him, “Take the narrow path Reginald. You will be glad you did.”

RELATED ARTICLE: Impact of Same-Sex Parenting on Children: Evaluating the Research

The Effort to Add God to the WW II Memorial

/in , , , /by

Now that the dust has settled from the 75th anniversary of the D-Day invasion, it’s interesting to reflect on a piece of unfinished business related to our remembrance of that historic event.

Presumably in a nod to the political correctness that currently blinds this nation, the World War II Memorial unveiled in 2004 noticeably left out any mention of thanksgiving to the Lord for His aid. Yet President Franklin D. Roosevelt repeatedly called on God’s help in the conflict. William J. Federer, the bestselling author and speaker, documents this in his book, The Faith of FDR.

In a recent radio interview, Bill Federer told me, “The World War II Memorial has absolutely no mention of God. And those that fought in the war were men and women of faith,” who are often disappointed by this omission, as they come and visit the memorial.

Federer also noted: “I read through all [FDR’s] public addresses, and I was shocked at how many times he mentioned Christianity and the Bible.”

Here is a small sample of things Roosevelt said in his speeches:

  • “I know that there is not room enough on earth for both German militarism and Christian decency.” (3/1/45)
  • “The world is too small…for both Hitler and God…the Nazis have now announced their plan for enforcing their…pagan religion all over the world—a plan by which the Holy Bible and the Cross of Mercy would be displaced by Mein Kampf and the swastika.” (State of the Union Address, 1/6/42)
  • In a radio prayer heard live by most Americans: “With Thy blessing, we shall prevail over the unholy forces of our enemies.” (“D-Day Prayer,” 6/5/44)

Perhaps the biggest omission of God at the WW II Memorial is any mention of the FDR’s “D-Day Prayer,” from which that last quote comes. It is estimated that 100 million Americans (out of a population of 138 million) tuned into that radio broadcast the evening of the largest military invasion in history.

Here are portions of what FDR prayed that night:

“Almighty God: Our sons, pride of our Nation, this day have set upon a mighty endeavor, a struggle to preserve our Republic, our religion, and our civilization, and to set free a suffering humanity.

“Lead them straight and true; give strength to their arms, stoutness to their hearts, steadfastness in their faith….

“Some will never return. Embrace these, Father, and receive them, Thy heroic servants, into Thy kingdom….

“Many people have urged that I call the Nation into a single day of special prayer. But because the road is long and the desire is great, I ask that our people devote themselves in a continuance of prayer….

“Help us to conquer the apostles of greed and racial arrogancies. Lead us to the saving of our country, and with our sister Nations into a world unity that will spell a sure peace a peace invulnerable to the schemings of unworthy men. And a peace that will let all of men live in freedom, reaping the just rewards of their honest toil.

“Thy will be done, Almighty God. Amen.”

The “racial arrogancies” no doubt refers to the Nazi plan to create the Master Race, to speed up evolution, to remove from the earth those deemed of inferior stock—the Jews, Gypsies, Slavs, etc. The first group killed in the gas chambers were about 200,000 handicapped people, including World War I veterans with severe wounds.

In 2014, Congress passed and President Obama signed into law a bill to add the complete text of the FDR D-Day Prayer to the World War II Memorial. The only catch is that this legislation will expire within the next year, and the project is still “under development.”

Bill Federer and Chris Long, president of the Ohio Christian Alliance, who has been spear-heading this effort, are raising private donations for this cause. More information can be learned at D-Day Prayer Project.

Federer told CBN News last week: “You go to Normandy, what do you see? Crosses – 9,000 of them – and Stars of David. These were men and women of faith. And so it’s only proper that there should be some acknowledgment of faith at the World War II Memorial in Washington D.C.”

In an age of political correctness run amok, the D-Day Prayer Project is a worthwhile goal to help us get over what I call our “American Amnesia”—where we continue to forget God, despite all His help. As FDR observed, “If the spirit of God is not in us, and if we will not prepare to give all that we have and all that we are to preserve Christian civilization in our land, we shall go to destruction.” (Speech at the Great Smoky Mountains National Park, September 2, 1940)

Dear Governor DeSantis: What is Florida Doing to Insure Its Voter Rolls are Squeaky Clean?

/in , , , , /by

Ever since the 2000 George W. Bush vs. Al Gore recount Floridians have been sensitive to voter fraud in the Sunshine state. As Floridians look forward to voting in the presidential primaries in 2020 the question is: Are Florida’s voter rolls squeaky clean?

Why is this a concern for Floridians?

Let’s look at some areas that continually resurface every election cycle in Florida and in other states:

  1. People (i.e. snowbirds) with legal residences in two states who vote in both states.
  2. People who have passed away voting. Charlie Kirk in a recent tweet stated: According to a data specialist who independently audits voter rolls: Current Florida voter file received as of election day: 7,001 people born between 1900 to 1916; 516 born 1900 to 1908; 80 born 1900-1903; Plus 16 from 1886 to 1899.
  3. Illegal aliens voting (Florida has the fifth largest illegal alien population in America. (in 2012 election 200,000 illegals voted?)
  4. 275 convicted felons illegally voting in 2018?
  5. Refugees illegally voting. According to the Refugee Resettlement website, “Since 2002, 47,960 refugees from 62 countries have resettled in Florida.”
  6. Do the sixty-seven Supervisors of Elections fully follow the laws in insuring voter rolls are squeaky clean (remembering Broward County)?

VIDEO: Tom Fitton on CBN: 3.5 MILLION ‘Ghost Voters’ on Voter Rolls–‘That’s where you get fraud’:

It is illegal to cast a fraudulent vote in Florida

According to A Compilation of The Election Laws of the State of Florida:

Fla. Stat. Ann. §104.18

Prohibits voting twice within the state, or for the same office.

The following persons shall be deemed guilty of an election fraud: (5) Every person who, at any election, votes or attempts to vote in the name of any other person, living or dead, or in some fictitious name, or who, having once voted, votes or attempts to vote again, or knowingly gives or attempts to give more than one ballot for the same office at one time of voting;

According to the Heritage Foundation’s Election Fraud Cases database since 2010 only 15 cases of election fraud have been filed in Florida.

What must happen in Florida?

  1. Every Florida Supervisor of Election must insure they follow the law.
  2. Every citizen of the Sunshine state must vote.
  3. Every city, county and state elected official must support the ideal that only legal ballots are cast.
  4. Every citizen of Florida must report suspected voter fraud to their local Supervisor of Elections.

Every illegal vote cast negates a legal vote. Vote in 2020.

Will Abortion Politics Give Birth to Trump’s Second Term?

/in , , , , , , , /by

The good news for Joe Biden? There are still 17 months until the general election. That could be enough time to move past some of his catastrophic mistakes. The bad news for Joe Biden? There are still 17 months until the general election. And that’s an awful lot of time to make more.

Not many candidates survive a week as disastrous as the former vice president’s. And if you ask a lot of strategists, there’s no guarantee Joe Biden will either. As far as Democrats are concerned, his flip-flop-flip on the Hyde amendment — one of the most stunning policy reversals in 40 years — may have single-handedly reelected Donald Trump. “One of the largest obstacles to the defeat of President Trump in the 2020 election is the radicalism of the Democratic Party on the issue of abortion,” Michael Gerson writes in the Washington Post. “By forcing Joe Biden to abandon his support for the Hyde Amendment,” he goes on, liberals have given this administration its best chance at a second term.

“The problem here is not only that Biden appears weak and vacillating on an issue of conscience — which he does. Or that he will now be pressured to repudiate every hint of moderation in his 36-year legislative career — though he will be. The Hyde Amendment has played a particularly important role for Catholic politicians. It has allowed them to draw a distinction between permitting abortion and promoting it. Supporting the amendment has let them claim neutrality on abortion even while being effectively pro-choice. For Biden, this fig leaf is now removed. And seeing a 76-year-old man religiously and ethically naked is unappealing.”

For others, the shock wasn’t so much Biden’s betrayal — but what it reveals about the Democratic Party. “It’s troubling,” Richard Cohen mused, that the Left “is so intolerant of an opposing idea that it would doom a candidacy on that basis alone.” But then, this entire year has been a rude awakening for a lot of Americans who desperately wanted to believe that moderation still had a seat at the party’s table. Those illusions are gone, along with any whiff of Biden’s sincerity on abortion — or any other issue.

“He has put himself in an even worse position than Hillary Clinton during the 2016 campaign,” the Wall Street Journal argues. “I think he is actually toast,” “The Five’s” Greg Gutfield insisted. “I think that this is going to push him out the door.” Even in the press, the unofficial Biden fan club, the vice president went from legitimate contender to political cartoon. And why not? This is a politician who was talked out of four decades of conviction by the cast of “Who’s the Boss?” It doesn’t matter if you’re a Democrat or Republican: a man who gets intimidated by Alyssa Milano is not who most Americans want negotiating with Kim Jung Un.

Even the liberals who agree with Biden’s new position aren’t cutting him any slack. Deep down, even they recognize how important a compromise like Hyde is to his electability. That’s why, the Washington Post argues, “almost every Democrat in Congress has voted for legislation containing Hyde Amendment language, and according to research by [our] Mike DeBonis, that includes every Democrat running for president who is currently in Congress or previously served on Capitol Hill.” Hyde’s popularity is one reason the policy was never really an issue for either party until Hillary Clinton made it one three years ago. And we all saw how that turned out.

Even now, in battleground states like Pennsylvania, Americans don’t want anything do with the extremism of the new Democratic party. In fact, Axios explains, most people (89 percent) are well aware of the abortion debate playing out in state legislatures across America. “And they support the moves to enact strict new restrictions on abortion.” In Erie, “a few of our participants said [the restrictions] may actually make them slightly more likely, on average, to support Trump.”

The time is coming — and soon — when someone will ask Joe Biden about his stance on infanticide. Let’s hope he has a better answer.

Tony Perkins’ Washington Update is written with the aid of FRC Action senior writers.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott Signs Bill to Stop Infanticide, Care for Babies Born Alive After Abortion

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Launches Campaign to Force Americans to Fund Abortions

Kevin Sorbo on Democrats: “A Party That Supports Abortion is Going to Lecture Me on Morals? Don’t Think So”

Abortion Activist Jordan Hunt Sentenced to 8 Months Probation After Roundhouse Kicking Pro-Life Woman

Delta Air Lines Will Not Boycott Georgia for Protecting Babies From Abortion

When Push Comes to Pole…

Cuccinelli Puts the Legal in Immigration

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

VIDEO: Gold Star Families Rally Against Socialism — Independence Day 2019

/in , , , , /by

Please consider helping dozens of Gold Star family members make their voice heard this Independence Day as we rally together on the lawn of the Capitol against the rise of socialism in our nation.

We, America’s Gold Star families, carry a unique qualification to speak common sense over this issue.

Moms for America (a 501c3 non-profit) is hosting this event. All donations are tax deductible. Events like this require a tremendous amount of money to pull off. We’re taking it on because we believe this can honestly make a difference.

Please Stand With Us by Donating Today!

Chernobyl HBO Series: The Radiology of the Ideology

/in , /by

Comrades! After having watched with growing indignation all five episodes of the new HBO miniseries, Chernobyl, we feel it is our duty to denounce this show for its counter-revolutionary agitation and to report its creators for slander and sabotage to the proper authorities.

OFFICIAL TRAILER:

The show’s many thought crimes against progress and socialism pale in comparison with the egregious question asked at the very end: “what is the cost of lies?” It implies that in a socialist state people are afraid to speak the truth, and that the question on everyone’s mind is “what is the cost of truth?” while the question they should really be asking is about the cost of lies. According to the show, the cost of lies is a disaster of apocalyptic proportions.

The audiences are led to believe that the Soviet state was run on lies and that everyone in the chain of command lied to their subordinates and to their superiors alike, to cover their own behinds and to ensure career growth. That view is a gross deviation from the Party line.

Along with all progressive people of good will, we know that “lies” is what comes out of the mouths of the enemies of progress. What we say is never a “lie.” The preferred nomenclature here is the “current truth,” and it is subject to change without notice as per the interests of progress and socialism. The only exception is Gorbachev’s statement that Chernobyl had led to the collapse of the USSR. That is a lie.

Some ex-Soviet dissidents may similarly claim that the horror of Chernobyl was a metaphor for the failure of socialism. Everybody in the USSR, they say, had jobs in the monopolistic state-run economy, witnessing gross mismanagement and incompetence of their higher-ups on a daily basis and later telling bitter jokes about it. As things kept breaking all the time, the Party promoted role models who unthinkingly filled the cracks in the broken system at the cost of their own lives. The permanent state of crisis demanded individual sacrifices for the common good, validating the collectivist moral code.

The real surprise here was not that the Chernobyl reactor finally exploded, but that something of that nature hadn’t happened sooner and on a larger scale. Once that idea sank in with most Soviets, putting an end to the socialist system became a simple matter of their survival. Compounded with the degrading faith in the power of the state and the Party, it led to a psychological chain reaction and a proverbial 1991 meltdown five years later.

Such understanding is complete rubbish. The current truth is, of course, that the accident was caused by the agents of Zionism and Yankee imperialism, and the Communist Party was truly a guiding force in the heroic struggle of the Soviet workers, who sacrificed their lives for the glory of the Motherland and for the victory of socialism around the world.

The series neglected to mention that five days after the nuclear explosion, millions of residents of Kiev, the Ukrainian capital city 70 miles south of the reactor, poured into the streets to partake in the official May Day parade, the annual celebration of the international solidarity of workers. The revelers hadn’t been informed about the radiation for their own good, or else they would’ve been fleeing in panic rather than demonstrating the unbreakable bond between the Soviet people and the Communist Party. Every progressive person of good will would agree that given the choice between the radiology and the ideology, the ideology prevails and the show must always go on. By then, of course, all the top Party leaders and their families had left the city in an organized fashion; the state couldn’t afford to lose their most valuable cadres.

Another reason to ban this HBO series is its blatant white nationalism. As noted by one British filmmaker who happens to be a young woman of color, “there are so many great actors of colour in this country that would’ve been amazing in #chernobyl.” She was disappointed to see “yet another hit show with a massive cast that makes it looks like PoC don’t exist.” And yet, an entire gang of Russian miners – all played by Caucasian actors – was filmed in blackface. Couldn’t the directors just hire black actors for that, saving on makeup and sparing themselves an embarrassment? As for the lack of racial diversity complaint, let’s just say that the Soviet Union’s glorious diversity of black and brown people at all levels of government could only be rivaled by its diversity of thought. Here’s a little-known fact: Vladimir Lenin was 1/1024th Native American.

And yet, in spite of all their efforts to distort the Party-approved history, the makers of Chernobyl couldn’t avoid showing the selfless heroism of the Soviet people under the caring leadership of the Communist Party. Neither could they hide the workers’ spectacular living conditions at state-run housing projects, as well as the poignant visual agitation and propaganda in the form of artistic murals, portraits of Lenin, and a red banner saying “Our goal is the happiness of all mankind.” We dare you to disagree with that slogan.

On behalf of all progressive workers and peasants, we demand that all digital copies of this muckraking British-American series be destroyed, all digits be scrambled and buried under a ton of concrete like the radioactive dead dogs in Episode 4. All TV schedules must be retroactively cleansed of this title to erase the memory of its existence, and this very report must be also burned after reading along with all the viewing equipment.

Is Islam a Religion?

/in , , , , , /by

Whereas a representative Republic is defined as the rule of the people, by the people, for the people, Islam is defined as the rule of Allah, by Allah and his emissaries, for the pleasure of Allah. And when people, out of concern for political correctness or ignorance, describe Islam as a religion, (forget the peace) they are, at the very least, guilty of misrepresenting it.

Islam is a comprehensive totalitarian form of slavery. It is the opposite of freedom. Islam means submission or surrender. True to its name, Islam strives for nothing short of enslavement of the body of humanity as well as the bondage of its mind. This non-negotiable surrender to Islam requires the individual, as well as the society, to disenfranchise themselves of many fundamental and deeply cherished human rights.  Islam seeks nothing less than total global domination.

Islam is an unabashed politico-expansionist movement wrapped in the trappings of religion and bent on universal conquest by any and all means or tricks available at its disposal.

In the interest of impartiality, the authors of the Constitution did not define what constitutes a religion. Presently, a plethora of sects, cults and orders-all claiming to be religion-cover the length and the breadth of the land. So, as long as these “religions” minister to the legitimate spiritual needs of their congregations without threatening the rights of others, there is no reason for concern. However, when one or more of these claimants strive to undermine the very Constitution that protects them in order to impose their beliefs and way of life, serious problems arise.

The problem is, too few Americans are aware of it and organizations like CAIR and the Muslim Brotherhood are taking full advantage of our naiveté. Moreover, Islam stands in stark contrast to the Declaration of Independence, the US Constitution and what the First Amendment was designed to protect—our God-given unalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Islam considers itself the three branches of government. It enacts laws as it sees fit, adjudicates laws, and executes them as it deems. Islam is anathema to the provisions of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution and much more.

Islam proclaims itself as the only legitimate religion for the entire world, grudgingly granting minor recognition to Judaism and Christianity from whom it has liberally plagiarized much of its dogma. Jews and Christians are allowed to live under the rule of Islam as “dhimmis” and must pay a special religious tax of jizyah. Buddhists, Hindus, Zoroastrians, Baha’is, members of other religions, agnostics and atheists are not even allowed to practice their belief or disbelief. Islam actively suppresses and even prohibits the practice of other religions, including those of the “people of the book,” Jews and Christians.

There is not a single church or synagogue in the cradle of Islam, Saudi Arabia, while thousands of mosques are tolerated and welcomed in Western non-Muslim lands. Islamic countries that allow for Jewish and Christian places of worship subject these “people of the book” to numerous subtle and not-so-subtle forms of persecution. Muslims in non-Muslim lands proselytize relentlessly and convert others while any Muslim who leaves Islam is considered an apostate and is automatically condemned to death.

Freedom of speech is just about non-existent in Islam. The word is Allah’s, his chosen divines such as Ayatollahs and Imams are the only ones who have the power to make pronouncements squarely based on Allah’s word, the Quran. Any expression that deviates in the least from the Quran, the Hadith or the edicts of Islamic high divines is heresy and severely punishable. Hence, stifling of free expression is the major mechanism by which the Islamic clergy retain power and prevent constructive change in Islamic societies.

Freedom of the press is completely alien to Islam, since a free press tends to express matters as it sees it, rather than as it is stated in the Quran. To Islam, the Quran is the press and the only press. There is no need for critical reporting, no need to present ideas that may conflict with the Quran, and no place for criticism of anything Islamic.

Peaceful assembly of the people is not allowed.  Backward oppressive Islamic societies inflict great hardship on the citizenry and any assembly of the victims presents a threat to suffocating rule. Islamic governments routinely prevent peaceful assemblies from taking place. Failing to do so, they unleash their hired thugs, the police and even the military against any assemblage no matter how peaceful and how legitimate is its grievance. The Islamic Republic of Iran which is vying with Saudi Arabia as the leader of true Islamic rule, routinely attacks any and all gatherings of its people, arrests them, imprisons them without due process, tortures them, and even executes them in secret dungeons.

As harsh as it is, here is the reality…

Devout Muslims literally have turned into walking missiles. You can’t reason with Muslims blinded by hate. You can’t argue with Muslims blinded by Islamic faith. Islam hates the power of the individual. Islam hates the achievements of women. Islam hates progress. Islam hates the religious freedom of others. Islam hates the pre-Islamic heritage of other nations. Islam is against free-will and hates democracy, liberty and justice for all. Islam simply loves to devour you alive.

The greatest threat facing the United States today is its own ignorance about Islam. Until American citizens understand the threat of Islam on American soil — people will continue to die. Until there is a true understanding of this satanic faith and means to control it, people will continue to die.

No, Islam has never been hijacked by militant or radical Muslims. In fact, radical Muslims are true Muslims. Islam itself has hijacked humanity for almost 14 centuries. Unfortunately, American politicians ignore this, lie to their citizens and portray Islam as a religion of peace. What a shame!

Any dogma, doctrine, cult or a religion that seeks to create its own governance, its own legal system and seeks to mobilize its own militia is itself not interested in separation of Church and State, and has no right to use that separation to create hegemony. In fact, such a doctrine is not even a religion at all.  It is a totalitarian regime, and must be considered the enemy of the US Constitution and everything Americans believe in.

Conclusion

Islam is not a religion by any standards. It is a militant, political and violent cult created by one man: Muhammad. It is time that we treat Islam as the greatest threat to the human race. The Islamic treasury, flushed with oil extortion money together with the help of Marxist-Democrats and Hollywood celebrities (“Muslim Brotherhood front-groups have targeted Hollywood as one of many vehicles through which to conduct its civilization jihad.”) are having the upper hand in this battle of survival for freedom.

Time is of the essence. Americans must act now and stem the tide of this deadly threat. If we don’t defeat it politically and do it swiftly, our children and grandchildren could be engaged in a religious and ideological bloody war, the likes of which has never been seen on American soil.

WANTED: The Good Guys

/in , , , , /by

While I was recently reading The Tale of Troy with my fifth-grade class, a hand shot up from the back of the classroom.   The student wanted, desperately, to know, “Who are the good guys?”  The thread of good and evil, right and wrong, had been lost in confusion and machination, in plots and treachery, and in the struggles of the immortal against the mortal, and of the strong against the weak.  Knowing who was winning did not matter to this young man. Knowing who stood with right and honor was what strengthened his heart.  He wanted to know: “Whose side do I fight on?  Where do I sign up?”

In that cry for clarity, I saw once again how the human heart has an innate need to know who the good guys are.  It helps to keep us grounded.  It strengthens us.  We can endure suffering, if we recognize the forces of good, why they fight, and the moral ground on which they stand or fall.

When Sir Ernest Shackleton embarked on his Imperial Trans-Antarctic Expedition, he ran an advertisement in The London Times: “MEN WANTED: for hazardous journey.  Small wages, bitter cold, long hours of complete darkness, constant danger, safe return doubtful.  Honour and recognition in event of success.”

Over 5,000 applied.

The same ad has been run by the Holy Spirit in our day, and the same response is pouring in.  We just need to recognize it.

Throughout history, and no less now, the good guys have often been few or hidden or seemingly defeated.  They have pondered the implications of refusing an oath and have chosen to be God’s servant first.  They have gone into hiding in an Amsterdam attic and kept hope alive in a copybook.  They have left their blood on church floors in Sri Lanka on Easter morning and witnessed to the Resurrection. Their safe return was doubtful.  They lost and were silenced.  Or so it sometimes seemed.

During World War II, a call went out for writers to preserve journals and diaries. There was a conscious effort to safeguard the witness of those fighting on unconventional battlefields: delivering supplies on bicycles, hiding families in farmyards, and whispering news behind enemy lines.  We know of those good guys because we have their stories.

*

What if St. Thomas More had sketched his thoughts as he reasoned his way to martyrdom?  What if a child’s diary from Mosul revealed her defiant hope?  What if the men who drafted the dubia had preserved their notes for posterity?

The truth, and the good guys who safeguard and defend it even at the cost of their lives, is needed now more than ever.  In today’s struggle between good and evil, the battle lines are often dangerously blurred.   The powerful have the pulpit, they falsify truth by stonewalling and obfuscation, and the moral path is abandoned as a relic of an unenlightened past.

And sometimes those whom we think are the good guys turn out to be crooks.  They betray our trust, inflicting deep wounds.

But the clarity of moral right has ultimate and enduring power, which cannot be silenced. The existence of good is, in itself, a response to evil.

You become a good guy in the silent, regular actions of everyday life or in its most dramatic moments.  When Todd Beamer boarded United Flight 93 on September 11th, he brought with him faith, courage, and principle.  God chose him for that flight because He needed a good guy.  Todd led the passengers against the terrorists with the “Our Father” and a “Let’s roll.”

The very existence of the good guys in the Church today preserves our sacred patrimony: the spiritual, doctrinal, and moral traditions handed down through the centuries by God through the minds and hearts of fellow good guys who have resisted attacks on truth in order to strengthen us for what is to come, for what we will be called to endure.

They ponder the implications of redressing error in red paneled rooms down the Tiber in Rome.  They may go into hiding because they’ve seen the evil behind closed doors and have refused to acquiesce to the convenience of a cover-up.  They are silenced in solitary confinement in a cell in Melbourne and witness each day to the lived Crucifixion.

The call is a privilege. The safe return is doubtful.

Shackleton’s men never reached their destination.  They lost their ship, Endurance, and languished off the coast of Antarctica in what seemed an endless vice-grip of the elements.  But that failed expedition is known as one of the greatest triumphs of the human spirit.  Shackleton returned with every man alive, doubtless drawing strength from his family motto, “Through endurance, we conquer.”

In a 1969 radio address, Joseph Ratzinger predicted, “From the crisis of today the Church of tomorrow will emerge. . . .the real crisis has scarcely begun. We will have to count on terrific upheavals.  But I am equally certain about what will remain at the end. . . .the Church of faith. . . .[It] will enjoy a fresh blossoming. . .where man will find life and hope beyond death.”

Long hours of darkness may lie ahead, but we are assured of the final victory. The gods on chariots with lightning bolts in their arsenals never have the last word.  The God of Israel, who speaks in silence to the faithful soul, always has the final say.

WANTED: The Good Guys.

Never underestimate how much you are needed to answer the call.

COLUMN BY

Elizabeth A. Mitchell

Elizabeth A. Mitchell, S.C.D., received her doctorate in Institutional Social Communications from the Pontifical University of the Holy Cross, in Rome, Italy, where she worked as a translator for the Holy See Press Office and L’Osservatore Romano. Mitchell writes from Wisconsin, where she serves as Dean of Students for Trinity Academy, a private K-12 Catholic school. Her dissertation, “Artist and Image: Artistic Creativity and Personal Formation in the Thought of Edith Stein,” focused on Saint Edith Stein’s understanding of the role of beauty in evangelization. Mitchell also serves on the Board of Directors of the Shrine of Our Lady of Guadalupe in La Crosse, WI, and is an adviser to the St. Gianna and Pietro Molla International Center for Family and Life.

EDITORS NOTE: This Catholic Thing column is republished with permission. © 2019 The Catholic Thing. All rights reserved. For reprint rights, write to: info@frinstitute.org. The Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own.

Trump Will Get Deals With Both China And Mexico

/in , , , , , /by

Most of the media won’t get it, probably even when it happens, but all of the signals are pointing to President Trump getting deals with both China and Mexico — and they will be better deals than what the United States has or has had.

Mexico is actually the easier nut to crack here. The government is corrupt, weak and totally reliant on the United States for both its legal economy and its black market economy. A full-out trade-war with the U.S. would of course cause some harm to the U.S., but would be catastrophic for Mexico. And more importantly, for Mexico’s government.

If the current political leadership wants to stay in power, and if future political leadership wants to attain power, they need a decent relationship with the U.S. And given the millions of Mexicans sending billions of dollars back to Mexico in remittances, running on an anti-American plank is not likely to be popular or successful — at least for long.

The tariffs on all Mexican imports began at 5 percent and rise by 5 percentage points each month before reaching 25 percent in October — unless Mexico takes serious steps to stop the flow of Central American migrants now swamping the southern American border. These 25 percent tariffs would crush the Mexican economy, and possibly have the perverse effect of strengthening the deadly cartels even more.

Mexico’s leadership is fully attuned to this dynamic, and that is why Mexican leaders are moving quickly to respond to Trump’s punitive tariffs launched Friday, with escalations coming, by agreeing to meet in Washington today.

President Trump tweeted Sunday: “Mexico is sending a big delegation to talk about the Border. Problem is, they’ve been ‘talking’ for 25 years. We want action, not talk.”

They’ve been “talking” and American leaders have been “talking” and everyone was fine with the arrangement as long as nothing was ever done. It’s obvious this President expects something to be done or those tariffs will just keep increasing.

So Mexican Economy Minister Graciela Marquez will arrive in Washington today (Monday) to meet with U.S. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross. On Wednesday, delegations led by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Mexico Foreign Relations Secretary Marcelo Ebrard will meet in Washington.

That was fast.

China is a tougher nut, but some of the same dynamics are in place as with Mexico.

As with Mexico, China is far more reliant on the U.S. than the U.S. is on China. Their economy is built on selling to the giant and prosperous U.S. consumer market. If that is cut off or diminished through tariffs, their much smaller secondary markets leave them in an economic tailspin, particularly considering that they are facing other economic headwinds, such as an aging and soon declining population, a fluctuating currency and increased competition from India (an ally that Trump should look to for a friendlier trade deal.)

One of the ways the Chinese Communist Party has maintained its iron fist of control is by not being communist, or socialist, but by freeing up its markets and allowing a form of capitalism to operate. That has created huge wealth gains, a growing economy and an emerging middle class.

Chinese who lived in generational poverty seeing the opportunity for a better life for themselves and their children have been willing to live with the totalitarianism of the Communist Party. But they may be much less willing to put up with the iron rule if the economy tanks.

One of the last things the Chinese government wants as it pursues its global ambitions is unrest at home. A trade war with the U.S. would risk that, and could begin to threaten their hold on power.

But the Chinese’ global ambitions based on their historic view of themselves as the Middle Kingdom — the center of the world — also drive them to be much more intransigent negotiators than the Mexicans. And patient negotiators as they take the long view. Newt Gingrich does a terrific job spelling this out in writing and on his podcast.

These are China’s competing interests in the negotiations: showing strength at home and abroad while actually being strong at home and abroad.

In the end though, their Middle Kingdom aspirations and desire for long-term control will mean that a new trade agreement is the lesser bitter pill to swallow. The Chinese are ultimately very pragmatic, and would likely view a new trade deal — even one that was not tilted in their favor — to be worth the trade-off for their ultimate vision.

That is why we’ve seen China moderating its original harsh rhetoric to Trump pulling out of negotiations after the Chinese deleted most of what they had agreed to. They had pulled this trick on previous administrations, counting on American president’s willingness to take a fake victory, if you will, and they were right.

However, they miscalculated with Trump. He’s just not a typical politician in so many ways.

So Beijing released a government policy paper on trade issues Sunday which as usual blamed the U.S. for the negotiations breakdown, but also turned much more conciliatory. They’ve realized Trump won’t come back to the table without real movement and so throughout the paper and at the briefing at which it was released, the Chinese government said repeatedly that they are willing to return to negotiations.

“We’re willing to adopt a cooperative approach to find a solution,” Vice Commerce Secretary Wang Shouwen said.

No talks are scheduled, but U.S. and Chinese trade officials will be at meetings of the Group of 20 major economies this weekend in Japan. A possible meeting between Mr. Trump and President Xi Jinping of China at the G-20 summit is seen as an opportunity to re-start trade talks. Don’t be surprised if that happens.

China “is expressing its wish to work together,” said Zhang Yansheng, a researcher at the state-backed think tank China Center for International Economic Exchanges, told the Wall Street Journal.

China will come back to the table that Mexico is already at. And Trump and Americans will ultimately get a better trade deal with China and better security on our southern border with Mexico — unless China holds out until November 2020 and we elect a new president that falls back to the status quo of China picking our pockets and stealing our tech.

EDITORS NOTE: This Revolutionary Act column is republished with permission.

The Sludge Sisters

/in /by

Throughout the ages, Jews have been the targets of genocidal forces both large and small, educated and ignorant, liberal and conservative, pagan and religious.

Other small sects and religions have never inspired the particular psychotic animus that Jews have because they never threatened the larger populace as Jews have with blazing green-eyed jealousy–the most powerful emotion of the human species. In fact, Proverb 14 states:

“A heart at peace gives life to the body, but envy makes the bones rot.”

After all, Jews were the first people in history to:

  • Introduce monotheism to the world.
  • Introduce the seven-day week––after the six days of creation and the seventh day on which God rested.
  • Reject child sacrifice.
  • Establish the world’s ultimate Code of Ethics––the Ten Commandments.
  • Introduce a strict legal system of blind justice.
  • Enshrine the value of lifelong education.
  • Produce a Bible in which God pronounced the Jews His “chosen people.”
  • Resurrect a 2,000 year old language, Hebrew, the language of Israel.
  • Transform the deserts of Israel into flourishing orchards, farms, and gardens.
  • Pioneer some of the greatest technological, scientific and medical advances in the modern world.
  • Witness the fall of massive and powerful civilizations, nations, empires and regimes that tried to destroy the Jews such as the Egyptians, Babylonians, Romans, Philistines, Assyrians, Greeks, Crusaders, Nazis, et al, and––to this day––still try to destroy them, i.e., the Iranians, the people who call themselves Palestinians, Islamic radicals, and not to omit the crazed, worldwide anti-Semites whose preoccupation with Jews obsesses them night and day!

And yet the Jews of the world are still here, still flourishing wherever they live, and still driving anti-Semites to the brink of clinical insanity as they try to cope with their utter and abject failure to do what Hitler and all the others also failed to do––destroy the Jewish people.

Don’t these idiots know that will never happen? Only if they converted to Judaism would they appreciate that the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob insured repeatedly it would never happen. And it never has…and it never will!

Yet, the Jew haters plod ahead, as we can see by the new Sludge Sisters in the U.S. Congress––Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) and Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI)––and their sycophantic supporters, including the Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, who is so intimidated by these far-left racists that she has rewarded them with influential positions on House committees.

She even gave the vulgar Rep. Tlaib the distinct honor of becoming the first Muslim woman to preside over the House floor. This is exactly what panderers like Pelosi do when they fear being displaced by more powerful pimps.

As writer, lawyer and Rabbi Dov Fischer notes: “And now the winds of Jew-hate have come to America’s Democrat Party…rooted in the core of the party…Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer have counted the tea leaves and…determined that it is bad Democrat politics to call out the Jew haters and Nazis in their party for what they are: Jew haters and Nazis.”

YUCK…WHY SLUDGE?

In a recent article, I offered a definition of sludge: a muddy mixture of dirt, muck, dregs, contaminants, filth. We’re all familiar with this ugly slime, which often contains human and animal feces, toxic drugs, nuclear waste, et al. Big yuck!

In that article, I also stated my Vessel Theory of human behavior, which is simply that no matter how fancy or decorative a vessel appears to be, the real measure of its value is its contents. A beautiful crystal vase, for instance, might contain urine; a ceramic creation, vomit; while a plain vessel might pour out pure spring water.

Lesson: what’s inside is the real thing!

Perfect examples are Ms. Omar, Ms. Tlaib, and their sympatico Jew haters––Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), Women’s March organizers Tamika Mallory and Linda Sarsour, and Rasha Mubarak, an Islamist anti-Semite of the Florida Democrat Party, who believes Israel has no right to exist––the list of repulsive racists is shockingly long.

And under the Sludge Sister umbrella are like-minded men like the longtime leader of anti-Israel groups James Zogby, as well as ole reliables like “Rev.” Jesse Jackson, “Rev.” Al Sharpton, “Rev.” Louis Farrakhan, too many Democrat members Congress to list here….again the list is long.

We are witnessing yet another grotesque mutation of anti-Semitism, propounded exclusively by Democrats––who get millions upon millions of dollars from Arab nations and who apparently imbibed their hatred with mother’s milk, who conveniently ignore the reality of or––for all we know––silently applaud jihadist children wrapped and strapped in suicide vests, who subscribe not to the U.S. Constitution but to Sharia Law––a law that subjugates women, endorses wife-beating, murders homosexuals, embraces honor killings, and widely practices female genital mutilation as described here in gruesome detail by professor/author Phyllis Chesler. And that’s the short list!

According to Mychal Massie, an ordained minister and founder and chairman of the think-tank The Racial Policy Center (RPC), Reps. Omar and Rashida “are rabid anti-Semite Muslim bigots and haters of America…uncouth, common, contumacious daughters of evil, who find America and Israel objectionable but somehow overlook the treatment of Islamic women and female children.

“There have been 34,925 terrorist attacks worldwide since the deadly American attacks on 9/11, Rev. Massie continues, “Where is their compassion for the people those of their religion have slaughtered?”

MEDIA WHORES

But why is this a subject in 21st century America? If our “culture” really believed that rank racists like Reps. Omar and Tlaib should be condemned and marginalized––the way singer Kate Smith’s performance of God Bless America during the seventh-inning stretch at Yankee Stadium was banned after almost 20 years because she supposedly sang a song with a racist lyric over 70 years ago––the Sludge Sisters would already have been relegated to eternal ignominy.

Writer Daniel Greenfield explains that “Americans don’t have an anti-Semitism problem. American politics has an anti-Semitism problem.”

Exactly! And our politics is fueled by leftwing media whores, all of whom take their marching orders from their globalist bosses––honchos who have been deeply complicit in the hate-Trump mania for the past three years and have purposefully––and malevolently––concealed the astounding accomplishments of the most pro-American and pro-Israel president in American history because of their vast international investments which are now threatened by an America-First president.

While they try to blame the president for the shootings of innocent Jews attending synagogue services, it is they themselves who scapegoat and vilify Jews for the good of the Party, which requires them to embrace the Sludge Sisters and their ilk. In fact, the Clarion Project credibly accuses “many mainstream media newspapers [of joining] The New York Times in shilling for the Muslim Brotherhood.

As Greenfield notes: “American politics….is full of politically active people who will defend anti-Semites against charges of anti-Semitism because they agree with them on the rest of their political agenda.”

Translation: Democrats are guilty of collusion––real collusion––with Jew-hating and Israel-loathing radicals because those radicals support their fetishes for wide-open borders, parasitical Sanctuary Cities, strangulating regulations, a weak military, the hoax of climate change, and infanticide! Lovely.

ROT

Not that proof is needed beyond watching the Sludge Sisters in action, but writer David Catron describes the deeply vile nature of Rep. Tlaib at a C-SPAN presentation this month, where she told the audience that,

“There’s always kind of a calming feeling, I tell folks, when I think of the Holocaust, and the tragedy of the Holocaust, and the fact that it was my ancestors––Palestinians––who lost their land and some lost their lives, their livelihood, their human dignity, their existence in many ways, have been wiped out, and some people’s passports.”

According to Catron, “Every semi-coherent syllable of Tlaib’s word salad is pure fiction,” a fact expanded upon by Abe Greenwald in Commentary Magazine.

“Disease is reversible—rot isn’t,” Greenwald writes. Reps. Omar and Tlaib brought the disease of anti-Semitism into the upper echelons of the Democratic Party when they were elected in November. The party could have fought the disease. It chose instead to nurture it. And that’s when the irreversible rot set in.”

Greenwald also corrects Tlaib’s egregious historical-revisionist fantasy about her “ancestors.” At the time, he says, “Haj Amin al-Husseini, the grand mufti of Jerusalem, was a supporter and ally of Hitler. When the two met, al-Husseini told Hitler that they shared the same enemies: `the English, the Jews, and the Communists.’ The two went on to scheme about how best to set upon and destroy the Jews of the Middle East. What’s more, the Arabs regularly massacred Jews in Mandatory Palestine.”

“Lies,” Greenwald explains, “are the lifeblood of anti-Semitism…it depends on lies because its very motive is to hide the truth of one’s own failings and lay blame on the Jews.”

Writer Ari Lieberman adds that,

“Tlaib’s ancestors, the so-called champions of safe haven for the Jews, rejected outright the 1947 United Nations Partition Plan, sparking a conflict which resulted in their defeat. Far from benevolence, the Palestinians exhibited hate, xenophobia and anti-Semitism in the extreme, and likely would have perpetrated mass ethnic cleansing and a second Holocaust had they won the war. The anti-Semitic attitudes exhibited by the Palestinians in the 1920s, 1930s and 1940s are no different than they are today.”

No surprise. One of the arch tenets of Islam is taqiyyah, which approves of and indeed encourages Muslims to lie in the service of their larger goal––to establish a worldwide caliphate under Sharia Law. As Americans have already witnessed, the Muslim invasion of Europe and the Scandinavian countries has already overtaken those countries…and now their target is America the Beautiful.

THE REAL PROBLEM(S)

As Dov Fischer stated: “It is not just about Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib. They are two blips of time, two mistakes that will be ignored by future American historians.” Rather, the problem for all decent non-racist people (the majority of Americans, I believe) is multifold.

It is about the Democrat House that recently defeated a resolution to condemn the Boycott-Divest-and-Sanction (BDS) movement designed to strangle Israel economically?

It is about the significant number of Jewish Democrats––many in positions of great power in the U.S. Congress (like Senate Minority Leader Schumer)––who have remained thunderously mute over these last many months as the anti-Semites in their Party spewed hatred of Jews and Israel on a daily basis.

These are the cowardly Jewish DEMOCRATS in the 116th Senate and House who have said NOTHING as the new flock of anti-Semites have, in essence, vowed to destroy them and all of world Jewry and Israel itself! The two Republicans––David Kutsoff (R-TN) and Lee Zeldin (R-NY) are the only exceptions of this list to speak out forcefully against the Sludges out there and anti-Semitism in general.

Senate
(8 Democrats, 1 Independent)

Michael Bennet (D-CO)#
Richard Blumenthal (D-CT)
Benjamin Cardin (D-MD)
Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)
Jacky Rosen (D-NV)*
Brian Schatz (D-HI)
Bernard Sanders (I-VT)
Charles Schumer (D-NY)
Ron Wyden (D-OR)

House
(25 Democrats, 2 Republican)

David Cicilline (D-RI)
Stephen Cohen (D-TN)
Susan Davis (D-CA)
Ted Deutch (D-FL)
Eliot Engel (D-NY)
Lois Frankel (D-FL)
Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ)
David Kutsoff (R-TN)
Andy Levin (D-MI)*
Mike Levin (D-CA)*
Alan Lowenthal (D-CA)
Nita Lowey (D-NY)
Elaine Luria (D-VA)*
Jerrold Nadler (D-NY)
Dean Phillips (D-MI)*
Jamie Raskin (D-MD)
Max Rose (D-NY)*
Jan Schakowsky (D-IL)
Adam Schiff (D-CA)
Kim Schrier (D-WA)*
Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL)
Brad Sherman (D-CA)
Brad Schneider (D-IL)
Elissa Slotkin (D-MI)*
Susan Wild (D-PA)*
John Yarmuth (D-KY)
Lee Zeldin (R-NY)

Never has it been more true that SILENCE IS CONSENT! And this is not only consent, not only approval and reward, this is collaboration!

Writer Karen McQuillan knows this species well. In her stunning article, “Democrats Rally Around Their Anti-Semites, she writes: The Democrats’ embrace of multicultural anti-Semites such as Tlaib, Omar, and Ocasio-Cortez poses a danger to our country—both morally and politically. No nation has ever embraced anti-Semitism and remained a decent country for its own citizens. This is a path we do not want to go down, because down it leads.”

And most significantly, to my mind, it is about the large number of Jewish Americans:

  • Who continue to cling stubbornly and blindly to the Democrat Party, which voted twice for Barack Obama whose entire regime was stacked with career anti-Semites and which made a deal with Iran to help that terrorist state obtain the nuclear weapons capable of wiping Israel off the map, as the Mullahs promise to do this very day,
  • Who inherited from their parents and grandparents a Democrat gene going back to FDR, who sadistically turned away the straggling remnants of the Holocaust (including 20,000 Jewish children) from coming to America by ship,
  • And who have also decided that there is nothing quite as important in life as abortion on-demand….and now infanticide, thanks to the New York State legislature (watch them applaud).

And most relevant, the above-mentioned elected Democrat legislators have made a deal with the devil because all of them are about to be exposed and possibly jailed as complicit in the greatest scandal in American history––the bogus collusion-and-obstruction hoax that they hoped would deflect attention from the vast corruption and criminality of the Obama regime for which they shilled.

Yoo Hoo, you Democrat Jews out there––the 24 candidates running for your Party’s presidency are not your friends…they loathe you! They support every anti-Semitic statement and anti-Israel initiative coming down the line.

It is well past the time for you to vote for the candidate who loves America, who is a passionate stalwart for Israel (in deeds, not words), and who has made life better for all the constituencies––black, Hispanic, women, youth––you claim to represent.

And very far past time that you manned up and womanned up and spoke out in opposition to the  Sludge Sisters and their male counterparts in the Democrat Party!

PODCAST: Is Impeachment Truly Necessary?

/in , , , /by

The Democrats and main stream media are currently consumed with impeaching President Trump, particularly as we approach the 2020 elections. Frankly, they are fooling nobody but themselves regarding their agenda. Even if the Democrats in the House passes charges of impeachment, they will inevitably fail in the Senate which is under Republican control.

Only two U.S. presidents in our history were impeached: Our 17th president, Andrew Johnson, in 1867, and Bill Clinton in 1998-1999. Let’s be clear, impeachment means charged with misconduct only. A trial is then conducted by the Senate to determine guilt or innocence. In the cases of Johnson and Clinton, both were found not-guilty by the Senate. President Richard Nixon resigned as opposed to having the country suffer through impeachment proceedings. Of the presidents, let us compare and contrast Presidents Nixon, Clinton, and Trump, as they are the most recent presidents to undergo this treatment.

INTRO

Richard Nixon – 37th president, Republican, served in office 1969-1974
Bill Clinton – 42nd president, Democrat, served in office 1993-2001
Donald Trump – 45th president, Republican, serving in office 2017-present

Mr. Nixon was the first and only president to resign from office before his term was over. He was succeeded by VP Gerald Ford, also a Republican.

POLITICAL CLIMATE

President Nixon worked with the 93rd Congress where both chambers were controlled by the Democrats.

President Clinton faced the 106th Congress where both chambers were controlled by the Republicans.

President Trump faces the 116th United States Congress which is split, with the Democrats controlling the House of Representatives, and the Senate controlled by the Republicans.

Mr. Nixon was elected as a “law and order” president to bring stability from the chaos of the 1960’s and promising to end the Viet Nam war. Although not a favorite among liberals, he easily won over Hubert Humphrey who served as LBJ’s Vice President.

Mr. Clinton was elected because of the perception he was more youthful and full of ideas than incumbent President George H.W. Bush, who presided over a faltering economy.

Mr. Trump was elected as an alternative to career politicians and to correct the liberal policies of President Obama. Democrats were shocked that Trump won as they believed Hillary Clinton would easily win. Their shock turned into hysteria and a resistance movement to obstruct every decision he made.

RELATIONS WITH THE PRESS

Perhaps the only president to earn such hatred from the press, other than Mr. Trump, was Richard Nixon, going back to when he was Vice President in the 1950’s (see Checkers speech of 1952) and helping to defeat him in the 1960 presidential election, losing to JFK. In 1962, he ran for governor of California, losing to Pat Brown. In his concession speech, he made the following statement which indicated his displeasure with the press, stating, “You won’t have Nixon to kick around anymore because, gentlemen, this is my last press conference.” He obviously returned to public life with his presidential victory in 1968.

President Clinton had a warm relation with the press during his two runs for president. They portrayed him as young and vibrant, and Republican candidates George H.W. Bush and Sen. Bob Dole were portrayed as old and stodgy.

President Trump has had a feud with the press ever since his first presidential campaign. He coined the term “Fake News” to describe the spin of the press.

In all three situations, the press played an important role in impeachment. There is no doubt they have a demonstrative record supporting Democrats over Republicans.

CHARGES

President Nixon was accused of covering-up the break-in at the DNC Headquarters at the Watergate Complex. There was no evidence to indicate he had any role in initiating the break-in, just the cover-up. The House spent considerable time sifting through evidence as presented by the FBI and the media, particularly The Washington Post. The president eventually resigned as opposed to facing the embarrassment of impeachment.

As for President Clinton, the House relied on the findings of an extensive investigation by independent Special Prosecutor Kenneth Starr, which included 11 charges, mostly lying under oath and obstruction of justice.

In terms of Mr. Trump, the country awaited a two year investigation by Independent Counsel Robert Mueller whereby no charges were presented. This did not satisfy the Democrats in the House who continue to investigate alleged improprieties by the president.

PUBLIC SUPPORT

President Nixon’s public support can be described as shaky at best. It eroded as evidence continued to pile up, particularly disclosure of the White House tapes which contained damning evidence as to Mr. Nixon’s involvement in the cover-up.

In terms of President Clinton, everyone seemed to know he was guilty, including the Democrats, but they didn’t believe the punishment fit the crime. Although he remained popular among members of his party, he also became a political liability, which explains why his endorsement is no longer sought.

As to President Trump, his support among Republicans and many independents appears to be on solid ground, much to the chagrin of the Democrats.

SUMMARY

If we have learned anything about impeachments over the years, it is they are always political, and always divisive. It used to be impeachment was considered a last resort to take, but it is rapidly turning into a common political tool, which is disturbing and hints at the desperation of the party pressing the issue. If the Democrats think such a move is going to unify the country, they are sadly mistaken. Impeaching President Trump is a risky political maneuver as it will only energize his base, particularly since the Mueller investigation produced no sign of wrong-doing. This is substantially different than Nixon and Clinton. Consequently, the American people will see President Trump’s impeachment as the charade that it is.

From the perspective of the Republicans, an impeachment of the president will be the best thing that could happen as the American populace will strongly re-elect the president and drive the Democrats out of office in the House. This will damage the Democrats for years to come.

The Democrats insist we have a “constitutional crisis” at hand. I agree, but not for the same reasons. I perceive them as undermining the Constitution by wanting to eliminate the Electoral College, changing the composition of the Supreme Court, and changing our fundamental rights and freedoms, such as speech and to bear arms.

So, why are the Democrats doing this? They know Mr. Trump has strong support from the populace thanks in large part to his economic policies. As such, they hope to distract voters by simply besmirching his character.

One last thing to consider, under Presidents Nixon and Clinton, the Congress kept on working and produced considerable legislation. Unfortunately, this is not true today. Because of their preoccupation with trying to stop President Trump, the Congress has come to a standstill. In all likelihood, the 116th Congress will go down in history as one of the most incompetent sessions, doing nothing for the American people they are supposed to serve.

Just remember, in our nearly 250 years of existence, no sitting U.S. president has ever been removed from office through impeachment. In the cases of Presidents Johnson and Clinton, they both returned to work after being found not guilty, and completed their term in office.

Keep the Faith!

EDITORS NOTE: This Bryce is Right podcast is republished with permission. All trademarks both marked and unmarked belong to their respective companies. All rights reserved.

INTEL REPORT: Sudan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, France & Algeria.

/in , , , /by

SUDAN

After weeks of more or less peaceful demonstrations by the quwa al-horeeya w-at-tagheer (Freedom and Change forces) with the exception of an unknown individual(s) shooting at the demonstrators, which was blamed on “deep state” holdovers from the

al-Basheer regime, this past weekend saw the regular Sudanese armed forces open up intense fire on crowds demonstrating.  Dozens were killed and hundreds more were wounded.

Most of the talking heads on al-jazeera Arabic have been blaming Egypt, Saudi Arabia (KSA), and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) for the shooting, saying that they pressured the current ruling military junta to squash the protests because they hate the idea of Democracy taking root in any Arab or Islamic country.

As if to direct more hate towards the Sudanese Junta and by extension its regional backers (Egypt, KSA, and UAE), al-jazeera Arabic has been playing clips of the most brutal scenes from the weekend’s slaughter over and over and over again.  And, 90% of their news coverage the past several days has been of that recent episode in the Sudan.

Al-jazeera’s website www.aljazeera.net has also reported that the junta has recently made a decision to escalate the situation vis-à-vis the “Freedom and Change forces.”

And, there might be some truth to that contention.  Saudi-owned media such as al-hadeth TV, and al-arabiyya TV have reported that the junta has decided to postpone elections possibly for up to nine months.

ANALYSIS

Previously on this column I reported that there were more than one faction among the protesting groups, that while Egypt and its allies supported the removal of the former clownish (and Islamist) dictator al-Basheer, they also supported at least one of the factions among the protestors.  Meanwhile Turkey and the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) supported one of the other factions, which is the hard core Islamist faction.

Therefore, in view of recent developments, I suspect that the “Freedom and Change Forces” as a whole have been taken over by the MB/Turkey-supported faction.  This in turn has caused Egypt and its Gulf allies to throw their support behind the current military junta as the lesser of two evils.  It isn’t Democracy as such that Egypt and its allies fear so much as it is the possibility of the MB and Turkey gaining control of a key country like Sudan.  Egypt’s life blood for the nearly 6,000 years of its history has been the Nile river.  And, Sudan controls the entire flow of the Nile as it enters Egyptian territory.  Therefore, Egypt must have a strong, stable government in Sudan.

Finally, given the way that al-jazeera has been covering the Sudan issue recently, that would seem to lend strong support to Egypt’s contention that Turkey and the MB (because of Qatar’s and al-Jazeera’s alliance with Turkey and the MB) have gained control of the “revolution,” so best to support the junta regardless of what ever warts it might have in terms of how it goes about squashing the rebellion.

The end result for Sudan, in my view, is a fracturing based on tribal lines in Africa’s largest country in terms of geographical extension.  In some of these regions chaos will reign.  Some of the vast territories of Sudan can be expected to become excellent staging and training grounds for the likes of ISIS and al-Qaeda or some time to come.

IRAN

Iran in the past has threatened to close off the Hormouz strait, through which all Gulf oil and natural gas passes, by sinking a ship or two at strategic choke points if is threatened.   Iran had never previously specified what sort of ship they would sink whether it would be  a military or civilian vessel, an oil tanker, or not, or a foreign vessel, or one of their own that they could sink in the strategically right place to choke off all transport through the straights.

Egypt’s al-ahram has reported that Iran is now specifically threatening to sink American ships if they are attacked.  According to this report, Iran is claiming that any military conflict between the U.S. and Iran will result in the global price of oil to rise to more than 100 dollars a barrel.  They are also claiming that their missiles can take out any foreign ship that enters the Gulf.

SAUDI ARABIA

The al-Jazeera website, www.aljazeera.net, has reported that Saudi Arabia is planning to execute three religious scholars.  The gist of this article is about a petition that some 80 prominent Muslims in the West have signed begging Saudi Arabia to refrain from executing these three religion scholars.

ANALYSIS

Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman, the defacto ruler of  KSA, has given the impression to the outside world that he thinks that the Islam of KSA, by nature, is a kind, tolerant religion.  Perhaps he even believes that fantasy himself.  When a reporter once asked him what he’s going to do about “Wahhabism” (the strict, fundamentalist brand of Islam that has dominated the Arabian peninsula since the late 1700s).  His answer was “what Wahhabism?”

The implication of that being that he is trying to pretend that “Wahhabism” does not exist, and that any radicalism that has arisen in the KSA is entirely the fault of the 1979 Iranian revolution and the influence it has had on Arab youth (he has said as much).

Bin Salman’s arresting, and executing, radical fundamentalist, or “Wahhabi” preachers should be seen as his attempt to stamp out fundamentalism so that the “Disneyland” form of Islam he believes in will be the only Islam left in the KSA.

FRANCE and ALGERIA

Like Sudan, Algeria has been undergoing and Arabic Spring 2.0 for the past several weeks.  And, like in Sudan, the reigning Dictator for life and a handful of his cronies have been forced to step down.  Meanwhile, the military officers have assumed control of the administration to keep things running, and to prevent total chaos until elections can be held.

But, like in Sudan, the crowds are chanting that they want elections now, they want a “civilian” government now.  They want all vestiges of the old regime (including, apparently, the Military officers) to step down and get out of the way.

According to the al-jazeera article, many in Algeria are complaining about the “pro France” factions in their country.  In this regard they blame the military and intelligence personnel for their historical close relationships with the French military and intelligence.

In this context al-jazeera noted that there are six million French citizens who have dual  French and Algerian citizenship, and that this huge number has had a profound effect on French elections.

ANALYSIS

The implication of there being six million with dual citizenship is that these French-Algerian connections would also strongly influence Algerian politics.

Westerners, however, should look at these numbers through a different lens.  The six million figure of those with dual citizenship does not count the 2nd and 3rd generation Algerian Muslims who are citizens of France and no longer hold dual citizenship with Algeria.  Nor does it count any of the Muslims from other countries who now reside in France.  What this means is that the Muslim population of France is likely closer to 15% than it is to 10%.  And, they are making their presence felt in very tangible ways, to put it lightly.