Vitriol Goes from Zero to DeNiro…

/in , , , /by

For the handful of Americans sitting at home watching the Tony Awards, it must have been a confusing scene. Actor Robert DeNiro walked out on stage, pumped his fists in the air, and started talking. The audience went wild with applause — but since CBS producers had scrambled to bleep out the Godfather star’s profanity, no one was quite sure what all the frenzy was about. Unfortunately for the liberals who are trying to knock off President Trump in two years, they do now. “I’m going to say one thing,” DeNiro started. “F— Trump. It’s no longer down with Trump. It’s f— Trump.” After a gasp, the whole room stood and cheered. Though, 24 hours later, no one is quite sure why. Though plenty of liberal activists probably agree with DeNiro, they also know the kind of damage this kind of anti-Trump rage can do.

As commentators on the Right and Left pointed out, the only one who stands to gain from it is the man he’s trying to shame!

“These idiots are going to make sure Trump is president forever,” tweeted one liberal pundit. People like Laura Ingraham can’t believe the Left continues to be so out of touch with America. “Another ‘celebutainment’ gift to the GOP & @realDonaldTrump.” It might as well be, Becket Adams agreed in the Washington Examiner, “an early in-kind donation to the committee to reelect Trump.” Over at the Atlantic, Sophie Gilbert called it “toothless,” saying, “It’s easy to be angry. It’s easy to take a platform that offers easy (if bleeped-out) access to millions of people and use profanity to capture a mood, to express an emotion. But the outrage that will doubtless ensue is a distraction from what really matters, and what’s much harder to realize: the work of trying to change a situation, not just rage against it.”

Once again, some on the Left are coming unhinged. There’s no longer even a fig leaf of impartiality with the entertainment industry and liberal extremists. This administration, through their reversal of President Obama’s anti-family, anti-faith policies, is clearly revealing what the 2016 election did: the fault lines in America. As we’ve seen with Meryl Streep, Avenger director Joss Whedon (who tweeted a death wish for the president), the curtain is now clearly pulled back on America’s so-called cultural elite (and I have to say “so-called,” because their limited four-letter word vocabulary shows how they truly lack culture).

There was a time when civil society didn’t allow for such language in public. Now, some want to feign disgust at the president while, as former press secretary Sean Spicer pointed out, “they engage in the same behavior they find reprehensible – except,” he points out, “they do it in public, on public airways where every American can see and see just how deplorable they are.” The hypocrisy is astounding. So is the elitists’ belief that this condescension is working. The more they sneer and belittle Trump’s base, the more committed voters will be.

When it comes to Hollywood, regular folks — the New York Post’s Salena Zito warns — have had enough.

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

RELATED ARTICLES:

Conversation Peace: U.S., N. Korea Prep for Historic Meeting

Twitter Chief Grilled over Chick-fil-A

RELATED  VIDEO: Dan Bongino on Robert De Niro’s Tony speech: “Captain String Bean. Look at this guy. Limpy with his arms here. I think cause he played Travis Bickle in Taxi Driver and LaMotta in Raging Bull, I swear to you this guy thinks he’s a real life tough guy.”

An Interview With Tucker Carlson on What Makes Trump a ‘Political Genius’

/in , , , , /by

Tucker Carlson, host of the popular Fox News show “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” spoke to Daily Signal Editor-in-Chief Rob Bluey at The Heritage Foundation’s 41st annual Resource Bank meeting in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. Carlson received the prestigious Salvatori Prize, recognizing his work to uphold and advance the principles of America’s founding. The full video, plus an edited transcript of the interview, is below.

Rob Bluey: It is a true honor to celebrate the work that you’ve done, and I want to begin with the advice that you left this audience on how conservatives can take back the culture. You had two pieces of advice. Tell us about them.

Tucker Carlson: Well, have more children. I grew up in a world where it was considered embarrassing to have more than two children. I don’t think that’s the case now among middle-class, upper middle-class people, but it was.

First of all, it’s the most rewarding, greatest, most fun thing you can do. But it’s also the most profound thing. If you don’t like the direction of the country, have children, raise them the way that you want, consistent with your beliefs. It seems like all the answers are basic, nature-based answers, in my opinion. To everything. That’s the most basic of all, have more kids. Raise decent children.

And the second was just say what you think is true. I don’t actually think you get a ton out of confronting people and getting in people’s faces. I don’t think you’re going to convince anybody that way. But I think there’s inherent value in speaking principle out loud without shame or fear. And again, without the expectation that you’re going to win people over right away, because most times you’re not going to.

Aggression really doesn’t help much. I’ve definitely concluded that after years of being aggressive. But I think telling the truth is an inherently valuable act.

Bluey: You’ve had tremendous success with your show. It’s highly rated and millions of people are tuning in. How does that last point inform the work that you do on a day-to-day basis?

Carlson: The show’s successful because it’s on Fox News, which is successful. I’ve worked at a lot of different TV networks, and the network is what matters most.

I don’t imagine that my show is successful because I’m so great. I do think much more about what I say because there’s a bigger audience and because we’re in the middle of this revolutionary moment, and I’m counterrevolutionary.

I don’t say a lot of things without thinking them through, which is good. I mean, occasionally I do and get in trouble for it. But I really try to think through what I really believe and what I really think is true.

Bluey: But I’d say the topics you cover and the way that you conduct your questioning is different and unique from other TV hosts.

Carlson: Well, I don’t have a lot to add. I would just say two things. I think President Trump is interesting, and I agree broadly with his agenda. I certainly agree with immigration, that’s for sure. But I don’t think that every story is about Donald Trump, and most other people at the other networks think every story is about Trump.

I don’t have anything to add to that; I don’t think it’s that interesting. I don’t want to talk about Trump five hours a week, I just don’t. And not because I have some political agenda and it’s bad to talk about; I’m just not that interested, actually. There’s a lot of interesting stuff going on. I try to talk about that.

The second thing is, I really try to have an honest conversation. By the way, my mind occasionally changes. There are a bunch of topics, several topics, where I’ve totally changed my views because someone else had a better point than I did. And I love that.

Tucker Carlson at The Heritage Foundation’s Resource Bank. (Photo: Ivan Apfel Photography for The Heritage Foundation)

Bluey: You have a book coming out this fall called “Ship of Fools.” I want to hear about it because it relates a bit to Trump, right? I mean, you’re going after the elites, the ruling class.

Carlson: The book, like the show, is based on the most obvious questions. I’m not a super-clever person, I try to keep it very simple. Why would America elect Donald Trump president?

And the explanation in Washington is, well, they didn’t really. Putin did. Or voters were just so dumb, they didn’t know the difference. Or America’s racist, so they elected a racist. Those are contemptible nonexplanations. Those are stupid.

The real answer, obviously, is that people were so dissatisfied with the leadership in place as of the first Tuesday in November of 2016, that they decided to punish them by electing Trump.

This was a referendum on the ruling class; and by the way, we have a ruling class, and I’ve lived in it most of my life, so I know it’s real. It’s not a conspiracy, but we have a class system, increasingly, in this country.

The people in charge have done a really bad job on the big things, on foreign policy and the economy; and they’ve gotten us into a number of counterproductive wars. That was a bipartisan effort. It was started by Bush, but it was applauded by Clinton. So it wasn’t one party, it was both parties.

They made a bunch of assumptions about the economy that turned out to be wrong, and they helped destroy the American middle class, and then they don’t care. So they’re terrible. They’re deeply unwise and selfish and stupid.

Trump is the result of decades of unwise, selfish, and stupid leadership. It’s so obvious. I’m not a genius, I’m hardly a genius. It’s just so clear, and no one says that. I’m not sure why.

Carlson: He’s certainly made the divisions clear, which was always his role. Trump is whatever the opposite of a technocrat is; it’s Donald Trump. He’s not a detail man, to put it mildly.

He hasn’t swept into town with the “Mandate for Leadership” that Heritage produced in 1980 to guide the Reagan transformation of Washington. Here is how you handle every department of government. There’s nothing like that. And that really wasn’t the point. One hopes that there will subsequently be someone like that, but that’s not Trump’s role.

Trump’s role was to realign, or to make what had already happened obvious to everyone—which is that Republican Party really didn’t represent its voters very well, and the Democratic Party didn’t represent its voters very well either.

Actually, it’s not a contest between left and right so much as it’s a contest or a struggle between people who’ve benefited from the way things were going—me and all my neighbors—and everyone else who has gone backward, particularly economically.

If I could just say, the one sort of sin that conservatives like me committed was not paying attention to the massive transfer of wealth upward, and the stagnation in the middle. We thought that income inequality was something that you weren’t supposed to talk about, or you only cared about if you were Bernie Sanders and against capitalism. I’m totally for capitalism, but that’s bad.

You don’t want to live in a country where a small group of people control everything because you will have a revolution, and the system will be destroyed. Conservatives missed that and liberals were benefiting from it, so they didn’t say anything. That’s what the book’s about.

Bluey: You brought up Bernie Sanders and the left, and we’re having a conversation right now about whether we’re going to have a huge wave of progressives come into Congress next year. What is the left’s end game in view?

Carlson: The end game is always the same, which is to take back power. And Trump is offensive to them probably for a bunch of reasons, but the core offense is taking power away from them, disempowering the technocratic class.

Trump is the candidate for people who didn’t go to Choate and Princeton and Harvard Business School, and work at McKinsey. Those are his voters. The people who did buy into the system—with the expectation they would be in charge—are deeply offended by that, deeply offended by the power transfer.

So the point always is to take back control. But below that, a bunch of different things are going on. And politically, I think it’s pretty obvious now there’s no actual agenda. It’s not like they’re mad about trade.

They don’t like Trump, and Trump’s weird kind of unintentional political genius is to drive his opponents crazy. So all of a sudden you have liberals, some of whom are kind of reasonable, smart people, defending MS-13 and the dignity of porn stars. They basically are pivoting against Trump in such a way where whatever he’s for, they’re against and vice versa. Whatever he’s against, they’re for.

But then do they really want to be on the side of no borders, or calling ICE the stormtroopers, or defending Salvadoran gang members? Like, what?

He’s driven them crazy, and how does that work itself out? I don’t really know, it’s amazing to watch it, though, I’ll tell you that.

Fox News host Tucker Carlson received the prestigious Salvatori Prize, recognizing his work to uphold and advance the principles of America’s founding. The award was presented by The Heritage Foundation’s David Azerrad, director of the B. Kenneth Simon Center for Principles and Politics and AWC Family Foundation fellow. (Photo: Ivan Apfel Photography for The Heritage Foundation)

Bluey: It sure is amazing to watch. Tucker, finally, I want to ask you: You started your career at The Heritage Foundation as a writer for Policy Review. Here you are today receiving the Salvatori Prize. What does it mean to you to win this high honor?

Carlson: I’ve always been grateful to Heritage for doing the most important thing you can do for a young person, particularly a young man, and that’s give him a job—making $14,000 a year! But no one else was hiring me, and Heritage did.

Adam Meyerson, who ran Policy Review, hired me and really kind of systematically taught me journalism. He was conservative, it was a conservative publication. But I actually didn’t write about politics, I wrote about the police and it was kind of nonpolitical. It was more a study in how to gather information, organize it coherently in an expository essay, just the basics. They’re not very complicated, but someone needed to teach me, and he did.

The Heritage Foundation made that possible and I’ve always been grateful for that. I don’t know why they hired me. I wouldn’t have hired me. I was a total loser. But they did, and so I’ve never stopped being thankful for that, ever.

Bluey: We’re so glad it worked out.

Carlson: Thank you. I am too.

Bluey: Make sure you watch his show, “Tucker Carlson Tonight.” Pre-order the book, “Ship of Fools.” Tucker, great to be with you.

Carlson: Great to see you, Rob.

INTERVIEW BY

Portrait of Rob Bluey

Rob Bluey

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

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

G7 — World Throws Tantrum As President Trump Puts America First

/in , , , /by

Leading up to the G7 summit, the entirety of the world Left, from Eurocrats to Media to American Democrats, are angry and supposedly fearful over President Trump starting a new trade war and tearing down the post World War II world order. They claim he is destabilizing the western world and much of the globe.

But that stability was for too long built on America shouldering everyone else’s load, from military protection for Europeans who could afford to do more for their own defense to unfavorable trade deals with those same Europeans and non-allied competitors such as China. In the decade or two after WWII decimated the world, that probably made sense. Maybe even through the fall of the Soviet Union in 1988, although that is less clear. But by 2018?

A shakeup in that part of the Post-War order is long overdue, and many common-sense Americans know this. And it may ultimately be good for the Europeans, depending on their long-term response.

The global pre-G7 hand-wringing and anger of the elitist Left is more akin to a child who has been coddled and spoiled and is suddenly being held to account for his actions. That child is naturally going to be angry and throw a tantrum.

This is most clear with our cushioned western European allies. Our eastern European allies are less elitist, less cushioned and have a more pro-American take.

Donald Tusk, President of the European Council and an elitist bureaucrat among elitist bureaucrats, arrogantly dismissed President Trump as mere “seasonal turbulence.” It’s really pitch perfect for exactly what is wrong in Europe, including that this man, a “president,” is utterly unaccountable and unreachable by any European voters.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel said after Trump criticized European leaders for not spending what they promised to spend on military as part of NATO — part of America shouldering an undue share of their burden: “the times when we could fully rely on others are to some extent over.”

Germany has been one of the biggest leeches on the American military, and thus American taxpayer, even though they were at the front line of the Iron Curtain. If Merkel is saying “fully rely” on America to carry too much of the German defense burden, then hopefully she is right. It doesn’t mean we aren’t allies

But Merkel, arguably the worst Post-War German Chancellor (counting only West Germans when the nation was divided) has continued on her anti-Trump, and anti-America-first rhetoric leading up to the G7.

Just Wednesday, she said, “That was my takeaway from the NATO summit, and in the meantime I continue to feel confirmed by my statement…All of that confirms the assessment that the world is being reorganized.”

Merkel, along with French, Belgium, Norway, Sweden and other western European leaders combine the NATO comments with Trump’s decision to exit from the Paris global climate treaty — which has since been revealed to be the empty vessel it was — and his exit from the Iran nuclear “accord” last month with his push for more fair trade for Americans, as a threat.

It’s only a threat to the coddled. Ultimately, forcing the Europeans to stand more firmly on their own two legs, and compete for fairly, will be good for them unless they just lay on the floor scream in tantrum mode. They probably will not. After an adjustment period, they will begin altering policies to reflect the new reality and potentially become more lean and competitive and be able to carry more of their own defense load.

Because the reality is that the American economy is rocking from top to bottom, and a lot of it is due directly to the election of Trump and his deregulation and tax policies.

Here is a telling confession from a top American economist: “A lot of us economists have had our long-term forecasts ruined by the election of Donald Trump,” Moody Managing Director and Chief Economist John Lonski told Fox Business Network’s Stuart Varney. “The idea was that growth would be stuck at 2 percent indefinitely, stagnation had set in for the long run and now we’re not so sure that is necessarily going to be the cast.”

GDP growth is now estimated to be 3.5 percent this year. Trump has changed the domestic paradigm as he is working on the international paradigm.

Trump upsetting the table cart domestically has meant net good things for all Americans who don’t want to just live on the dole. It can mean the same for our European allies, too. But they’ll have to adjust.

We won’t see that sentiment at the G7 summit. But we might down the road.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Larry Kudlow: “Trump Is Presiding Over Extraordinary Growth. G-7 Leaders Should Notice.”

Peter Navarro: The Era of American Complacency on Trade Is Over

Donald Trump Calls for Total Tariff Removals at G7 Summit.

Trump Takes On World Leaders For The Betterment Of American Businesses

President Trump Stomps On “Fake News” CNN at Quebec G7 Presser (VIDEO)

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in The Revolutionary Act.

Majority of Democrats find Pornography ‘Morally Acceptable’

/in , , , , , /by

DETROIT (ChurchMilitant.com) – Recent Gallup polls are showing the moral divide between political parties is widening.

“For the first time on record, a majority of Democrats (53 percent) say pornography is morally acceptable,” Gallup writes. Published Tuesday, their annual poll on Morals and Values found 43 percent of Americans overall find porn “morally acceptable.” This is a jump of seven percent over 2017 and the highest level of acceptance since 2011 — the first year the question was asked.

Gallup also found that Republicans are increasingly accepting of pornography, although at roughly half the rate of Democrats. Twenty-seven percent of Republicans now think pornography is morally acceptable, a two percent increase over 2017. In that same time span, acceptance by Democrats jumped 11 percent. The poll also tracked Independent voters, whose acceptance rates climbed from 40 to 45 percent.

“From 2011 onward, notable shifts in opinion are apparent for actions such as doctor-assisted suicide, gay/lesbian relations, sex between unmarried people and having a baby out of wedlock,” Gallup reports, noting views on pornography have changed more than any of the other in the poll.

Gallup also found that America is the most liberal it has ever been. The results show record high acceptance for birth control, divorce, pre-marital sex, gay relations, doctor-assisted suicide and polygamy, while a record number of people find testing on animals and the death penalty morally wrong.

“Across a number of issues related to sexuality and sex, Americans have … been adopting a more permissive viewpoint, including such behaviors as sex between unmarried people and gay/lesbian relations.” Gallup notes. “Even behaviors that most Americans still consider beyond the pale, such as polygamy, have seen a notable increase in acceptability. In this context, it is hardly surprising that a similar change would be observed with respect to perceptions of pornography.”

Image

Gallup Morals and Values Survey

Gallup did not pinpoint a reason for Americans accepting pornography as normal, although they suppose the public scandal involving Stormy Daniels and Trump may have influenced public opinion.

“The cause of the single year shift on this item, though, is less clear,” according to Gallup.

In line with the increasing acceptance of sexual permissiveness is the increasing number of transgender or openly gay political candidates elected since Trump took office. The Victory Fund, “the only national organization dedicated to electing openly LGBTQ people,” has listed over 120 openly LGBTQ candidates.

Their website notes that they have helped to get thousands of pro-LGBT politicians elected, saying, “These LGBTQ voices have made significant contributions to advancing equality … from passing non-discrimination laws to defeating amendments to ban marriage equality.”

Gallup also found that 83 percent of Democrats favor same-sex “marriage” — nearly twice the rate of Republicans. Only 44 percent of Republicans favor it, a three percent drop from 2017.

Seventy-one percent of independent voters support same-sex “marriage.”

“The trend toward increased public support for same-sex marriage could very well continue, given that there is still room for increased support among Democrats and independents,” Gallup predicts. “Reaching a national consensus on the issue would depend more on greater acceptance among Republicans, who remain mostly opposed to legally recognized same-sex marriages.”

Gallup also found 71 percent of Americans are dissatisfied with the moral and ethical climate and 77 percent feel it is getting worse.

Overall, 49 percent of Americans rate the country’s values are poor.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Open Pedophile Running for Office in Virginia by Anita Carey 

Podcast: Trump’s Record on Pro-Life Issues

Government Is the Greatest Purveyor of Inequality

/in , , , , , /by

Thomas J. Eckert The government itself is inequality.

by Thomas J. Eckert

With June being celebrated as Gay Pride month, every year around this time we seem to experience an increase in conversations and media attention regarding the fight against inequality. Across the country, massive celebrations are held, often meant to highlight the differences human beings can have with one another while maintaining a peaceful coexistence, as equals. And while I applaud this mindset of peace and tolerance towards others, there is a growing miscalculation in this fight against inequality.

The Largest Purveyor of Inequality

More and more people have begun to buy into the notion that the current societal problems ailing us are a direct consequence of inequality. Now, whether you believe this to be the case, these problems, we’re told, “require” the all-too-eager hand of government to resolve. But, as we’ll see, if fighting inequality is your goal, applying a bit of an objective lens to your campaign will uncover that government, as it turns out, is the largest purveyor of inequality that has ever existed; and fighting inequality means fighting government.

Let’s start by highlighting the fact that government itself is inequality, in that it falsely grants some individuals the authority to rule over others, essentially creating two classes of individuals; rulers and the ruled. For obvious reasons, they have tried to blur these lines over time by creating alternative forms of governance like democracy, whereby they repeat nonsensical idioms like “we’re all the government” until the ruled class begins to believe it.

To prove this isn’t true, you could simply walk up to your local police officer and proceed to order them around by telling them you’re the government or try walking into your state representative’s office and tell them you’d like to speak on the floor today using the same line. You’ll either quickly learn which class you belong to, or chances are, end up in a jail cell if you persist long enough.

Throughout history, the most successful groups who’ve pushed for inequality (such as the Ku Klux Klan, slaveholders, etc.) all used government institutions to further this unequal divide, oftentimes under the guise of pushing for equality—think Jim Crow’s “separate but equal.” It’s important to recognize this division if you wish to quash inequality. Because too often, solutions put forth to combat this inherent flaw in government are met with opposition from those ignorant of the facts; usually making outrageous claims to keep government programs in place because private solutions could possibly yield inequality.

Private Solutions to Government Inequality

A good example is when we’re told we can’t privatize the police because it will result in two tiers of policing, with rich neighborhoods receiving exceptional service from their ability to pay, and poor neighborhoods getting none at all. Except that two-tiered policing already exists and is arguably much worse due to government’s monopoly control of it.

We continuously see those with money and governmental connections getting away with crimes, often involving a multitude of victims unable to shoulder the cost to fight back. Meanwhile, those in low-income neighborhoods are routinely profiled and preyed upon by police for victimless crimes, which regularly carry draconian sentences due to mandatory minimums and the War on Drugs; all because they can’t afford to endure the arduous court battles. And when it is pointed out that police do make a mistake, it’s nearly impossible to ensure they are held accountable—unless paid leave is to be considered punishment enough for wrongful deaths.

This one-size-fits-all, governmental approach to policing leaves those worst off among us the least represented. And, thanks to government regulation, it’s difficult for private alternatives to easily enter the market. Even so, we’re still seeing people opt out of using police, instead choosing private security companies wherever possible. So much, in fact, that private security officers now outnumber police in many countries around the world. And that’s not the only place we see government fostering inequality.

The same arguments used to defend the monopoly on police are also used—even more aggressively—against those who wish to end public schools. Rich neighborhoods, we’re told, would hire all the good teachers, have the best equipment, etc., while poor neighborhoods would be left with sub-par teaching staff and a shortage of necessities. Resulting in poor students being uncompetitive after graduation and ultimately ending up in an inter-generational cycle of poverty. Which is absolutely terrible, until you realize that’s already the exact system we have today.

With public schools, students in low-income neighborhoods are forced to attend the poorly-run schools within their city’s borders, while state-mandated accreditation and licensing restrictions keep cheaper, alternative schools from coming in and alleviating part of this problem. It’s so bad in fact, that the inter-generational poverty gap exists in large part thanks to government. Whereby kids in inner-city, public schools are more likely to go to prison than college due to gangs and other criminal activities that have crept into these mismanaged government schools; effectively turning them into a “lack of” concentration camp.

Neither of those two examples comes close to the worst one on our list, though. Healthcare in the United States is a blatant example of the government granting itself a monopoly over an entire industry in the all-too-logical hopes of avoiding the problems associated with a monopoly.

With Obamacare adding more than 20,000 pages of regulation to our healthcare system alone, they have effectively created the same, unequal system we’ve shown already exists in police and education. Prices have sky-rocketed for insurance and simple medicines like Epi-pens, while the “free” market is blamed, rather than the labyrinth of red-tape mandated from the FDA. Which, as of 2014, resulted in the cost of bringing new drugs to market to hit more than $2 billion dollars. This leaves the poorest among us unable to get the medical care they need, while simultaneously making it harder for free-market oriented hospitals to enter the market and alleviate this crisis. When we couple all that with the infuriating notion that those who passed the ACA made sure they could opt-out if they’d like, and the Orwellian tactic of naming it “The Affordable Care Act,” it becomes almost indefensible to say that government is not a nefarious source of inequality today.

What we need is a wake-up call to these egregious scenarios we find ourselves in when we defend the government as it tramples on the rights of individuals. We need to highlight the blatant hypocrisy of asking them to fix this manufactured inequality in our society. But most of all, if we ever hope to improve the well-being of those most vulnerable and poorest among us, we need to realize that inequality isn’t the cause of our problems, but rather a clever symptom distracting from of a much larger disorder: The State.

Reprinted from Being Libertarian.

AUTHOR

Thomas J. Eckert

Thomas J. Eckert

Thomas J. Eckert is a Copy Editor for Being Libertarian. With a passion for politics, he studies economics and history and writes in his spare time on political and economic current events. He is a self-described voluntarist.

VIDEO: Scott Israel May as Well Have Bought the Gun for Parkland Killer — He Enabled Him

/in , , , , , , /by

“Sheriff Scott Israel worked hand in hand with Robert Runcie to hide criminal actions, misdemeanors, felonious behavior of students like this murderer. They enabled him to avoid having a record established that would have prevented him from legally purchasing a firearm. In my opinion, Sheriff Scott Israel may as well have walked into the gun store and bought it for him.” —Dana Loesch

The Real Story of Parkland: Failed Leadership and Failed Cover-Ups

“The real story of how this murderer could pull off his plan undeterred is and has always been about those who were tasked with recognizing the threat that he posed before that fateful day.” —Dana Loesch

Remembering the Men Who Fought and Bled on D-Day

/in , , , , /by

June 6 marks the 74th anniversary of the Battle of Normandy, Operation Overlord, D-Day.

As new generations begin to emerge and the honorable men and women of the Greatest Generation continue to enter history, the memory of D-Day threatens to be lost to time.

Preserving its place in history is important for honoring those who served our country in the past, but also as a reminder to honor those who continue to serve our country today.

Operation Overlord, under the command of Gen. Dwight Eisenhower, proved to be a pivotal moment in World War II and led eventually to the liberation of France and provided a leverage point for an Allied advance upon Adolf Hitler himself.

Back in the U.S., President Franklin D. Roosevelt delivered a stateside address and prayer, in which he declared: “For these men are lately drawn from the ways of peace. They fight not for the lust of conquest. They fight to end conquest. They fight to liberate.”

Some 14,000 paratroopers infiltrated and sabotaged the German defenses from behind, and naval bombardment by the USS Arkansas, USS Nevada, and USS Texas softened the defenses from the front.

Under the command of Gen. Omar Bradley, Utah Beach was stormed by the U.S. VII Corps in three waves. By the end of the day, Utah was secured, with casualties amounting to 197 from the assault and 2,500 paratroopers. But the assault on Omaha Beach proved a far greater challenge.

Critical for the German defense, Omaha demonstrated a formidability unlike its neighbor. The U.S. V Corps, led by Gen. Leonard Gerow, faced elevated terrain and a variety of fortifications. High sand flats prevented the landing craft from reaching the shore. The men got out in shoulder-deep water and waded ashore, and many died from drowning and from enemy fire.

It became one of the bloodiest beach landings of the war. Omaha, taken by late afternoon, cost about 3,000 casualties of the 43,250 men that carried out the assault. In all, the Allies suffered 4,413 fatalities at Utah and Omaha, 2,499 of whom were Americans.

The sacrifice those men gave proved the tipping point to liberate Europe. Had that operation not occurred, or failed, Europe would have remained in the hands of Nazi Germany and tyranny.

They fought not for their homeland, but for the preservation of the free world itself. That is their legacy.

We remember D-Day not just for the significance of the battle and the liberation of Europe that followed. Even more so, we remember the sacrifice given by the men who died that day, and those willing to do the same today for our country.

It is a spirit embodied by everyone who serves in our military. As Secretary of Defense James Mattis has described it, they have “a willingness to sign a blank check, payable to the American people; a blank check payable with [their] lives, to defend our revolutionary ideas enshrined in our Declaration of Independence and our Constitution, putting freedom above all else.”

It is upon this principle that those men sacrificed their lives and our soldiers today risk theirs.

It is upon this principle that we must fight for the preservation of liberty, be courageous when evil shows its face, and be a beacon of light when darkness approaches.

COMMENTARY BY

Matthew Ahlquist

Matthew Ahlquist is a member of the Young Leaders Program at The Heritage Foundation.

Portrait of James Di Pane

James Di Pane

James Di Pane is a research assistant in the Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy at The Heritage Foundation.

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: The featured image is of U.S. Army troops wading ashore on Omaha Beach during the D-Day landings on June 6, 1944. (Photo: CPHOM Robert F. Sargent/U.S. Coa/UPI/Newscom)

BREAKING: Jack Phillips Wins His Case

/in , , , , , /by

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor today of Jack Phillips, the owner of Masterpiece Cakeshop in Lakewood, Colorado, who declined to bake a custom cake to celebrate a same-sex wedding because of his religious beliefs.

Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission is a historic case involving religious liberty, LGBT rights, and the First Amendment.

In the 7-2 ruling, the high court said the Colorado Commission of Civil Rights, which had ruled against Phillips, demonstrated “clear and impermissible hostility” toward the baker and cake artist’s Christian belief that marriage is the union of one man and one woman.

“The Civil Rights Commission’s treatment of his case has some elements of a clear and impermissible hostility toward the sincere religious beliefs that motivated [Phillips’] objection,” wrote Justice Anthony Kennedy in the majority opinion.

As The Daily Signal previously reported, in 2014 Colorado Civil Rights Commissioner Diann Rice compared Phillips’ not making a cake to slavery and the Holocaust. Rice apparently didn’t know that Phillips’ father fought in World War II and was part of a group that helped liberate Buchenwald concentration camp.

“For her to compare not making a cake to the Holocaust, knowing what my dad went through, is ludicrous, and personally offensive,” Phillips, 62, told The Daily Signal.

“This is a big win for the religious liberty of all Americans,” says Ryan Anderson, a senior fellow at The Heritage Foundation. “The Court held that the state of Colorado was ‘neither tolerant nor respectful’ of Jack Phillips’s beliefs about marriage. But as the Court also noted ‘religious and philosophical objections to gay marriage are protected views and in some instances protected forms of expression.’”

“Americans should be free to live their lives, including at work, in accordance with their belief that marriage unites husband and wife. Congress and the states should make this crystal clear by passing legislation, such as the First Amendment Defense Act, which explicitly prevents the type of government intolerance that took place in Colorado,” Anderson added.

This story is breaking and will be updated.

COLUMN BY

Portrait of Kelsey Harkness

Kelsey Harkness

Kelsey Harkness is a senior news producer at The Daily Signal and co-host of “Problematic Women,” a podcast and Facebook Live show. Send an email to Kelsey. Twitter: @kelseyjharkness.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

In Baker Decision, Justice Kennedy Stresses the Importance of Religious Freedom

After Declining to Make a Wedding Cake, He’s Going to the Supreme Court. Here’s How That Journey Challenged His Faith.

4 Highlights From Christian Baker’s Wedding Cake Case at Supreme Court

Meet the Lawyer Who Argued at Supreme Court for Christian Baker’s Right to Free Speech

Underreported: Christian Baker Reacts to Government Official Comparing Him to a Nazi

Christian Baker Fears Loss of ‘Everything’ Unless Supreme Court Upholds Right Not to Make Cakes for Gay Marriages

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 TODA

The most disturbing thing on TV. Your children are the target audience.

/in , , , /by

Despite pleas from pro-family groups to cancel the second season of the original Netflix series 13 Reasons Why, it was released May 18. All 13 hours of it. At one time. For the whole world to devour … or be devoured by.

Season 2 is a continuation of the first season of the series that was based on a young adult novel by Jay Asher. Season 1 focused on the graphic suicide of teenager Hannah Baker who slits her wrists in a bathtub full of water. Her decision to end her life is explained through a collection of cassette tapes that she leaves behind blaming the people responsible for her death.

Season 2 picks up months after Hannah’s suicide, and characters are seen dealing with the aftermath of her death; a lawsuit and court case make up the overarching storyline. This time the focus is sexual assault, and suicide takes a back seat. But sadly the filth and gratuitous content from season 1 is only exacerbated in season 2.

Both seasons have received mixed reviews – some praising the writers and creators for their efforts to address taboo topics and bring awareness to sensitive and relevant issues such as mental illness, teen suicide, substance abuse, and sexual assault while others are calling for the series to be removed from Netflix because of the detrimental effect it is having on young people and their families.

Take, for example, the Bright family from Alabaster, Alabama. Fourteen-year-old Anna Bright committed suicide after binge-watching the first season of 13 Reasons Why. She patterned her suicide after Hannah Baker’s. Bella Herndon and Priscilla Chiu, both 15-year-olds from California, also took their own lives after watching the first season, as did a 23-year-old Peruvian man who also left behind recordings similar to those Hannah left behind.

Anna Bright Story from American Family Studios on Vimeo.

More recently, a Florida mother spoke out blaming the series for her teen daughter’s suicide attempt on Mother’s Day. According to Fox News, “The teenager sent a video of her cutting herself … and reportedly complained that ‘it’s taking too long … It’s not like on 13 Reasons.'”

But if the reports of those deaths are not enough to convince you of the darkness and evil that enshroud this series, AFA’s Rebecca Grace has written a compelling blog which exposes the dark, disturbing and demonic content found in season 2 of 13 Reasons Why.

Do all you can to help stop it. Join us in our efforts. Use your voice to be part of the solution, not your silence that ignores the problem.

  1. If you haven’t already, sign a petition to Netflix demanding the streaming giant pull both seasons 1 and 2 of 13 Reasons Why.
  1. Learn more about the dangers of 13 Reasons Why. Read Rebecca Grace’s cautionary blog on AFA’s blog site, The Stand.
  1. Share this alert with your family, friends and church members, especially those who have children at home.

If our mission resonates with you, please consider supporting our work financially with a tax-deductible donation. The easiest way to do that is through online giving. It is easy to use, and most of all, it is secure.

Second Thoughts on First Amendment?

/in , , , , , /by

If there were a book on how to agitate an anti-faith extremist, chapter one would almost certainly recommend talking about the importance of religious liberty in America. That definitely worked on LA Times’s opinion writer Michael McGough, who was so perturbed by Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s speech on international religious freedom report that he spent 446 words quibbling over the order of our First Amendment.

What did the secretary say that was so offensive, exactly? Nothing that isn’t common knowledge to everyone who’s taken fifth grade history. “Religious freedom is in the American bloodstream,” Pompeo said. “It’s what brought the pilgrims here from England. Our founders understood it as our first freedom. That is why they articulated it so clearly in the First Amendment.”

McGough, who must have missed the class on religious persecution in 17th century England, took issue with Pompeo’s observation that religious liberty was the key to all other freedoms. “Not quite,” he fired back.

“[B]y linking ‘first freedom’ to “First Amendment,” the secretary of state seemed also to be suggesting — erroneously — some connection between the two ‘firsts.’ If so, he wouldn’t be alone. In 1993, during a debate on the Religious Freedom Restoration Act Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) said: ‘It was no accident that the Framers of our Bill of Rights chose to place the free exercise of religion first among our fundamental freedoms.'”

“It’s true that the 1st Amendment mentions religion before it moves on to guarantee freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and the right to peaceably assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances… But the idea that this makes either the First Amendment, or freedom of religion, more important than other constitutional rights is a pious fiction.”

Of course, the freedom of religion was of preeminent importance to the framers. They were only a century and a half removed from the nightmare that drove 102 people to take a two-month journey to an unforgiving land on a ship the size of a volleyball court. They didn’t do that because they were adventurers — or in search of great riches. They came here for the freedom King James I denied them: the ability to worship freely and in peace. Years later, Samuel Adams talked about the relationship between these liberties when he said, “Driven from every other corner of the earth, freedom of thought and the right of private judgment in matters of conscience direct their course to this happy country as their last asylum.”

If McGough wants to squabble over the order of our First Amendment freedoms, let him. But that still doesn’t alter the reality that a free society hinges on free religion. And, ironically, by invoking Jerrold Nadler (who is as liberal as they come), McGough is exposing just how far outside the mainstream his position really is. If the importance of religious liberty is acknowledged by even the fiercest of New York Democrats, then this reporter is only marginalizing himself by attacking it. That — not Pompeo — is the real extremism.

Religious liberty is for everyone — not just for conservatives, and certainly not just for Americans. It’s a human right on which all other freedoms are built. “God who gave us life gave us liberty,” Thomas Jefferson said. “And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the Gift of God?”

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

RELATED ARTICLES:

Obama Reflects: Hope, Change, and Confusion

‘I Have Set Watchmen on Your Walls, O Jerusalem…‘

Advocacy-Fueled Hysteria Hides the Truth on School Violence

/in , , , , /by

In the wake of the two recent high-profile school shootings, the institutional gun control movement and many in the mainstream media have taken their always alarmist rhetoric to new heights. Michael Bloomberg anti-gun front group Everytown for Gun Safety has released misleading and routinely debunked figures on the prevalence of school shootings in the U.S. A New York Times columnist, wrote an item following the Houston shooting titled, “This Is School in America Now,” calling such tragedies an “everyday nightmare.” A reporter for the Washington Post authored an article with the salacious and misleading headline “2018 has been deadlier for schoolchildren than service members.” It wasn’t until the fifth paragraph that the Post bothered to mention that there are 50 million public school students as compared to 1.3 members of the military; meaning service in our armed forces is in fact, contrary to the headline, 17 times deadlier. Barack Obama’s Education Secretary Arne Duncan called for a school boycott, while contending that “the threat of gun violence infects everyday life.”

All of this is meant to instill fear in parents and schoolchildren and adolescents in order produce ratings and clicks while pushing a stagnant gun control agenda. A sober look at the data reveals that school mass shootings are extraordinarily rare events and that schools are the safest place a child can be.

Northeastern University Lipman Family Professor of Criminology, Law, and Public Policy James Alan Fox has led extensive academic research on mass shootings. In February, Fox released data he and colleague collected for a forthcoming book titled, “The Three R’s of School Shootings: Risk, Readiness, and Response.”

A Northeastern.edu article that summarized Fox’s research made clear that “Mass school shootings are incredibly rare events.” Further, it pointed out that the researchers found that “shooting incidents involving students have been declining since the 1990s.”

Quoting Fox, the item went on to state,

Four times the number of children were killed in schools in the early 1990s than today, Fox said. “There is not an epidemic of school shootings,” he said, adding that more kids are killed each year from pool drownings or bicycle accidents.

Following the shooting in Houston, Fox took to the pages of USA Today to reiterate his call for calm. Fox pointed out that “School shootings, however horrific, are not the new normal,” and that “despite the occasional tragedy, our schools are safe, safer than they have been for decades.”

Other academics have also tried to put the recent tragedies in perspective. Following the shooting in Parkland, Fla., Harvard instructor and expert in risk analysis David Ropeik wrote a piece for the Washington Post titled, “School shootings are extraordinarily rare. Why is fear of them driving policy?” 

Ropeik explained, 

The Education Department reports that roughly 50 million children attend public schools for roughly 180 days per year. Since Columbine, approximately 200 public school students have been shot to death while school was in session, including the recent slaughter at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla. (and a shooting in Birmingham, Ala., on Wednesday that police called accidental that left one student dead). That means the statistical likelihood of any given public school student being killed by a gun, in school, on any given day since 1999 was roughly 1 in 614,000,000. And since the 1990s, shootings at schools have been getting less common.

Ropeik went on to point out,

The chance of a child being shot and killed in a public school is extraordinarily low. Not zero — no risk is. But it’s far lower than many people assume, especially in the glare of heart-wrenching news coverage after an event like Parkland. And it’s far lower than almost any other mortality risk a kid faces, including traveling to and from school, catching a potentially deadly disease while in school or suffering a life-threatening injury playing interscholastic sports.

In a moment of journalistic integrity, the New York Times addressed this topic in a piece titled, “Why Campus Shootings Are So Shocking: School Is the ‘Safest Place’ for a Child.” Director of the National Center for Juvenile Justice Melissa Sickmund told the paper, “Especially in the younger grades, school is the safest place they can be.” Pointing to a report from school safety analysts Safe Havens International, the Times explained, “In some parts of the country, accidents related to high winds, like tornadoes, presented a more deadly threat to children than an active shooter.” Driving the point on risk home in another New York Times piece, columnist Tina Rosenberg wrote, “A school can expect a shooting once every few thousand years.” 

Data from the Department of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics shows that there is not an upward trend in fatal violence in schools. The NCES’s Indicators of School Crime and Safety: 2017 report, which measures through 2015, explained,

The percentage of youth homicides occurring at school remained at less than 3 percent of the total number of youth homicides between 1992–93 (when data collection began) and 2014–15, even though the absolute number of homicides of school-age youth at school varied across the years.

According to data from the Centers for Disease Control, the overall rate and number of homicide deaths among school-age children and adolescents (ages 5-18) dropped by more than half from 1993 to 2015.

Data from the report also indicates that “threats and injuries with weapons on school property” are decreasing. The report points out that “The percentage of students who reported being threatened or injured with a weapon on school property was lower in 2015 than in every survey year between 1993… and 2011.”

In light of all of the data showing schools are the safest place for a child, Duncan’s call for parents to keep their children out of school is a galling attempt to score political points with a proposal that would expose children and adolescents to more risk than they would ever face in a classroom. Moreover, Duncan’s comments reveal the altitude of the ivory tower he lives in.

Out here in the real world public schools are the nexus of several vital social services that extend beyond their educational mission. According to a report from the U.S. Census Bureau, 30 million American children rely on their schools for free or reduced-price meals through the National School Lunch Program. In many cases this includes breakfast and lunch. In recent years, New York City has hesitated to close school for inclement weather because the need for these meals is so acute. Schools are also the avenue by which many children and adolescents in need obtain physical and mental health services.

While Duncan’s set might be fortunate enough to leave their children at home with the nanny, public schools provide a necessary childcare function for working and middle-class families. A report from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development found that U.S. couples with young children spend 25.6 percent of their income on childcare, while single parents spend 52.7 percent. The Economic Policy Institute determined that in 23 states childcare costs more than in-state public college tuition.

In the midst of the current advocacy-fueled media hysteria, policymakers and concerned citizens should slow down long enough to examine the facts on school safety. A thoughtful analysis of the data reveals that the type of violence seen in Parkland, Fla. and Houston remains rare and that public schools are the safest place for children and adolescents.

Setting Brushfires of Liberty

/in , , , , , , , /by

5 years in the making, filmed in 25 states with over 40 patriot super stars, REVELATION Dawn of Global Government is resonating with Christians and conservatives alike. Although highly unusual for a conservative Faith based film to release in theaters, REVELATION, was 7th in the nation for box office. Hundreds of enthusiastic fans have written reviews urging concerned Americans to watch this critically important film and share it as a tool to educate their own families and friends.

Watch the trailer by clicking here.

Here’s what people are saying:

“This was exceptional! Anyone who truly loves this country will take an hour and a half out of their life to go and learn. I knew a lot but it sure connected the dots for me!

“I spent many years in television news and one of the best things that I took away from that experience is… Nothing makes a huge impact like a film can! During my career, I saw many small groups do wonderful things. This is one of those!! May God bless you all.”

“We went last night to see REVELATION….. Amazing!!! My spirit was Sooo stirred…. we live evil times and this was eye opening on so many levels! WE need to get this message out to the public! GO see this movie!!!”

“Like drinking from a firehose!”

“My husband and I saw it and it was EXCELLENT !! I hope and pray it goes well spreading the word for all to see it!! This is so well put together. A MUST-SEE if you love America!”

Now this beautifully produced film is available on FREE beginning JUNE 8- 17!

The home spun wisdom and common sense of Country music legend Charlie Daniels is woven through out this riveting story as the narrator. Sitting in an old Tennessee log cabin, fiddle in hand Charlie reminisces:

“When I was a boy, things were pretty much like those wonderful Norman Rockwell images of 30’s America. But today, something’s wrong and we all know it!”

Mr. Daniels goes on to explain and introduce the main themes in this 5 star “must see” film which connects the dots on what has happened to our once mighty nation. Our Republic, originally blessed because of our Christian founding principles and heritage, is in a fight to the death involving the unseen realm of spiritual warfare.

Co-Star Lt. General “Jerry” Boykin proudly served this nation in the uniform of the U.S. Army. Most of his time was spent in Special Operations. He was one of the original members of the Army’s Delta Force. He commanded all of the Army’s Green Berets. He served a tour at the Central Intelligence Agency and finished his career as the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence. General Boykin was the commander of Delta Force during the tragic events of “Black Hawk Down” He is a devout Christian and serves on President Trump’s evangelical advisory team.

General Boykin explains the many facets of Marxism and Socialism increasingly popular in our nation, as he witnessed them in other countries around the world. The fascinating true life story Elena Chitta who escaped from a totalitarian Romanian communist regime is interwoven with General Boykin. The 73-year-old soft spoken Chitta feels called to sound the alarm by comparing her experiences to what she sees today.

Edward Griffin succinctly explains the birth of the Federal Reserve and how our Republic was secretly subverted during the infamous meeting at Jekyll Island.

He also explains Collectivism, which many people foolishly believe is our system of government!

Ex Muslim Brotherhood member, Kamal Saleem was sent to America as a sleeper cell and exposes the stark reality of the Islamic threat which goes to the heart and foundation of our civilization. Sharia law is not compatible with our form of government!

We then go on a wild ride through history with General George Washington and several very realistic historical reenactments reminding us of our Nation’s great moments of courage and sacrifice including the faith of our founding fathers and the Black Robed Regiment so named during the American Revolution.

Many other critical subjects are introduced by host Alex Jones of InfoWars.com including the Globalist Agenda and its incompatibility with our hard won and God inspired Constitution. The goal is to create a one world government. It’s as old as time itself. National sovereignty is a firewall against a globalist takeover.

At one time, mention of the New World Order was considered conspiracy but REVELATION exposes the roots, which go back to the time of biblical Nimrod and the battle for world control continues today. The latest and most diabolical plan, developed by the UN, is called Agenda 21. Every American citizen needs to understand and protest the implementation of Agenda 21 which is antithetical to our Constitution. The underlying premise is that private property rights, the backbone of our Constitution, are to be abolished!

The Second Amendment Right to bear arms is explored by several speakers including our own founder Stewart Rhodes.

Rock star Ted Nugent emphatically states “We the people have the right to keep and bear arms so that no king or emperor, or slave driver, ever rises up again and stops this sacred, unique unprecedented experiment in self government.”  Larry Pratt executive director of “Gun Owners of America” explains how we must be working to roll back much of the legislation put in place unconstitutionally.

Randy Weaver of Ruby Ridge notoriety, in an extremely rare and candid interview gives his heartbreaking testimony of a militarized police out of control. His young wife and nursing baby were shot and killed by an FBI sniper along with his 11-year-old son, Sammy. You will cry with him as he states “I’ve always loved this country; I still do”

The unique design of our Constitution is based on the concept that our rights come from God, not man. We the people, of the United States, then delegated 17 enumerated powers to this newly established federal government. For many decades now, the federal government has continued to get outside those bounds. It is the states’ responsibility to stop that overreach. We need to educate people about the 10th amendment and how the states have a rightful role to say “no” to corruption from the federal government. The states, who created the federal government to begin with, must be the ones that say, “Enough.”

When our forefathers, just a few years after having fought for liberty from tyranny, decided that they needed to establish a federal government, they were scared to death of reestablishing another tyranny.

This film is the “Common Sense” of our time.

Oh ye that love mankind, ye that oppose not only tyranny, but the tyrant. Stand forth. Thomas Payne, Common Sense, 1775.

We have been given a short reprieve with the election of Donald Trump but now is not the time to rest. We need to be more vigilant than ever in preparing for the next huge battle on the horizon. Obama has set up camp just blocks from the White House in an effort to undermine President Trump and our liberty with his “Organizing for Action”501 c3. Armed with the databases collected during his own presidential campaigns, OFA is strong, organized and well funded. As Charlie Daniels puts it “Kind of like the Trojan horse, you roll it inside the gates and all the bad guys slither out in the dark of night.”

After educating yourself and those around you by watching this film you will conclude as Samuel Adams did “It does not take a majority to prevail… but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.”

The film may best be summed up by the lyrics to the original theme song written by Charlie Daniels below:

There was a mighty nation, blessed above all of creation, it was a rare and precious pearl.

Conceived in faith and liberty, home of the brave, land of the free, it was the envy of the world.

But this shining city on a hill has turned from the Creators will and let evil take control…now the reckless men who lead them want to strip away their freedom and steal their very souls.

Now it’s smoke and mirrors, switch and bait, criticize and confiscate, and let the guilty walk away.

In this once righteous Godly nation, in the halls of education, they forbid a child to pray.

They say we need to spread the wealth, they pretend to guard the health of the feeble and the poor, while the hand they hold behind their back confuses and conceals the fact that the wolf is at the door!

There’s an unseen hand that pulls the string and makes his little puppets dance to every song he sings.

The night rolls in on a rising tide, look beyond the shadows…Behold A Pale Horse rides!

They claim to seek a New World Order, nations without borders, but don’t believe the lie!

Even in this wealthy nation it can come down to starvation in a twinkling of an eye.

They tell us there will soon be peace, our lives will be an endless peace but they lead us toward the dark.

In the distance sabers rattle and armies train for battle as the beast prepares his mark.

There’s an unseen hand that pulls the strings and makes his little puppets dance to any song he sings.

The night rolls in on a rising tide, look beyond the shadows…Behold A Pale Horse rides!

It’s time for every righteous man to step up tall and take a stand there is so little time.

For if we hear and hesitate soon it will be too late, we are the last hope for mankind.

Time hurries on, the shadows fall, the hand is writing on the wall but even now there is still a chance.

For if the ones called by God’s name repent of sin and seek his face he will hear and heal the land.

There’s an unseen hand reaching from above and the gentle voice that beckons us to the shelter of his love.

Come on home my wayward child cause out on the horizon there is a…Pale Horse Running Wild!

America my wayward child can’t you hear the thundering hoof beats of a…Pale Horse Running Wild.

Pale Horse running wild…

Pale Horse running wild…

Pale Horse running wild…

To Vietnam, Freedom of Expression Is a ‘National Security Offense’

/in , , , , /by

“In Vietnam, there is no such thing as a ‘prisoner of conscience,’ and there’s no such thing as people being arrested for ‘freely expressing opinion,’” Vietnamese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Le Thi Thu Hang told reporters in April.

The exact opposite is true.

A recent report by Amnesty International listed 97 known prisoners of conscience in Vietnam—all facing or serving stiff sentences on national security-related charges for peacefully exercising their rights.

Vietnamese military members march during an honor guard ceremony at the Ministry of Defense in Hanoi, Vietnam, Aug. 14, 2014. Photo: U.S. Department of Defense

In Vietnam, activist groups campaigning for democracy and environmental protection are often treated as criminals “aiming to overthrow” the state.

In similar fashion, writing articles criticizing government policies constitutes “conducting anti-state propaganda” or “abusing democratic freedoms,” while authorities imprison religious minorities for “undermining the national unity policy,” according to Amnesty’s report.

The case of Nguyen Ngoc Nhu Quynh, a human rights activist popularly known as “Mother Mushroom,” clearly demonstrates the government’s intolerance for criticism.

Since 2006, Nguyen, 38, has written extensively on controversial issues, such as deaths in police custody, government policies toward China, and environmental issues.

She was arrested in 2016 because her critical postings allegedly “caused detriment to national security and social order.” Last year, the People’s Court of Khanh Hoa sentenced her to 10 years’ imprisonment for “conducting propaganda against the state” under Article 88 of the country’s 1999 penal code.

Last November, Human Rights Watch reported that Nguyen’s mother and fellow activists staged a protest outside the court. They defended her innocence and condemned the unfairness of the trial, upon learning that the appeals court upheld the original verdict.

But within minutes, protesters were attacked by several men in civilian clothes who did not hesitate to beat them in the presence of uniformed police, who did not take any action to stop them.

In addition to lengthy prison sentences, political prisoners of Vietnam are often singled out for physical abuse and solitary confinement. Prison authorities reportedly assault the prisoners to exact “confessions.”

Detainees with health problems are compelled to admit to crimes for which they are then convicted if they want necessary medical treatment. To make family visits difficult, political prisoners were often held far away from their homes.

Domestic and international communities alike have urged the government to repeal the vaguely defined national security provisions, which are frequently cited to punish people for peacefully exercising their rights.

However, according to the Vietnam Committee on Human Rights, a new penal code that came into force this year not only preserved the problematic provisions, but also made amendments that criminalize “preparation” for such “crimes.”

To make matters worse, the revised penal code introduced a new provision that holds lawyers criminally responsible for failing to report their clients to the authorities for a number of crimes, including national security offenses.

Despite some prisoners’ releases upon completed sentences, 2017 and the first quarter of 2018 saw a net increase in the number of prisoners of conscience over previous years.

The Vietnamese government’s response to condemnations of its human rights record has been intensified suppression of people’s freedom to silence their growing voices.

COMMENTARY BY

Sang Hyuk Park

Sang Hyuk Park is a member of the Young Leaders Program at The Heritage Foundation.

Portrait of Olivia Enos

Olivia Enos

Olivia Enos is an Asian Studies Center Research Associate within The Davis Institute for National Security and Foreign Policy at The Heritage Foundation. 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

A Lessen of Liberty in North Korea

/in , , , , , /by

The worst part of the State Department’s new report on international religious freedom isn’t the stories it tells, but the ones it doesn’t.

In some of the darkest corners of the world, a lot of people aren’t even captured in the statistics. They just vanish — victims of a brutal war that’s been waging for centuries on faith.The West has seen flashes of the cruelty in places like North Korea, where the simple act of bowing your head could be all the evidence the government needs to ship you to prison camp. There, refugees warn, you’ll be beaten — sometimes to death — or die from something as simple as diarrhea because there’s no access to medicine. It’s a country where Christians trust no one. Kim Jong Un’s spies are everywhere, trained to “uncover religious people.” Even a secret prayer meeting could be a trap, organized by state officials to catch believers. Some Chinese pastors are even recruited and paid to turn in North Korean believers.

The ones who are caught talk about the torture, the brainwashing, and executions. “The government continued to deal harshly with those who engaged in almost any religious practices,” the State Department report read. “An estimated 80,000 to 120,000 political prisoners, some imprisoned for religious reasons, were believed to be held in the political prison camp system in remote areas under horrific conditions.” Children grow up never knowing their parents were believers, a fact that’s hidden from thousands of young people for their own protection.

Christians like Han-me flee to China, only to be captured and sent back with a virtual death sentence. “Some defectors [on the train] had been arrested before,” she says. “They told me: ‘When you’re interrogated, there are two questions you should never answer ‘yes’ to. The first one is: Have you been in touch with Christians? The second one is: Have you read in the Bible?’ It turned out to be true. In prison, the interrogators tied me to a chair and beat me with chains and a wooden stick wrapped up in a newspaper. They pressed me to confess I had been in contact with Christians. I told them I hadn’t met any Christians while in China. It was a lie, but I wanted to survive. It was all I could think of.”

Higher profile Christians are the targets of assassination. After one Christian, who was heavily involved in an underground railroad for refugees, was murdered, South Korean intelligence officials stepped up their surveillance of people crossing the border. They called one local man and warned him not to meet up with a North Korean acquaintance. “This man will attempt to murder him, they say. Not much later at a train platform, South Korean police arrest the North Korean agent carrying needles and poison.”

Over the last seven years, the crackdown has only gotten worse. When Kim Jong Un succeeded his father in 2011, the already-brutal regime became the stuff of real-life horror. More house raids, more spies, more killings. “Every Christian in my country has the spirit of martyrdom in him,” said the friend of one detainee. “If you lose that spirit for one second, you cannot carry the burden of being a follower of Jesus.”

Unfortunately, this is the grim backdrop U.S. officials face in their high-stakes negotiations with North Korea.”Religious freedom is in the American bloodstream,” Secretary Mike Pompeo told reporters yesterday during the flurry of behind-the-scenes work to salvage talks with Kim Jong Un. “The release of the report is critical to our mission to defend religious liberty, and brings to light the state of religious freedom all over the world.”

From more allied countries like Saudi Arabia to known enemies in Iran and Nigeria, the report outlines the tall — but not impossible — task of Pompeo and U.S. Ambassador at Large for Religious Freedom Sam Brownback. In hot spots like Myanmar, the attacks seem to be growing right along with worldwide outrage. Extremists are burning, raping, and killing their way through the Rohingya Muslim population with a ferocity world leaders are desperately trying to stop. In a dramatic turn from the Obama years, Trump’s State Department was quick to label the campaign “ethnic cleansing.”

“It’s extraordinarily significant when the United States formally designates something as ethnic cleansing,” said an advocacy director for Human Rights Watch. “Ethnic cleansing is a crime against humanity.” Almost a quarter million Rohingya have already fled to Bangladesh, the report points out, where the situation is just as dire. Mudslides continue to wipe away makeshift shelters, stripping families of whatever peace of mind they had leaving the turmoil at home.

Fortunately for the Rohingya — and every persecuted faith group — they have an ally in this White House. “Our goal is to protect the freedom of conscience for all people. That means protecting a Muslim, Buddhist, Falun Gong practitioner or Christian in China and their ability to pray and live out their life,” Ambassador Brownback said. His partner in the effort, Secretary Pompeo, told reporters what most Americans already know: “Religious freedom is, indeed, a universal human right that I will fight for.” The world has made important strides, he went on, “but we still have a lot of work to do.” Thanks to this report, they know exactly where to start.

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

RELATED ARTICLE: We’ll See You… in September!

Trump’s Populist Coalition Reshapes American Politics

/in , , , , /by

Salena Zito and Brad Todd recently co-authored the book “The Great Revolt: Inside the Populist Coalition Reshaping American Politics.” They spoke to The Daily Signal’s Ginny Montalbano about who the Trump voters are, what motivated them during the 2016 election, and what they can tell us about the future.

Ginny Montalbano: Your new book called “The Great Revolt: Inside the Populist Coalition Reshaping American Politics” just came out. Can we start with what inspired you to write this book and what it’s about?

Brad Todd: I didn’t see Trump’s nomination coming in 2016 in the election. I was working for a different candidate. After watching it come about in spite of my expectations and then watching the general election develop, I really was interested to know if the long-term question; was this something that was just starting, was this something that was in the middle, or was this something that was finishing with this reforming of the coalition on the right?

Salena Zito: He and I had numerous conversations that began back in 2006 when we first met, in trying to understand this disruptive force that was starting to build among conservatives. That’s not just Republicans, but independents and Democrats as well.

I saw that this was coming, but mainly because as a reporter I live in Pittsburgh, so I spend my time outside the Beltway. I saw the evidence of this in 2016, really beginning with the April Pennsylvania primary. How Trump just steamrolled through my state and created an enthusiasm that I have never seen among Republican primary voters.

I remember right before the night of the primary election going to the Farm Show Complex in Harrisburg, which is massive. I went there and there was 25,000 people inside, there’s at least 10,000 to 15,000 outside. I remember thinking, “Wow, this is April in Pennsylvania. Something’s happening here.”

Montalbano: The president has tweeted about your book. He said, “It does much tell the story of our great election victory, the forgotten men and women are forgotten no longer.” What is the disconnect between the actual Trump voters and the Trump voters that a lot of the media tries to portray?

Todd: It’s a pretty optimistic coalition. I think you see a lot of the stories about the Trump voters convince you that they’re all destitute, and laid off factory workers who are strung out on heroin, and convinced that they’re angry with the world.

We found something exactly the opposite. In traveling through the five Rust Belt states that switched from Obama to Trump and conducting a survey of Trump voters in those states, 86 percent of those people actually are optimistic about their own economics situation and their own economic career prospects.

They’re scared to death about their communities, but they’re very optimistic. We think that that sense of optimism and forward-looking nature is a thing that was missed.

Zito: Yeah, absolutely. I think one of the things that people will enjoy about “The Great Revolt” is that there is these seven different archetypes, the most surprising archetypes of the Trump coalition, that emerge and come to life. I think as people read it, more often than not that they’ll see themselves through these stories.

Brad is right about the optimism. “Make America Great Again,” people made fun of it as nostalgic or racist. I’ve even heard dog whistle, which I’m not even sure what that means. To them it was an aspirational about doing something and being part of something that was bigger than themselves.

That’s a very important component, a very uniquely American thing whether you have been in this country for two weeks or for seven to nine generations. It’s something that you find inherent within all American people. I think that the national press missed that and missed that understanding of who these voters are.

Montalbano: You’ve written that Trump was not the cause of this movement, he was the result of it. What exactly are these Trump voters reacting to and what can they tell us about the future?

Todd: Nothing in American politics happens on accident for one time, usually it’s something that builds. When these trends happen, it builds over a period of time and it continues. Trump, it may have taken someone as uniquely outside the political system to fully catalyze the coalition.

Most Trump voters just think both parties are responsible for the dysfunction in Washington, they trust him more than they trust politicians of either party. To some extent, therefore, he definitely was essential in bringing it together, that’s a fair argument.

In the end, this populous coalition, this fusion of populism and conservatism, it’s been coming for a while. We saw it in Republican primaries in 2010, 2012, and 2014. It really almost had to crystallize in the general election at some point and it’s going to continue even after Trump’s off the stage.

Zito: Yeah, absolutely. I think one of things that’s really important to understand is that the influence of this coalition goes well beyond the ballot box. We saw evidence of that on Wednesday, when you saw what the NFL made the decision about what they’re going to do about what happens if you as a player want to make this decision to kneel or not.

To me and Brad, you can tell me if this is wrong, to me, it meant that they cried uncle. That they recognized that in these past two seasons, that they have seen a crumbling of not only their fan base, but also of their brand, a gold standard brand.

Todd: This means that the fans got what they asked for. The league’s original position was that they were going to allow players to kneel, there would be no ramifications for it. The fans spoke, I’m not saying every person in that fan base is politically motivated, but it’s another example of a coastal decision-maker getting it wrong and the customer base responding.

That’s really what it was in the election, both in the Republican primary and the general. Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton represent the last gasp of the legacy brands in politics and the voters broke both of them.

Zito: Brad makes this point all the time, he said, “Look where the NFL’s located, Park Avenue.” They make their decisions based around that sort of life and people that are like them. Brad has said to me several times, “They should be located in Canton, Ohio, where the Hall of Fame is.” They would be more attuned to how their fan base thinks.

Montalbano: What are you hoping that political elites and media take away from the lessons that you’ve learned throughout writing this book?

Todd: This culture craves respect. That I think that treating them and their cultural backgrounds without respect is peril for both sides.

Zito: Absolutely. I think that both political parties have shown these voters, and a lot of voters across the board, very little dignity. They have made it appear as though their opportunities aren’t as important as coastal opportunities are. Again, that’s a problem in the ballot box, it’s a problem outside of the ballot box. Honestly, both parties would learn from “The Great Revolt.”

Montalbano: Thank you both so much.

Zito: Thank you.

Todd: Thanks a bunch.

COMMENTARY BY

Portrait of Ginny Montalbano

Ginny Montalbano

Ginny Montalbano is a contributor to The Daily Signal. Send an email to Ginny. Twitter: @GinnyMontalbano.

RELATED ARTICLE: These California Rebels Are Working With Trump, Not Against Him

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: The featured image of President Donald J. Trump at the U.S. Naval Academy graduation 2018 is by Kevin LaMarque/Reuters /Newscom.