Don’t become Distracted, this Election is All About Saving America

Don’t let media distractions cause you to miss your blessing – being an American citizen.

I recently had a conversation with a good friend about the presidential election. He repeated the often heard term of voting for the lesser of two evils. The idea is which is better, Hillary the known evil, or Trump an unknown. My take is that Americans must vote for America and the candidate who best can turn our nation around.

The media wants voters to focus on the unimportant rather than what is truly important, saving America from the elitist class that seeks power at the expense of ordinary citizens.

the-way-back-to-restoring-america-book-coverFrank Buckley, author of The Way Back: Restoring the Promise of America in a speech given at Hillsdale college on July 11,2016 titled “Restoring America’s Economic Mobility” said:

In the Communist Manifesto, Marx and Engels wrote that “the history of all hitherto existing societies is the history of class struggles.” Today the story of American politics is the story of class struggles. It wasn’t supposed to be that way. We didn’t think we were divided into different classes. Neither did Marx.

America was an exception to Marx’s theory of social progress. By that theory, societies were supposed to move from feudalism to capitalism to communism. But the America of the 1850s, the most capitalist society around, was not turning communist. Marx had an explanation for that. “True enough, the classes already exist,” he wrote of the United States, but they “are in constant flux and reflux, constantly changing their elements and yielding them up to one another.”

In other words, when you have economic and social mobility, you don’t go communist. [Emphasis added]

Stop economic and social mobility and you kill America.

Buckley warned, “That is the country in which some imagine we still live, Horatio Alger’s America—a country defined by the promise that whoever you are, you have the same chance as anyone else to rise, with pluck, industry, and talent. But they imagine wrong. The U.S. today lags behind many of its First World rivals in terms of mobility.”

In his column “Aborting the Trump Revolution” Patrick J. Buchanan notes:

Five weeks before Election Day, Trump’s taxes have displaced the former Miss Universe as the critical issue, as determined by the anti-Trump media.

Their motivation is not difficult to discern. Their goals are two. First, make Trump unacceptable as an agent of change. Second, keep the people distracted from their determination to rid America of the incompetent and corrupt ruling class that controls this capital city.

Consider but a few of the disasters that establishment does not want discussed or debated, or the American people thinking about, when they head for the polls in November.

There is the great betrayal of the American working class, the deindustrialization of the country, and the loss of economic independence it took America a century to achieve.

Buckley echoes Buchanan’s “great betrayal of the American working class”, stating:

A complacent Republican establishment denies this change has occurred. If they don’t get it, however, American voters do. For the first time, Americans don’t believe their children will be as well off as they have been. They see an economy that’s stalled, one in which jobs are moving offshore. In the first decade of this century, U.S. multinationals shed 2.9 million U.S. jobs while increasing employment overseas by 2.4 million. General Electric provides a striking example. Jeffrey Immelt became the company’s CEO in 2001, with a mission to advance stock price. He did this in part by reducing GE’s U.S. workforce by 34,000 jobs. During the same period, the company added 25,000 jobs overseas.

Buckley concludes, “Since 2012, establishment Republicans have continued to be less than concerned for the plight of ordinary Americans… There are even the ‘conservative’ pundits who offer the pious hope that drug-addicted Trump supporters will hurry up and die. That’s one way to ameliorate the class struggle, but it doesn’t exactly endear anyone to the establishment.”

Buckley drives home his point with, “[T]he principles held up as sacrosanct by establishment Republicans might be logically unassailable, derived like theorems from a set of axioms based on a pure theory of natural rights. But if I don’t see them making people better off, I say to Hell with them. What the establishment Republicans should ask themselves is Anton Chigurh’s question in No Country for Old Men: If you followed your principles, and your principles brought you to this, what good are your principles?”

To hell with them!

Trump, Kaepernick and Gratitude

A black relative in his late 50s told me I should be more sympathetic of Colin Kaepernick’s grievances with America; more understanding of young blacks dissing their country. I say, “Hogwash!”

My 88 year old black dad might have a reason to dis our National Anthem, but not Kaepernick. Kaepernick is a wealthy bi-racial pro-athlete whom America has been extremely good to. His grievances are rooted in ingratitude and lies promoted by Black Lives Matter.

Dad told me when he was a young Merchant Marine, after several months at sea their ship arrived at a maritime base in St. Petersburg Florida. The crew was extremely excited about their much anticipated shore leave. Then, Dad and his fellow black seaman were told they could not leave the ship due to the town’s curfew for blacks. Dad said his outraged fellow black seaman exploded into an endless rant of cussing. Dad said he cried.

Dad said they were the first blacks to arrive at that base. The two blacks eventually had to leave the ship because it was scheduled for decommission. On that U.S. Maritime base, dad said they had to be accompanied everywhere by body guards. Meals were eaten separate from white seaman. They had to call a black cab company for a ride into town. Blacks could only enter the movie theater via stairs in the back of the building which led to a ticket booth and seating in the balcony.

Dad told me years ago how white seaman on that base trapped and attempted to hang him. White shipmates saved Dad’s life.

Folks, that was real-deal painful racism. Hearing gen-xers and millennial blacks whine about racism is absurd; flat-out nonsense. So no, I do not want to hear Kaepernick’s arrogant and ignorant disrespect, his lack of gratitude for Americans, black and white, who suffered and died paving the way for him.

Blacks are only 12% of the U.S. Population. How does Kaepernick and other arrogant ungrateful young blacks who keep kicking America in the teeth think blacks have risen to power in practically every area of American life; culminating with a black man holding the highest office in the land for the past 8 years? Obviously, a majority of white Americans regret past injustices and sought to make things right.

Some may argue that America is not perfect. The Bible acknowledges that we live in a sinful world. Therefore, nothing is prefect. However, America’s positives far outweigh her negatives. I continue yelling from the rooftops, “America is the greatest land of opportunity on the planet for all who choose to go for it!” Cut the victim crap and pursue your dreams!

Pumphrey, the community I grew up in had a banquet honoring my dad who was a pillar of the community. Dad is a great man, but he is a human being. Therefore, he is not perfect. What if at Dad’s banquet a speaker from the podium said this banquet is a sham, spouting negatives intended to bring down Dad’s status? Dad’s guests would be outraged. Pumphrians realize their Rev. Dr Lloyd E. Marcus is not perfect, but his life bears testimony that his good far surpasses his not so good.

We Americans who honestly weigh America’s positives against her negatives feel love and respect for our country. This explains the heartbreak we feel regarding this trend of athletes from the pros down to middle school giving America their middle finger. This is why it is so offensive hearing wealthy, spoil-brat black “yutes” dissing their country based on lies and racist experiences of which they know nothing about.

Though praised by America hating Leftist media, Kaepernick exposed his ignorance when he attacked Trump by saying, “America has never been great for people of color.” What was America when it elected a black man to be president for two terms? What was America when it made a dark-skin over-weight black woman (Oprah) one of the richest most powerful persons in the world?

In the late 1970s, I became the first black graphic designer at a Baltimore TV station. My buddy Joe Ford became the first black Art Director at Baltimore prestigious advertising agency, W.B. Doner. We blacks were pretty peerless in our fields. Today, blacks are present in almost every field of expertise. To say that blacks have not come a long way baby in America is absurd.

From politicians who awarded me scholarships to attend art college to businessmen who hired and mentored me, most of my career stepping stones have been placed ahead of me by whites.

Folks, I could go on and on with examples of how America, which is mostly white, has been extremely good to blacks. We all know and see this reality. And yet, the America hating Left and Black Lives Matter lies rule the day; millennial hearts and minds. Very sad. Devastatingly destructive.

Philosophers, gurus, and spiritual teachers, secular and religious, all tout the wisdom and proven powerful personal benefits of an attitude of gratitude. 

The universal proven principle at work is that when one expresses gratitude you attract more good stuff to you.

And yet, the Left (democrats, mainstream media and Hollywood) demeans and belittles grateful American blacks. Blacks who spit in the face of their homeland are considered, cool, brave and enlightened by the Left. The Left says blacks who understand the blessing of being born an American are either stupid or mentally ill suffering with Stockholm Syndrome

The Left celebrating blacks who dis their country while beating up on blacks who are proud Americans is yet another example of the Left selling blacks another destructive bag of excrement with a bow on it.

Blacks are trending towards voting for Trump. I pray that enough blacks have finally seen the light; saying, “No thank you” to the Left’s masterfully wrapped bag of excrement, filled with racial hate, more false promises and destructive deceptions.

I informed a clueless black relative that every major city controlled by democrats for the past 40 years is a hellhole of black suffering; through-the-roof unemployment; epidemic school dropouts; over 70% fatherless households, high incarcerations and record-breaking black on black homicides. Blacks’ negative experiences in America are all easily traceable back to their irrational loyalty to democrats; sleeping with their enemy.

Isn’t it ironic that the source of “real” hope and change for blacks, along with all Americans, is Donald Trump? Trump will, “Make America Great Again!” We are all sooooooooo ready!

RELATED ARTICLE: Trump tells Colin Kaepernick Where He Can Go….Listen to this!

VIDEO: Hillary’s Moronic Gun-Grab to Stop Terror

On this new special edition of The Unknown, Anni Cyrus focuses on Hillary’s Moronic Gun-Grab to Stop Terror, asking: Will taking Americans’ guns away really stop Jihad and Sharia?

And make sure to watch Anni discuss Honor Killing Your Own Sister for Islam, in which she wonders if Hillary will stand up for the memory of Farideh and tweet about her: CLICK HERE.


Here are All 25 Answers Hillary Clinton Just Gave About Her Email Server Under Penalty of Perjury

Bulgaria bans face veils — and offenders will lose their benefits

Lejla Colak Video: What My Experience With Islam Tells Me About “Islamophobia”

Florida: Conservative Activist Evicted from Miami Dade College

A conservative activist was kicked off Miami Dade College’s Kendall Campus after being told she was on private property, despite the school being a public institution.

Driena Sixto, a field representative for Turning Point USA, was recruiting for the conservative organization at Miami Dade College when an administrator called campus police to have her removed, according to a video obtained by Campus Reform.

“I’m not here to argue whether it’s public or private.”

“We have free speech zones,” Lauren Adamo, director of Student Life, tells Sixto before hopping on the phone with campus police.

Sixto said Adamo was at another table nearby helping students register to vote, when she randomly approached to ask Sixto if she had permission to be there.

“Hi, there’s a woman in the breezeway and she’s not authorized to be here,” Sixto can be heard saying on the phone with campus police.

Sixto continues to recruit students while Adamo waits for police to arrive, and can be heard pitching her organization’s stance on free speech.

“We believe in free speech,” said Sixto. “We’re against ridiculous free speech zones on public universities, which they are actually trying to enforce here.”

Later in the video, Miami Dade College police officers arrive, and Sixto explained to them that she should be free to recruit without approval given she was in a public area.

“In a public university you can table; you can be in any area that’s considered public,” she stated. “So this is a public sidewalk, just like those other organizations that are considered registered.”

The camera pans to show three other groups with tables on the same pathway.

Sixto continues, “It doesn’t matter if it’s an administration rule, the school can actually get in trouble for having free speech zones or for removing people from a public area just because they’re not a registered student organization.”

“Everyone has rules,” one officer responds. “Right now you’re gonna have to leave.”

“We’re not telling you that you can’t do this, but there are procedures,” the other officer chimes in.

According to the MDC Manual of Procedure, outside organizations have to receive 15 days advance approval and pay a daily table fee of $100. Administrators also have the right to limit outside organizations to one visit per month or to deny the visit request due to “space availability.”

Read more…

EDITORS NOTE: Readers may follow Campus Reform on Twitter and like them on Facebook here.

Main Stream Press hands first debate to Trump?

No one was shocked when CNN (Clinton News Network) proclaimed Hillary Clinton the landslide victor of the first 2016 Presidential debate from Hofstra University in New York. At least CNN was honest enough to admit that their sampling was heavily weighted towards liberal viewers. That’s the most honest statement on CNN in decades. The only network in agreement is Lester Holt’s employer and debate host network NBC.

But the snap-polling results from nearly every other “main stream” news outlet were shocking, to say the least.

TIME MAGAZINE              TRUMP 58% – CLINTON 42%

CBS NEW YORK                 TRUMP 58% – CLINTON 42%

FOX 5                                     TRUMP 61% – CLINTON 33%

WCPO Cincinnati                 TRUMP 60% – CLINTON 35%

SAN DIEGO TRIB                TRUMP 60% – CLINTON 34%


VEGAS SUN                          TRUMP 81% – CLINTON 19%


VARIETY MAG                    TRUMP 51% – CLINTON 48%

PIX                                         TRUMP 54% – CLINTON 41%

NEW JERSEY.COM           TRUMP 53% – CLINTON 41%

MICHIGAN LIVE                TRUMP 52% – CLINTON 47%

FORTUNE MAG                 TRUMP 51% – CLINTON 49%

CNBC                                     TRUMP 51% – CLINTON 49%

BREITBART                         TRUMP 76% – CLINTON 24%

DRUDGE                              TRUMP 81% – CLINTON 18%

Now, as a lifelong hardcore terminal conservative capitalist who has spent over 20 years writing about the crimes, corruption and treason of career criminals like Hillary and her sexual predator husband Bill, I personally wanted to see Hillary dragged off the stage by her heels as her head bounced down the staircase.

Instead, what I saw was the typically nasty Clinton taking unfounded and unchallenged personal pot shots at Trump while Trump had clearly followed advice to hold the high ground, even making sure that he was referring to Hillary in an acceptable form as Madam Secretary, sort of like addressing Queen Elizabeth or Chairman Mao.

No, the knock out I had personally hoped to see just wasn’t there. So, how do I interpret the amazing snap-poll data above, wherein every major news outlet except CNN and NBC conceded the debate to, as Hillary calls him with great disrespect and disregard, “Donald?”

I spoke with a number of viewers this morning to glean some sense of the polling results, which seemed at odds with my own personal assessment of Trump’s performance.

In my view, Trump neither helped nor harmed himself in the first debate, and maybe that was the goal. It was almost (I said almost) like watching milquetoast Mitt all over again. But clearly, in poll after poll, others saw the event quite differently.

Was something happening here that I missed?

Drudge, Breitbart and Fox affiliate polls were easily anticipated as news outlets that enjoy the support of a conservative leaning audience. But the rest are absolutely shocking, especially known left leaning publications like TIME, San Diego Tribune and the Washington Times.

What is causing all of these polls to proclaim Trump the winner of a somewhat lack-luster debate?

In speaking with a number of viewers this morning, who are not political writers or activists, what I learned was quite interesting.

From the females I spoke with, Trumps refusal to dive into the gutter with Hillary and return personal attacks against her family in like kind to Hillary’s personal attacks, made Trump more “likeable” among women. He needed that!

Let’s face it… despite Hillary being the “first woman presidential candidate in history,” most American women have known that Hillary is not at all pro-women, ever since she verbally abused and assaulted countless women who accused her husband of sexual assault and rape since his college years. No one has ever treated women worse than Hillary Clinton, over forty years of defending her sexual predator husband’s bad behaviors.

So Hillary’s false accusations about Trump treating women poorly fell on the deaf ears of women across the country who had heard Hillary attack woman after woman, every time her husband was caught in another sexual tryst.

As for the men I spoke with, Trump’s point about Hillary making the same promises for thirty years in politics without ever keeping even one of those promises, rang true and relevant. It is a fact that Hillary Clinton has been using the same political talking points for thirty years now, without ever delivering on any of the promises made as a lifelong political operator.

Then I spoke to a few from the black community… who know that what Trump is saying about the Democrat Party as a whole failing the black community, is also true, and they are sick of hearing the same old promises from Democrats. So once again, Hillary’s efforts to appear concerned about them also fell on deaf ears.

So maybe I was wrong… Maybe Trump didn’t need to bludgeon Clinton into dust in order to win the first debate. Maybe he just needed to let Hillary act like the mean-spirited conniving liar she is, while he simply stayed on his message of ridding this nation of all career politicos who are just like her.

Maybe Trump’s number one job in the first debate was to become “likeable” rather than provide the anti-Trump media with more ammunition to paint him as “unlikeable.”

In the end, the snap polls tell the story…

When even lifelong Democrats like Andrew Stein cross the aisle to support Trump, something magical is happening. Maybe all of those millions of pro-American prayers for a new way forward in America are being answered… and maybe, the Clinton Dynasty is collapsing right under Hillary and her adoring press.

Stay tuned for my next column – Fact Checking Lester Holt!

Victory Can Be Ours

If there is one thing that is true about elections in our country, it is that things can change very rapidly.

Nothing demonstrates this reality more than the campaign for president.  In the last 90 days, candidate momentum has changed at least three times.  But since Labor Day, there is no doubt that Donald Trump has gained momentum, with polling in almost every battleground state and nationally showing that he has closed the gap with Hillary Clinton.

In key swing states, such as Ohio, Florida, North Carolina, Iowa, Virginia and Nevada, Trump has pulled either statistically even or slightly ahead.  And he has significantly closed the gap in a number of other key states, including a few that were not initially thought to be competitive such as Pennsylvania, Colorado, New Hampshire, Michigan and Maine.

The narrative that the media would have us believe, that Hillary Clinton has the race in hand, is not true.  In fact, some of the leading analysts and political pundits are admitting that Donald Trump has a better than 50% chance of winning.  This is a big change from predictions of just a few weeks ago.

This means that America’s law-abiding gun owners are in a position to stop Hillary Clinton, and we now need to put on a full court press to ensure that Trump voters are motivated to get to the polls on Election Day.

It means something else that is also important.  As Mr. Trump has improved his position in key states, we have also seen a similar improvement for several pro-gun Senate candidates.  Holding on to the pro-gun majority in the Senate is also critical, and the prospects for that outcome have improved in a very short time.

In states such as North Carolina, Nevada, Ohio, Indiana, Wisconsin, Missouri and Florida, gun owners can make the difference in who controls the Senate.  This is critical to stopping Senator Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) from becoming Senate Majority Leader, which would be a disaster for the Second Amendment.

The message for gun owners is clear.  Now is the time to pull out all the stops to work to elect our pro-gun allies.  We need to talk to our friends and family to convince them of the threat that Hillary Clinton poses to our liberties and that we CAN win this election from the top of the ticket down.

We face a serious threat, but we also have a huge opportunity to win on Election Day and advance our efforts to protect the Second Amendment for generations to come.

Your NRA-ILA Campaign Field Representative (CFR) is an NRA-ILA staff person who is living in your area, coordinating our volunteer activities with one goal in mind–ensuring pro-Second Amendment voters turn out to “Vote Freedom First!” on Election Day.  Your CFR is recruiting volunteers to:  register voters, make phone calls, knock on doors, generate letters to the editor, distribute candidate information, attend events and turn out the pro-gun vote on Election Day.  Please contact your CFR today to find out how you can assist in ensuring pro-freedom lawmakers are elected to office.

To find contact information for your CFR, please click here.

RELATED ARTICLE: She Was Raped at 22. Now She Advocates for Women to Have Choice to Carry a Gun.

Expert Makes Presidential Prediction Based on Hair — Trump/Pence Dominate


Dr. William Yates

CHICAGO, IL /PRNewswire/ — Dr. William Yates, author of Hair Matters and a national leader in hair restoration, announced research results about the correlation between successful presidential candidates and the oval office.  Since the 1960’s, when television became a huge part of the political campaign process, a candidate’s appearance and hairline started to play a significant role in voter’s decision making.

For an excerpt on Dr. Yates’ chapter, “Of Politics and Presidents,” click here.

“Studies show that framing of the face is a subconscious trigger that portrays the perception of superior strength, youthfulness, vitality and decisiveness, all qualities Americans look for in their Commander-in-Chief,” Yates said.  “It’s not about the most hair or the best styled hair, having hair is as much of a requirement as being 35-years-old and a naturally born citizen,” he added.  The only president that was balding in the last 50 years was Gerald Ford, who assumed office by default.

In 1960, a handsome John F. Kennedy took over well-known rival Richard Nixon and hairline has played an important role in nearly every election contest since. From Carter to Regan and the salt and peppered Bill Clinton to Obama, Americans make hair a requirement for the oval office.  However, according to Yates’ research, there is nothing citizens like more than seeing their president’s hair turn grey while they’re in office representing wisdom and their unrelenting work ethic.

In this year’s republican primary contest, Yates says candidates with thinning hair such as Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz, Chris Christie and Mike Huckabee were eliminated by this subconscious phenomenon.  When it comes to hairline wars on the democratic side, Hillary Clinton clearly dominated over Bernie Sanders windblown combover.

In the general election, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton both have hair with hairlines that give them framing of the face.  Even though Donald Trump’s hair and his hairstyle have been a frequent source of jokes for late night TV, the fact remains he still has hair and his face is adequately framed.  Givetn two presidential candidates that have adequate framing of the face with near equal popularity, Dr. Yates research says the subliminal evaluation defaults to the Vice Presidential candidates.  While they are close in favorability, between Tim Kaine and Mike Pence, he says the republican dominates in this hairline contest.

Based on the political ticket with the best hair, Yates predicts Donald Trump is poised to be our next President.  Bet you never thought you’d hear “best hair” and “Trump” in the same sentence before.

A Personal Message to my Christian Friends who Hate Trump

I Will Never Follow You Into Battle…

Look, I love my Christian friends who for “ethical” reasons are deciding NOT to vote for Donald Trump, I just will NEVER follow them into battle, any kind of battle anywhere, ever, NEVER.

Once these “proof-texting” buddies allowed their Biblical exegesis to incapacitate their decision making process in a real-world binary context and they conclude that the best action which most honors the God of the Universe (who by-the-way, has to make really tough decisions about every millisecond) is NO action, the “I-just-can’t-morally-vote-for-Trumpers,” forfeit their right to ever lead anyone anywhere.

Yeah, that sounds a bit tough, especially on my friends, but hey, what are friends for if I can’t tell them that, analogously, this is as if they were leading their squad of soldiers behind enemy lines and they came to a fork in the road where one way was certain death and the other was possible death, they froze, stopped, decided to pray about the direction they should go and God (or their fear) told them, don’t go anywhere, in fact, tell your fully-strapped boys that you have chosen to be completely ineffective in providing any leadership in this extremely difficult situation… which, by-the-way, is what leadership is all about!

When so many have lived and died to assure our right to cast a vote that has electoral meaning, not some sort of spiritual protest and when we live in a political system that requires your participation to function in a moral way and you freeze at the point of need, really, how can you expect anyone ever to follow your lead anywhere ever?

Oh, and if I read the Bible correctly and history, it seems that your Boss, the Big Guy, the Grand Pu-bah Himself actually voted for some pretty whacked out dudes as leaders at unique times and many of them would up becoming heroes of the Faith.

I dunno know, maybe that’s something to think about?


Trump Represents Americans Suffering from the Failed Policies of Career Politicians

WASHINGTON, D.C. /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Former presidential candidate Gary Bauer, chairman of the Campaign for Working Families, observed that Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump “accomplished his main goals last night.  He stood on the debate stage with a career politician who has been in Washington for decades.  He voiced the anxiety of American workers who feel as though they are staring into an economic abyss.  And Trump repeatedly pointed out that Hillary Clinton has virtually no accomplishments.

Hillary Clinton was at the center of the chaos that led to the Iranian nuclear deal, deteriorating conditions in theMiddle East, worsening race relations here at home and the gutting of America’s manufacturing base.  Trump reminded voters watching at home that Hillary Clinton has sat in Washington, D.C., like it was a luxurious hot tub, raking in millions of dollars trading off her celebrity, while hard-working Americans suffered.

“Voters who want real change this election will not get it from a career politicians like Hillary Clinton,” said Bauer.

Bauer served all 8 years of the Reagan Administration, as under secretary of education and as President Reagan’s chief domestic policy advisor, later running in the 2000 Republican presidential primaries. TheGuardian called Bauer “one of the leading campaigners in the U.S. on pro-life and pro-traditional family issues.” Bauer is available for satellite interview via a VideoLink ReadyCam studio. To book call at 617-340-4100 or 571-244-6324.

Learn more at

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of Donald Trump supporters, from left to right: Susan Bates, Royce Barnes, Sabrina Kim, Maya Brudnay, and Arthur Robertson. (Photographs by Michelle Frankfurter, Ricky Rhodes, and Josh Ritchie)

Paid for by Campaign for Working Families, PAC., and not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee.

Love Him or Hate Him, Donald Trump Has Transformed Politics Forever

As my readers know, I don’t pay much attention to polls. I think they are a total waste of time and have proven to be extremely inaccurate over the past few years. According to polls, Mitt Romney should have been president after the 2012 elections.

Just as the polls have been egregiously wrong in predicting election results, so have most of the pundits in discussing the “Trump Phenomenon.”

Republican pundits attribute Donald Trump’s rise to his out sized personality, but if they really faced facts, they would find the roots of his success in the mirror. The Republican establishment is so out of step with the base of the party and they also seem to suffer from cognitive dissonance—the inability to see what they don’t believe.

The base of the party doesn’t want amnesty for those in the country illegally, they don’t want all these trade deals that hurt American donaldtrump2016workers, and they don’t want us involved in wars all over the world.

Donald Trump comes along advocating a simple platform: no amnesty for illegal immigrants and a wall on the U.S.-Mexico border; trade deals that put Americans first; let other countries protect themselves, unless there is a clear overriding American security interest at state.

These seem like very reasonable positions to me, notwithstanding Trump’s sometimes bombastic rhetoric in expressing his vision for America.

Democratic pundits attribute Trump’s rise to his “racist appeal to low-educated White voters.” In the immortal words of legendary singer Michael McDonald of the Doobie Brothers, “what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away; what seems to be is always better than nothing at all.”

These Democrats have no choice, but to blame Trump’s rise on “racism.” They are terrified of the lack of enthusiasm Blacks are showing for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. According to every economic indicator, Blacks have regressed during Obama’s two terms in the White House and Democrats refuse to blame it on their failed liberal policies; so they fall back on their tried and true—the race card!

I have warned the Republican Party incessantly of this quadrennial exercise by the Democratic Party, but, as usual, Republicans are yet again unprepared.

There are many areas of legitimate criticism one could place at Trump’s feet, but I am amazed that no one is willing to give him credit for a tectonic shift in the body politic that is unheard of for a Republican presidential candidate.

Donald Trump has been roundly criticized for his cynical approach of outreach to the Black community. I, too, have been one of his critics in this regard. Trump is just another example of a Republican trying to do the right thing, but doing it the wrong way.

Trump has single-handedly laid out in stark detail the devastating impact that liberalism has had on the Black community more than any Republican since Richard Nixon. He has mentioned the Black community more than the sum total of all of our presidential candidates combined over the past generation.

He has been roundly ridiculed by the D.C. punditocracy for this, but I challenge anyone to name another Republican in recent memory that has devoted this much time in their speeches to the Black community.

His solutions to some of the pathologies affecting the Black community are: school choice and vouchers; increased access to capital for small businesses; and more funding for Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs). This is a pretty good start.

Trump has shifted the conversation from the Republican Party ignoring the Black vote to arguing about how much of the Black vote Trump is going to get.

This is where the tectonic shift in the political landscape has taken place and no one is even talking about it.

In marketing, this is considered the “proof of concept stage”; where one has moved beyond whether you have a viable product to how viable the product is. No one is arguing whether anyone will buy an electric car; the question is now how many will be sold.

Donald Trump’s actions regarding the Black vote have now shifted the conversation from not whether, but how much of the Black vote he will get. This is truly transformational.

If Donald Trump had “real” Black operatives around him who were Republican, he could truly gain a decent amount of support from the Black community; but he, unfortunately has surrounded himself with Blacks who are not up to the task.

Blacks are begging the Republican Party to give them a reason to vote Republican. The door is still cracked just a little for this to happen this cycle, but there must be a more substantive approach to the Black community by Blacks, who have credibility both in the party and in our community.

This has been the missing ingredient. If Donald Trump can correct this in short order, double-digit support from within the Black community is not out of the question.

Defining and Understanding Liberalism

When the term “liberalism” (derived from the Latin word liberalis, meaning “pertaining to a free man”) first emerged in the early 1800s, its hallmarks were a belief in: individual rights (which included civil liberties, political equality, freedom of conscience, and freedom of thought); the rule of law; limited government; private property; and laissez faire economics. Moreover, liberalism favored a pluralistic secular state and opposed all efforts to link religion to the government. It also believed strongly in the idea of progress, but stressed, unlike socialism, that progress should take place by means of orderly, legal procedures rather than by revolutionary upheaval; in other words, liberty could not be separated from the means used to attain it. These would remain the defining characteristics of liberalism throughout the liberal epoch, generally identified as the period of 1815-1914. It was a time of industrial development, unprecedented growth in both population and living standards, expansion of individual liberties and social tolerance, the abolition of slavery and serfdom, a reprieve from major wars, and the waning of political authoritarianism.

The foregoing liberal ideals did not coalesce in a vacuum. Classical liberalism grew out of the 17th-century Age of Reason and the 18th-century Enlightenment. This was a period when:

  • Western culture broke its long-held faith in the presumptive and everlasting authority of the past, and embraced instead the notion that human beings were capable of progressing beyond the knowledge and insights of ancient scholars and writers;
  • skepticism gained unprecedented prestige, making it acceptable to doubt every tenet of conventional wisdom or tradition that could not be readily justified by a valid criterion of truth;
  • man’s willingness to admit his ignorance about things that could not be proved by scientific method, was seen as a proper humility, preferable to feigned certainty;
  • legislators, philosophers and the common man alike endeavored to devise better ways of governing and of treating their fellow citizens;
  • the culture came to believe that “natural” human motivations such as the pursuit of happiness — which eventually would be enshrined in the Declaration of Independence — were every bit as constant and predictable as the natural laws that governed the orbits of the planets;
  • the West came to understand that each person’s knowledge and beliefs were limited to his experiences and surroundings, a realization that promoted tolerance for other cultures, faiths, and worldviews;
  • it was widely believed that a commercial, secular, and religiously diversified state was much to be preferred over a state dominated by the elite of any single faith; and
  • a free-market, laissez faire economy was seen as the system best suited for the creation of wealth.

These views were proposed and advanced by a host of giants in the fields of philosophy, economics, and science — among them Francis Bacon, Rene Descartes, Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, the Baron de Montesquieu, David Hume, Joseph Butler, Denis Diderot, and Adam Smith.

No figure was more important than Locke, whose observation that all knowledge and ideas arise from human experience paved the way to classical liberalism’s humility about the limits of our knowledge, its respect for freedom of thought and of religion, and its admonition against sudden, revolutionary breaks with established tradition. Locke also identified the vital link between political liberty and private property; indeed, history has since shown that only when a government acknowledges the right of the individual to own private property, does that government understand that there are boundaries to its own power.

When the American colonists issued their Declaration of Independence in 1776, that document was steeped in liberal Lockean themes. Most notably, its assertion of the right of every man to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” echoed Locke’s claim that everyone had a right to defend their “life, health, Liberty, [and] possessions.” The Declaration’s notion that governments should be abolished and replaced if they become abusive of people’s natural rights, is yet another Lockean idea.

1776 also saw the publication of Adam Smith’s The Wealth of Nations, the foundational work of free-market economics. Embodied in that book, and in the Declaration of Independence, was a liberalism that was evolving from the proposals of philosophers into the policy of governments — thereby setting the stage for the century-long liberal epoch that would soon commence.

Since the end of that epoch, however, “liberalism” has been gradually transformed from a term denoting Jeffersonian domestic liberty, into a synonym for the welfare state; from a term advocating limited government, to a shill for expansive statism.

Tracing the cause of this semantic shift, the economist Joseph Schumpeter says: “As a supreme, if unintended, compliment, the enemies of private enterprise have thought it wise to appropriate its label” (i.e.,”liberalism”). In the early 20th century, for instance, the education reformer John Dewey marveled at the achievements of Soviet Bolshevism and urged Americans “to give up much of [their] economic freedom,” to abandon their “individualistic tradition,” and to recognize “the supremacy of public need over private possessions.” And yet Dewey called himself not a Marxist but a liberal — a “new” liberal; similarly, he referred to his ideas not as collectivism but rather as individualism — a “new” individualism.

Over the ensuing years and decades, leftists, progressives, and socialists have routinely championed crusades and ideals bearing ever-less resemblance to classical liberalism, yet they invariably have identified both themselves and their evolving causes as “liberal.” Programs that were in fact leftist and socialist were enacted by legislators and social reformers in the name of “liberalism,” whose reputation as a guardian of human freedom served not only to shield those programs from public criticism, but in fact to win wide public approval of them.

In terms of both semantic usage and governmental policy, “liberalism” today is most widely associated with a single concept: the mixed economy, i.e., a state that is neither completely capitalist (laissez faire) nor entirely socialist (totalitarian). It is a union of conflicting — liberal vs. anti-liberal — elements. As Friedrich Hayek, the great twentieth-century scholar of liberalism, observed, such inconsistencies raise a host of vital questions:

  • If we have the redistribution of wealth, then what of private property?
  • If we enact biased laws to effect economic (or “social”) equality, then what of political equality?
  • If we regard the collective as the essential entity, then what of the primacy of the individual?
  • Precisely what is the mix of the mixed economy?
  • When is it capitalist and when is it socialist?
  • When does it protect property and when does it confiscate it?
  • When does it leave people alone and when does it coerce them?
  • When does it adhere to the ethics of individualism and when does it obey the code of collectivism?

Mixed practices (such as the mixed economy) imply mixed principles, which in turn imply mixed, and therefore irrational, premises. And it is precisely that jumble which constitutes the modern “liberal” welfare state. Its exemplar is the “liberal” who supports laissez faire for social issues but statism for economic issues.

Contemporary “liberalism,” then, is a parody of its predecessor. It is leftism in disguise. Specifically, it is a stalwart champion of:

  • group rights and collective identity, rather than of individual rights and responsibilities (e.g., the racial preference policies known as affirmative action, and the left’s devotion to identity politics generally);
  • the expansion of government rather than its diminution (favoring ever-escalating taxes to fund a bloated welfare state and a government that oversees virtually every aspect of human life) (also a disregard for the separation of powers, as evidenced by the executive and judicial branches usurping the legislative authority of Congress);
  • the redistribution of wealth (through punitive taxes and, again, a mushrooming welfare state) rather than its creation through free markets based on private property; and
  • the circumvention of law rather than the rule of law (as exemplified by the flouting of immigration laws and nondiscrimination laws, or by a preference for judicial activism whereby judges co-opt the powers that rightfully belong to legislators, or by permitting certain individuals to be above the law and its penalties).

With regard to the fourth item listed above, Hoover Institution Fellow Thomas Sowell has identified a number of ways in which President Obama has taken steps to impose his own political agendas on the American people, rather than abide by existing law. For example, writes Dr. Sowell:

  • “To have a law [ObamaCare] that can cost an organization millions of dollars a year either apply or not apply, depending on the whim or political interest of the President of the United States, is to make a mockery of the rule of law. How secure is any freedom when there is this kind of arbitrary power in the hands of one man? What does your right of freedom of speech mean if saying something that irritates the Obama administration means that you or your business has to pay huge amounts of money and get hit with all sorts of red tape under ObamaCare that your competitor is exempted from, because your competitor either kept quiet or praised the Obama administration or donated to its reelection campaign?” [NOTE #1: As of November 2012, the Obama administration had issued waivers from Obamacare’s onerous financial burdens to more than 2,000 favored companies and unions.] [NOTE #2: In the summer of 2013, it became widely reported that Obamacare, which did not exempt members of Congress or their staffers from its reach, included a provision that should have cost each member of Congress and each staffer $5,000 to $11,000 per year. Many staffers were threatening to quit their jobs as a result. At that point, Obama got personally involved in working to circumvent the problem. On August 1, 2013, the President announced that taxpayers would cover 75% of those extra costs.]
  • “You do not have a self-governing people when ‘czars’ are created by Executive Orders, so that individuals wielding vast powers equal to, or greater than, the powers of Cabinet members do not have to be vetted and confirmed by the people’s elected representatives in the Senate, as Cabinet members must be.”
  • “You do not have a self-governing people when a so-called ‘consumer protection’ agency is created to be financed by the unelected officials of the Federal Reserve System, which can create its own money out of thin air, instead of being financed by appropriations voted by elected members of Congress who have to justify their priorities and trade-offs to the taxpaying public.”
  • “You do not have a self-governing people when laws passed by the Congress, signed by previous Presidents, and approved by the federal courts, can have the current President waive whatever sections he does not like, and refuse to enforce those sections, despite his oath to see that the laws are faithfully executed. Barack Obama, for example, has refused to carry out sections of the immigration laws that he does not like, unilaterally creating de facto amnesty for those illegal immigrants he has chosen to be exempt from the law.” [NOTE #1: notes that in the summer of 2012, “Obama directed immigration agencies not to deport some illegal immigrants who were brought to America as children, and to give them work-authorization permits. In effect, he implemented much of the DREAM Act that Congress has long debated, but never enacted.” In fact, Congress had rejected the measure more than 30 times over the years.] [NOTE #2: In August 2013, President Obama instructed immigration agents to refrain from arresting and deporting illegal immigrant parents or primary providers of minor children.]

Another noteworthy feature of today’s “liberalism” is that, unlike classical liberalism, it is intolerant of opposing viewpoints, favors the promotion of group-think, and interprets as treason any deviation from its own intellectual orthodoxy. We see this phenomenon manifested with particular clarity by self-identified black “liberals” who excoriate black conservatives as “race traitors,” “house slaves,” “Oreos,” and “Uncle Toms.”

DEPLORABLE: The Smearing of the Middle Class by Pseudo-Intellectuals

Long before Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank claimed to have the “statistics” to prove Hillary Clinton’s assertion that half of Donald Trump supporters are “deplorables,” a liberal outlets that has repeated such slurs — the New York Times — published an article titled “Poll Finds Tea Party Backers Wealthier and More Educated.”

That was back in April 2010, a year after the rise of the “Tea Party movement,” a movement inspired by the “rant” of Rick Santelli in 2009 over Obama’s massive “stimulus” spending on infrastructure (sidewalks that went nowhere), “green energy” (Solyndra), and bribes to governors to participate in the federal takeover of education (Common Core).

The 2010 New York Times poll found that most Tea Party members held views that were typical of the general public. Reporters wrote that their responses to questions “are like the general public’s in many ways.” Most described the amount they paid in taxes as “fair,” most sent their children to public schools, and most believed that Medicare and Social Security are worth the cost. In fact, the poll found that most Tea Party members had higher incomes and were better-educated than the general public.

But they did have three major concerns: “the recent healthcare overhaul, government spending, and a feeling that their opinions are not represented in Washington.”

In other words, these are well-informed middle-class Americans. They are concerned about federalism and spending and believe in representational government.

Such a presentation of the Tea Party was short-lived. The Tea Party was soon transmogrified into an old stereotype: bigoted and uneducated white Southerners.

Their disagreements with Barack Obama’s policies were translated into “racism.”

The journalists had the help of academics, such as those ensconced at the left-wing Berkeley Center for Right-Wing Studies, where the “right-wing” label is applied without distinction to Mussolini and the Tea Party.

In the fall of 2010, the Center hosted a conference and then produced a collection of essays by participants titled: Steep: The Precipitous Rise of the Tea Party. Contributor Charles Postel of San Francisco State University claimed that “’right-wing rage’” leads to a seeking of solutions in the free market, embodies the concerns of older, white Americans, and is a re-emergence of the Cold War’s “apocalyptic fears of communism.”

The pseudo-scholarship of such centers was employed by reporters to cast Tea Party members as irrational and crazed.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on PJ Media.

Donald Trump is ‘in his strongest-ever position’ to win on November 8th

Well, folks, this is getting tight. Donald Trump is in his strongest-ever position in FiveThirtyEight’s polls-plus forecast, which gives him a 46 percent chance of winning the election. Trump’s chances are about the same, 45 percent, according our polls-only forecast, his best standing since it showed him with a 50 percent chance in the midst of his convention bounce.

Our models have been on the move toward Trump for roughly six weeks. But with dozens of polls coming out over the past few days, he’s no longer much of an underdog at all. Hillary Clinton leads narrowly — by 1.5 percentage points — in our projection of the popular vote. But polling weakness in states that Clinton probably needs to win, particularlyColorado and Pennsylvania, makes the Electoral College almost even.

I’m aware that there’s a lot of consternation and/or excitement out there about our forecast. But there’s nothing particularly deep going on here — our numbers are just reflecting what the recent polls are saying. First, here’s a list of the 10 national polls that we’ve added to our database since Saturday. I’ve shown both the current result and — since this is how our model’s trend-line adjustment works — how it compares to the average of other polls conducted by that pollster throughout the year:

ABC News/Washington Post Clinton +2 Clinton +6 Trump +4
CVOTER International Clinton +1 Clinton +1
Monmouth University Clinton +4 Clinton +7 Trump +3
Morning Consult Trump +1 Clinton +4 Trump +5
Quinnipiac University Clinton +1 Clinton +4 Trump +3
RKM Research Clinton +2 Clinton +2
Selzer & Company Trump +2 Clinton +11 Trump +13
SurveyMonkey Clinton +5 Clinton +4 Clinton +1
USC Dornsife/LA Times Trump +4 Trump +1 Trump +3
YouGov Clinton +3 Clinton +3
National polls added since Sept. 24

On average, Clinton is ahead by only 1.3 percentage points in these polls — right where our forecast shows the race. And the trend lines are mostly negative for her, with Clinton polling an average of 2.6 points below the previous editions of the same polls.

Meanwhile, here are the state polls we’ve added since Saturday. The list excludes the latest editions of the Ipsos/Reuters and CVOTER International 50-state tracking polls, which our model uses but assigns a relatively low weight.

Ariz. Data Orbital Trump +2
Colo. CNN Trump +1
Colo. Gravis Marketing Trump +4 Clinton +1 Trump +5
Colo. YouGov Clinton +1 Clinton +1
Fla. Cherry Comm. Clinton +2 Trump +4 Clinton +6
Ga. JMC Enterprises Trump +6 Clinton +7 Trump +13
Ga. Landmark Comm. Trump +4 Trump +1 Trump +3
Iowa Loras College Trump +1 Clinton +13 Trump +14
La. JMC Enterprises Trump +10 Trump +16 Clinton +6
Maine U. of New Hampshire Clinton +4 Clinton +7 Trump +3
Mass. YouGov Clinton +13
Minn. SurveyUSA Clinton +7
Minn. Gravis Marketing Tie
Mo. YouGov Trump +9
N.H. Amer. Research Group Clinton +4 Clinton +5 Trump +1
N.Y. Marist College Clinton +21 Clinton +29 Trump +8
N.C. High Point University Clinton +1
N.C. Gravis Marketing Clinton +1 Trump +1 Clinton +2
Ohio Gravis Marketing Trump +1 Clinton +2 Trump +3
Ohio TargetSmart/Wm. & Mary Clinton +3
Pa. CNN Clinton +1
Pa. Harper Polling Clinton +2 Clinton +5 Trump +3
Pa. Gravis Marketing Clinton +3 Clinton +2 Clinton +1
Pa. Mercyhurst University Clinton +1 Clinton +8 Trump +7
Pa. Muhlenberg College Clinton +2 Clinton +7 Trump +5
Utah Dan Jones & Associates Trump +9 Trump +7 Trump +2
Va. Christopher Newport U. Clinton +6 Clinton +9 Trump +3
Va. YouGov Clinton +8 Clinton +12 Trump +4
W. Va. Just Win Strategies Trump +27
State polls added since Sept. 24

These tell pretty much the same story. On average among this weekend’s polls in what we consider swing states, Clinton leads by only 1.2 percentage points. And the trend has moved in Trump’s direction by an average of 2.9 percentage points. Again, that’s right in line with what our forecast shows.

Unfortunately for Clinton, her state-by-state polls are configured in a way that makes her Electoral College position relatively vulnerable. Particularly problematic for Clinton were the numbers in Colorado, where two of the three new polls this weekend had her trailing Trump. A couple of those pollsters (Gravis Marketing and CNN) have Trump-leaning house effects, but still, it’s a close race there, and Clinton leads by only 1.6 percentage points in our Colorado forecast. Without Colorado in her column, Clinton would need to win a state that she currently appears to trail in, such asNorth Carolina or Florida.

There were also five polls of Pennsylvania that showed Clinton ahead by only 1 to 3 points there. She leads in Pennsylvania by 2.4 percentage points in our forecast.

Not every poll was bad for Clinton: She led fairly comfortably in two new polls of Virginia, although they showed negative trend lines for her. She got relatively good polls in Florida and Ohio. And as with any long list of polls, this one contained a mix of good and not-so-good pollsters. But there was no clear pattern of better pollsters showing better numbers for Clinton, or vice versa. For instance, the single poll that hurt Clinton the most in our forecast was a national survey from Selzer & Co. on behalf of Bloomberg Politics, which showed her trailing Trump by 2 percentage points. Selzer is one of our highest-rated pollsters and had shown strong numbers for Clinton earlier in the cycle.

Recently, FiveThirtyEight has shown better better odds for Trump than other models have, for several reasons. First, our model is generally quicker to update than others, because of its use of the trend-line adjustment. That allows us to make inferences about how the polls are moving in every state, even when they haven’t been polled recently. For instance, the model correctly anticipated significant tightening in Colorado and Pennsylvania, even after we went a long stretch without many new polls there.

A good test of whether a model is too conservative, too aggressive or “just right” is whether it does a good job of matching new polls as they come out in a state. So far in this election, the FiveThirtyEight and Daily Kos Elections model — which also uses a trend-line adjustment — have done a good job of this, while other models sometimes lag behind the trend.

A good, related question is whether polls are mean-reverting. Clinton has generally led Trump by more than the 1 or 2 percentage point lead she has now. Does that mean she’s more likely to gain ground than to lose ground from this point onward?

Our polls-only model makes no assumptions about this, instead taking the polls at face value. Polls-plus does account for mean reversion, but it assumes that polls revert toward a mean established by an index of economic conditions, rather than the long-term average of polls. Because economic conditions project a very close race right now, the polls-plus forecast is about the same as polls-only.

One could argue for reverting polls toward a long-term average instead, as at least one other forecaster (Princeton Election Consortium) does. We’re not totally sold on the empirical case for this, but theoretically it’s perfectly sound: A model could have the race as a dead heat in the event of a hypothetical election held today but nonetheless have Clinton favored onNov. 8.

FiveThirtyEight’s models also generally account for more uncertainty than other models — or at least they do in this election because the presence of a large number of undecided and third-party voters, who contribute to polling volatility. That helps Trump’s odds, since he’s (narrowly) the underdog in our forecast.

Another difference is whether one uses the version of the polls with third-party candidates included, as FiveThirtyEight’s forecasts do. Clinton’s leads are often slightly larger in two-way matchups. But those two-way matchups describe a hypothetical election — in actuality, Libertarian Gary Johnson will be on the ballot in every state, and the Green Party’s Jill Stein will be on the ballot in all but a handful of them. That’s why we prefer the version of the polls that include their names. It’s up to Clinton and Trump to earn those votes and not up to us to make assumptions about how those voters will behave.

So to summarize:

  1. FiveThirtyEight’s models are faster to incorporate new data and identify trends than most others. For the time being, this helps Trump, since he’s been gaining in the polls.
  2. FiveThirtyEight’s models account for more uncertainty than most others. For the time being, this helps Trump, since he’s the underdog — although it potentially also means we give Clinton a better chance of a landslide than other models do.
  3. FiveThirtyEight’s models use the version of the polls that include third-party candidates. For the time being, this helps Trump, since he’s losing less to third-party candidates than Clinton is.

None of these will necessarily help Trump permanently, however. It hasn’t always been the case that third-party candidates so disproportionately hurt Clinton, for instance. And if Clinton gains following the debates, FiveThirtyEight’s models will probably be among the quicker ones to detect it.

For now, however, the polls show a very close race. Clinton leads in the majority of national polls, but not by much, and there are several that have Trump ahead. Likewise, she leads in the narrow majority of swing state polls, but there are many Trump leads in the swing state polls as well, and Clinton does not have clear leads in enough states to win the Electoral College. Therefore, the race is close. This ought to be clear whether you’re looking at relatively simple averages like those at RealClearPolitics or considering more complex methods like FiveThirtyEight’s.

Check out our 2016 election forecasts.

VIDEO: A Comparison of each Party’s Platform — As Important as the Candidate!

While the media largely ignores the party platforms after the political conventions, they should play a major role in every voters’ decision-making for 2016.

Apart from outlining the core beliefs and philosophies of the two parties, these documents are — at their core — the party’s contracts with voters for how both sides will govern if elected. In many ways, these documents are just as important — if not more so — in guiding the politics of both parties as the candidates themselves.

In the past several presidential election cycles, FRC and FRC Action have played significant roles in shaping the GOP’s platform — in 2016’s case, helping to draft the most conservative document in the Republican Party’s recent history.

With a coalition of committed conservatives in Cleveland, we managed — not only to stave off the attacks of the moderate wing of the party — but move the ball forward on several key issues.

Most people, meanwhile, never believed the Democratic Party could out-radical its 2012 national platform. Two weeks later, Hillary Clinton proved them wrong, putting her stamp of approval on an extreme grab bag of policy goals like taxpayer-funded abortion, special rights for transgenders, increased support of Planned Parenthood, a dilution of religious liberty, and more.

Candidates are only as good as their party platforms — so make sure you know what yours says! FRC Action just produced a valuable video contrasting the two documents on a slew of key issues. Take a few minutes to watch it, and then share it with your friends and family!

Please watch this video and get informed on the 2016 party platforms for the Republican and Democratic parties and how they are created!

Beer Company Mocks Families Whose Loved Ones Were Killed by Illegals and Migrants

HEINEKEN USA has produced a TV commercial mocking families who have had loved ones killed by illegal aliens and refugees. Tecate Light, the fastest growing light beer in the U.S., will debut a controversial, disturbing and politically biased national television commercial called “The Wall” on Fox News, Univision and Telemundo during the first Presidential debate.


Felix Palau, Vice President Heineken Brand, Global Marketing, Americas.

“Tecate is using beer as the great unifier in developing a fun, lighthearted and clever commercial where friends from two bordering countries share a couple of Tecates over a wall,” said Felix Palau, Vice President, Tecate. “With this spot, Tecate is acknowledging an ongoing conversation, while raising a glass to beer’s uncanny ability to bring people together in a positive way.”

What is not shown in the commercial are drug cartel gang members, terrorists and human traffickers celebrating with a glass of Tecate.

There is nothing fun, light hearted, positive nor cleaver when it comes to national sovereignty and the security of Americans in the homeland. What unifies Americans is not beer. It is respecting America’s immigration laws and a love of American values.

HEINEKEN, a Dutch brewing company, should understand that as it’s headquarters is in Holland, which has its own serious border security issues with Muslim migrants. Europe has experienced gang rapes by Muslims, violence, clashes with police and growing anti-Semitic rhetoric. The narrative HEINEKEN is promoting is a the position taken by left wing politicians such as Gregor Gysi and Hillary Clinton.

This ad in effect promotes Hillary Clinton’s open borders policy with the false notion that we can all get along over a glass of beer.

The Tecate ad reminds us of President Obama’s beer summit between African-American professor Henry Louis Gates and the white police officer Sgt. James Crowley who arrested him. How did that work out given the riots in Ferguson, Missouri, Baltimore, Maryland and Charlotte, North Carolina?

HEINEKEN has taken a globalist position in their advertisement.

The media company behind this ad believes its a great idea and that it will sell beer. This ad is a slap in the face of those who have lost loved ones to those here illegally and those who migrated here to commit slaughter, most recently in a mall in the state of Washington. According to CBS Seattle, “The man was described by witnesses to police as a young Hispanic man dressed in black. Surveillance video captured him entering the mall unarmed and then recorded him about 10 minutes later entering the Macy’s with a “hunting type” rifle in his hand, Mount Vernon Police Lt. Chris Cammock said.”

We are wondering if 20-year old Arcan Cetin, a Muslim immigrant from Turkey, drank a Tecate Light before slaughtering five innocents inside the Macy’s store at the Cascade Mall in Oak Harbor, Washington. Perhaps HEINEKEN will send a case of beer to the funerals of those slaughtered as a symbol of lighthearted unity with their message to not build a high enough wall or have an immigration system that keeps out terrorists and illegal aliens?

Perhaps HEINEKEN and Tecate Light shouldn’t make light of the burning issue of national security, which begins with border security. Looks like Trump supporters will be drinking Budweiser beer?

Some find the HEINEKEN USA commercial deplorable.

We also noted something unusual about the Tecate logo design. Do you notice the similarities?


RELATED ARTICLE: Washington state: Turkish Muslim, Arcan Cetin, arrested for murder of five people inside Cascade Mall

RELATED VIDEO: “Deplorables Unite”

All over the world – the spread of the Trump revolution continues for a free people and sovereign nations free from the clutches of globalism and Islamic terrorism. If being nationalistic, patriotic, and free people who enjoy the riches of modern civilization is considered “deplorable” then count us in and consider us UNITED!