The Two Countries with the Greatest Commitment to Democracy

The world over, commitment to democratic values is worryingly weak.


For those old enough or educated enough to remember, humanity still lives very much in the shadow of the bloody 20th century (the most murderous in human history) with its failed political ideologies and the resulting huge loss of life.  It was democracy that won out, proving much more effective at protecting human life, based as it was on Judeo-Christian values and the intrinsic worth of every person.

Yet, commitment to specific democratic values is not particularly strong according to recent research conducted by the Pew Research Centre, despite the idea of democracy remaining popular.  One wonders if people continue to have a good understanding of what our democractic values are, why they matter, and what the alternatives are.  The research, which surveyed 34 countries, found:

  • only 64% of people thought that it was very important to have freedom of speech;
  • only 64% of people thought it was very important to have freedom of the press;
  • only 54% of people thought it was very important that opposition parties be able to operate freely;
  • only 65% of people thought it was very important to have regular elections; and
  • only 68% of people thought freedom of religion was very important.

The largest shares of the public describing all nine rights and institutions tested as very important are in the United States and Hungary.  Yet, even in those two countries only a third (33%) considered all nine democratic principles to be very important.

Interestingly, freedom of religion was the top priority in all three sub-Saharan African nations in the study as well as in Turkey, Indonesia and India. However, it was the lowest priority in several more secular nations, especially in Europe, where the French, Swedes, Spanish and Dutch all rate it their lowest priority, as do Japan, South Korea and Canada.  Religious persecution is often significantly under-reported in the Western media, perhaps contributing to these differing views of its importance.

A key problem seems to be the belief that elected officials are completely out of touch with the people they presume to govern.  Across the 34 countries surveyed, 64% of people believed elected officials do not care what people like them think.  In the United States, 71% shared this view (perhaps a contributing factor to a polarising figure such as Trump unexpectedly winning the presidency).  In nearly every nation surveyed, those who think politicians don’t care about average citizens are more likely to be dissatisfied with the way democracy is functioning in their country.

It stands to reason that increasing numbers feel their views are repressed and unheard, because freedom of speech is indeed narrowing.  We are increasingly no longer trusted to hear and express a wide range of ideas, the repulsive and attractive alike, and freely make up our own informed minds about what we think, allowing the more repulsive ideas to weaken by their very expression (rather than fester and become stronger in the dark).  Instead, an elite group of people, be they politicians, academics or rich corporations with the skewed ideals of their bottom lines, decide what we are allowed to hear or even think; their reasoning often puts the protection of minority groups from harm or offence above freedom of speech, sometimes very nobly.  But the fundamental problem is, who gets to decide what ideas can be freely discussed once we decide many views will be censored?

Freedom of speech can be understood as a multi-faceted right that includes not only the right to express, or disseminate, information and ideas, but also:

  • the right to seek information and ideas (this concerns the people who want to listen to the ideas to get to the truth of a matter);
  • the right to receive information and ideas; and
  • the right to impart information and ideas.

Quotes you have probably heard before include: “I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it”, and “To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticise.”  For people to feel listened to in a functioning democracy, and perhaps counter-intuitively to also rid ourselves of the more extreme ideas, we need to protect the right to safely and freely debate a range of ideas.  There is no need for freedom to discuss ideas everybody likes.

No matter what the system, ultimately a just society depends on the individuals within it possessing virtue and behaving in a virtuous manner.  No human rights or constitutional documents will save us if virtue is absent from the hearts of individuals, and faith in the system and society is lost.  Our constitutional systems do not uphold themselves.

Perhaps a survey like this shows individuals need to take more time to understand democracy and its alternatives, taking into account how the various systems have worked in practice in history and their track records in upholding the dignity of people and the value of their lives.  Then, if we indeed still believe in them, we might need to be more explicit about making sure future generations understand the value of democratic principles like freedom of speech.

In which country where the press is strictly controlled, ideas are not able to debated, and opposition is suppressed would the people who answered that these values are not ‘very important’ like to live in I wonder.

COLUMN BY

Shannon Roberts

Shannon Roberts is co-editor of MercatorNet’s blog on population issues, Demography is Destiny.  While she has a background as a barrister, writing has been a life-long passion and she has contributed to a range of publications.

She has regularly written on demographic issues for almost a decade, and her writing informs both academic teaching and international debate.

Shannon balances her writing with her other passion – her family.  She has three beautiful children and lives in Auckland, New Zealand.

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

ISRAEL: No! Not all votes are equal!

There is—and should be–a qualitative difference (i.e. a structural inequality) between votes cast for parties that wish to undermine the Jewish nation-state and those who wish to protect and preserve it

… the right of the Jewish people to establish their State is irrevocable…This right is the natural right of the Jewish people to be masters of their own fate, like all other nations, in their own sovereign State…Accordingly, we…hereby declare the establishment of a Jewish state in Eretz-Israel, to be known as the State of Israel… The State of Israel will be open for Jewish immigration – From Israel’s Declaration of Independence

Why was the First Temple destroyed? Because of three things which prevailed there: idolatry, illicit sexual relations, bloodshed… But why was the Second Temple destroyed, seeing that in its time they occupied themselves with Torah, mitzvot [religious observance] and acts of charity? Because baseless hatred prevailed. This teaches you that baseless hatred is equal to the three sins of idolatry, illicit sexual relations and murder. Babylonian Talmud, Yoma 9:B

The election results put us in the position of choosing which election promise to break. In this situation, removing Netanyahu is the main goal. We have no choice but to rely on the Joint List.” MK Moshe (Bogey) Yaalon, Blue & White, March 12, 2020 

It would be so nice if something would make sense for a change – Alice in Alice in Wonderland (The film)


These four excerpts encapsulate concisely, yet precisely, much of the implausible events that transpired in Israel’s political arena over the last few days—from the disturbing departure from the founding ethos of the State of Israel to the pernicious conduct of those, who allow their personal pique to undermine the very foundations of Jewish sovereignty.

A Kafkaesque aura

This Wednesday (March 11, 2020), a surreal—almost Kafkaesque—aura descended upon political realities in Israel, shrouding them in a thick swirl of bizarre fog, distorting familiar perspectives, and conjuring up outlandish spectacles, previously considered inconceivable, before our very eyes.

Incredibly, and despite fervent assurances to the contrary, official envoys from Blue & White, MKs Ofer Shelah and Avi Nissenkorn, unashamedly proceeded to engage the heads of the Joint List in an effort to cajole them into entering a coalition to oust PM Benjamin Netanyahu from office—or at least into supporting the establishment of such a coalition.

This, of course, constitutes a breathtaking abandonment of principle by Blue & White, a party headed by three former IDF chiefs-of-staff, who time and again assured the electorate that any government that their party formed would not rely in any way—neither directly nor indirectly—on the overtly anti-Zionist Joint List.

This was a pledge that appeared eminently plausible. After all, the Joint List, a motley, ad hoc political amalgam of Stalinists, Islamists and Arab ultra-nationalists, united only by an incandescent animosity towards Israel as a Jewish state, is a party, which represents the utter negation of everything the leaders of Blue & White have dedicated much of their adult life to defend.

“…would rather die than sing Ha’tikva…”

What makes this Blue &White endeavor even more perverse is the fact that, less than a year ago, prominent Joint List members repeatedly accused the heads of Blue & White of war crimes!

For example, just prior to a planned April 2019 visit by Blue & White MK Moshe (Bogey) Yaalon to the Arab city of Tamara, in the Galilee, the Ra’am-Balad alliance—today part of the Joint List—issued a harsh statement, condemning the visit: “The entry of war general [Bogey] Ya’alon to the city of Tamra and the Arab towns is dangerous, audacious, and signifies a crossing of red lines,…It is unthinkable that we will receive and shake the hand of someone who has blood on his hands…”

The statement went on to call for the cancellation of the visit: “We call to cancel the event which aims to market the party of generals involved in war crimes, and to gather in support of our nation’s [i.e. the Palestinian-Arabs’] justified struggle…”

This, of course, is an illustrative rather than an isolated example. Thus, a recent Joint List MK (2015–2019), Jamal Zahalka, brazenly declared he would “prefer…to die than to sing the Israeli anthem [Ha’Tikva],” and that the Israeli flag is “worse than a rag.” He also proclaimed that his Balad faction was not part of the Israeli left, but rather “an integral part of the Palestinian national movement”.

Declaration of Independence as Israel’s seminal Social Contract

After the outcome of the 1948 War of Independence, Israel’s Declaration of Independence laid out , in effect, the parameters of the Social Contract between Israel’s institutions of governance and its citizens—all its citizens, including its Arab citizens who elected to remain in it after Israel’s victory against the combined Arab attempt to annihilate it.

Indeed, the Declaration of Independence is the cornerstone that defines the ideological and ethical foundations upon which Israel was established and, as such, circumscribes the bounds of legitimate political dissent within it.

In this regard, it is significant that in the Declaration of Independence, the words “Jews” or “Jewish”, appear 24 times, all in reference to nation and/or nationality. By contrast, the words “equal” or “equality” appear in total twice, both times in reference to civil and social, but not national, equality.

It is thus indisputable that Israel was established as a sovereign Jewish nation-state, in which the Jews—and the Jews alone—have exclusive national rights, while all non-Jewish inhabitants have equal civil rights. (It was precisely in order to cement this fundamental and foundational precept in law by giving it legislative standing that Basic Law: Israel – the Nation State of the Jewish People was passed—belatedly—in July 2018).

Israel’s seminal Social Contract (cont.)

With regard to the question of the bounds of legitimate political dissent within Israel, there are of course a myriad of matters of legitimate political dispute. For example, these include:

Whether it should be a “cradle-to-grave” welfare state or one where the unbridled forces of the free market determine socio-economic outcomes—or what the appropriate mix of these two countervailing perspectives should be.

Or whether Israel should extend full sovereignty over all the territories beyond the pre-1967 lines or withdraw from them completely—or some hybrid blend of these diametrically opposing views.

While disputes over these issues may well be vehement, as long as they relate to ways and means to secure and develop Israel as the nation-state of the Jews, they are indeed, legitimate.

However, dissenting views begin to depart from legitimate debate when they pertain, not to how to preserve or promote Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people, but to transforming it into something qualitatively different.

Thus, when one is on a soccer field, there are different tactics and styles one may adopt as long as they conform to the rules of soccer. What one cannot do is adopt methods that contravene these rules. Thus, for example, one cannot pick up the ball and run with it or tackle the opponents as if it was a rugby match. If a player objects to being precluded from using his hands and persists in violating the rules, he will be removed from the field. Indeed, he may even be removed from the team, and advised to join a rugby club where he will no longer be bound by the rules to which he objected.

Violating the “rules of the game”

Although some might find this analogy somewhat simplistic, it is in many ways both appropriate and illuminating.

Readers may recall that in my previous column, Time to bar the Joint List, I underscored the perverse paradoxical practice that prevails in Israel, whereby anti-Zionist parties are persistently permitted to participate in parliamentary elections, despite being in flagrant violation of the “rules of the game” i.e. the law setting out the conditions for such participation.

Thus, Clause 7A of Basic Law: The Knesset prohibits a person or a party from participating in Knesset elections if their “objects or actions…expressly or by implication, include one of the following:

  • negation of the existence of the State of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state;
  • incitement to racism;
  • support of armed struggle, by a hostile state or a terrorist organization, against the State of Israel.”

Indeed, even a cursory perusal of the official platforms both of the Joint List itself and its component factions reflect a stark rejection of Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people as set out in the Declaration of Independence, as well as an equally stark violation of the letter (and spirit) of the Basic Law stipulating the conditions for participating in the national parliamentary elections.

Judicial gobbledygook no substitute for common sense

In earlier pieces, I cataloged the innate and enduring enmity shown by the Knesset members of the Arab parties comprising the Joint List towards the founding ethos of Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people, and their unequivocal identification with Israel’s most vehement enemies—see for example here. (For additional chronicles by others, see here and here.)

Such malfeasance included, among other things: spying for Hezbollah in 2006; smuggling mobile phones to convicted terrorists in prison; consorting with leaders of enemy states; expressing support for terrorist organizations and justifying attacks against IDF personnel and civilians across the 1967 Green line.

Yet despite clear evidence that the objects and the actions of both the people and the party consistently and continually contravene the legal provisions for participation in elections, neither the Joint List nor any of its constituent factions, nor any of its recalcitrant candidates have been barred from taking part in them.

But the generals of Blue & White cannot invoke unfathomable judicial decisions to underwrite their political actions—for judicial gobbledygook is no substitute for common sense—or a sense of national responsibility.

After all, by attempting to coopt the anti-Zionist Joint List—whether actively or passively—into the formation of a governing coalition, they are in effect—inadvertently or otherwise—contributing towards legitimizing and promoting its anti-Zionist agenda—or, at minimum, aiding in facilitating it. After all, the Joint List will not lend its support to Blue & White without extracting a heavy price in terms of advancing its anti-Zionist aims, which hitherto have been—rightly—thwarted by a Zionist majority in the legislature.

Conflating two separate issues: Arab ethnicity vs Arab enmity

The brouhaha over Blue & White’s approach to the Joint List causes two separate issues to be conflated and confused.

The one relates to the voting rights of the Arab minority, the other to the nature of the parties that they can vote for.

This confusion was clearly reflected this week in an article by New York Times Jerusalem bureau chief, David Halbfinger, entitled Israel Faces a Defining Question: How Much Democracy Should Arabs Get?. In it, he asks “Are the votes of Arab citizens worth as much as those of Jews?

There is, of course, no dispute in Israel that its Arab citizens have the right to vote.

But in the context of the preceding analysis, the “worth” of their vote is not –and should not be determined by who cast them—but who they were cast for. Likewise, there also should be no dispute that there is a qualitative difference (i.e. a structural inequality) between votes cast for parties that wish to undermine and dismantle the Jewish nation-state and those who wish to protect and preserve it—however vehemently they may disagree on how that is to be done.

In this regard, Israel’s Arab citizens voted almost monolithically for the former—i.e. for the Joint List. It is thus not their ethnicity that determines attitudes to their votes, but their enmity.

The perils of personal pique & BDS (Bibi derangement syndrome)

Of course, none of this is abstruse “rocket science”. None of it is unknown to the leaders of Blue & White. And yet they persist in their seemingly obsessive effort to include the inimical Joint List in determining the fate of the Jewish nation-state—see Gantz’s latest demand to include the Joint List in the broad emergency government suggested by Netanyahu to deal with the current coronavirus crisis.

It is difficult to find any convincing explanation for this disturbing depravity on the part of Blue & White, other than that the deep-seated ad hominin opprobrium, which its leaders harbor for Netanyahu, has befuddled their judgement, warped their priorities and caused them to succumb to the dreaded BDS—the Bibi Derangement Syndrome.

© All rights reserved.

The Difference Between East and West

I’ve been to Japan several times over the years on business and have had the privilege of seeing Japanese work habits first hand, which are noticeably different than in the United States. As a small example, the first time I visited, I noticed in addition to having Coke and Pepsi machines on a street corner, there were also beer and whiskey machines. I discovered the Japanese were not worried about the youth getting alcohol from the machines as it would cause their families to “lose face” through embarrassment. If we had such machines in this country, they would probably be emptied by our youth faster than the vendors could stock them.

Aside from this though, there are a few other differences I observed in corporate Japan:

  1. Japanese do not like to say “No” to someone as they do not want to offend the person. Instead, they tend to say, “Maybe Yes,” which, when translated, means “No.” If they nod their heads in the affirmative, it only means they understand what you are saying but they don’t necessarily agree with you. Because of this, it is not uncommon for American businessmen to fool themselves into believing they are being successful when they make a presentation in Japan. In reality, the Japanese understood the presentation but need time to digest and discuss it among themselves. If an American asks them something like, “Was I correct in this regards?” If they answer, “Maybe Yes,” the American is in trouble.
  2. I’ve been in a few large offices in Japan where I have seen young employees suddenly jump up on their desks and give a five minute speech on why he is proud of his company and what a pleasure it is to work with his coworkers. When finished, the rest of the office politely applauds before returning to their work.
  3. It is not proper for an employee to be insolent and openly criticize his superior. Knowing this may lead to pent up frustrations, some companies have small closet-sized rooms where the disgruntled employee can go into, close the door, and quietly beat an effigy of the boss with a bamboo stick. It may sound kind of silly, then again, you don’t hear of anyone going “postal” in Japan either.
  4. It is still important for the Japanese to reach a consensus on any significant decision. This process may take some time to perform, but they want to emphasize team building and inclusion of employees in the decision making process.
  5. When you join a major company in Japan it is common to first “pay your dues,” whereby you and your “class” (those who joined at the same time) are put on the same employment level and work for ten years, after which it is determined who the hard workers are and reward them with a major job promotion. If you didn’t work hard, the company won’t necessarily fire you, but your advancement in the company is arrested. Nonetheless, the emphasis here is on teamwork and creating a spirit of cooperation.

In the United States though, things are a little different:

  1. Americans are not afraid of offending anyone. So much so, that “Hell No!” (or stronger) is a natural part of our vernacular. Unlike the Japanese who digest something before speaking, Americans do not hesitate to tell you whether they agree with you or not.
  2. Rarely do you find an American employee who is steadfastly loyal to his company. Instead, it is more likely he will start an anonymous blog to bitch about his company and slander the character of the boss and his coworkers.
  3. Americans tend to vent their frustrations more publicly than the Japanese. For example, you might get attacked in the company parking lot, or someone may pull a gun out and start shooting.
  4. Instead of group decision making, Americans prefer rugged individualism whereby decisions tend to be made unilaterally as opposed to seeking the counsel of others. Consequently, employees tend to undermine any decision which is jammed down their throats.
  5. When you join a major company in the United States, you are rewarded more for individual acts as opposed to team playing. This results in a never ending game of scratching and clawing your way up the corporate hierarchy. Obviously, this approach promotes interoffice politics and cutthroat tactics as opposed to a spirit of cooperation.

Why the substantial differences? Primarily because Japan is a homogeneous culture, and the American “melting pot” is heterogeneous which includes people of all races, faiths, and beliefs.

Although the differences between east and west are noticeable, things are slowly changing in Japan, whose youth have grown up with the Internet and are starting to emulate the work habits of their counterparts in the west. In other words, instead of observing courtesy, honor and respect, Japan is slowly becoming Westernized and I fear that some time in the not too distant future “Maybe Yes” will mean nothing more than that.

Keep the Faith!

P.S. – Also do not forget my books, “How to Run a Nonprofit” and “Tim’s Senior Moments”, both available in Printed and eBook form.

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

Biden To Defy CDC Warning To Stop Touching Other People’s Faces

U.S.—As Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden is constantly in crowds, health officials are greatly concerned that he will catch the coronavirus — which would be especially bad for him as he’s very, very old. Despite these concerns, Biden just can’t follow one of the CDC’s main recommendations to avoid catching the disease: Stop putting your hands all over other people’s faces.

“It’s just so hard,” Biden told the press. “I keep thinking to myself, ‘Don’t touch people’s faces. Don’t touch people’s faces.’ But the next thing I know, there are my hands rubbing all over some person I just walked into.”

Staffers have tried a number of methods to help train Biden to stop the behavior, such as spraying him in the face with water whenever he starts touching someone. Nothing has worked so far, but his staffers are hopeful. “It’s just a habit he has to unlearn,” said Biden staffer Melanie Chapman. “We’ll just keep working until–”

At that point, Chapman was interrupted by Biden putting his hands all over her face. “You’re doing it again!” Chapman informed him.

“Oh no,” Biden said. “Well, is it okay if I just rub people’s shoulders?”

“No, that is never okay,” Chapman told him.

RELATED POLITICAL SATIRE:

Hillary Clinton Says Epstein Assassination Was To ‘Manage Anxiety’

Brian Williams To Host New Game Show ‘Are You Smarter Than A Journalist?’

Opinion: If Americans Aren’t Sexist, Then How Come They Refuse To Elect The Most Unlikable Women On The Planet?

Hell Confirmed To Be Eternal Ride On ‘It’s A Small World’

Brian Williams Claimed Bloomberg Could Have Given Every American $1 Million. Fact Check: TRUE. But Not All At The Same Time

Other Candidates Beg Warren Not To Endorse Them

EDITORS NOTE: This political satire by The Babylon Bee is republished with permission.

Rights Versus Wishes

Sen. Bernie Sanders said: “I believe that health care is a right of all people.”

He’s not alone in that contention. That claim comes from Democrats and Republicans and liberals and conservatives.

It is not just a health care right that people claim. There are “rights” to decent housing, decent food, a decent job, and prescription drugs. In a free and moral society, do people have these rights? Let’s begin by asking ourselves: What is a right?

In the standard usage of the term, a “right” is something that exists simultaneously among people. In the case of our U.S. Constitutional decree, we have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Our individual right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness imposes no obligation upon another other than the duty of noninterference.

As such, a right imposes no obligation on another. For example, the right to free speech is something we all possess simultaneously. My right to free speech imposes no obligation upon another except that of noninterference. Similarly, I have a right to travel freely. Again, that right imposes no obligation upon another except that of noninterference.

Sanders’ claim that health care is a right does impose obligations upon others. We see that by recognizing that there is no Santa Claus or tooth fairy who gives resources to government to pay for medical services.

Moreover, the money does not come from congressmen and state legislators reaching into their own pockets to pay for the service. That means that in order for government to provide medical services to someone who cannot afford it, it must use intimidation, threats, and coercion to take the earnings of another American to provide that service.

Let’s apply this bogus concept of rights to my right to speak and travel freely. In the case of my right to free speech, it might impose obligations on others to supply me with an auditorium, microphone, and audience. It may require newspapers or television stations to allow me to use their property to express my views.

My right to travel freely might require that others provide me with resources to purchase airplane tickets and hotel accommodations.

What if I were to demand that others make sacrifices so that I can exercise my free speech and travel rights? I suspect that most Americans would say, “Williams, you have rights to free speech and you have a right to travel freely, but I’m not obligated to pay for them!”

A moral vision of rights does not mean that we should not help our fellow man in need. It means that helping with health care needs to be voluntary (i.e., free market decisions or voluntary donations to charities that provide health care.) The government’s role in health care is to protect this individual right to choose.

As Sen. Rand Paul was brave enough to say, “The basic assumption that you have a right to get something from somebody else means you have to endorse the concept of theft.”

Statists go further to claim that people have a “right” to housing, to a job, to an education, to an affordable wage. These so-called rights impose burdens on others in the form of involuntary servitude. If one person has a right to something he did not earn, it means that another person does not have a right to something he did earn.

The provision by the U.S. Congress of a so-called right to health care should offend any sense of moral decency. If you’re a Christian or a Jew, you should be against the notion of one American living at the expense of another.

When God gave Moses the Eighth Commandment—”Thou shalt not steal”—I am sure that He did not mean, “Thou shalt not steal—unless there is a majority vote in the U.S. Congress.”

COPYRIGHT 2020 CREATORS.COM

COMMENTARY BY

Walter E. Williams is a columnist for The Daily Signal and a professor of economics at George Mason University. Twitter: .


The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now


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

This Week in the UK – Truth still being crucified.

These are my views as a woman living in England, on how the culture and spirit of my country has changed over 50 years.   Why the country does not feel protected or strong any more, how it has lost, and is losing it values and decency, and how we are daily losing our free speech.


The local organization that I work for is constantly telling me that I have the freedom to speak up in the workplace.   An advocate for freedom of speech has also been appointed for staff to contact either openly, or anonymously, should they feel that there are issues which might need addressing which may compromise their position should they openly voice their complaint!

For some reason, despite this re-assurance, and my not even knowing this particular advocate, I unfortunately still don’t trust the process which may possibly be giving me the illusion that anyone may be interested in my own particular concerns which span the course of 50 plus years.

You see, during that time I have observed a massive cultural shift where the populace have been, in simple terms, ‘worked upon’, and from which I was once one of its victims in my outlook.

A collective rhetoric has been implemented which gives the impression that it cares for everyone.   In my opinion, if you don’t follow their particular script you are really an enemy and are viewed as someone to silence.   For this reason, in the UK you may have freedom of speech behind closed doors, but it certainly does not exist in the open without a level of persecution for constantly offending someone.

Just 20 years ago when I worked within the Church of England and I faced my own particular injustice and spoke up, I realized that the truth was even being crucified there, from within its very walls.

Standing alone and having your outlook and your world turned upside down is not a good place to be in.  For a mere mortal it is suffocating and can also be frightening.  The revelation of how this new and more loving humanity which continually preaches kindness, minus some facts, can damage those you love and care for,  can also be very confusing.

Friends and family can also shun you and label you extreme, despite your common-sense view.

The temptation to resent such situations and to be told you just aren’t loving enough to go along with the collective rhetoric, now labelled British Values, does however have a very ‘good side’ if you allow it………..

Climate Anxiety!

Driving home from the local supermarket the other evening, I decided to tune in to a radio station and listen to the local news from the Shires.   It was from here that I found myself listening to a conversation between two radio presenters and a psychologist discussing the anxiety that children are facing today in relation to the climate and how we could help them?

It was one of those moments when you decidedly wished there was a more balanced voice in the mix, outside the confines of your car, to say the least; but as you listened with a certain recognition of what made you anxious yourself as a child, the female radio presenter in the duo, then suddenly decided to take advantage of the situation and voice her disapproval of the image of Christ on the cross (the crucifixion) which she felt frightens many children in schools.   Really!

Fortunately for the presenter she was indeed free to make a weak attempt at strength for openly voicing her displeasure at Christianity, which in its purest form is a faith which has constantly been mocked.

However, in view of her comments I wondered how many media outlets would daily report on the persecution and the death of Christian’s world wide (in very horrific ways) and if she really knew of the very real ‘anxiety’ that adults and children face daily across the world for their faith.   For a detailed account of numbers world wide please see the link below which reports the facts.  The persecution of Christian’s world wide has sometimes been called a silent epidemic.

Those Vicious Politicians

This week it has also been reported that the UK’s Human Rights watchdog is under pressure to investigate our Conservative party with accusations of Islamophobia.

In an initial document submitted in May 2019 in which 150 people connected to the party were accused of anti-Islam remarks, a new document now accusing 300 individuals, including Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, has been presented to the Equality and Human Rights Commission by the Muslim Council of Britain.

From the 300 allegations, just three of them are as follows:

The allegations made against Boris Johnson were that he used dehumanizing and offensive remarks against Muslim women who wear a veil likening them to ‘bank robbers’ and ‘letterboxes’.

I imagine he might thinks nuns look like penguins as well.

Were any of the above people exercising their right to freedom of speech or were they inciting hatred?

  • Dominic Cummings suggested weirdoes and misfits with odd skills were needed in government.
  • Karl McCartney stated that boys were disadvantaged because of over-feminized schools. Something I agree with.
  • Mr Andrew Sabisky also allegedly made remarks in favour of eugenics and compulsory contraception. Something I find sickening.

In all of the above commentaries, offence can be taken by many different people in society and whether we like someone’s comments or not silencing someone is evil, but today much of the truth is being silenced and pushed underground by various groups.

In the UK, there is now a massive divide between groups of people who most certainly have freedom to speak up, and between people who are being ostracized for minor comments, or for even voicing their concerns, most especially in terms of immigration, abortion or gender issues.

This polarization of society has not come about by chance.   At its core this spirit hates humanity.   It is not kind or loving or considerate.  Persuasion, coercion and brainwashing has been taking place over a period of time to kill truth.  We know it.  This is a problem we should all be shouting about and be advocates for.

Silencing the truth may see many innocent people die from injustice.

What do you believe about freedom of speech, and have you followed the most popular rhetoric of the day in order to go along with the crowds?   This part you play is important.

But the chief priests and elders persuaded the multitudes that they should ask for Barabbas and destroy Jesus.

21 The governor answered and said to them, “Which of the two do you want me to release to you?”

They said, “Barabbas!”

22 Pilate said to them, “What then shall I do with Jesus who is called Christ?”

They all said to him, “Let Him be crucified!”

23 Then the governor said, “Why, what evil has He done?”

But they cried out all the more, saying, “Let Him be crucified!”

Matthew 27:20 -23

Israeli Politics: Fickle, Faithless and Feckless

This week, Israeli politics plumbed appalling new lows with reports that, Blue& White, which, as the major rival to PM Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud, emerged as the second largest party in last week’s Knesset elections, was actively planning to violate its solemn pledges to the voters, made only days previously.

In a breathtaking display of unprincipled cynicism, Blue &Whites leadership, which comprises three former commanders of the IDF, appears poised to renege on its explicit campaign pledges. Thus, despite repeated—and seemingly resolute—vows that they would not seek to establish a coalition dependent on the anti-Zionist Joint List, a motley amalgam of Communists, Islamists and radical Arab nationalists, Blue & White is doing precisely that!

Worse, beyond making a covenant with a party that not only undisguisedly supports Israel’s most vehement enemies but openly denies its status as a Jewish state, the Blue & White leadership has castigated party members who insist on honoring its election pledges–even demanding their resignation for their display of public integrity .  This is particularly the case with Yoaz Hendel and Zvi Hauser, two prominent Right-of-Center members of Blue & White.

Ironically, during the election campaign, both Hendel and Hauser played a crucial role in presenting Blue & White’s professed views to the public and particularly in establishing its Right-of-Center credentials, designed to distance itself from Israel’s floundering Left.

There seems no rational explanation for this manifestly irrational behavior other than that Netanyahu’s rivals’ seemingly pathological ad hominem hatred for him has totally unhinged them from any reasonable and responsible political action.

This is clearly a scandalous and unacceptable breach of public trust. It must be met with correspondingly appropriate public outrage.  All fair-minded men and women, both inside and outside Israel’s political system, must express their righteous anger at this intolerable deception and duplicity and make sure it will not succeed. For the future of the entire Zionist enterprise may literally hang in the balance.

© All rights reserved.

NORTH CAROLINA: First Muslim Woman to Win Elected Office in the State Flaunted Hijab as Campaign Logo

Nida Allam has been elected to office in North Carolina, and her campaign has prioritized the significance of her Democratic primary win in Durham county:

The campaign told CNN that officials looked back at previous North Carolina election data, county by county, and found no previous Muslim American women who had won elections to hold office in the state. “That’s when you realize — this hasn’t been done,” Allam told CNN.

Allam celebrates and promotes the hijab — an Islamic symbol of female oppression — and deems it bigotry to oppose it:

My silhouette on my campaign logo is of my hijab because I wanted to be very unapologetic about that. These little girls were so excited. They said, ‘That’s you? Is that really a hijab? Is that a hijab that you use?’ They were so excited to see that kind of representation,” Allam said. “And it really solidified for me how important it was to for me to be running for office.”

This is what Nida Allam beams with pride over and wants Americans to accept:

(Quran 24:31) And tell the believing women to reduce of their vision and guard their private parts and not expose their adornment except that which appears thereof and to wrap [a portion of] their headcovers over their chests and not expose their adornment except to their husbands, their fathers, their husbands’ fathers, their sons, their husbands’ sons, their brothers, their brothers’ sons, their sisters’ sons, their women, that which their right hands possess, or those male attendants having no physical desire, or children who are not yet aware of the private aspects of women. And let them not stamp their feet to make known what they conceal of their adornment. And turn to Allah in repentance, all of you, O believers, that you might succeed.

If a woman does not cover, she is fair game to be assaulted:

(Quran 33:59) O Prophet, tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to bring down over themselves of their outer garments. That is more suitable that they will be known and not be abused.

Allam was a signatory to a Muslim Affairs Council petition entitled We stand with Rep. Ilhan Omar and subtitled Community leaders from all over the US are supporting Rep. Ilhan Omar against bigotry.

Allam wants to see “better” education in schools, since in her view, opposing the hijab is rooted in “hatred” and “bigotry”:

“Allam said she wanted to run for commissioner because of the significant role the board has in allocating funding for schools. ‘This type of hatred and bigotry that my friends were lost to, I feel like there’s a lack of education, that also leads to that type of environment,’ she said.”

CAIR, which has been increasingly influential in North Carolina, not surprisingly supported Allam’s candidacy. Back in September, CAIR called on North Carolina Lieutenant Governor Dan Forest to “withdraw from headlining an event featuring several controversial anti-Islamic speakers.” According to North Carolina Policy Watch, the roster of speakers for the “private conservative Christian event” included:

  • A pastor who calls the notion of a separation between church and state “cowardice” and those in the movement for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender equality “militant homofascists” bent on turning the U.S. into Sodom.
  • An author who has railed against Muslims as would-be conquerors and rapists and LGBTQ rights as a first step to America living under Sharia law.
  • A pastor and Republican politician who has asserted anyone not committed to the U.S. as an explicitly Judeo-Christian nation should leave.

No names were given and no fair coverage was provided about what message these individuals have actually delivered.

CAIR’s national communications director, Ibrahim Hooper, stated that “such ‘comments’ once regarded as limited to the political fringe – have sadly become more mainstream in American politics.” Then Hooper proceeded to blame (who else?) Donald Trump:

“Unfortunately with the election of Donald Trump we’ve seen the empowerment of white supremacy, xenophobia, Islamophobia and anti-immigrant extremism around the country,” Hooper said. “That includes among lower level public officials who perhaps had these beliefs in the past but kept them private.”

North Carolina Policy Watch featured more “Muslim rights activists in North Carolina,” who stated that they were “pushing back….after the U.S. Education Department ordered the Duke-UNC Consortium for Middle East Studies to revise its curriculum, saying it is advancing ‘ideological priorities’ and promoting ‘the positive aspects of Islam’ and is in danger of losing its federal grant funding.”

The alliance between Nida Allam, CAIR, and the Muslim Public Affairs Council, and her unwavering support for Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib should be matters of concern.

“North Carolina woman says she’s first Muslim American woman to win elected office in the state,” by Jessica Campisi, CNN, March 5, 2020:

(CNN)Nida Allam made history on Tuesday night when she became the first Muslim American woman to be elected to office in North Carolina, her campaign says.

Allam, who ran as a Democrat, was one of five women to win the party’s primary for the Durham County Board of Commissioners’ five seats, according to the North Carolina State Board of Elections. She finished fourth with 39,523 votes.

Since there are no Republican candidates running in the general election, Allam and the four other candidates will presumptively take office in November.

“People of Durham you made history last night by electing me as the FIRST Muslim Woman to serve the state of North Carolina,” Allam tweeted Wednesday morning. “I can’t even express how grateful I am to have earned your trust and support.”

The campaign told CNN that officials looked back at previous North Carolina election data, county by county, and found no previous Muslim American women who had won elections to hold office in the state.

“That’s when you realize — this hasn’t been done,” Allam told CNN.

Muslim advocacy groups, such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations and Muslim Advocates, celebrated the win.
“She succeeded where others weren’t able to break through that glass ceiling,” Robert McCaw, the council’s Government Affairs Department director, told CNN.

Allam’s campaign priorities include a $15 minimum wage for county workers, boosting mental health services in schools and investing in businesses run by women and people of color, according to her website….

RELATED VIDEO: High School Teacher Reprimanded for Insulting Islam on Facebook.

RELATED ARTICLES:

St. Louis: Hassan is 15 and Has a License to Commit Crimes

FBI missed chances to stop several jihad massacres in the US, failed to investigate suspected jihadis

Germany: Woman converts to Islam, joins ISIS, hands over her 7-year-old for ISIS indoctrination

Sweden: Non-Muslim school forces 9-year-olds to pledge allegiance to Allah and write “I belong to Islam”

Netherlands: Muslim leader calls Hamas “legitimate protest movement,” says Holocaust “perpetrated by the Jew Hitler”

Turkey arms Muslim migrants with tear gas: “Allahu akbar, Erdogan has arranged for free rides, Allah bless his soul”

Greek border in flames as Muslim migrants keep trying to break through

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

Nothing New in the Sick World of Jew Hate

“Though marked by levity, Purim is deadly serious: We are reminded that Haman exists in every generation and that we Jews dare not ignore our own identity.” Rabbi Meir Y. Soloveichik


This year, the Jewish holiday of Purim begins on Monday, March 9th and ends on March 10th. It is a significant holiday that has everything to do with Jewish survival, which today is as relevant as it was throughout Jewish history, not only 75 years ago in Nazi Germany when six-million Jews were savagely incinerated in burning ovens while the entire world looked on, but also 3,000, 4,000, 5,000 years ago!

The story of Purim takes place in ancient Persia (now Iran). The Holy Temple in Jerusalem had been destroyed more than 50 years earlier and the Jews had become servile subjects in Persia.

The King of Persia, Ahasuerus, who was drunk at the time, became furious with his exquisite wife Vashti when she refused to undress before his court, so he ordered her execution. But after her death, he became lonely and had his servants orchestrate a beauty contest so he could pick another wife. When Esther appeared, he was enchanted with her great beauty and married her, making her the Queen of Persia.

Unbeknownst to the King, Esther was a Jewish orphan who had been raised by her cousin Mordechai. Shortly after she became queen, Mordechai overheard two of the king’s chamberlains discussing a plot to assassinate him. Mordechai reported the plot, and the traitors were hanged.

But one of the king’s ministers, Haman, was a fanatical Jew hater, exactly like so many Democrats are today––“Rev.” Louis “the powerful Jews are my enemy” Farrakhan, “Rev.” Al “Jews are bloodsucking Jew bastards,” “white interlopers” and “diamond merchants” Sharpton, Democrat Linda Sarsour, the “official surrogate” of Democrat Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign, “Jew-hater-on-steroids musician Roger Waters, the list is endless.

And that is not to omit Democrat Rep. Ihlan Omar (MN), Democrat Rep. Rashida Tlaib (MI)–– who was recently nominated as anti-Semite of the Year by StopAntisemitism.org.––Democrat Rep. Ayanna Pressley (MA), and Democrat Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY), all of whom appear to loathe America and detest Jews and Israel, sentiments they often express. In addition, they have lamented the death of the Iranian arch-terrorist Qasem Soleimani, steadfastly refused to condemn the epidemic of anti-Semitism on campuses across America, and engaged in a steady stream of anti-American and anti-Semitic rantings.

That’s right, the very people presidential candidate Joe Biden (D-DE) cannot bring himself to condemn! No surprise here, as former VP Biden presided over the illegal and unconstitutional Iran Deal, which gave the virulently anti-American, anti-Semitic mullahs in Iran $150 billion dollars in cash to create nuclear weapons with Tel Aviv’s address on them!

Can’t get more Jew hating than that!

Oops, did I forget to mention the other presidential front-runner, Democrat Bernie Sander (VT)? As Daniel Greenfield writes: “Like Karl Marx, Bernie Sanders is one of those non-Jewish people of Jewish derivation whom Jews hate and anti-Semites love. And Bernie keeps pouring fuel on the fire, expressing his disdain for Jews and Jewish causes, while cozying up to anti-Semitic figures…”

Getting back to the story of Purim, when Mordechai refused to bow down to Haman, Haman ordered the Persians to rise up against the Jews and kill them all––men, women and children. However, Mordechai learned of the plan and pleaded with Esther to intercede with the king on behalf of all the Jews who were targeted for death.

Through both intelligence and guile, she ultimately succeeded. She revealed that she was Jewish to the king, Haman was exposed and hanged, Mordechai was elevated in the king’s court, and the king allowed Esther and Mordechai to issue a decree allowing the Jewish people to attack their enemies preemptively, a successful campaign that resulted in saving the Jewish people from annihilation.

NOTE: FDR, to his everlasting shame, clearly never read the Book of Esther!

PLUS ÇA CHANGE…

Today, two decades into what we would like to believe is an evolved 21st century, the same obsessive hatred––based largely on psychotic jealousy––is fueled by:

  • The vast networks of unregulated social media that spread anti-Semitic blood libels with maniacal glee and total impunity.
  • DNA anti-Semites––in America, Europe, et al––once again emerging from their hate holes.
  • A growing number of Democrat elected officials.
  • The Democrat Party whose members, by their thunderous silence on the anti-Semitic statements and votes of their colleagues, de facto encourage and indeed sanction the widespread dissemination of the oldest hatred of mankind.

Here are just a few out of thousands of examples:

  • Maniacal Tiffany Harris, who makes a habit of slapping and spewing vulgarities at Jewish people on NY City subways, has been repeatedly released without bail in the city run by Democrat Mayor Bill Di Blasio and in the state run by Democrat Governor Andrew Cuomo, both of whom support and embrace the new no-bail law.
  • The Boycott-Divest-Sanction (BDS) movement seeks to destroy Israel through economic sanctions. And yet House Democrats––including Long Island Representatives Tom Suozzi and Kathleen Rice––demonstrated their anti-Israel, anti-Semitic bias by voting to block an anti-BDS bill which would have forbade domestic support for foreign boycotts of Israel from organizations like the anti-American, anti-Semitic United Nations Human Rights Council and European Union (which still refuses to designate Hezbollah and Hamas as terrorist organizations).
  • The cases of Jew and Israel hatred on campuses all across America are too numerous to mention here, although the Middle East Forum’s Campus Watch does an excellent job of monitoring the frequent and often violent acts that take place routinely on U.S. college campuses, which blogger Pamela Geller says have become cesspools for left-wing Jew hatred and totalitarianism.

The august Melanie Phillips spells out in ghastly detail (read the entire article!):

  • A recent carnival in Belgium featured floats depicting Jews as insects and participants in Nazi uniforms;
  • A carnival in Spain, ostensibly to commemorate the Holocaust, featured dancing Nazis, concentration-camp prisoners in sequined tights and Israeli flags, and a ‘gas chamber’ float with a giant Hebrew menorah between two chimneys;
  • In Britain, anti-Semitic incidents rose last year to an unprecedented high;
  • In France, anti-Semitic attacks soared by more than 75 percent last year;
  • In Germany, anti-Semitic incidents are rising at a similar rate;
  • In the United States, more than 50 Jewish community centers in 23 states have received e-mailed bomb threats, attacks on Orthodox Jews are reported daily, there have been synagogue murders in Pittsburgh and Poway, and widespread bullying of Jewish students on college campuses.

“This is all inextricably tied up with hatred of Israel,” Phillips says. “Better advocacy for Israel, necessary as that is, will not address this anti-Jewish derangement…and the problem—and tragedy—for the Jewish people is that so many of those subscribing to this liberal onslaught are themselves Jews.

But Democrats will still vote for a clinically diminished Biden and whomever actually runs the country in his stead. Why? Because of their holy grails: abortion, open borders, a weak military, unemployed blacks, gay marriage, fidelity to globalism, and the hoax of climate change, et al.

The survival of Judaism and the safety and security of Israel don’t matter to them!

WEAK JEWS, A STRONG ISRAEL

Unfortunately, these Democrats include a large Jewish community that has been tethered to the Party for 100 years, not because it is empirically the “party of the people,” or has done anything to improve the lives of its most devoted adherents, but rather because American Jews have largely been spared the ravages of the 5,000-year history that saw Jews enslaved in Egypt for 400 years, marginalized in pogroms and ghettos, victimized in the vicious Crusades and Inquisition, wandering the world in a cruel Diaspora, and murdered in cold blood in the Holocaust.

Spared to live life in freedom in America, spared to not have to look over their shoulders or cower in fear, and spared to invent a new form of Judaism in which, ironically, victimization became enshrined and their new calling card was Social Justice––a movement more based on narcissistic self-aggrandizement than do-gooderism.

No one describes the devolution of America’s leftist-liberal-progressive Jews more powerfully than Lauri B. Regan in her stunning article, “G-d Is Testing American Jews. They Are Failing.” Regan compares today’s leftist Jews to those who distrusted Moses on Mt. Sinai and created a golden calf to worship.

“Today’s Diaspora Jews,” Regan writes, “are worshiping a different type of false idol.  For eight years, it took the form of Barack Obama, but he was only representative of a progressive ideal for which Jews are constantly searching.  Our history of slavery, torture, dhimmitude, persecution, and genocide has led to a people who desperately seek peace, obsess over “tikkun olam” and social justice, and worship at the Torah of Liberalism.” American Jews are fixated “on every victim class but their own …and the Democrat Party…is harming the survival of our people.”

“Our national population is minuscule––approximately 2%,” Regan continues. “Our power is not in our numbers, but in our voices––and our voices are becoming dangerously self-destructive.”

Yet, it is also true and thrilling to people like me that Israel is now a strong and thriving democratic state with a military of immeasurable strength, capable of taking on and annihilating those who wish her ill, and that includes not only bellicose enemies in the Middle East but, on a morale basis, also her ideological enemies like the thugs in the United Nations and the anti-Semites in the U.S. Congress and the Jew haters throughout the world.

Again, for the remaining Jews like me who care very much about the magnificent culture of Judaism, our disproportionately huge contribution of ethics, law, art, music, literature, science, medicine, and technology to the world, and the true social justice that demands equitable treatment and not blind, envy-fueled hatred, the resolve to defeat our enemies never flags.

To combat the rising tide of Jew hatred, Charles Jacobs and Avi Goldwasser, co-founders of Americans for Peace and Tolerance, have created An Action Plan for a New Jewish Leadership, which, among its 10 bullet points, includes:

  1. Increase Physical Security to Protect the Community, including increased police presence, neighborhood security patrols, facilitation of gun ownership, and holding public officials accountable for indifference or willful inaction to confront Jew-hatred.
  2. As sanctity of life is the highest Jewish value, allocate more resources for the defense of the Jewish community and less for projects of social justice.
  3. Educate the community and the public about the nature and sources of Jew-hatred. Like all hatred, Jew-hatred is based on envy and resentment (in this case, of Jewish success) and the tendency to blame others for the haters’ failures and inadequacies. Jew-hatred has always been aimed at the elimination of Judaism (forced conversion), or of Jews (Final Solution), or of the Jewish state (anti-Zionism). Jew-hatred is promoted by lies and demonization, propelled by class warfare, and now also by identity politics.
  4. Build alliances based on mutual interests and honest reciprocity, not virtue-signaling.

I would add the following….it is clear that the Jewish organizations that once strongly advocated for Jewish issues and fought anti-Semitism aggressively no longer do so unless they involve politically correct issues that won’t inspire the vindictive wrath––and financial support––of Jewish Democrats.

These include: the UJA-Federation, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), the American Jewish Committee (AJC), the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC)­, the Hillel chapters on college campuses and the Reform movement.

So don’t count on these organizations and don’t send them another dollar!

The good news is that, along with wide support from political conservatives, most Republicans, and the Christian Evangelical community, other Jewish advocacy organizations and publications are working tirelessly to combat the relentless assaults of the Jew- and Israel-haters among us.

They include:

AFSI (Americans for a Safe Israel)
1751 Second Avenue
New York, NY 10128
www.AFSI.org
Tel: 1-212-828-2424
Mark Langfan, Chairman

Americans for Peace & Tolerance
5 Main Street, Suite 118
Watertown, MA 02472
https://www.peaceandtolerance.org
Founder: Charles Jacobs

CAMERA–Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting and Analysis
PO Box 35040
Boston MA 02135-0001
Andrea Levin, Founder

Campus Watch (a project of the Middle East Forum) monitors bias on American campuses, issues reports, and takes strong action where indicated.
https://www.meforum.org/campus-watch/
E-mail: info@meforum.org
Tel: 1-215-546-5406

Canary Mission
www.canarymission.org
Canary Mission documents individuals and organizations that promote hatred of the USA, Israel and Jews on North American college campuses.

Coalition of Pro-Israel Advocates (COPIA)
10507 Tanager Lane
Potomac, Maryland 20854
info@copma.net

Combat Anti-Semitism
www.combatantisemitism.org
info@combatantisemitism.org
Email: sacha@combatantisemitism.org
Tel: +1- 646 417 4046

EMET (Endowment for Middle East Truth)
PO Box 66366
Washington, DC 20035
https://emetonline.org
Sarah Stern, Founder

Gatestone Institute
14 East 60 Street, Suite 705
New York, NY 10022
Www.GatestoneInstitute.org

HonestReporting.com
165 East 56th Street, 2nd Fl
New York, NY 10022-2709
Tel: 1-847-745-8284
E-mail: action@honestreporting.com

Jews Choose Trump
62 William Street
New York, NY 10005
Jewschoosetrump.org
www.jewschoosetrump.org

NCJA (National Conference of Jewish Affairs)
90 Washington Valley Road, Suite 1261
Bedminster, NJ 07921
www.conservativehq.com
Attn: Rabbi Aryeh Spero

Republican Jewish Coalition
50 F St NW, Suite 100
Washington, D.C. 20001
www.rjchq.org

The Exodus Movement, founded by Elizabeth Pipko for “proud Jewish Americans who reject the hypocrisy, anti-Americanism, and anti-Semitism of the rising far-left.”
Elizabeth Pipko, founder and president of The Exodus Movement.

The Exodus Movement
740 South Mill Avenue, #200
Tempe, AZ 85281
www.theexodusmovement.com
Elizabeth Pipko, Founder
https://theexodusmovement.com

The Lawfare Project
633 3rd Avenue, Fl 21
New York, NY 10017-8157
https://www.thelawfareproject.org/
Brooke Goldstein, Founder/Director

PRIMER- Promoting Responsibility in Middle East Reporting
P.O. Box 0591
West Hartford, CT 06137-0591
http://primerct.org/index.php?content=index&title=PRIMER-Connecticut
info@primerct.org
Founder: Alan Stein
President, Mark Fishman
http://www.jewishledger.com/2014/07/primer-israel-advocacy-in-good-times-and-bad/

Stop Anti-Semitism,org
https://www.stopantisemitism.org/
Features Anti-Semite of the Month and Anti-Semite of the Year
Contact: Liora Rez at Liora@stopantisemitism.org.

Understanding the Threat
Provides tools to leaders, police and citizens to identify and dismantle jihadi/terrorist networks in their local communities.
P.O. Box 190772
Dallas, TX 75219
www.UnderstandingtheThreat.com
Founder: John Guandolo

ZOA (Zionist Organization of America)
633 Third Avenue, Suite 31-B
New York, NY 10017
https://zoa.org
Morton Klein, President

E-Mail Joan Swirsky: joanswirsky@gmail.com

© All rights reserved.

Biden: ‘I Am The Only Candidate Who Can Beat Ronald Reagan’

HOUSTON, TX—Fresh off his afternoon nap, presidential candidate Joe Biden gave a fiery, high-energy speech in Houston today, claiming to be the only candidate who could beat incumbent Ronald Reagan.

“I am the only candidate who can unite the party to defeat Reagan,” he said to scattered applause. “When Super Thursday hits here in a few weeks, we can rally the 150 million Democrats here in the great country of Texas to vote for me so we can get Reagan and his crony Dick Cheney off the Iron Throne there in the Imperial Senate. Go Hoosiers!”

Aides scrambled to turn off Biden’s mic but he beat them away with his walker.

“The time has come for the reign of Tippecanoe and Tyler too to end!” he shouted, though by this point he had wandered into a nearby field and no one could hear him.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Dems Break Ties With Taliban After They Make Deal With Trump

Controversy As Transgender Woman Wins Jar Opening Contest

Bernie Sanders Yelling At Kids To Get Off His Many, Many Lawns

Nation Optimistic About Future Now That All Presidential Candidates Projected To Die Of Old Age Before Election

EDITORS NOTE: This political satire column by The Babylon Bee column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Virginia US Senate Candidate, Victor Williams, Speaks on Dual Threats of Coronavirus and Democrats’ Leftist Lurch to Socialism

ARLINGTON, Va.March 3, 2020 /PRNewswire/ — “The Fed must act immediately to cut interest rates and boost liquidity” says Prof. Victor Williams. “The Fed must act now.  The Fed has foolishly fallen behind other central banks. The US Fed must lead in rate cuts and liquidity boosts immediately.”

According to Prof. Williams, a Law & Economics expert who is also a 2020 candidate for the U.S. Senate in Virginia, the Fed is again showing a woeful lack of leadership.  Prof. Williams stated:

“By its delayed response to coronavirus uncertainty, the Fed threatens to stall the booming American economy.  A significant (75 basis point) rate cut and a substantial boost to liquidity is needed now.  By delay, the Fed jeopardizes America’s economy and its own credibility.”

Williams argues that American markets actually face two different threats – coronavirus uncertainties and the Democrats’ leftward-lurch to socialism:

“The Fed must act now to protect the economy against uncertainties of coronavirus but Fed action is also needed to buffer the markets reaction to the Democrat Party’s hard-left lurch to economic socialism.”

Williams continued:

“We do not know the extent of future disruptions by coronavirus. However, we know from history — with absolute certitude – what horrendous economic and social damage will be caused by the Democrats’ dangerous socialism.”

“For America’s economic health and future, Democrats like Bernie SandersJoe Biden, AOC+3, and Mark Warner must be stopped.  There is not a dime’s worth of difference between Sanders, Biden, and Warner. Warner has joined in the hard-left lurch as his party threatens to:

  • Legalize and Encourage Late Term Abortions (including post-birth infanticide);
  • Kill Economic Growth and Fiscal Stability (with increased taxes and regulations bankrupting Virginia’s coal industry);
  • Throw Open the Southern Border (to allow a massive flow –invasion — of aliens who will then be given free health care and other largess);
  • Eliminate Medicare (insuring “Medicare for None” with socialist schemes raising taxes on American workers and making private-employer insurance illegal).”

Williams’ statement against Warner continued:

“Virginians remember that Mark Warner has never adequately explained his own 2014 Phil Puckett scandal.  He has never explained his offer to sell a federal judgeship in a quid pro quo for a local politician’s partisan cooperation?  “Puckettgate” remains a viable issue in 2020. “

Warner’s weak and conflicting responses to the 2019 Northam/Fairfax scandals are best described as Puckettgate II” as Warner again chooses corrupt politicians over Virginia’s interests.  Sen. Warner actually said that Ralph Northam had a “right” to keep his high office if the Governor could manage to talk his way out of the racist scandal. ”

16 years of Warner is enough.  Virginia deserves much better.”

On July 4, 2019, Prof. Williams announced his campaign with the intention of promoting an early, strong GOP field of candidates.

Today, Williams praised all his competitors in the primary contest.  However, Williams gave special praise to veteran Daniel Gade for his proven fundraising abilities and his tireless campaigning throughout the Commonwealth of Virginia:

“I announced my campaign stating that I wanted to encourage the strongest, best Republican candidate to emerge early.

As Virginia filing deadline approaches, veteran Daniel Gade is fast emerging as that strongest candidate.

Dan Gade clearly has the public support, dedication, and passion to defeat Mark Warner in November 2020.

Williams, who is the  founder of “Law Professor for Trump” also predicted that Donald Trump will win Virginia in the 2020 presidential contest.

Prof. Williams returned to his more immediate message:

“But meanwhile, the laggard Fed must significantly cut rates and substantially boost liquidity.”

Paid for by: Victor Williams for Virginia  vw4v.com.

© All rights reserved.

Top Former Obama Official Praises Trump. Twice.

The top State Department official under Barack Obama who negotiated the Iran deal has praised President Trump on two foreign policy points — both of which should be easy for Democrats who are not obsessed with removing or damaging the President over supporting what is demonstrably good for America.

But of course they aren’t interested in that. If Democrats ravaged by Trump Derangement Syndrome immediately leap to blaming the Coronavirus on President Trump, then all lunacy is possible.

The first point of praise was the proposed Afghanistan peace deal to end the 18-year war the U.S. has been bogged down in. The peace plan included a negotiated ceasefire.

“This is a good, useful, first step,” said former Ambassador Wendy Sherman, who served as undersecretary of state for political affairs in the State Department. This simple, true sentence is so rare among Democrats today it’s actually newsworthy, which is why the local newspaper led with it under the headline: “In Sarasota, Obama official praises Trump’s Afghanistan deal”

Sherman, who was the lead negotiator for the Obama administration on the terrible Iran nuclear deal that President Trump wisely pulled out of, was speaking last week at the Ringling College Library Association Town Hall lecture series in Sarasota, Florida.

“If we get this agreement to move forward with Afghanistan, this is a very good thing,” Sherman said. There now. Was that so hard? Of course it is a good thing.

Sherman, who naturally laced her speech with withering criticisms of Trump’s foreign policy — she is an Obama Democrat after all — qualified her comments on the Afghanistan peace talks, saying that any final agreement must include protections for women and girls — who are second-rate human beings under the Taliban’s Islamic theocratic rule.

The irony is that the Trump administration is probably more likely to press this point than the Obama administration would have been because of Obama’s sympathies toward Muslim nations. Looking at the contrasting actions of the two administrations, Trump policies have benefitted women, children and minorities more than Obama’s.

On the second point of praise, Sherman said that the “controversial” missile strike ordered by the President to kill Iranian terrorist leader General Qasem Soleimani while in Iraq would probably act as a deterrent to Iranian aggression in the region. She called the move risky in moving the U.S. and Iran to the brink of war, but considering how it has played out, the attack was probably a good action.

It’s highly improbable that the killing actually moved the two countries to the brink of war as Iran’s leaders have everything to lose in a direct war with the U.S. military — and they know it well. No traditional army has been able to stand against the U.S. military for more than a couple of weeks. The Mullahs prefer to work through their network of terrorist proxies in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen.

While it is clear that Sherman has gigantic differences with the Trump administration on a range of foreign policies, and probably domestic ones also, kudos to her for being willing to say publicly that the actions taken by Trump on two fronts that are unarguably in a good direction for Americans — are indeed a good thing.

EDITORS NOTE: This Revolutionary Act column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

You Deserve The Truth About Socialism/Communism

Socialism is not a laughing matter: it is an infection like coronavirus, a political disease of incompetence, dishonesty, and eventually violence spread by Soviet Charlatans. Unfortunately, the American education system has failed to teach the criminal history of Socialism. Socialism is a culture of abuse and total corruption inside a system of slavery, depriving people of all rights known to humanity. Sen. Bernie Sanders has never lived under Socialism and he is deceiving and fooling you by presenting a Soviet Style propaganda, of a ‘cosmetic’ version of Socialism in the best traditions of Stalinist Political Correctness.  Sen. Bernie Sanders is a liar and fraud. He loved the USSR and praised Fidel Castro, who enslaved the Island of Freedom (Cuba) and its people by implementing Socialism and its Soviet System. Bernie is not alone, unfortunately, there is an army of Socialist-liars in America…

Bernie’s Democratic Socialism is a fraud. The term itself is an oxymoron—a democrat can’t be a socialist, a socialist can’t be democratic. The term reveals a total absence of the knowledge of socialist policy. Socialism means a dictatorship in a struggle to end individual liberty and private property, which is the opposite of democracy. To really know and understand socialism, you must have lived through it. I am a survivor of Soviet Socialism and I know what it truly means. To prove it, I’ll give you only one feature of Soviet Socialism to grasp the reality, and it is not Gulag, Perjuries, or Show Trials, you have already heard about. I’ll give you the picture of the real human disaster that is life under Socialism/Communism.

The Real Face of Soviet Socialism—A Communal Apartment

Until I got married and moved to Estonia, my entire life since childhood had taken place in a communal apartment (kommunalka) first in Moscow and then in Leningrad. It was the very famous Pertsov’s building, biggest in Leningrad, if I am not mistaken, 10,000 people lived there. Pertsov was a successful Russian businessman dealing with railroad transportation, particularly with the first Russian railroad from St. Petersburg to Moscow. It was the famous Imperial Government of Russia Nicolas Railroad built in 1869 in honor of Czar Nicolas 1. After the 1917 Socialist Revolution all Real Estate of the country, including the Pertsov’s building was confiscated and nationalized, thus becoming the property of the State.

As thousands of 2 to 7 room apartments had become property of the government, they were remade to be communal ones, where each family received one room. My family got a room in the apartment on the second floor. Although it was a pretty big room, there was not enough light—the only window at the corner, looked out at the building’s wall. We had to have electrical lights on all the time. There were seven families in this particular apartment, which had one kitchen, one bathroom, one lavatory next to the kitchen. Can you imagine what was going on at seven o’clock in the morning in our apartment??? The long corridor outside our room had never been empty—each family had the right to locate some old items and boxes with laundry next to a door off their room.

The kitchen was big and comprised of seven tables with seven kerosenka (an oil or paraffin-stove), one on each table.  We had a table with our own kerosenka to cook. The women in the apartment would spending hours in the kitchen preparing the meals for the family. Our kitchen became the place to socialize and exchange views. The big kitchen also had a back door to take the garbage out. All the neighbors threw their garbage down stairs to the back yard, where the big wooden boxes were constructed for garbage. I am talking about the time of the 1950-60s.

If you are a woman and have a good imagination, you can perceive the life of a Soviet women for all 24/7, let alone the empty shelfs in the supermarket, and limited incomes to buy food in a farmer’s market. It was hard life for everybody in the Soviet Union, especially for the women.  Suddenly we got interesting news. In late 1958, the Soviet Union and the United States agreed to set up national exhibitions in each other’s nation as part of their new emphasis on cultural exchanges. Vice President Nixon was bringing a model of a modern American kitchen to Moscow… Now you can’t imagine what happened in each communal apartment behind the Iron Curtin… An American kitchen in Moscow!?

The apartments with an individual kitchen had been a rarity in the country, only 3-5 percent of the population had them—the Communist leaders. The rest had lived in communal apartments in a country spread across eleven time zones. After hearing the news over the radio, the entire female part of the country wanted desperately to see the American kitchen. The very air behind the Iron Curtin was buzzing with women’s whisperings, desires, and preparations. There were no barriers the women couldn’t overcome to go to Moscow to see the American kitchen. Women and men traveled by horses, by the contingent trucks, by ships, by trains, often walking miles to get some means of transportation, in the country of eleven time zones.

The men were also concerned, especially the men in power, the Communists, they had never seen such active women’s movement. The exhibition of the American kitchen occupied the minds of the population and the KGB was not ready to react adequately. The significance of the event had scared them, they had known about a desperate housing situation in the country and did not know how to respond to ‘capitalist propaganda.’ “During the grand opening ceremony of the American National Exhibition in Moscow, Vice President Richard Nixon and Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev engaged in a heated debate about capitalism and communism in the middle of a model kitchen set up for the fair. The so-called ‘kitchen debate’ became one of the most famous episodes of the Cold War.”

In front of an army of reporters and photographers who followed them around, Nixon and Khrushchev continued their argument in the kitchen of a model home built in the exhibition: “For a few moments, in the confines of a “modern” kitchen, the diplomatic gloves had come off and America and the Soviet Union had verbally jousted over which system was superior–communism or capitalism.” The KGB and all Communists hated Nixon, because they were helpless, being exposed by the presence of the American kitchen… Yet, the enemies of democracy have a long memory and use it when circumstances present them the opportunity…

I have visited this exhibition, met a lot of women, talked to them and I know the dramatic effect of the American individual kitchen on the Soviet human mind in 1959. The KGB also recognized the dramatic effect the Soviet people had experienced and they used the opportunity of revenge to Nixon in the 1970s. It is a huge story that requires a different column to tell you how the KGB organized the Watergate and ousted President Nixon with the help of some Democrats. Ironically, history repeats itself and we are dealing with the same KGB and the same set of techniques today, fifty years later. Now the KGB works with the entire Democrat Party against President Trump, confronting his family and the people working for him. You are witnessing this every day, yet you don’t know who is really behind anti-Trump campaign… Stay tuned…

A Hundred Years War: Communism vs. Capitalism

If you read documents about the famous “kitchen debate,” you will have the big picture arguments about Capitalism and Communism, which in fact continues between America and Russia today, in 2020. It is an “epidemic of disinformation” produced by Russia today, using the old Stalinist arsenal of lies, fraud, deceptions, and obfuscations to fool and deceive you. Writing for the last thirty years and giving you a detailed anatomy of this war, I have been calling it an asymmetrical war against capitalism and Western civilization. Actually, it is the same war against the Truth, waged by the Russian Intel against the Republicans fifty years later. Knowledge is Power–Richard Nixon had known the Truth of the housing disaster in Russia. He had exposed the biggest problem of a totalitarian State—misery conditions and quality of life under Stalinist Socialism.  “The communal apartment became the predominant form of housing in the USSR for generations, and examples still exist in “the most fashionable central districts of large Russian cities.” Wikipedia

Telling the truth is a powerful method to expose the “epidemic of disinformation” that has continued since the victory of the Socialist Revolution in Russia in 1917. Knowledge is the best disinfector!  You deserve to know the Truth! Do you know that the carrier of this epidemic was then and still is the Russian Intel?  I used the term KGB writing about them to show Stalin’s skillful propaganda techniques and dirty tricks. President Nixon knew the true Housing disaster in Russia. His courageous actions cost him the presidency. The enemy of America had prearranged, connived and manufactured the activities against him with the help of some Democrats. It was open season on the Republicans and they had not defended their President–instead they surrendered. Many did not recognize deep infiltration of the Soviets into our political system and in all corners of our society, some did…

Today, fifty years later Putin can celebrate an enormous success in his collaboration with the Democrat Party against the American Republic. The Democrat Party joined and supported Putin’s KGB, which has been infiltrating America since the 20th century. Read my column: …and the KGB in the White House, June 1, 2017.  Fifty years later we see something very similar to the past: the attempt to oust another American President–Donald J. Trump. The last thirty years have given the Soviet System the time and opportunity to enhance the Russian military and its intelligence apparatus to continue its expansion to the world. The predicament in America is even worse today, due to erroneous American foreign policy, during the last thirty years. Up to now, the American public is still unaware of the ideology of real Socialism, which, to survive, will never stop fighting successful capitalism. Today we have a global political forces confronting a sitting American President… Read my books and columns…

Wake up America!  We will find remedy from Coronavirus. But…it is important to remember: there is no cure for Socialism/Communism!!!

To be continued www.simonapipko1.com or at www.drrichswier.com/author/apipko/.

© All rights reserved.

Another actress, another point of view on Harvey Weinstein — Are women always victims in the sleazy world of Hollywood?

Cassie Jaye, now 33, was a struggling actress in Hollywood in her late teens and early twenties. Her story sheds light on the Weinstein debacle.

She describes how young beautiful actresses have contracts with publicists and now the publicists find them entry-level work with the rich and powerful of Los Angeles.

A beautiful young woman might become an “atmosphere model” at the opening of a new club and be paid $100 an hour to stand around looking beautiful, while not telling anyone they are being paid to be there. Or they might be a “shop girl” promoting a particular liquor at an upscale bar.

Ms Jaye was once sent by her publicist to work at a fundraiser with over a thousand other beautiful young models at the Playboy Mansion, having been directed to “dress as candy.”

She arrived in a metallic mini tube dress (hoping it looked enough like a candy wrapper) and was rather surprised to find that she was the most clothed young woman there. The others were mostly nude with candy necklaces or well-placed whipped cream. They dressed themselves.

She quickly found out that “the more beautiful you are and the more willing you are to use your beauty as a financial asset the more you will be paid … there is a lot to gain from making connections with powerful and wealthy people.” She further notes that “female models are paid more than male models. Yes, there is a pay gap there.”

Just starting out, Ms Jaye found a job in a B movie. The female director decided there was not enough nudity in the movie and changed the script halfway through shooting. She decided that Ms Jaye’s character would now have a nude scene. She refused. The director then brought in a different actress for that scene. She was paid more for those five minutes of work than Ms Jaye (or other members of the cast) were paid for the entire movie.

It became clear to her that those women with the most physical beauty and the fewest scruples could make the most money and get the furthest in their career.

In L.A., says Ms Jaye, “the line between sex and business is very blurry… A man can say, ‘have sex with me and I’ll give you this role’ just as much as a woman can say, ‘if you give me this role I’ll have sex with you.’”

She eventually left acting for directing documentaries on topics that mattered to her. Her remarkable film The Red Pill, which started out as a feminist exposé of the dark underbelly of the men’s rights movement, changed in the production to be rather different. Her 15-minute Ted talk, Meeting The Enemy, is a beautiful plea for reason and depolarization of the gender debate.

In all of the horrifying stories that came out of the Harvey Weinstein affair we are expected to take the stance that every female is vulnerable all the time. We must never ask if maybe the women in question got something out of the encounter that benefited them, even if this might explain why, for instance, the chief complainants in the trial of Weinstein, Miriam Haley and Jessica Mann, would continue to have casual contact, texting, selfies and dinner, and even consensual sex (!) with the movie mogul after he raped them.

And if it is true that these or other complainants got something significant out of such encounters – perhaps a role in a film – why is that okay? Is it just that a woman can complain of the rape but still gets to keep the financial and other sorts of gain from a crime?

The other justice issue that looms large in the #MeToo context was highlighted by Donna Rotunno, Weinstein’s lawyer, who is no fan of the movement. As the New York Times reported:

“As the #MeToo movement grew, she embraced the role of contrarian, arguing that a public rush to condemn men accused of sexual misconduct and assault was shredding reputations and careers without due process. Even if the movement had helped the feminist cause, she said, it came at too high a price. If we have 500 positives that come from a movement, but the one negative is that it strips you of your right to due process and a fair trial, and the presumption of innocence, then to me, not one of those things can outweigh the one bad,” she said in an interview. “We can’t have movements that strip us of our fundamental rights.”

In the same Times article, Jane Manning, an advocate for rape victims and a former New York City sex crimes prosecutor, said of Ms. Rotunno: “Her willingness to claim that #MeToo has gone too far is attached to a steady stream of big paychecks, but is not supported by the facts.”

But is Ms Rotunno’s paycheck bigger than that of the Hollywood actress-accusers? And how did they get those paychecks? If it’s true that Weinstein’s female lawyer can say false but expedient things about him for gain, then how can we #believeallwomen?

Some female is not telling the truth here. Which one is it?

Perhaps #MeToo is not attempting to do away with the presumption of innocence; perhaps it is only shifting the presumption of innocence to the female side of humanity (which might account for why some people these days would like to be female who are not) while creating a presumption of guilt that must be overturned on the male side. This is sexism and it must stop.

The fact that feminism is allied with the sexual revolution has confused a lot of us for a long time. Why on earth would supposed feminists want to champion so many things that hurt women, like pornography, promiscuity and prostitution? Current feminism seems to be using female sexuality for the sake of the movement’s own goals, the chief of which appears to be, fewer men in positions of power.

At the end of the first year of #MeToo, the New York Times ran an article entitled, #MeToo Brought Down 201 Powerful Men. Nearly Half of Their Replacements Are Women.” Language like “bring down” suggests big game hunting and leaves one asking if this is about seeking justice or simply replacing one kind of predation with another? To quote Cassie Jay again:

“The part of me that cares about justice for women wants to believe that the #MeToo movement has helped women find the strength to share their sexual assault stories with law officials for due process to take place and find healing through that. But when I look at the #MeToo movement and what it has inspired I don’t see healing as the main result. I see it inspiring hatred directed at men in general and also cruel and degrading treatment of men who have come out with their own #MeToo stories.”

We seem to have lost touch with what our judicial system is for. It is not for revenge; it is for the greater good. Nothing that risks punishing the innocent can be said to be working for the greater good. Why? Because the government must never be allowed to perpetrate crime. Blackstone’s ratio – “It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer” – is a hallmark of our system of law. If we see a person escaping punishment it is not necessarily a sign that our system is not working — it might be a sign that it is!

Weinstein may deserve his sentence – or even more – but a system that always convicts the bad guys will necessarily also convict a few innocent people, something we should find abhorrent, but about which feminists routinely laugh.

We would have fewer bad guys, however, if more women lived up to the slogan that “girls can do anything”, including maintain their self-respect.

Having self-respect means saying No to what we don’t want. Ethically responsible women say No to sexual predators, walk away and then press charges to help protect other people from being abused. When you fail to press charges (instead of taking the benefits you get from the relationship with the perpetrator while staying silent), you betray yourself and you let down all the other victims, past and future.

I would suggest to women everywhere that we should live up to the equality we claim with men. That means taking responsibility for our actions, and not playing the women=vulnerable people, men=oppressors card.

Powerful men with money and insatiable sexual appetites must take their chances in court, but if we destroy due process for the Harvey Weinsteins of the world it won’t be there for us and the ones we love when we need it.

COLUMN BY

Katherine Baker

Katherine Baker is a freelance writer who lives in Western Pennsylvania.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Whither populism?

An embarrassing truth about the fertility crisis

“Trust me, I’m a landlord”

Kids benefit from seeing euthanasia close up, says Canadian doctor

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

Hope for America from CPAC [+Videos]

My wife Mary and I are having a wonderful time at CPAC, Wednesday Feb 26-29th, reconnecting with patriots and Tea Partiers we have not seen in years. We are promoting the release of the Trump Train 2020 song music video. We ask each of you to host Watch Parties when the music video goes live on YouTube. Here is the commercial promoting the music video release on Tuesday, March 3rd at 11:55 am.

First of all, I was struck by the huge number of young conservatives in attendance. I met two people who really excited me.

Ben LaCross is author of “Tucker for President” written to teach conservative values to middle school students and educate them about how elections work. Those who read my articles know I have ranted for years about how we have allowed progressives to dominate public education. This is why we have a generation of Bernie Bros who believe they are entitled to what others have sacrificed and worked for. Ben LaCross’ book is an awesome way to begin taking back our kids. Please show Ben some love: Like “Tucker for President” on Facebook.

Here is a short video Mary shot of me interviewing Ben.

Check out Ben LaCross books.

The second person who excited me was Kim Klacik, a young black conservative Republican woman running for congress in Baltimore, the rat-infested district of the late Democrat Elijah Cummings. I’m from Baltimore. It is always exiting to meet fellow blacks who are not brain-dead zombies for the Democratic Party. Mary shot a short video of Kim explaining to me what prompted her to run and why she is not a Democrat. Here is the video

Seeing so many young people at CPAC is really encouraging folks. Fake news media would have us believe that all millennials support killing babies even after they are born and support Bernie Sanders confiscating everyone’s earnings for redistribution. Trump was correct in saying young people are the heart of the pro-life movement.

Young people are fired up to take back America. We have surrendered too many great traditions and institutions to progressives.

Years ago, I wrote an article advising the Boy Scouts not to allow openly homosexual scout masters. Isn’t that like allowing a fox into the chicken coop? I was chairman of a conservative PAC. Progressives/LGBTQ enforcers immediately pounced, branding me and anyone associated with me a homophobe and a hater. A congressional candidate was attacked for allowing me and my PAC to work on his campaign.

I do not care about what progressives say or think of me. They’ve been calling me an Uncle Tom, self-hating and stupid n***** for decades. However, I did struggle with guilt over candidates being harmed by association.

Mary and I concluded that it would be best for me to resign from my chairmanship to continue fighting the good fight independently; spreading truth as the Lord leads. Then, all of the attacks will be targeted at me only. God’s Word says, “No weapon formed against me shall prosper.”

The Boy Scouts of America has filed for bankruptcy due to an overwhelmingly huge number of sexual assault (pedophilia) lawsuits. Upon hearing the sad news, I flashed back years ago to a Facebook post by an angry mom. She vowed to remove her son from the “hate group” if they did not admit openly homosexual scout masters.

LGBTQ activists said we were hateful and paranoid for thinking they would change the 100 year old historic institution founded on Christian principles. And yet upon entering the BSA, homosexuals’ first act was to demand that “morally straight” be deleted from the Scout Oath. Then, activists demanded that “boy” be removed from the title and that they admit girls.

Since its founding in 1910, around 110 million Americans participated in BSA programs. The BSA mission was to “prepare young people to make ethical and moral choices over their lifetimes by instilling in them the values of the Scout Oath and Law.” Now, the BSA will probably close their doors. Another great American institution will have bitten-the-dust due to surrendering to LGBTQ enforcers’ bullying and incrementalism.

We are not in a battle in which Democrats and Republicans simply have different views regarding how best to serve America. We are in a battle of good vs evil; a battle for the heart and soul of America.

As a Christian, black Conservative and Republican, my activism is my ministry.

© All rights reserved.