Marching Toward Gun Confiscation: Prohibition Advocates Released Unhinged Gun Control Plan

/in , , , , /by

This week, March for Our Lives – the gun control group that arose in the wake of the criminal mass attack at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla. – released a lengthy plan outlining its vision for firearm regulation in America. Reduced to its essence, the plan is to discourage gun ownership through numerous layers of red tape, fees and government mandates.

Perhaps to their credit, March for Our Lives are more forthcoming in their proposals than disingenuous anti-gun groups who falsely profess commitment to the Second Amendment (see, for example, this week’s article on “Gun Owners for Safety”). No one can come away from reading the entire March for Our lives ”plan” with anything but the impression that the group wants to end gun ownership as America currently knows it. Even the anti-gun mass media has had to admit it is “sweeping,” “ambitious,” and “far-reaching.”

Boasting the Orwellian title of “A Peace Plan for a Safer America,” the agenda is actually a disarmament plan against law-abiding gun owners.

The centerpiece of the plan is the ever-trendy concept of a massive ban on semi-automatic firearms, coupled with a program to force formerly law-abiding owners of those guns to surrender them to the government or face punishment.

The plan doesn’t get into the specifics of which guns would be banned, how much compensation would be offered for their surrender, or what would happen to those who did not comply with this “full mandatory” scheme, but the goal would be “a reduction of our domestic firearm stock by 30%.”

Needless to say, however, any plan that by its own terms aims to have the U.S. government collect and destroy nearly 1 in every 3 guns in America must contemplate harsh treatment for anyone who doesn’t comply. Americans are not known for just casually surrendering their lawfully-acquired property and essential freedoms.

Even those who weren’t forcibly required to surrender their guns would still be subject under the plan to programs to “encourage” the “voluntary” civilian relinquishment of “handguns and other firearms.”

The plan also targets those still stubborn enough to want to legally acquire or keep a gun or ammunition. That would require a “multi-step approval process, overseen by a law enforcement agency, that requires background checks, in-person interviews, personal references, rigorous gun safety training, and a waiting period of 10 days for each gun purchase.”

Some version of this process, moreover, would have to be repeated each year that the person wanted to keep the gun.

And, of course, licensees would have to pay substantial “annual licensing fees” to atone for the high cost of “gun violence” they themselves are not committing.

Besides the licensing process, which would apparently allow licensing officials some discretion to deny even otherwise qualified applicants, mandatory disqualifiers for gun ownership would also be greatly expanded.

Young adults (ironically, the same demographic being used to market the “Peace Plan”) would be automatically prohibited. Anyone who was considered to have a “propensity for violence” would also be ineligible, a category that could be established by court records, misdemeanor convictions, and apparently even intemperate speech that did not rise to the level of a prosecutable offense.

Those who passed this rigorous licensing process, however, would still not be out of the woods. The plan would provide ongoing mechanisms of disarmament, either by license revocation or through a “federal policy” of “extreme risk protection orders” filed by family members or others who objected to the person having a firearm.

As if this weren’t enough, the plan would create a new National Director of Gun Violence Prevention, answerable only to the U.S. President, to marshal the vast resources of the federal government in support of the plan’s gun control agenda. Among other things, this official would be responsible for “educating” the pubic to reject the idea that “guns are safe products” and ensuring Americans understand that “the presence of a firearm in your home dramatically increases your chance of death.”

Characterizing “officer-involved shootings” as a “leading cause of death for young American men,” the plan even takes aim at police use of firearms and deadly force. The aforementioned director would also be tasked with promoting “stricter policies on the use of force” and directing the U.S. Department of Justice to conduct civil rights investigations of local police departments to exact “consent decrees” that subject the departments to federal oversight.

Ironically, at the same time the plan calls for additional restrictions on law-abiding gun owners and the police, it also insists on more lenient treatment of convicted criminals through criminal justice, pretrial, and sentencing reforms. The goal, in contrast to the increased surveillance and management of gun owners and police officers, would be to “lower the footprint of the criminal justice system” in everybody else’s lives.

And it just goes on an on. Most of the worst (and often discredited) thinking in gun control over the last 40 years is included in some form or fashion. For example, the plan calls for:

  • Rationing the purchase of firearms;
  • Banning “high capacity” magazines;
  • Banning online advertising of guns;
  • Banning online sales of ammunition and firearm parts;
  • Holding gun manufacturers and dealers civilly liable for crimes committed with firearms;
  • Creating a searchable national registry of firearms and firearm owners;
  • Creating national “safe storage” requirements; and
  • Granting the Consumer Products Safety Commission authority to regulate firearms.

How would any of this be consistent with the Second Amendment?

The plan has thought of that, too. The very concept of an individual right to keep and bear arms, as articulated by the U.S. Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller, would undergo a “serious rethinking.”

The U.S. Department of Justice, for example, would be required to reexamine its own conclusion that the Second Amendment protects an individual right and work toward repudiating the foundations of the Heller decision.

A “different interpretation of the Second Amendment” would also become a litmus test for the “next generation of federal judges.” The president would choose judicial prospects in concert with March for Our Lives to “develop a slate of gun violence prevention champions for federal judicial nominations ….”

Even the U.S. Supreme Court itself would face “reform” under the plan, the better to ensure that “structural limitations” did not stand in the way of the court eventually reversing the “excoriated” and “controversial” Heller decision.

But the plan doesn’t stop there. It even envisions a federally-funded “Safety Corps,” modeled on the Peace Corps, to pay legions of young activists to promote the principles and objectives of the “Peace Plan.”

The “Peace Plan” concludes by calling “on every Presidential candidate for the 2020 election” to endorse it.

So far, none of the candidates seem to have taken the bait.

But if any of them do, March for our Lives will have done the entire American electorate a favor by showing just how far some politicians are willing to go to eradicate America’s constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Divide and Conquer: Giffords (Formerly LCAV) Looks to Split Gun Owners to Enact Controls

Florida Alert! “Assault Weapons” Ban Amendment Bans ALL SEMIAUTOMATIC RIFLES AND SHOTGUNS

Another Week, Another Democrat Presidential Contender Out to Round Up America’s Guns

Flag on the Play: Media Promotes Gun Confiscation Laws by Exaggerating “Study” Results

EDITORS NOTE: This NRA-ILA column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

The Inconvenient Truth about Public Charge Provisions of Immigration Laws

/in , , , , , , , /by

There are two broad categories of lies that could be referred to as crimes of commission and crimes of omission.

The crime of commission is when facts are blatantly misrepresented, while the crime of omission involves leaving out relevant information, for example, when statements are taken out of context or relevant information is left out of the report.

These tactics have become commonplace and routine particularly when the mainstream media reports on the Trump administration and also when it reports on issues pertaining to immigration.

When the Trump administration promulgates policies that impact immigration, synergy kicks in and the truth is likely nowhere to be found.

Over a century ago a popular expression, the streets are paved with gold, drew immigrants to the United States who were determined to strike it rich in America.  When they got here they found that the streets were paved, not with gold, but with cobblestones that came from the cargo holds of ships that used those cobblestones as ballast.

Back then the cargo holds of the merchant ships that arrived at America’s ports were filled with cobblestones that served as ballast to keep those ships stable on the voyage to the United States.  Once here, those stones were off-loaded and all sorts of products that were made in America replaced the cobblestones in the cargo holds of those ships that returned to their original ports with merchandise to be sold.

The cobblestones were used to pave the roads of the port cities.

Nevertheless the immigrants who came to America worked hard and earned a living and built their futures in our nation.  None of them expected, nor received a “free ride.”

You could say that rather than being paved with gold, the streets were paved with blood, sweat and tears of the immigrants.

With their new-found freedom to worship and to pursue their dreams, many succeeded in building successful and happy lives in the United States.

On August 12, 2019 Business Today breathlessly published a Reuters News report under the title, “New Trump administration rule to target legal immigrants who get public assistance”.  The subtitle of that report utterly twisted the truth:

U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration unveiled a sweeping rule on Monday that would limit legal immigration by denying visas and permanent residency to hundreds of thousands of people for being too poor

That article also included this excerpt:

The 837-page rule could be the most drastic of all the Trump administration’s policies targeting the legal immigration system, experts have said. Advocates for immigrants have criticized the plan as an effort to cut legal immigration without going through Congress to change U.S. law.

The new rule is derived from the Immigration Act of 1882, which allows the U.S. government to deny a visa to anyone likely to become a “public charge.”

That last paragraph creates the utterly false impression that President Trump had to dig back to law books published 137 years ago to find legal justification for invoking the concept of public charge to prevent aliens on public assistance from receiving lawful immigrant status.

In reality, while the notion of public charge was first codified in 1882, it has persisted in all subsequent rewrites of America’s immigration laws and, in fact, is still an element of the current Immigration and Nationality Act.

The claim that Trump’s public charge policies would deny entry to aliens who are poor is false.  This concern does not deny entry to aliens who are poor.  Historically many immigrants who were destitute have come to the United States.  However, they worked their way up the economic ladder to create the American Dream for themselves, their families and ultimately, for America.

The issue is not whether or not an alien seeking to enter the U.S. is poor but if that alien has the physical capabilities and skills and/or education to work and be self-sufficient in the United States.

In fact, Ellis Island was run by Public Health officials along with immigration officials.  Public Health officials had two concerns- that the arriving immigrants were not suffering from dangerous communicable diseases that could create a deadly epidemic and that the arriving immigrants were mentally and physically capable of working and supporting themselves and, perhaps, their families.

My earlier article, “The Left’s Immigration Con Game”, referenced the extraordinary documentary, “Forgotten Ellis Island”, that chronicles the true story about Ellis Island, and the story is not particularly pretty or romantic and runs contrary to the bogus mythology told by the immigration anarchists of today.

On August 16, 2019 CNBC reported, “Advocacy groups file suit to block Trump’s new ‘public charge’ immigration rule” that included this outrageous quote:

“This rule change is a direct attack on communities of color and their families and furthers this administration’s desire to make this country work primarily for the wealthy and white,” said Antionette Dozier, senior attorney at the Western Center on Law and Poverty. “Our immigration system cannot be based on the racial animosities of this administration or whether or not people are wealthy.”

More recently NBC reported, “New York, Connecticut and Vermont sue to block Trump’s public charge rule.”

Once again, the Left is resorting to “Lawfare”, filing lawsuits to achieve political objectives.

The quote that appears in the CNBC article noted above from Western Center on Law and Poverty was quick to invoke race.  Let us also be clear that race, religion and/or ethnicity play absolutely no role in determining whether or not to admit aliens into the United States.

The grounds for determining admissibility of aliens into the United States is codified in a section of the current Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S. Code § 1182.

Among the categories of aliens who are excludible are aliens who suffer dangerous communicable diseases, serious mental illness, are criminals, spies, terrorists, human rights violators, fugitives from justice, aliens who had been previously deported (removed) from the United States and aliens who have committed fraud in their applications for visas and/or immigration benefits.

Additionally, it establishes that aliens are inadmissible (excludible) if they are likely to become public charges.

This is how the current Immigration and Nationality Act unambiguously lays out the entire issue of public charge:

(4)  Public charge

(A)   In general

Any alien who, in the opinion of the consular officer at the time of application for a visa, or in the opinion of the Attorney General at the time of application for admission or adjustment of status, is likely at any time to become a public charge is inadmissible.

(B)   Factors to be taken into account

(i)  In determining whether an alien is inadmissible under this paragraph, the consular officer or the Attorney General shall at a minimum consider the alien’s–

(I)  age;

(II)  health;

(III)  family status;

(IV)  assets, resources, and financial status;  and

(V)  education and skills.

(ii)  In addition to the factors under clause (i), the consular officer or the Attorney General may also consider any affidavit of support under section 1183a of this title for purposes of exclusion under this paragraph.

The media has accused President Trump of wanting to separate families.  In point of fact, family members may provide an affidavit of support wherein they guarantee that they will provide financial assistance to their family members who seek to immigrate to the United States.  This would help to unite families not divide them.

The issue is not about dividing families or denying poor people an opportunity to immigrate to the United States, but to protect the financial solvency of the United States, an issue of increasing concern as the national debt continues to soar into the stratosphere, by simply enforcing existing laws.

I must remind you that the imposition of American policies to address public charge laws is not new, but has a long-established history that goes back 137 years.

It is clear that the United States is unable to secure its borders.  Billions of humans around the world live below the poverty line.  If the United States was to permit all of the world’s poor to come to America with the expectation of receiving free healthcare, free education, housing subsidies and other such free benefits, our nation would implode.

As it is, our national debt has soared into the stratosphere and continues its upward trajectory.

The time has come for the Radical Left to be reminded of one of their favorite chants, the one that deals with “sustainability!”

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

More Women Now Understand that Guns Save Lives

/in , , , /by

A woman wrote in New York Times,

“While it appeared to be counterintuitive to people who did not grow up around firearms, we saw guns in our house as tools of protection and empowerment — for women who lived alone in a house without a man. And, on a couple of occasions, the guns helped deterred intended crime and saved our lives as women.”

A lot of women have the similar stories and experiences of how they accomplished self-defense, hence life-saving with the help of a gun. But, does gun really save life? Keep reading to learn more.

Guns for Self Defense – A Myth or Magic?

In many cases, a lot of women wonder if they are making the right decision to acquire a gun. This contemplation stems from certain ugly and fatal incidents associated with keeping guns at home.

Typical example of such incident is the case of the woman whose son killed 20 kids in an elementary school, including some adults. It was later discovered that the gun he used was his mom’s. In fact, the woman had multiple guns all to herself and kept them at home.

And, it’s hard to also forget the case of Christy Salters Martin — a professional boxer who also possessed a concealed carry permit. Her husband shot her with the gun she acquired when she tried to walk away from him. As a result, she now cautions women to be careful and not make the mistake she made. She added that merely possessing a gun as a woman is not the solution to staying safe. Often, the women are overpowered by the male culprits who would end up using the gun on the women.

However, some other women have a contrary opinion. The opinion states that “guns are amazing equalizer between men and women.” Wayne LaPierre declared “there’s something a rapist deserves — a good woman armed with a gun.” Wanye is a member of the National Rifle Association and serves as the executive vice president of the association.

The Best Weapon for a Woman’s Safe Defense is Gun

Janalee Tobias is the founder and president of Women Against Gun Control. According to Janalee, a number of women have transformed and built confidence by the reason of learning how to handle firearms properly. She concluded that there’s no better weapon for a woman to use as self-defense and protection tool than a gun. She added that “Guns are magical. When people perceive you have a gun, they will be careful not to meddle with you. In fact, they will be afraid of you.”

Women are Increasingly Being Involved in Roles that Require Protecting Themselves and the People Under their Care

In places such as Louisiana, a group exists that empower and educate female gun owners. Typical example of such group is the Well Armed Woman Chapters. In Bayou region, Adrianna Eschete is the chapter leader. According to her, “More often, women are finding themselves in responsibilities necessitating the need to protect those under their care.” And of course, such women also need some form of protection for themselves.

Adrianna added that “more and more ladies today are independent — some are single moms, others are alone in their homes because their husbands are working in a different region, state or country, and some go about alone in building their careers. In fact, some women stay out late into the nights running errands. Don’t over look this — a lot of women are caught up in situations where they are the ones providing protection for themselves and those under their care, rather than being the protected.”

A elderly woman of 63 years old who killed a 16-year old burglar has this to say,

“When I heard noise in my home late at night, I managed to retrieve the gun I stashed in my safe.  I was face to face with a young boy who was holding a shotgun and demanding that I give him money.”

It’s a pity he’s no more, but I was only doing what I had to do – defend myself and family right inside my own home, at such late hour. I don’t have to wait until he harms me or my family, I had to act fast — exercise the right to defend myself.”

Report

The National Shooting Sports Foundation provided a study report in 2015. According to the report, nearly 49 percent of the female folks affirmed they got a gun for both home defense and self-protection. The study also pointed that over 80% of the women surveyed said they feel more secure and safer because of the firearm in their possession, while the rest of the female respondents (more than 73 percent) agreed that having a firearm is a matter of self reliance and more importantly a matter of survival.

A Typical Scenario

Julia Benson, 29 years old, lives with her daughter, being a single mom, in a region with high crime rate. According to Julia, “I already owned a gun when I was 18 — it was given to me by my first boyfriend for self defense and protection. And now that I’m alone with my precious daughter, in a secluded and crime-prone area, I acquired more guns – shotguns and handguns. The reason is that my residence is very far away from the city — as a result, relying on the police when emergency arises could be fatal. So, I have to protect myself and my daughter. I depend on myself to protect my daughter and myself. It’s something that women who find themselves a lone should consider.”

However, those concerned about the proliferation of guns in today’s society are calling for a proper balance. These people are of the opinion that the proliferation of gun has not done much to reduce crime rates, but it appears it’s making matters worse  —- including the cases of homicides and suicides, of which women have been reported to be more victims than their male counterparts.

Socialism Infects the Globe, It Must be Defeated

/in , , , , , /by

After Jeffrey Epstein’s bizarre death, Attorney General William Barr found “Serious Irregularities” and ordered an investigation. He also promised that: “We will get to the bottom of what happened and there will be accountability.” Unfortunately, America faces a whole range of “Serious Irregularities.” They are the ills, tentacles or symptoms of Socialism in our domestic and foreign policies: from the Russia Probe to war in Afghanistan, from two Soviet style propagandist-manipulators Rep. Omar and Tlaib to the conversion of the Dems to Socialist party. To understand the nexus of these issues you have to know that they all have been brought about by the ideological war going on between Capitalism and Communism/Socialism for the last hundred years. Read my column American Socialism: The Enemy Within, New Right Network, August 1, 2019.

The recent mysterious, failed Russian military experiment and nuclear radiation of the world a-la Chernobyl indicates old Soviet intent to dominate and their usual attempt to cover it up their mistakes. Just watch, Russia will blame America for the crime they committed. Actually, most of the trouble in America and the world derives from and is caused by Russia and Putin’s KGB. I am emphasizing the significance of the KGB, because it represents Russia today and am using the term KGB to represent the entirety of the Russian Intelligence Services. If you’re wondering what any of this has to do with mass shootings in America, political mistrust of the government, and the other ills at this moment in time, simply imagine the decades of the KGB’s infiltration to do just that–fighting the American Republic from within….

To be aware of interconnection between all fronts of this war, you have to know well the enemy and the variety of forms, methods, and tricks used against Capitalism by the radical army of Communist/ Socialist mafia. Trump’s tariff-war, systematic mass shootings, the rise of Anti-Semitism, violence, and unspeakable hatred are only a few symptoms of this war. Yet, they are inextricably connected to each other by a philosophical concept of Soviet Socialism, the Stalinist Dogma of “Divide and Conquer.” Trump’s tariff-war with Communist China is a part of this long war. Yes, read the book by Michael Pillsbury, who scholastically identified this war: The Hundred-Year Marathon CHINA’S SECRET STRATEGY TO REPLACE AMERICA AS THE GLOBAL SUPERPOWER. If we want to survive we can’t escape and hide from it, because the ultimate agenda of Communism/Socialism is the destruction of Capitalism, Western civilization, and the American Republic.

Mass shootings have also taken a chronicle character in America since it started with Columbine School Shooting in 1999, under Clinton. It was investigated very poorly, missing the major cause—use of mentally disturbed people by the KGB. Mental Health is the crux of the matter. I had discussed the issue and blamed the incompetence on our Intel then, in my book The Russian Factor: From Cold War to Global Terrorism, Xlibris, 2006. There is a direct connection between the Columbine School Shooting under Clinton and Epstein’s repulsive crime spread globally: a pedophile, who also sponsored the Clinton Foundation, which I called “the eyes and ears of the KGB.” We still don’t understand Russia and its Intelligence Apparatus, which is destroying America from within. Trump is right, alleging that the Clintons were behind Jeffrey Epstein’s sudden death. My hopes for AG Barr’s awareness of the ongoing war to execute a successful investigation of the International Watergate No.2 in America.

What is at stake in this war? Everything America cares about: our set of values, democratic institutions, our personal liberty, and all freedoms we enjoy under the unique and most humane system known to the world, left to us by our Founding Fathers. I have been writing about this war for the last thirty years, because I recognized the main culprit of the war—Stalinist Soviet Socialism–a system of corruption, abuse, and fraud, built within the Democrat Party. I had lived through Soviet Socialism for half of my adult life and, as a former Soviet attorney, I know the system pretty well… Soviet Socialism is the enemy of humanity, installed and functioning in the half of the world today. Trump is right, talking about a “long-term catastrophe,” he warned us about our national security twenty years ago…

An Axis of Evil Spreads the Infection

As a matter of fact, the roots of the tariff’s war are much larger and broader than only China. Yes, it started a hundred years ago, but not in China, it was waged by Russia against Western civilization after the 1917 Socialist Revolution. It‘s still going on! History is the Mother of all sciences. If you go back and research the history of Stalinist Soviet Socialism, you will find interesting facts. Knowing that Russia alone can’t spread his ideological Dogma, Stalin began exporting communism abroad. The erroneous American foreign policy for decades gave the Russian KGB and military the opportunity to expand the fraudulent ideology of Socialism and consolidate the power globally.

Stalin started by converting Mongolia, North Korea, China, Eastern Europe,  Palestine, his devoted disciples continued expansion to Syria, Venezuela, Nigeria, Iran, and Turkey. All Intelligence Services of those countries had been built imitating the Soviet structure and were subordinated to the Kremlin—they all went through the KGB’s schooling. Today it is not Russia or China, we are dealing with the Axis of Evil under the umbrella and supervision of Russia. Nothing reciprocal is possible with those countries. This Axis of Evil doesn’t favor a specific race or nationality, yet, none of those countries honor agreements they have signed and don’t follow the International order unless it furthers their aims. The main point for them is–their common ideology aimed at ruining Western civilization.

To this end, Socialism has also created the groups of radical Islamic terrorists from al-Qaeda to ISIS spreading the KGB’s criminal methods throughout the world, using them and the rest of the Socialist mafia to implement Stalinist ideology. In this connection Afghanistan is a turning point to understand the destabilizing role of Russia, which, in fact, has a long border with Afghanistan and is using it. I have repeated many times that knowledge of Russia, its Security Apparatus, and its methods and tricks is a must. To understand this destabilizing role of Russia, please read in this e-magazine my column The KGB’s Roots and Pedigrees, October 19, 2017.

It is not Brexit, but October 1, 2019 is a very significant date for China—Seventy years as a Communist State, designed and built by Stalinist Russia. Though China has changed the economic structure of the Communist system and injected Crony Capitalism, the span of seventy years is looming. In that period of time the Russian socialist economy had collapsed unable to compete with Capitalism. I am not predicting a collapse of China, yet the uprising in Hong Kong is a Ringling Bell for a disaster similar to Tiananmen Square. Remember, after Political Correctness and Social engineering Communism uses brutal violence to prevent their regime from collapsing! Stay tuned!

California: The First Socialist State in America

America did not escape the Stalin’s design as well…To grasp the Truth you should know the transformation which has taken place in the Democrat Party, which is not democratic any longer. Instead, we are dealing with the typical Socialist Party. A Socialist mafia with a socialist agenda aligns with The Axis of Evil to destroy America’s capitalist economic system in order to integrate it into the socialist system worldwide…

Don’t be surprised that California experiences defecation crises. History can explain the tragic transformation of California to Socialism. It was 1963 when University of Berkeley held a communist strategy meeting, where the primary targets were determined. Look at this:

“Primary targets were determined, namely; Family, Free Enterprise, Morality (by/ censorship) and Environmental. At the same meeting they adopted the goals of the “Naked Communist” by Cleon Scouse (1970) were set up as their preamble.” There are 45 goals in total in different stages of the communists operating covertly toward the socialization our nation. “In 1992 A communist strategy meeting was held at the University of California Berkeley, for the sole purpose of updating their objectives, originally proposed in 1963.” To get the essence of those goals, let me give you only four of them:

15. Capture one of the political parties in the United States. I’ve written you about the transformation of the Dems to a Socialist mafia for the last thirty years.

19. Use student riots to foment publicity. Look at the riots in our Universities and Colleges against the First Amendment and the foundation of the American Republic.

20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, and policy making positions. I was warning you about Andropov’s design to infiltrate American media and all security services for the last several decades. I am a victim of that, writing the truth about Russia, my writings were banned by the FBI Socialist mafia.

24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them “censorship” and a violation of free speech and free press. Our culture has become unrecognizable due to a success of our enemies…

Those four goals are very familiar to me, I had lived through their successful execution in Russia—it was called Soviet Socialism. I won’t surprise you, but these exact goals depicts the Socialism in California and America—a system of abuse, injustice, corruption, and fraud…

Don’t be surprised that almost 90% of the agenda had been accomplished in California. If you watch TV, you know the result in a city of millionaires, San-Francisco: abject poverty, violence, and homelessness are out of control, endangering public health. As a result of the official distribution of syringes for addicts, their spent needles and even their excrement litter the streets. There is also risk of a national epidemics of typhus … This is what American Socialism brought San Francisco by the Dems!

As you can see the enemies of the American Republic have the same agenda: whether it is Socialism/Communism within or “The Axis of Evil” outside the country—those are acting in unison against the American Republic on different fronts. Just look at some Dems’ candidates for the US Presidency using the KGB’s play-book: they are scaring us with existential threat of “humanity caused change climate,” for decades, yet, the science did not support them. I identified several of those candidates as being sponsored by the KGB.

What do you think about the events mentioned above by me? Do they constitute “Serious Irregularities” in the American Republic? And another question: Who are you Governor Gavin Newsom? Why do you hate the unique and most humane system left to us by our Founding Fathers???

Socialism—Humanity’s Most Dangerous Sickness

In the beginning of this column, I called “Serious Irregularities” the ills, tentacles or symptoms of Socialism in our domestic and foreign policies: from Russia Probe to the war in Afghanistan, from two Soviet style propagandist-manipulators Rep. Omar and Tlaib to the conversion of the Dems to Socialist Party. Yes, I recognized the Soviet style of propagandist-manipulators Rep. Omar and Tlaib, they are the epitome of Stalinist Political Correctness: lies and fraud. I don’t believe anything coming from their mouths. World Jewish Congress condemns Rep. Rashida Tlaib. I dedicated several columns to Stalinist P.C. let me give it again: “… Political correctness is a Stalinist policy, driven by the political agenda, a skillfully crafted design of a quintessential system of lies, fraud, and a long-term strategy of war against Western civilization to create of One World Socialist Government under Kremlin’s rule.”

I identified another long term objective when the Muslim invasion of Europe took place. It was executed by the KGB in cahoots with Socialist mafia of Greece, Turkey, with the silent agreement of the EU and Germany. All Caravans on our Southern border have been planned by the same culprits. Yet, it is not my duty to present the analysis on all of the KGB’s crimes, as they fight against social and economic freedom in America and the world. It is a duty of the FBI to prevent destabilization of America by the Socialist mafia! The FBI was obligated to do that during the last several decades! They did not! The result is an institutional failure of the FBI! Read my columns here.

Look at the Dems’ candidates for presidency—they are an irresponsible and ignorant lot, and an arrogant Socialist herd of clowns united by a collectivized hatred toward President Trump. Alas, our deceived and fooled Millennial generation seems to prefer socialism, hoping for “free stuff.” They are inculcated by socialist professors in cosmetic socialism, and escaped knowledge of the malevolent and evil side of socialism. They all have no idea the horrors Socialism will bring. They never read my books and don’t know how it is terrible to live in a communal apartment and stay in line for hours to buy milk. Socialism is the enemy of Humanity! America must know that!

Jerry McCormick is right: “When you implement a socialist government, you will eventually have people starving for the necessities of life on a regular basis. Currently, in Venezuela, there are people who have to cross the border to get basic supplies like milk, eggs, and bread. When these kinds of desperate conditions arise, you see violence in your streets and the authoritarian regime sends people to prison and worse. Report: At least 7,000 Venezuelan deaths can be attributed to socialist regime, Patriot News Alerts, July 28, 2019 by Jerry McCormick.

Communism/Socialism did not come to Russia as the result of a demanding public. It was imposed on her from a small minority hiding behind democratic slogans in Russian Duma (parliament). They had ousted a Provisional Government and after a volley from Aurora-ship in Petrograd, the Bolsheviks proclaimed a victory of Socialist Revolution in 1917. Read about Alexander Kerensky, who ran from Petrograd wearing a woman’s dress. His government was overthrown by the Lenin-led Bolsheviks. In reality it was a coup d’état committed by the Bolsheviks in Russia.

Pay attention to what is going on in the House of Representatives in America: the creeping coup d’état against President Trump by Socialist mafia has been going on for the last three years… Don’t be surprised by the similarity with Russia—the countries of the Axis of Evil have the same agenda and Socialist mafia, schooled by the KGB, operating in a similar manner around the world. North Korea is threatening us by testing weaponry, Russia endangers the world with nuclear radiation, Iran is launching missiles, and Syria is poisoning and gassing its people. All leaders of those countries have destabilized the world and hate our successful freedom loving U.S. President Donald J. Trump.

And so do the Dems. Watch the DNC and radical leftists, who I call American Socialist mafia. They hate Trump, and in the best tradition of Stalinism, blame him for the crimes they had committed:

  • They collaborated with Russia for decades and created a hoax of Trump/Dossier, while accusing Trump of treason by being Putin’s agent.
  • They applied fascist methods and tactics in violence like a POGROM in Berkley and accused Trump of being a fascist, calling him Hitler.
  • They are defending a vicious Anti-Semitism of the Islamists in the House of Representatives and accusing Trump of Anti-Semitism, calling him a racist.
  • They are destroying and dividing American Republic for decades and calling Trump a divider, when he is successfully building a Great America.

Enough is enough, wake up America!

To be continued www.simonapipko1.com

The Unchanging Principles of Conservatism Defined

/in , , , , /by

At The Heritage Foundation, we’re always thinking about ways to talk to new and nontraditional audiences about how conservative principles can create the greatest freedom, opportunity, prosperity, and civil society for the American people.

We realize that for these ideas to take hold, we have to counter the false narratives of left-leaning media outlets, educational institutions, and politicians.

We also see how messaging to new audiences can be diluted when some institutions and politicians who bear the “conservative” label drift far from fundamental conservative principles.

This not only hurts the conservative brand, but it also leaves these audiences thinking we’re not authentic about our views and that we change them based on convenience. It harms our credibility and leaves them thinking what we told them was right and true really wasn’t.

Many institutions and politicians start out as conservative, but if they’re not firmly rooted in principles, they can deviate from the path.

This is called trajectory: In physics, think of throwing a ball straight ahead. Eventually, forces like wind and gravity will cause the ball to curve and drop instead of continuing straight.

In politics and policy, the forces that create a curved trajectory—deviating from principles—include pressure from the media or political opponents, pressure from those you normally agree with deviating from principles themselves, or not wanting to be seen as the only one advocating for a position that’s right but not popular.

Since principles are meant to represent our highest ideals and should be based on fundamental truths, they should mostly be unchanging.

While good conservatives may have differing viewpoints about some aspects of conservatism, there are certain fundamental principles where we must remain resolute. In fact, at The Heritage Foundation, we call them the True North principles because they represent a fixed direction on which to stay focused, regardless of which ways the forces may be pressuring us.

Some of these major principles include:

  • The federal government is instituted to protect the rights bestowed on individuals under natural law. It exists to preserve life, liberty, and property—a mission that includes not only protecting the sanctity of life, but defending freedom of speech, religion, the press, and assembly, and the right of individuals to be treated equally and justly under the law, and to enjoy the fruits of their labor.
  • The federal government’s powers should be limited to only those named in the U.S. Constitution and exercised solely to protect the rights of its citizens.
  • Government functions best when it is closest and most accountable to the people and where power is shared between the federal government and the states.
  • Individuals and families make the best decisions for themselves and their children about health, education, jobs, and welfare.
  • America’s economy and the prosperity of individual citizens are best served by a system built on free enterprise, economic freedom, private property rights, and the rule of law. This system is best sustained by policies that promote general economic freedom and eliminate governmental preferences for special interests, including free trade, deregulation, and opposing government interventions in the economy that distort free markets and impair innovation.
  • Tax policies should raise the minimum revenue necessary to fund only constitutionally appropriate functions of government.
  • Regulations should be limited to those that produce a net benefit to the American people as a whole, weighing both financial and liberty costs.
  • Judges should interpret and apply our laws and the Constitution based on their original meaning, not upon judges’ own personal and political predispositions.
  • America must be a welcoming nation—one that promotes patriotic assimilation and is governed by laws that are fair, humane, and enforced to protect its citizens.
  • America is strongest when our policies protect our national interests, preserve our alliances of free peoples, vigorously counter threats to our security and interests, and advance prosperity through economic freedom at home and abroad.

These are just some of the unchanging principles of conservatism.

As the left continues to push policies like “Medicare for All,” free college tuition, open borders, and depleting the strength of the military, conservatives must counter these policies with a strong voice.

We must convince more and more people that our ideas work better and can assure a more free and prosperous future for all Americans. If we don’t do that, and more Americans succumb to the false promises of the statists, we soon won’t recognize America.

If ever there was a time we needed to be clear about our principles, it is now.

Originally published in The Washington Times

COMMENTARY BY

Kay Coles James

Kay Coles James is president of The Heritage Foundation. James formerly served as director of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management and as Virginia’s secretary of health and human resources. She is also the founder and president of The Gloucester Institute. Twitter: .

Dear Readers:

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

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

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

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

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

ACTIVATE YOUR MEMBERSHIP TODAY

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

Higher Ed Is Dominated by the Left. So Where Should Conservative Students Turn for Help?

/in , , , , /by

It is no secret that college campuses have become a bastion for progressive thought and activism. With so many universities striving to push their left-wing agenda on young people, the work of the Intercollegiate Studies Institute is more important than ever.

On today’s episode of The Daily Signal Podcast, Charlie Copeland, ISI’s president and CEO, shares how his organization is working on college campuses all over America to provide students with an educational background on conservative thought. Copeland weighs in on the state of high education today and what trends he is seeing across university campuses.

Listen to the full episode or read a lightly edited transcript below.

Rob Bluey: We are joined by Charlie Copeland, president and CEO of the Intercollegiate Studies Institute. ISI is an organization that’s focused on providing college students with an educational background on conservative thought.

The liberal Left continue to push their radical agenda against American values. The good news is there is a solution. Find out more >>

Charlie, thanks for joining us.

Charlie Copeland: Thank you so much for having me. I’m looking forward to it.

Bluey: Well, Charlie, as you and I know, students across America are heading back to campus, or in many cases probably already there, and ISI’s mission is to inspire them to discover, embrace, and advance the principles and virtues that make America free and prosperous.

Tell us, as those students are now back in their classes and experiencing all the joys of campus life, how do you go about accomplishing that on so many of these bastions of liberal thought in America?

Copeland: We’ve been around since 1953, and so we’ve got some pretty good experience. The first place that we start is with our faculty associates. We have a network of faculty, conservative faculty and libertarian faculty, on campuses across the country. Interestingly enough, they do exist. They’re woefully outnumbered, but they do exist.

We’ve been offering graduate student fellowships since the early ’60s. About 600 faculty on campuses across the country are actually ISI graduate student fellows. Then there’s another almost 2,400 faculty that are on the campus that we’ve engaged with in one way or another, and we communicate regularly to them with content ideas, with curriculum ideas, and other information about conservative ideas and where the educational space is in conservative circles.

In return to that, they provide us access to some of their students. We are really looking for bright, deep-thinking, intellectually curious conservative and libertarian college students who really … understand that there’s something else out there than what they’re being fed by 90% of the faculty, and they’re looking for it, and they find it through our faculty associates.

Then we also have a few staff that we have of regional directors, and they’re usually just a year or two out of college. They carry a caseload of college campuses, and they go and they meet with students and help those students develop ISI societies. They help those students organize and host lectures and debates.

We’ll also work with students to set up student journalism programs and student newspapers. We’ve got on almost 60 campuses conservative-focused, if you will, coming from the conservative side, investigative journalism newspapers that do stories on campus.

It’s really very robust, and it’s across the board.

As I said, we have these faculty members that help us identify students. We have our staff, our regional directors that help identify students. Then we have other students that will say, “Hey, I know this young student, male or woman, or whatever, and they’d love to get involved in ISI,” and we dial them in.

Lastly, we do a lot of social media outreach. Any parent or grandparent or aunt or uncle or student who may be listening to the podcast, if they go to join.isi.org, they can sign up and get an intellectual starter kit, which includes a book from Russell Kirk and some other material, as well as Modern Age, which is an intellectual journal we’ve got, and some regular updates on conservative thought, both from economics, policy, philosophy, and politics.

Virginia Allen: That’s great.

Well, you’ve now served as ISI’s president since 2016, after a career in politics and business. Can you share about the founding of ISI and why your predecessors saw the need for an organization that would advance critical thinking among college students?

Copeland: We go back a long way. We were founded in 1953, and our first president was William F. Buckley Jr. We’ve got some big shoes to fill over those many, many years. He started ISI, or became the first president, after writing his book “God and Man at Yale,” in which Bill Buckley pointed out, and, again, this is 1953, that the campus culture was being increasingly dominated by a progressive, secular, left-leaning faculty elite. So he started this, and we’ve been working away at it ever since.

Flash forward to today, where, as I mentioned, we’ve got almost 3,000 faculty associates that we work with, we’ve got 100 societies on campus, we run almost 200 lectures and debates every year.

What we’re looking for is, again, that really bright, deep-thinking, intellectually curious conservative or libertarian thinker who’s going to go on when they graduate and be a leader somewhere. They’re going to be a leader in their community, a leader in their state, a leader in the country, and maybe that’s in business or maybe it’s in politics, maybe it’s in the law.

The founders of The Federalist Society that have done such a great job identifying and promoting conservative justices were all ISI alumni. Two members of the Supreme Court, Sam Alito and Neil Gorsuch, both participated in ISI programming when they were on college campus.

I could go on and on with the number of folks that you and I would would all know out there that went through ISI programming.

We want to identify those kids because we firmly believe that one person with courage and intellect makes a majority … We know they have the courage and we know that they’re bright, and we want to make sure they understand where these root and foundational principles come from and why they are still appropriate to today’s culture, to today’s society, to today’s world—as a matter of fact, they’re more important today than ever—and why these are the tickets that will continue to make Americans, and frankly, the rest of the world, prosper and grow.

Bluey: Charlie, thanks so much for sharing that impact that you’re having. One of the things that I think is fascinating is the involvement you have on such a deep level on so many college campuses across this country. As you talk to students, or maybe some faculty in certain cases, what issues do you hear coming up over and over again today that our listeners should be aware of?

Copeland: There are a handful of issues, and they revolve around, as you might imagine, things like free speech. They revolve around intellectual diversity. They revolve around feeling that you are able to espouse and debate the ideas that you believe are correct. Maybe you find out that they’re not, but they’re afraid to necessarily even raise those points. It’s gone beyond just sort of this, ” … I don’t want to look like I’m the only one in the class,” to, in many cases, a fear of property and physical safety.

We, last year, identified what we thought were five of the most compelling activities of suppression of free speech, and that suppression of free speech came not only from fellow students, which were probably the least frequent suppressive activities, but from the faculty or the administrations themselves.

That’s what I think is much newer today, over the last 20 years, than you might’ve seen previously on college campus, is the administration and the faculty themselves really driving a dogma and a perception down to students that, if you don’t parrot back to us what we’ve said to you, we will affect your grades, we’ll affect what courses you can get into, we’ll affect what housing you might even get into, because the administrations and the faculty have significant leverage over students.

It is a power structure, and our students are the ones that are on the receiving end of that.

Then sometimes you wind up with the Antifas of the world and groups like that that are physically assaulting students, but it really is the universities themselves that have created bureaucracies that are trying to stamp out conservative or libertarian or free thought.

Allen: One of the key debates among young people and across America right now is gun control. When you speak with students on this issue, what are some of their concerns?

Copeland: The average student that we work with is not all that worried about gun control writ large, other than they believe in the Second Amendment and the right to bear arms. Obviously, they’re as affected as the rest of us are by these instances of mass shootings that get so much publicity. …

Again, our students are really bright, insightful young people, and they know it is not a soundbite issue. Whenever anybody says, “Oh, well, I’m just for commonsense gun reform,” well, what does that even mean? It’s when they start saying, “Well, we should do this or that,” that all of a sudden common sense disappears, and our students recognize that.

We’ve had students, even over the summer, write in some of our student journals editorials that are research-based across the board talking about, is this a mental health issue or is this a broader denigration of our culture issue? Should we have red laws? Should we not? What is the impact of these shootings versus the impact of just being on a college campus?

Every year on every college campus, there are acts of violence that do not get the coverage that a single grotesque act does, like Dayton or El Paso. And both Dayton and El Paso, as we all know, were conducted by individuals that had very different worldviews, although they both believed in the green agenda. But that’s not what was driving them. It was an anger, as far as I can tell, about American culture.

Our students, I think, very much understand that, to a certain extent, because they are in an area of culture on the college campus that is not the “preferred culture” by the administration and the faculty. They understand the harshness that now occurs and how social media creates a pile-on mentality.

I think that they’re very thoughtful and they’re very upset, but they don’t believe that you’re just going to solve this by snapping your fingers and saying, “Well, if we had ‘red flag laws’ and identified folks with mental health issues … ” because much gun violence is not committed by people with mental health issues, but they are people that are disconnected from society. Our students see that connection as directly as anybody else because they’re outnumbered on campus so significantly.

Bluey: Charlie, it’s so refreshing to hear you talk about the students having a principled point of view, and value for the founding principles of this country, and also the critical thinking skills to hopefully decipher what they hear about and read about.

We’re already here at the beginning of the the academic year and hearing stories about the political correctness on college campuses. We just had on The Daily Signal Podcast Penny Nance talking about her and her own son’s experience at Virginia Tech, for instance.

What advice do you have for parents who might be looking to ISI or to you personally for advice on some of the things that they’re hearing about on their children’s college campuses and how maybe the values that are reflected from those administrators stand in such stark contrast with those of their own family? What do you have to say to them?

Copeland: First, I would say to them, have their son or daughter go to join.isi.org, and make sure that that they’re tied into an intellectual community of bright, deep-thinking kids that are national in scope, and also involved in that community are our faculty associates across the country. And thirdly, involved in that community is our alumni base, which goes back decades. We’ve got alumni in almost every community around the country. That would be No. 1, join.isi.org.

The next thing I would certainly do is reach out to every campus … Our faculty associates are on 37% of college campuses, and most of those are on the elite schools, the large state schools, as well as some of the smaller liberal arts colleges.

So, there are conservative faculty members that are there, and reach out to us and get the name of who that faculty member is and go talk to them.

In addition to that, one of the questions I would ask that faculty member is, “Who are the other faculty members that may not be conservative on this campus, but who value viewpoint diversity and are good teachers?” Because there are good teachers on the left who recognize that no ideology or no set of beliefs has all the answers to all the questions that face society. If we had those answers, we would have solved them by now.

So, who are the good professors that will challenge you and make you think, even if those professors come from the left? Because there’s value in hearing and debating that type of viewpoint.

The last piece is identify other students who are not … There’s these radical, dogmatic, left-leaning students who aren’t really there to learn, but they’re there to threaten and cajole.

You can do well on almost every college campus across this country, but when you are a conservative or a libertarian and you want to try to investigate those intellectual backgrounds, you have to do more work, and you have to be very focused on what you do and avoid the useless courses that really junk up most college curriculum at this point in time.

The other thing is you need to have a sense of humor. It is so easy to be outraged at some of the, really, just childish things that other students and faculty and, honestly, the administration will do. If you let it eat you up and let it get you angry, you’re playing their game.

Roger Scruton is going to be speaking at our annual dinner. Well, he’s leaving a video message for us. He’s ill. But he talks about finding beauty in the world. I think that is something that conservatives do much better than liberals, is look and identify true beauty, not just this passing fad. I think that if we’re happy warriors who identify the right professors and the right students, you will be successful.

Allen: I love that expression, happy warriors. Thank you for sharing that.

You mentioned social media and how ISI is adapting to the way students get information today. What are some ways conservatives can more effectively communicate with Gen Z and with other young people?

Copeland: I think that everybody hangs out in Twitter, and Twitter is a little bit of an outrage factory. It’s designed to be that way. You can’t have deep intellectual discourse in 280 characters or less.

It’s fun to participate there and be there and that kind of stuff, but if you really want true discussion and discourse, social media is not the place to do that. …

You look at some of these folks who founded social media companies, and they clearly are not very good at interpersonal relationships, which is probably why they created computer programs to handle their interpersonal relationships for them.

If you really want to have discourse, you’ve got to go do that in person. You’ve got to go to an election. You’ve got to go to a debate. You have to have a discussion group or a reading group.

I would use social media largely to try to create those events and those opportunities to sit down with one, two, five, 20 other people and talk about the deep ideas and how to apply them to today’s community and culture.

Bluey: Charlie, I’m so glad to hear you say that. We often hear that same type of advice from our president at Heritage, Kay Coles James. What she does in terms of showing up—

Copeland: It’s good advice.

Bluey: Yes, it certainly is.

One of the other ways that you’re having success at ISI is through conservative journalism and teaching people the principles and the practices that go into creating some of those successful dialogues and discourse through campus publications.

Tell us more about that journalism program and what kinds of work that students are doing through ISI’s support.

Copeland: The student journalism program, we’ve been doing this for over 20 years, and we’ve got 57, 58 papers. They’re investigative journalist-type papers. If a student wants to start one of those papers, again, they can go to our website, and there’s an area on that website where they can indicate that.

We have a staff member here who actually ran a student newspaper when he was in college a couple of years ago and is a very bright and smart young man, and we’ve got a lot of great things going on there.

We have a couple of classes that we will offer throughout the year to help them get started, a couple of conferences that we invite student journalists to so that they can get an understanding of, “How do I do this? How do I run a student newspaper?” I use air quotes on that because only a handful of them actually still print hard copies. They’re largely web-based at this point in time.

It’s one thing to put content up on the web. It’s another thing, “How do you go and get the stories? And what kinds of stories should they be looking for?”

Then we help to promote those to other outlets, so that, in some cases, they can be picked up by national media and others and maybe even create the point of the sphere of a specific issue that might have occurred on a campus, whether it’s about free speech or whether it’s about viewpoint diversity or whether it’s about inappropriate behavior by a faculty member or what have you. We really want to encourage those papers along.

Then we offer, every year, 10 summer internships, paid internships, that we place our student journalists at major media outlets—Raleigh News & Observer, National Review—and we offer 10 full-year paid when you graduate fellowships at similar national or regional news outlets. We’ve got folks at places like USA Today, for crying out loud, and The Wall Street Journal. We’re very cognizant of trying to place these really bright kids who are great writers at these outlets because they do a great job.

In the last year, 70% of our fellows who wanted to stay in journalism were able to get jobs within the journalism area, and some of our alumni: Marc Thiessen, columnist at The Washington Post; Jonathan Karl, ABC News; Laura Ingraham at Fox; and Katrina Trinko at The Daily Signal.

Allen: Thank you for mentioning The Daily Signal.

Can you tell us just one more time about how students can get involved with ISI?

Copeland: The best way for a student to get involved in ISI, because it’s easy, is join.isi.org. You just put in your email, where you’re going to school, or if you’re at school, what grade you’re in, and we will send you an intellectual starter kit and we will get you onto our regular weekly email message, which usually includes three or four different five-to-seven-minute reads on conservative intellectual thought and history.

We’ll also be able to tie you into whether there’s a local ISI society there or if we have a faculty associate on that campus, as well as perhaps get you tied into debates and lectures.

We offer about five or six regional conferences every year. We have a summer honors conference, as well as we offer a freedom of virtue conference. That would be the No. 1 way.

No. 2 way is to look for an ISI society on your campus, as well as whether or not you think there’s a conservative professor on your campus. That professor is likely an ISI faculty associate and can get you tied in as well. But the best way is join.isi.org.

Bluey: Charlie, that’s great. Congratulations again on the success you’re having at ISI, and thanks for spending the time with The Daily Signal to tell us about it.

Copeland: Thank you very much, and thank you guys for what you do.

Bluey: We look forward to keeping in touch and following your work.

Copeland: You bet. Thanks so much.

COLUMN BY

Rob Bluey

Rob Bluey is executive editor of The Daily Signal, the multimedia news organization of The Heritage Foundation. Send an email to Rob. Twitter: @RobertBluey.

RELATED ARTICLES:

The Unchanging Principles of Conservatism Defined

How Jefferson Lost Some Luster in His Own Hometown

Dear Readers:

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

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

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

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

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

ACTIVATE YOUR MEMBERSHIP TODAY

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

New York Times’ ‘1619 Project,’ the MacArthur Foundation and Eugenics

/in , , , , , , /by

“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” – George Santayana

The New York Times “1619 Project” was funded by the MacArthur Foundation. Why is this important?

Because the MacArthur Foundation has also funded population control as a “major objective.”

In the 1998 book “Archons And Acolytes: The New Power Elite” Clarence C. Walton wrote:

Eugenics became a fashionable cause, and courses in the subject were soon introduced by a number of colleges and universities. The Rockefeller Foundation provided ample financial support, generously funding international conferences and research projects, and earning unwanted praise from the Nazis who welcomed the international respectability that their eugenicists needed. Today the Ford and MacArthur Foundations have also made population control a major objective of their funding efforts. In the first phase of the eugenics movement, artificial birth control (with Margaret Sanger identified as its major force) became the preferred method for controlling population growth.” [Emphasis added]

In 2013 the MacArthur Foundation presented their genius award to Angela Duckworth. Duckworth, a Christopher H. Browne Distinguished Professor of Psychology at the University of Pennsylvania, wrote a book titled “Grit: The Power Of Passion And Perseverance” in which she quoted Francis Gabon, the father of Eugenics. Duckworth wrote:

When I got to graduate school, I learned that psychologists have long wondered why some people succeed and others fail. Among the earliest was Francis Gabon, who debated the topic with his half cousin, Charles Darwin.

[ … ]

In 1869, Galton published his first scientific study [Hereditary Genius] on the origins of high achievement. After assembling lists of well-known figures in science, athletics, music, poetry, and law — among other domains — he gathered whatever biographical information he could. Outliers, Galton concluded, are remarkable in three ways: they demonstrate unusual “ability” in combination with exceptional “zeal” and “the capacity for hard labor.” [Emphasis added

Grit author Duckworth has also written for, or has been written about in, the New York Times here, here and here. SpeEdChange wrote:

The New York Times, have unquestionably accepted the work of a professor who has based her research in the work of a writer whose work brutalized and killed millions during the 19th and 20th Centuries, including the Nazi Holocaust, the Japanese assault on China during World War II, and the ethnic cleansing in Europe’s Balkans at the end of last century. There are also stories symbolized by the tale of Carrie Buck, where there’s an unquestionable direct line from Angela Duckworth’s favorite thinker to a deep well of human misery.

So the MacArthur Foundation has funded the New York Times‘ “1619 Project” and promoted population control and presented a genius award to a professor who idolizes the father of Eugenics.

Is there an affinity for racial purity in the form of population control espoused by Francis Gabon?

Is there a connection? We simply report, you will in the end decide.

© All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEO: The Ford Foundation | Scott Walter – Capital Research Center

RELATED ARTICLES:

New York Times’ ‘1619 Project’ Has Key Error About Our Founding

New York Times’ 1619 Project: All the News that’s Fit for the MacArthur Foundation?

Planned Parenthood Founder Margaret Sanger In Her Own Words

How States Got Away with Sterilizing 60,000 Americans

New York Times’ 1619 Project: All the News that’s Fit for the MacArthur Foundation?

/in , , , , , /by

Editor’s Note: This article has been updated to reflect Bryan Stevenson’s 1995 MacArthur Fellowship.

The New York Times’s controversial “1619 Project” is a series of essays and features examining the history of slavery in the U.S. and how that still affects modern America. Commenting on the history of the project itself, the media giant credits the idea to staff writer Nikole Hannah-Jones “who won a MacArthur Grant in 2017,” and notes Ms. Hannah-Jones also brought aboard “Kellie Jones, a Columbia University art historian and 2016 MacArthur Fellow.”

Tens of thousands of acrimonious words have been written about 1619 since its release, but very little has been said about its connection to the MacArthur Foundation by way of the “MacArthur Fellows” program (the so-called “MacArthur Genius” grants). And—similarly—there is the affiliation with the Pulitzer Center (no relation to the famous journalism prize of the same name), the New York Times’ “education partner” for 1619. Pulitzer credits MacArthur as one if its “primary core” donors.

The fingerprints of this politically left-leaning “non-profit” seem to be all over this controversy.

The New York Times promoted 1619 non-controversially as “an invitation to reframe how the country discusses the role and history of its black citizens.” RSVP’s coming back on that “invitation” have included Republican U.S. House Speaker Newt Gingrich (once better known as Newt Gingrich, Ph.D. – a former history professor), who went on Fox News to say the “whole project is a lie.” Meanwhile, on the “other side” a lot of the lockstep left media is preoccupied not with the invitation to discuss the contents of the work, but instead with analyzing and criticizing right-of-center critiques of the project.

In a more nuanced analysis, a researcher at the libertarian Cato Institute said the effort was “an ambitious collaboration to address the painful but necessary aspects of American history” that nonetheless contains debatable “claims about the relationship between modern American capitalism and slavery.” This perspective (shared by other libertarians over at Reason magazine) gets the controversy correct: 1619 is a mixed bag of both valuable fact and vapid fiction.

On the valuable (albeit controversial) side is the essay by the executive director of the Equal Justice Initiative, Bryan Stevenson, (also a 1995 MacArthur Fellow) linking the legacy of slavery to policies that built our dysfunctional criminal justice system. In the so-called “home of the free” we have the world’s highest incarceration rate and put more of our people in cages than does communist China, which has 4.5 times our population and little of our respect for civil liberties. One need not buy all of Stevenson’s conclusions to agree on the importance of opening this wound to inspection and cleansing.

The worst example on the “vapid fiction” side is a 1619 essay crediting racism as the reason we still don’t have universal health care. Fun fact: 2008 Republican presidential nominee John McCain’s health reform proposal would have created universal taxpayer-subsidized coverage if McCain had been elected and implemented it. Historical irony: John McCain was not elected because—demonstrating something clearly NOT fueled by racism—a clear majority of Americans voted instead for a guy whose plan did not provide universal coverage, namely Barack Obama.

But a close runner up for worst 1619 essay is Princeton University sociologist Matthew Desmond’s effort to both assert the dubious “brutality” of American capitalism and tie that to slavery. To pick on just the funniest of the many problems with this, the private university paying him teaches fewer than 10,000 students with a $26 billion endowment—an amount that exceeds the annual GDP of decidedly not-capitalist Laos (population 6.7 million). Desmond’s likely one-percenter Princeton salary and tenure is the bitter fruit of “brutal” capitalism.

MacArthur awarded Desmond a genius prize in 2015.

The MacArthur prizes come with a $625,000 no-strings-attached grant. And—as might be expected—“genius” is a rare thing to find; so difficult, in fact, that sharp-eyed genius spotters can’t find it if your brain doesn’t skew to the political left. According to a 2015 profile in Chicago Magazine discussing the political bias of the MacArthur staff, the “interests of the foundation have tended to be fairly liberal” and there “could hardly be a more liberal grant, for example, than the MacArthur Fellowship.”

That isn’t an exaggeration. In 1968, genius struck serial Doomsday alarmist Paul Ehrlich. He co-founded Zero Population Growth and began predicting the “utter breakdown of the capacity of the planet to support humanity,” which he said would occur within the ensuing 15 years. But by the mid-1980s the world had added another billion-plus mouths to feed; still, famine has become a problem associated only with wars and bad policies inflicted on people by horrible (non-capitalist) societies. Ehrlich subsequently adjusted his End Times prophecies to fit the emerging field of climate change, and the folks at MacArthur (no doubt impressed by the flexibility of his genius) awarded him a fellowship in 1990.

The MacArthur Foundation—assets $6.2 billion, as of 2015—was funded by John D. MacArthur, a politically right-of-center billionaire banker who established the charity so as to keep big government from taking his money away via estate taxes. But, showing what was perhaps a lack of “MacArthur genius,” he failed to stipulate what should be done with the fortune before he died in 1978. His charity is now the plaything of capitalist-hating leftists.

Influencing media has become a big part of MacArthur’s business. A June 2018 report co-produced by the Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School, revealed MacArthur to be the sixth-largest funder of non-profit journalism for the years 2010-2015 (inclusive). Recipients of MacArthur media money included ProPublica and the left-leaning Center for Public Integrity (which currently sports a main page with a half-dozen links collectively headlined: “Trump’s Tax Cuts: The Rich Get Richer”).

There is nothing inherently wrong with mixing non-profit news sources with a for-profit newsroom like that at the New York Times. In theory, it could increase the important facts and perspectives reaching news consumers. As noted, there are essays in the 1619 Project that meet this standard, but they’re mingled with (to put it charitably) very debatable opinions, and (less charitably) fiction mislabeled as fact.

The New York Times masthead famously reads “All the news that’s fit to print.” At a minimum, that should mean fully disclosing to readers the ideological bias of sources—such as MacArthur—that get printed. At best, and just as mainstream media has done relentlessly for right-of-center donors, shouldn’t it also mean a critical, deep-dive research that reveals to readers the powerfully well-heeled funders of left-wing bias in media?

COLUMN BY

Ken Braun

Ken Braun is CRC’s senior investigative researcher and authors profiles for InfluenceWatch.org and the Capital Research magazine. He previously worked for several free market policy organizations, spent six… + MORE BY KEN BRAUN.

RELATED ARTICLE: New York Times’ ‘1619 Project’ Has Key Error About Our Founding

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

VIDEO: Mosab Hassan Yousef, ‘the state of mind of so many Arabs is still deep in the 6th or 7th century.’

/in , , , , , , /by

Since he was a small boy, Mosab Hassan Yousef has had an inside view of the deadly terrorist group Hamas. The oldest son of Sheikh Hassan Yousef, a founding member of Hamas and its most popular leader, young Mosab assisted his father for years in his political activities while being groomed to assume his legacy, politics, status . . . and power.

But everything changed when Mosab turned away from terror and violence, and embraced instead the teachings of another famous Middle East leader – Jesus of Nazareth.

In Son of Hamas, Mosab Yousef – now called “Joseph” – reveals new information about the world’s most dangerous terrorist organization and unveils the truth about his own role, his agonizing separation from family and homeland, the dangerous decision to make his newfound faith public, and his belief that the Christian mandate to “love your enemies” is the only way to peace in the Middle East.

Joseph (Mosab Hassan Yousef) speaks truth to power.

The UN’s Dangerous Sustainability Conference

/in , , , , , , /by

The United Nations will meet to discuss its dangerous “sustainability” agenda at a conference next week in Salt Lake City.

CFACT will be there!

UN bureaucrats, urban planners, and left-wing activists find our individual freedoms and prosperity unsustainable.  They want us to give up thinking and choosing for ourselves, and move away from such bourgeois conventions as cars, air conditioning, refrigeration and single family housing.

CFACT senior policy analyst Bonner Cohen posted details to CFACT.org:

The forces behind the push toward sustainable cities and communities need to be taken seriously. A new generation of urban planners has come to the fore, and what these people have in mind for the rest of us is truly frightening… 

At the vanguard of efforts to transform our cities into green Utopias are activists whom Christopher F. Rufo has labeled “the new left urbanists.” Their goal is to achieve social justice on a scale that is both local and grand by completely rebuilding the urban environment, including housing, transportation, roads, and tolls.

Writing in the Wall Street Journal (Aug. 22), Rufo points out that these activists, many of whom are urban planners on the taxpayer payroll in municipalities across the country, rally around such slogans as “ban all cars,” “raise the suburbs,” and “single-family housing is white supremacy,” even though the activists themselves are predominantly white and affluent.

“Sustainability” sounds nice, but in the hands of the Left means “control.”

Anyone with a basic grasp on economics knows that we need the growth and prosperity that flows from freedom if we want to sustain both people and the planet.

The UN “sustainability” agenda would take us on the road to privation, danger and decline.

This is not the first “sustainability” conference for CFACT.  Many of our friends and supporters will remember past encounters at these conferences and our ongoing coverage of this important issue.

CFACT is headed to Salt Lake to expose this dangerous agenda and sound the wake up call.

RELATED VIDEO: United Nations Civil Society Conference in Salt Lake – The New American Video.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Fellow Millennials: Here’s Why We Must Reject Socialism

Michael Mann, creator of the infamous global warming ‘hockey stick,’ loses lawsuit against climate skeptic, ordered to pay defendant’s costs

How to measure the liberal bias in Google News

We should embrace nuclear energy

Will Al Gore be the first fake meat billionaire?

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

Michigan, California, Georgia, Texas, Florida, NJ public schools: Islam glorified, Christianity vilified, U.S. bashed

/in , , , , , , , /by

There is nothing wrong with students learning about Islam in school, if what they’re taught is accurate. But it isn’t. Because of the overpowering influence of the multiculturalist ethos and fears of charges of “Islamophobia” and “racism,” public school materials on Islam and other religions are for the most part heavily biased, with scarcely a critical word about Islam, Muhammad depicted as a cross between Gandhi and Sheriff Andy Taylor, no mention of jihad or dhimmitude, and harsh criticism of Christianity.

“TMLC Uncovers Tax-Payer Funded Islamic Propaganda Forced On Teachers,” Thomas More Law Center, August 22, 2019 (thanks to R.):

ANN ARBOR, MI – The Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), a national nonprofit public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, has uncovered evidence of a well-orchestrated Islamic propaganda campaign aimed at teachers in school systems throughout Michigan and several other states.

Concerned about a two-day mandatory teacher-training seminar on Islam conducted by a Muslim consultant hired by Michigan’s Novi Community Schools District, TMLC filed a Freedom of Information Act request for documents related to the workshop.

Richard Thompson, president and chief counsel of the Law Center, commented on the results of their investigation, “We found that the teachers were subjected to two days of Islamic propaganda, where Islam was glorified, Christianity disparaged, and America bashed—all funded by Novi taxpayers.”

Moreover, during the past five years the school district has presented no teacher-training seminars focusing on Christianity, Judaism or any other religion – only Islam.

The hired Muslim consultant was Huda Essa, a resident of the Dearborn area and of Arab descent. She appeared before the Novi teachers in a hijab, the Muslim headscarf, billing herself as an expert in “cultural competency” and “culturally responsive teaching.”

Most disappointing was the fact that of the more than 400 teachers attending the workshop, not one teacher challenged Essa’s denigration of Christianity or attacks on America.

TMLC inspected dozens of internal school documents, including audio recordings of Essa’s presentation.

The information on Islam she provided to Novi teachers was riddled with falsehoods and errors of omission that were clearly meant to deceive.

Essa provided no truthful information on Sharia law and jihad, two of the most important aspects of Islam. All references to terrorism were dismissed as having nothing to do with Islam. White Christian males, she suggested, are more dangerous than Islamic radicals.

Essa is the face behind Culture Links LLC, a Michigan-based consultancy. She describes herself on the Culture Links website as an advocate of social justice who encourages children to “take pride in their many identities.”

But, as TMLC discovered from the Novi documents, the one identity Essa does not celebrate is that of patriotic Americans who believe in our nation’s exceptionalism.

And her message extends far beyond Novi.

Essa’s client list reveals she has been spreading her “trash America first” philosophy to colleges, universities, schools and professional educator associations throughout Michigan, California, Georgia, Texas, Florida and beyond. In Michigan alone her website lists nine school districts as clients – Oakland County Schools, Ann Arbor Schools, L’Anse Creuse Public Schools, Plymouth-Canton Community Schools, Roseville Community Schools, Farmington Public Schools, Dearborn Public Schools, Birmingham Public Schools and Melvindale Public Schools.

Under the banner of promoting diversity, inclusion and a multicultural approach to education, Essa sets about comparing Islam to Christianity, calling them “mostly similar.” The one big difference, she claims, is that Islam is the world’s “only purely monotheistic religion.”

Islam’s holy book, the Koran, came straight from Allah to the prophet Muhammad and, unlike the Jewish and Christian scriptures, has never been altered or changed, she told the Novi teachers. Significantly, the Koran commands Muslims to “Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war.” (Koran 9:5)

Her message was clear: The Koran is superior to the Bible. But she did not address the fact that it calls for the extermination of Christian and Jews.

While quick to indict America as guilty of “cultural genocide,” Essa was silent on the 1400 years of actual genocides, also known as jihads, in which Muslims wiped out Jewish tribes on the Arabian Peninsula, and slaughtered millions of Christians throughout the Middle East, North Africa and the European Continent. Referring to Islam, Winston Churchill wrote, “No stronger retrograde force exists in the world.”

Novi’s Islamic teacher-training is just the latest example of professional Islamic indoctrinators infiltrating U.S. public schools even as Christianity has been forced out of the classroom.

“This type of infiltration amounts to an Islamic Trojan horse within our public-school systems,” Thompson said. “No other religion gets this kind of special treatment in our schools.”

Only action by patriotic American parents will put a stop to the indoctrination of teachers and students. They must attend school board meetings and call their board’s attention to the existence of unconstitutional Islamic propaganda whenever they find evidence of it in their children’s schools. And when their board is unresponsive, they must be willing to take legal action to stop it whenever the law permits.

TMLC has several active cases involving public schools bending over backwards to promote Islam while trashing Christianity.

In New Jersey, seventh-grade students at Chatham Middle School were taught “Islam is the true faith,” required to learn the Shahada, or Muslim creed, and forced to watch videos that sought to convert them.

TMLC is representing another student at La Plata High School in Maryland, where pupils in world-history classes were taught that “Most Muslims’ faith is stronger than the average Christian” and “Islam at heart is a peaceful religion.”

Jihad, meanwhile, was introduced to La Plata students as a “personal” spiritual struggle, having nothing to do with using violence to spread the faith. And, like in New Jersey, the Maryland students were forced to learn the Five Pillars of Islam and memorize the Shahada.

A SERIES OF DECEPTIONS

Essa spent a great deal of time in her Novi presentation talking about Muslim women, whom she described as victims of Islamophobia on the part of bigoted Americans.

She said her own mother’s decision to wear the hijab was met with “rage” from random Americans. Other hijab-wearing Muslim women have been spat upon, had hot liquids poured on them, been beaten and even killed because they wear the hijab, Essa said, without giving details of when or where these atrocities supposedly occurred.

Essa presented no statistics on hate crimes to back up her claims. FBI crime stats show that anti-Muslim attacks are relatively rare in America and actually fell by 17 percent in 2017. Anti-Jewish hate crimes that year out-numbered anti-Muslim offenses by nearly four to one.

Globally, Christians are the most persecuted of all religious groups, according to the watchdog Open Doors. Of the top-ten most dangerous countries to be a Christian, all but two of them are Muslim-majority nations, according to Open Doors’ 2019 World Watch List.

But Essa’s attempts to con Novi teachers into accepting her anti-American, pro-Islamic worldview didn’t stop with the idea that Muslims are the most persecuted and victimized people.

She said any poor treatment of women in Islamic countries should be attributed to “cultural” differences, not the religion of Islam.

She failed to mention that Muhammad, Islam’s prophet, is reported to have said that the majority of hell would be populated by women (hadith by Sahih Bukhari Vol. 1:28, 301, Vol. 2:161, Vol. 7:124-126). Also absent from her presentation was the Koranic instruction for husbands to beat a disobedient wife (Sura 4:34).

Exercising the art of deception, Essa said Muslims love Jesus and refer to him as “messiah.”

But the word “messiah” has a different meaning for Muslims than for Christians. When Christians speak of Jesus their Messiah, they are referring to God’s “anointed One,” who has the power to forgive sin and grant salvation.

Muslims confer no such divine authority to their Jesus. Under Islam Jesus was only a man, a lower prophet under Muhammad, not the Son of God, and he did not die on a cross or rise from the dead as documented in the gospels.

Essa hammered Novi teachers with the Islamic teaching that the Jewish and Christian scriptures are not to be trusted. Although once pure, they were gradually “corrupted” by unscrupulous men. Only the Koran contains the final, “pure” words of God, she said.

Essa also schooled teachers in the proper use of the phrase “Allahu Akbar!” or “Allah is greatest!” While this is widely known as battle-cry of Muslim terrorists, Essa said it’s really just a refrain that Muslims use to convey feelings of happiness, sadness, anger, or thankfulness while praising Allah.

Essa said the word “Islam” is an offshoot of the Arabic term “Salaam,” which means peace. This is a common ploy used by Muslim apologists to deceive uninformed Westerners.

“Islam” is more accurately translated as “submission” and good Muslims know they must submit to Allah and his Sharia (Islamic law), above all other systems of law.

Essa noted Islam is the world’s fastest-growing religion without mentioning that Muslims are forbidden from leaving the faith. Considered apostates, those leaving the faith are subject to severe punishment, up to and including death. And forced conversions have been a well-documented fact of history.

The Middle East and North Africa, once overwhelmingly Christian, were Islamized by a series of jihads starting with Muhammad, his successor caliphs and later by the Ottoman Turks.

She completely ignored the jihadi terrorist attacks conducted on U.S. soil: The 9/11 attack that murdered nearly 3,000 people, the Fort Hood massacre of 12 U.S. soldiers, the Pulse Nightclub attack that killed 49 Americans in Orlando, the San Bernardino attack that killed 14 at a Christmas party, the Chattanooga shooting that killed five at a Navy recruitment and reserve center, the Boston Marathon bombing that killed three and left hundreds wounded, and the Chelsea, New York, pipe-bombing that injured 30 innocent Americans. Not to mention the countless terror attacks that have been foiled by the FBI.

Here are some other facts uncovered by TMLC’s Freedom of Information Act requests:

  • Novi school district has no guidelines for the selection of presenters for teacher-training events.
  • The school district did not fully vet Huda Essa before selecting her as a presenter and providing her with data about the school district and its students.
  • Essa was given access to data from student and teacher surveys.
  • The school district said it had no records that would indicate it ever conducted a factual analysis of Essa’s presentation.
  • The school district signed a contract on August 2, 2017, agreeing to pay Essa $5,000 for her two-day seminar on August 28 and 29, 2017.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Austria: Muslim migrant arrested for attempted arson at office of party that warns against Islamization

Tlaib’s “Palestinian” village is wealthy and thriving as she whines about “oppression”

Denmark: MP proposes ban on migrants “with Muslim values” becoming Danish citizens

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

PODCAST: Why do Jews support Rashida Tlaib Israel entry?

/in , , , , /by

With all the gremlins in the system last week when we were talking with BARRY SHAW in Netanya, we never got to hear everything Barry wanted to raise and discuss on the Tlaib – Omar hateful crap, so we asked Nothing Left’s MICHAEL BURD to touch base with BARRY again.

Tlaib, Omar, the Democrats and progressive Liberal Jews, Barry and Michael have them well and truly covered.

Please check out the thoughts and writing of our good friend JUSTIN AMLER at the 30-minute mark, simply brilliant.

Shabbat Shalom  Am Yisrael Chai.   PEACE

© All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

BDS is Primarily an Assault on American Jews

Netanyahu’s Sound Decision to Bar Congresswomen Omar and Tlaib

BB&T and SunTrust are merging – make sure they support 2ndVote values

/in , , , , /by

By the end of 2019, two of America’s leading banks are expected to create a new mega-bank: Truist, a merger of BB&T (2.1 – Leaning Liberal) and SunTrust (2.3 – Leaning Liberal). The new company will serve 10 million Americans and be worth $66 billion, making it the nation’s sixth-largest bank.

Truist is meant to convey “trust” and “true.” As the merger comes closer to reality, 2ndVote is urging you to make sure the new company can be trusted to be true to American values. Currently, SunTrust ranks a 2.3 (lean liberal) on the 2ndVote scale, and BB&T ranks a 2.1 (lean liberal).

Neither of these rankings is impressive – but there is great potential for Truist to be a bank instead of a funder of the left-wing agenda. SunTrust donates to many groups who support liberty, such as The Heritage Foundation and the Cato Institute. Other donations are to groups which advocate for left-wing policies but have legitimate missions – such as Susan G. Komen and United Way.

Alas, SunTrust did recently pull the financial rug out from under two companies which partner with the federal government to house immigrants. That’s a policy which must not carry forward to Truist.

BB&T doesn’t engage in much corporate activism at all. Their greatest challenge is the total acquiescing to the LGBT agenda – BB&T ranks a 100 percent on the Human Rights Campaign’s Corporate Equality Index. This means that while they don’t push LGBT priorities in their external donations, their corporate structure is set up to make LGBT activists happy.

2ndVote Americans can engage with the future Truist in several key ways to urge the new bank to serve all Americans instead of using your money to serve the liberal agenda.

First, contact BB&T CEO Kelly King and SunTrust CEO Bill Rogers. They will serve in top leadership roles at Truist for the next several years – they must know how their Middle America customers feel and what you believe.

Second, spread the word on social media and among your friends and family. Let everyone know that these companies lean left, but that with the right pressure they may get back on the path of serving customers instead of spending hard-earned money on political advocacy. It’ll take everyone working together, but it can be done if all 2ndVote Americans are working arm-in-arm.

Third, let the future Truist know that you need to see progress or you’ll have to take your business elsewhere. No bank is truly neutral on the 2ndVote scale, but Central Pacific Financial is close –  a 2.9. Its main issue is that it donates to the gun control-supporting YWCA. However, they balance that support with donations made to Catholic Charities and The Salvation Army.

Again, the name “Truist” is meant to convey trust and true. You can help make that a reality instead of simply a slogan.

RELATED ARTICLE: The Company Contrast – Marriott International

EDITORS NOTE: This 2nd Vote column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Texas: Former Irving Mayor Beth Van Duyne to Run for Congress

/in , , , , /by

Former popular Irving Mayor, Beth Van Duyne has departed her post at the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development’s office in Fort Worth, Texas. She has announced on social media on August 5th that she plans to run for the United States Congress, district 24, which covers parts of Dallas, Tarrant and Denton counties.

Those of us who have been following Beth’s incredible career in the City of Irving, are very excited that she has decided to announce her candidacy for the United States Congress, District 24. A person of her outstanding principles is urgently needed in Washington, even though she will be missed here at home.

Beth, started her public service as far back as some ten years ago when she worked tirelessly for building a children’s park — to help her community’s children spend their vital energy in building strong bodies so that they could better shoulder the future demands that awaits them.

Next, she ran for City Council, and later served with distinction as mayor of Irving. And when the call came from President Trump’s administration, she, characteristically, offered her much-valued services.

Now, Texas and the nation need her in Washington, and once again she is willingly answers the call for service in the United States Congress where she can be a resonant voice for principled Conservatism that has made this country the standard bearer for democracy and freedom.

Our nation today is in dire need of firm leadership, courage, and responsibility for advancing bipartisan legislation, including bills, joint, concurrent and simple resolutions in Congress. In addition, to understand the political environment and the impact of decision making on diverse groups. Beth has these qualities and one inherent ability to fundamental leadership: courage. She also is very charismatic, enthusiastic, optimistic, and passionate about America. That’s the most important quality of all.

America is a nation and an ideal, birthed by a group of visionaries that gave it the Constitution to nurture it and protect it. What makes America, America the Beautiful, more than just a blessed land is our legacy, the Constitution. Sadly, the Constitution also makes for America the Vulnerable by enshrining freedom that enables the malevolent to subvert and destroy America from within. Beth Van Duyne is an avid supporter of the United State Constitution. In fact, during her tenure as a mayor, she proved that America has only one law and that is our Constitution. On her Facebook page, the mayor wrote:

“Sharia Law Court was NOT approved or enacted by the City of Irving. Recently, there have been rumors suggesting that the City of Irving has somehow condoned, approved or enacted the implementation of a Sharia Law Court in our City. Let me be clear, neither the City of Irving, our elected officials or city staff have anything to do with the decision of the mosque that has been identified as starting a Sharia Court.”

Freedom, in all its forms, is our greatest legacy, which this nation has bravely fought many wars on many fronts to preserve against the unceasing assaults of totalitarianism of all stripes.

I applaud Van Duyne tasking and courageous decision and offer her my full support in sending her to the United States Congress. I am certain that the wise patriotic Texans of District 24 will rise and stand behind her. Although we will miss her here at home, we feel that her service in Congress fully justifies her absence from the community.

In short, America and our party are at a turning point. The reign of the rigid old Republican establishment is coming to an end by a new generation of principled conservatives. Beth Van Duyne represents this class of Republicans, destined to restore the party that stands for the best hopes of all Americans.

64% Of Federal Arrests Were Of Non-Citizens In 2018, DOJ Finds

/in , , , , , , , , /by

Federal arrests of non-citizens has increased exponentially over the past two decades, and account for the majority of all federal arrests, data released by the Justice Department revealed.

Non-citizens made up 64% of all federal arrests in 2018 despite making up 7% of the U.S. population, according to Justice Department data released Thursday and reviewed by the Daily Caller News Foundation. Between 1998 and 2018, federal arrests of non-citizens grew by 234%, while federal arrests of U.S. citizens climbed 10%.

While the numbers provide credence to President Donald Trump’s argument that illegal immigration results in increased crime, immigration experts also pointed out that migrant apprehensions make up a significant portion of current federal arrests.

“Experience has taught the immigration agencies and DOJ that this works to reduce recidivism — in other words, when illegal crossers face some more severe consequence than just being sent back home, they don’t keep doing it,” Jessica Vaughan of the Center for Immigration Studies told the Washington Examiner.

Trump made increased immigration enforcement a hallmark goal of his administration. His efforts at beefing up border security and providing additional funding to the Customs and Border Protection have yielded satisfactory results. Federal immigration apprehensions climbed more than 50,000 from 2017 to 2018, according to the Justice Department data.

Ninety-five percent of the increase in federal arrests over the past 20 years were, in fact, due to immigration offenses, the Justice Department data found. Non-citizens accounted for 28% of all federal fraud arrests, 25% of all federal property arrests, and 24% of all federal drug arrests. The Justice Department identified the top five crimes non-citizens were most likely be prosecuted for: illegal re-entry, drugs, fraud, alien smuggling and misuse of visas.

“Opponents of immigration enforcement are obsessed with trying to establish that illegal aliens and legal immigrants commit fewer crimes than Americans, and so, as their narrative goes, local law enforcement agencies should not cooperate with ICE and should adopt sanctuary policies,” Vaughan continued in her statement. “This is first of all not true, but is off-point and a dangerous conclusion.”

COLUMN BY

JASON HOPKINS

Immigration and politics reporter.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Hundreds Of Illegal Migrants Carry Criminal Histories, DHS Investigation Finds

109 US Counties Have Become Majority Non-White Since 2000, Analysis Finds

Just 20 Miles From White House, Illegal Immigrant Rape Cases Keep Piling Up

New Report Shows Taxpayers Lost BIG TIME Last Year Because Of ‘Non-Citizens”

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.