The Schumer Shutdown has been Shutdown. Trump wins once again! When will anti-Trumpers ever learn?

On May 20th, 2016 then candidate Donald J. Trump at a rally said, “We gonna win so much you may even get tired of winning and you’ll say please, please Mr. president, It’s too much winning! We can’t take it anymore!”

This promise has become a political reality. President Donald J. Trump is winning for the American people. President Trump is keeping his inaugural address promise,

“What truly matters is not which party controls our government, but whether our government is controlled by the people. January 20th 2017, will be remembered as the day the people became the rulers of this nation again. The forgotten men and women of our country will be forgotten no longer. Everyone is listening to you now.”

The people are once again the rulers of this nation.

The government shutdown is the most recent example. The people took to their social media sites to voice their opinions of the federal government shutdown. The overwhelming response was don’t shut down the government to protect illegal aliens. That message, in just over 2 days, was heard by the swamp.

President Trump’s “We can’t take it anymore!” statement reminded me of the 1984 song  by Twisted Sister – We’re Not Gonna Take It:

RELATED ARTICLES: 

The Beginning of the End of the Progressive Democratic Party?

How Shutdown Under Trump Compares With Obama, Other Presidents

Democrats Change Their Tune on Government Shutdowns

Following End of Government Shutdown, Lawmakers Look to Continue Immigration Negotiations

RELATED VIDEO: White House Press Secretary Sarah ‘Huckabee’ Sanders answers questions the Government shutdown on January 22nd, 2018. Her answers are enlightening. Sanders makes it clear that President Trump is enforcing the laws passed by Congress and that by rescinding Obama’s DACA Executive Order he put the issue of immigration back where it should be, in the U.S. Congress. President Trump gave Congress six months to fix immigration laws. They have failed to do so.

VIDEO: Schumer Shutdown Makes Clear Democrats’ Real Priorities

A couple of days before the shutdown, Genevieve Wood recorded this commentary, which you can either watch above or read below.  Since then, Senate Democrats, whose leader is Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., did indeed refuse to join Republicans to vote for a spending bill, and so the government did shut down. 

As you may have heard, a government shutdown is looming here in D.C. Many of you out there watching probably think, “So what? That can be a good thing. Less of Washington, fewer bureaucrats telling us what to do and how to spend our money.”  Those are all good points.

But that is not why Democrats are threatening to shut down the government.

Let’s keep in mind this is the same party that is always telling us if we shut down the government, this will be a travesty for millions of Americans, so many government programs and services will be unmet.

But yet they’re still willing to do so. Why is that?

Well, it’s because their liberal base is demanding that in this election year they put the needs and desires of those who are here in this country illegally before anybody else.

So if you’re an American who wants to live in a safe community and wants a safe border, too bad for you. If you’re a man or woman serving in our military, sworn to protect us around the world, well, we’re just not going to get those funds in that the military may need. And if you’re somebody who is not an American citizen but you’re standing in line because you, too, want to have a chance at the American dream and you’re trying to do it the right way? To all of those folks, Democrats are saying, “Get to the back of the line. ”

Now for all of you of [Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals] recipients out there who may feel as though you’re kind of a pawn in this whole thing: Well, you have a reason to believe that. Keep in mind Democrats have made promises to you before. But when Barack Obama was president, Nancy [Pelosi] was running the House, Harry [Reid] was running the Senate—for two years, Democrats were in control of the White House and Congress, they did absolutely nada.

That’s why Democrats are willing to shut down government. The reality is they don’t really want a deal on immigration. They talk about addressing the needs of the DACA population, but they have no time to address the other side of the immigration issue, border security and enforcement.

Here’s the deal. Democrats are fearful that President [Donald] Trump and Republicans could go into the midterm elections with both victories on tax cuts and immigration reform. So at the end of the day, that’s what all of this is about. It’s an election year, and that means politics, not people, are their priority.

COMMENTARY BY

Portrait of Genevieve Wood

RELATED ARTICLES:

The Senate voted 81-18 to break a Democratic filibuster on a stalled government spending bill, clearing the way to end the three-day government shutdown. – Fox News

Shock poll: Americans want massive cuts to legal immigration – Washington Times

‘We Are Outraged!’ Illegal Alien Activists Turn on Democrats After Amnesty-or-Shutdown Fail – Breitbart News

A Note for our Readers:

Trust in the mainstream media is at a historic low—and rightfully so given the behavior of many journalists in Washington, D.C.

Ever since Donald Trump was elected president, it is painfully clear that the mainstream media covers liberals glowingly and conservatives critically.

Now journalists spread false, negative rumors about President Trump before any evidence is even produced.

Americans need an alternative to the mainstream media. That’s why The Daily Signal exists.

The Daily Signal’s mission is to give Americans the real, unvarnished truth about what is happening in Washington and what must be done to save our country.

Our dedicated team of more than 100 journalists and policy experts rely on the financial support of patriots like you.

Your donation helps us fight for access to our nation’s leaders and report the facts.

You deserve the truth about what’s going on in Washington.

Please make a gift to support The Daily Signal.

SUPPORT THE DAILY SIGNAL

VIDEO: Democrats ‘Complicit’ in Every Murder Committed by Illegal Aliens

The new DonaldJTrump.com campaign ad titled “Complicit” features Luis Bracamontes, a 37-year-old illegal alien from Mexico who allegedly shot and killed Detective Michael Davis and Deputy Sheriff Danny Oliver in October 2017.

Bracamontes in the courtroom during his murder trial stated. “the only thing I f**king regret is that I f**king only killed two and he wished he “had killed more of the motherf*ckers.”

RELATED ARTICLE: California to register illegal aliens to vote – automatically

Trump is right! Don’t bring Africa to America

This is an incredible report from Karin McQuillan at American Thinker thanks to reader George for sharing it.

Entitled:

What I Learned in the Peace Corps in Africa: Trump Is Right

It is one woman’s account of a year in Africa in which she describes the huge cultural chasm between African countries and America and she begins with one literal difference that relates to Trump’s supposed s***hole comment.

Africans in ConcordThree weeks after college, I flew to Senegal, West Africa, to run a community center in a rural town. Life was placid, with no danger, except to your health. That danger was considerable, because it was, in the words of the Peace Corps doctor, “a fecalized environment.”

In plain English: s— is everywhere. People defecate on the open ground, and the feces is blown with the dust – onto you, your clothes, your food, the water. He warned us the first day of training: do not even touch water. Human feces carries parasites that bore through your skin and cause organ failure.

Never in my wildest dreams would I have imagined that a few decades later, liberals would be pushing the lie that Western civilization is no better than a third-world country. Or would teach two generations of our kids that loving your own culture and wanting to preserve it are racism.

Last time I was in Paris, I saw a beautiful African woman in a grand boubou have her child defecate on the sidewalk next to Notre Dame Cathedral.  The French police officer, ten steps from her, turned his head not to see.

I have seen.  I am not turning my head and pretending unpleasant things are not true.

Senegal was not a hellhole.  Very poor people can lead happy, meaningful lives in their own cultures’ terms.  But they are not our terms.  The excrement is the least of it.  Our basic ideas of human relations, right and wrong, are incompatible.

Continue reading, I promise it will be well worth every minute of your time.

After you read the American Thinker piece, read this that came across my desk at the same time from “welcoming” Concord, NH. The liberal disconnect will be obvious.

RELATED VIDEO:  Shit Matters – An Introduction to Community-led Total Sanitation (CLTS) from the British Medical Journal featuring Kamal Kar – the Godfather of CLTS.

VIDEO: Border Wall Models Thwart U.S. Commandos In Tests

Citizen James Munder posted the following video on his YouTube channel. The testing on the eight border wall prototypes included using 7th Special Forces Group soldiers to try to breach the walls.

It appears according to reports that the favored designs are those with steel beams that border agents can see through. Officials indicated that the best features from each prototype will be used in the final design after testing is completed.

The Ugly Reason For Durbin’s Claim of Trump’s “Sh**hole” Comment

Lost in the ongoing poopy-storm surrounding what President Trump may or may not have said regarding the relative sanitary conditions of certain third-world countries, is this perhaps larger question:

Why did Sen. Dick Durbin do it? Why did the Illinois Democrat, with only a passing relationship with the truth, run to the media to claim Trump called some awful third-world countries poopy-holes?

Whether Trump said it or not, and whether this is more evidence that he is racist, has been debated and analyzed ad nauseum for what feels like an eternity in this era of a new news cycle every few hours. For a possibly fictional story about the President using a bad word in a meeting, it sure is hanging on. And for good reason — the same reason Durbin sprinted to the cameras with his tale.

Democrats don’t want an immigration deal. They do not want any immigration solution short of 100 percent of what they are asking for across the board.  What do they want?

The issue. Specifically, a galvanizing issue to inflame the Latino vote. In the same way they continually stoke racial tensions (and in this case, it’s a two-fer) to gin up black voter turnout and support, they need Hispanics angry and frightened to obtain their voter turnout and support. They believe that making Republicans look intransigent against “brown” people, and forcing “dreamers” out of the country will accomplish that. Based on how the media is guaranteed to dishonestly cover such an issue, they are probably right in their calculations.

Consider: If we seriously began solving race relations and immigration issues, how could Democrats drum up 70 percent of the Latino vote and 90 percent of the black vote? If those minorities did not feel the need for Democrats to alternately protect them from Republicans and give them other Americans’ stuff, why would they need the Democrats? Electorally speaking, without those margins, Democrats could not expect any chance of winning.

If this analysis is true — and it is for Democratic leadership based on all past and current actions, including Obama’s endless race-baiting when he had a chance to lead the nation in real reconciliation — that says something truly cold and ugly about Democratic leadership. (Democratic leadership as opposed to many rank-and-file Democratic voters we may know personally who follow the sound bites and spin and actually may want the best for minorities and not just electoral leverage. They just believe the spin on Republicans because they trust the media. Not their first mistake.)

What this says is that it appears Democratic leadership would rather Americans suffer, even Americans that make up their loyal voting base, than risk losing electoral advantage. It’s not like there are not Republicans who act this way, too. Of course there are. But this is just on marching display in front of us for Democrats.

Dick Durbin either saw or made up the chance to tank the negotiations. It’s hard to see any other motive. Making Trump personally look bad could have waited until the following day, or that afternoon, as that is pretty much all the media does now.

This was a different motive than simple anti-Trumpism. Far more cold-hearted and cynical. Sorry, loyal minority Democratic voters. Your party seems to be just using and abusing you.

EDITORS NOTE: In answering the charges made against the Obama administration’s targeting and seizing of private phone records of AP reporters and employees, and intimidation of Fox News reporter James Rosen by Obama’s Justice Department, Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) defended Obama’s actions by in-essence stating the Constitution is out of date in regards to journalism.  He suggested to Chris Wallace of Fox News’ that he believes certain people should not have First Amendment Rights, and then went on to say that the Constitution is out of date in 2013.  He asks if the Constitution applies to Bloggers and Twitter Users;  “Are these people journalists and entitled to constitutional protection? We need to ask 21st century questions about a provision that was written over 200 years ago.””

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in The Revolutionary Act. Check out The Revolutionary Act’s Youtube Channel.

What Russian immigrants can teach us about Jewish identity

Russian Jews know from personal experience that leftist ideology leads to totalitarian dictatorship, suppression of individual freedoms, and denial of personal autonomy.

Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Tzipi Hotovely was criticized a few months ago for opining that American Jews live “comfortable” lives and don’t know what it’s like to live under constant threat of attack, though she also acknowledged the continuing bond between them and their Israeli cousins.

While mainstream liberals took offense, they could not dispute the substance of her comments.  It seems progressive Jews are always offended when moderate, conservative, or right-wing Israelis (i.e., much of the Israeli electorate) have the temerity to chastise those whose politics threaten Israel’s safety, security, and continuity as a Jewish state.  It’s easy to criticize Israel from the comfort of North America for those who define religious and ethnic identity not by Jewish values and history, but by allegiance to a political worldview that devalues both.

Though Hotovely’s words were taken somewhat out of context, the truth is many American Jews are indeed naïve – especially those who believe Israel should conform to a political vision that characterizes her as an occupier, demeans the Jewish spirit, and belittles traditional Judaism.  To the extent her words offended those who support an agenda that undermines Israel and empowers her enemies, they were words that needed to be spoken and should be repeated often.  No longer should the mainstream blindly vouch for the religious and cultural integrity of the Jewish left, or of nontraditional clergy who find common cause with BDS advocates and Islamist front organizations.

Much of the non-Orthodox establishment seems to care more about secular political values than traditional Jewish ones, and its support for Israel is often apologetic or conditioned on her presumed acceptance of liberal ideals. Too often, progressive organizations provide forums for left-wing ideologues and unbalanced critics who disparage the Jewish State and traditional Judaism, while denying equal time to pro-Israel advocates and political conservatives.  This dynamic frequently plays out in college and universities where liberal campus leaders often show greater concern about the hypothetical risk of Islamophobia than the very real incidence of progressive anti-Semitism, and frequently condemn Israeli policies while ignoring Islamist rejectionism.


There is nothing inherently Jewish about political values that encourage assimilation and undercut Jewish observance and national integrity.

That’s why it’s refreshing to see organizations like the Russian Jewish Community Foundation of Greater Boston thriving and celebrating Jewish identity.  In some ways, the RJCF is like thelandsmanschaften associations of the early twentieth century that provided communal support to Jewish immigrants who came from the shtetls of Eastern Europe.  The RJCF’s core membership hails from the former Soviet Union, where seventy years of Jewish suffering under the yoke of Communism instilled a survival mentality and loyalty to heritage.  Instead of facilitating assimilation, the experience of Russian Jews as a persecuted minority seems to have fostered a commitment to identity, devotion to democratic ideals, and passion for the Jewish State.

The RJCF’s ardor for Israel was on full display at its recent, annual end-of-the-year Gala, where the theme was “United with Jerusalem” in honor of the fiftieth anniversary of the reunification of the ancient Jewish capital.  The keynote address was delivered by retired Lt. Colonel and former U.S. Representative Allen West, and the honoree for RJCF’s Jewish Advocacy Award was Rabbi Jonathan Hausman, who was recognized for his work on behalf of Israel and the international free speech movement.

The choices of Colonel West and Rabbi Hausman reflected the RJCF’s assertive commitment to Israel and to the free speech that is so essential for protecting democratic ideals and preserving Jewish identity in America.  Though both gentlemen have been attacked for their stances on radical Islam by progressive groups ambivalent or hostile towards Israel and traditional Judaism, and despite whisperings from some corners of the community that attendance would be hampered by their participation, the Gala’s organizers were resolute in choosing them as speaker and honoree.  And this resolve was rewarded by a tremendous turnout and enthusiastic audience response when the Colonel and Rabbi spoke.

The RJCF’s President, Alex Koifman, set the tone in his opening remarks by noting how Jews from the former Soviet Union strongly identify with Jerusalem’s reunification and draw strength and inspiration from Israel’s assertion of sovereignty over her ancient capital.  He also observed how bias against Israel and hatred of Jews is on the rise globally, and that the RJCF is committed to combatting both.  Because of their unique history and experience, it seems Russian Jews are particularly sensitive to the dangers of anti-Semitic hate speech and the need to confront it proactively.

These sentiments were echoed by Colonel West, who emphasized the importance of teaching and learning Jewish history – from Torah times to the present – and of understanding that the Jews’ presence in Israel is part of an unbroken historical continuum, while Palestinian claims have no history to back them up.  Organizations like the RJCF are important because they affirm Jewish history and the symbiotic relationship between the United States and Israel, he said, noting that Russian Jews know from personal experience that leftist ideology leads to totalitarian dictatorship, suppression of individual freedoms, and denial of personal autonomy.

Colonel West also emphasized the need to strengthen the American-Israeli relationship and undo the damage caused by the failed policies of the Obama administration, which gave billions of dollars to an Iranian regime sworn to exterminating Israel and bestowed moral legitimacy on the anti-Semitic BDS movement.  It’s up to the Trump administration to acknowledge the historical legitimacy of the Jewish State and influence other governments to do the same.  “There can be no peace in the Middle East without recognition of who [the Jews] are, and until Europe and the Arab nations stop shunning Israel,” he said.  This vision is not simply good politics, said West, but represents the fulfillment of the words spoken to Avraham by G-d in Sefer Breishit (Genesis).  “And I will bless those who bless you, and the one who curses you I will curse, and all the families of the earth shall be blessed in you.” (Parshah Lech-Lecha, Breishit, 12:3.)

In his remarks, Rabbi Hausman emphasized the Jewish tradition of debate, discussion and intellectual inquisitiveness, and that Jews thrive in societies that cherish free speech and critical discourse.  Freedom of expression and the exchange of ideas were once hallmarks of liberal democracy, but have come under attack in recent years by those who simply cannot tolerate disagreement and dissent, he said.  Though progressives claim to be the standard bearers of liberal ideals, they have turned their backs on classical liberalism, which in earlier generations had treasured critical thought and the interplay of opposing viewpoints.  “Societies where discussion becomes impossible are susceptible to totalitarianism, and nobody knows this better than Jews from the former Soviet Union,” Rabbi Hausman said to applause from the audience, noting further that such societies “are not conducive to the safety and security of the Jewish People or the State of Israel.”

Rabbi Hausman’s remarks gave perspective as to why Hotovely’s comments rankled liberals, especially those who tolerate or enable leftist totalitarianism, progressive anti-Semitism, and Islamist excess.  She clearly unnerved those whose political ideals are fundamentally incompatible with authentic Jewish values, but who nevertheless strain to claim consistency with Jewish tradition.  In redefining their identity according to politics that contravene Jewish religious and cultural continuity, liberal “social warriors” have lost the tools necessary for Jewish survival, and have politically aligned themselves – wittingly or not – with leftists who promote assimilation and Islamists who seek to eradicate Israel.

If the RJCF’s constituency is any indication, the Russian Jewish community has no tolerance for such religious and cultural suicide, as evidenced by its strong support for Israel in terms of both dollars and personal commitment.  Russian Jewish immigrants are extremely patriotic to the US and Israel, and they see more of their children serving as lone soldiers in the IDF than does the liberal mainstream.  Indeed, many lone soldiers from this community have parents who served before them – in sharp contrast to those progressives who disparage Israel and who shamefully condemned President Trump’s formal recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.

One gets the sense that the RJCF’s members might stop identifying as Russian after a generation or two, but will never cease being Jewish.  For them, “Russian” is the adjective that describes where they or their parents were born, but “Jew” is the noun that defines their essence.  If they were to cease identifying as Russian, they would still be Jewish because of their self-awareness and historical connectedness.  In contrast, American progressives who lose their political faith are deprived of the only thing by which they define Jewishness.  Take away their liberalism, and you take away their validation as Jews.  The irony, of course, is that there is nothing inherently Jewish about political values that encourage assimilation and undercut Jewish observance and national integrity.

And this is something that the RJCF’s members understand – as do emigres from any society in which Jews have suffered persecution.  Those who must fight to maintain their religious and cultural identity have a similar mentality to Israelis who fight not only for their own survival, but for that of the Jewish People.  They know that Jewish continuity depends on loyalty to history and tradition, which is a lesson that many American Jews have either forgotten or never learned in the first place.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in Israel National News.

VIDEO: The Truth About ‘Sh*thole Countries’

On January 12th, 2017 Paul Joseph Watson published the below video on his YouTube channel:

Watson concludes, “Trump was right. Some countries are sh*tholes.”

RELATED ARTICLES:

10 Thoughts on the President and the ‘S—hole Countries’

Why is liberal California the poverty capital of America?

Majority Of Americans Don’t Think Trump’s ‘Sh**hole’ Remark Was Racist.

Headline from 2014: San Francisco’s public defecation map highlights a shitty situation

It appears that the word sh_thole is making major network news lately. Various media outlets like CNN, MSNBC and ABC can’t seem to get enough of the word “sh_thole.” WARNING GRAPHIC LANGUAGE:

Perhaps its time to take a look back at a stark reality in San Francisco, California. A sanctuary city that has literally turned into a sh_thole because of its public policies.

Steve Dent from Engadget.com posted a column dated December 21st, 2014 titled “San Francisco’s public defecation map highlights a shitty situation.” Dent wrote:

Wondering what that smell near the Civic Center is, San Francisco resident? As far as serious interactive maps go, Human Wasteland is one of the strangest we’ve seen. Created by civil-engineer-turned-web-developer Jennifer Wong, the project plots human excrement “incidents” reported by the public to SF311. Her project won an internal hacking contest for employees of a real estate website, an ironic honor considering the city’s contentious housing issues. The highest concentration of crap is at a downtown alley next to the financial district, right in a high-traffic area frequented by tourists.

While the odd drunk or other soul may have had an emergency, the map is more about folks who don’t have a toilet, period. According to the SF Weekly, the map (graphically) reflects the city’s problems with limited, filthy public restrooms and lack of services for the homeless. So while it’s amusing for non-residents and disgusting for city center dwellers or tourists, it did make me think: “Where would I go in public if I had no choice?”

According to its website, (Human) Wasteland is a mochimachine project. It uses human waste reports made to 311 in San Francisco from DataSF and maps them in several ways. Human Wasteland links to three 2014 articles that address the problem of homelessness and lack of resources for the homeless in San Francisco:

When you go to the Human Wasteland webpage you see the below map of San Francisco:

Click on the image to view an interactive map of where people are defecating on the streets of San Francisco.

It appears that San Francisco has a serious poop problem. But it gets worse. Heather Knight in a June 26th, 2017 San Francisco Chronicle column titled “Despite money and effort, homelessness in SF as bad as ever” wrote:

On the face of it, San Francisco’s homeless problem should have improved dramatically over the past year.

After all, last summer Mayor Ed Lee formed the Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing to focus on the city’s most perplexing problem.

The city spent $275 million on homelessness and supportive housing in the fiscal year that ends Friday, up from $241 million the year before. Starting Saturday, that annual spending is projected to hit an eye-popping $305 million.

Public Works cleanup crews were busier than ever, picking up more than 679 tons of trash from homeless tent camps since June 1, 2016, and collecting more than 100,000 used syringes from the camps in that time span.

Read more.

According the San Francisco Chronicle, on 311 complaints in San Francisco:

Complaints to the city’s 311 service about encampments, human waste and needles have steadily increased from about 6,300 in 2011 to more than 44,000 in 2016.

Here is a map of the ongoing and growing problem:

The problem is clear. Rewarding bad behavior creates more bad behavior. If you don’t believe this just look at San Francisco.

RELATED ARTICLES:

10 Thoughts on the President and the ‘S—hole Countries’

Why is liberal California the poverty capital of America?

Why Is There So Much Human Shit on the Streets? — The Bold Italic — San Francisco

CALIFORNIA UNVEILS “HOMELESS BILL OF RIGHTS”, RIGHT TO PUBLIC URINATION: It may actually be the first law ever that turns public urination into a right.

Watch: Illegals Erect Huge Camp In Major Sanctuary City – Disgusting!

RELATED VIDEO: Illegal alien camp in sanctuary city of Santa Ana, California.

Leftist Toilet Mouths Condemn Trump as They Corrupt Nation

President Trump denies having used a vulgar term last Thursday to describe dysfunctional Third World countries. Yet there’s no denying that the leftist media, believing he did, responded by repeatedly disgorging the term in a childish orgy of decadence. Of course, the media no doubt think they’re damaging Trump — but they’re actually damaging society.

Let’s be clear: Leftists certainly object to the substance of Trump’s comments, that we shouldn’t continually absorb poor, unskilled, often functionally illiterate and unassimilable people from Third World nations. But they also object to his alleged style, labeling as obscene the use of s***hole (toilet) to describe such places. So to show us how bad such language is, the Crude News Network (CNN), for example, used it at least 36 times on Thursday. It’s sort of like inveighing against animal abuse and then bludgeoning dozens of dogs to death on air to prove your point.

WARNING GRAPHIC LANGUAGE:

Let’s be clear about a few other matters:

  1. You probably wouldn’t lose money betting that all the leftists now complaining about the toilet term use vulgarity themselves off air.
  2. In reality, most media leftists actually have mouths resembling sewers.
  3. It’s the Left that, mainly via entertainment, has coarsened society, defining deviancy downwards and normalizing vulgarity. This is why the younger generations now use profanity, publicly, as a matter of course.
  4. This is very, very destructive to society.

Why it’s destructive I’ll explain momentarily. Note, however, that this article isn’t about immigration, which I take a hard line on and believe should be completely ended. Something else that should be ended, however, is our increasing tolerance for public crudity.

Let’s begin with what the Father of Our Nation and first president, George Washington, wrote about vulgarity in a 1776 order:

The General is sorry to be informed that the foolish, and wicked practice, of profane cursing and swearing (a Vice heretofore little known in an American Army) is growing into fashion; he hopes the officers will, by example, as well as influence, endeavour to check it, and that both they, and the men will reflect, that we can have little hopes of the blessing of Heaven on our Arms, if we insult it by our impiety, and folly; added to this, it is a vice so mean and low, without any temptation, that every man of sense, and character, detests and despises it.

In point of fact, few of us had great-grandparents who wouldn’t have been at least somewhat appalled at today’s tawdry tongues. And whatever a few of them might have occasionally uttered in private, they certainly wouldn’t use bad language in polite company (does this even still exist?) or around children. Now note that every time we use profanity publicly — on the Internet, for example — we are using it in front of children.

This raises the matter of the blessed asterisk and its cloaking cousins. Many will ask what the point is, since kids have already heard every vulgar word we’re obscuring. Yet this is a bit like saying: If children know about serial killers, what’s the big deal about inundating them with snuff films?

We (should) use asterisks in print, bleep out words in broadcast and generally obscure the obscene because doing so sends an important message:

The obscured things are wrong.

Opening up the closet of the coarse, crude and carnal sends the message that such things are okay. Sure, kids have heard bad language. But the point is to not normalize and legitimize it through continual and cavalier adult use. The point is to instill in the young virtue, good moral habits, not the bad ones called vice. And habits are created via repetition — a fact that should make us think twice about on-air repetition of vulgarity.

Instinctively, many of us still sense vulgarity’s ugliness. This ugliness is best illustrated by putting it in the prettiest of mouths: Would you find a group of nine-year-olds cursing like a drunken sailor an uplifting scene? Would you think they were on a good moral path?

Well, as poet William Wordsworth put it, “The Child is father of the Man”; a youth’s well-learned dark lessons become adult transgressions. Yet some will still wonder why this matters, maintaining that vulgarities are “just words” (actually, they’re unjust words). For an in-depth exposition on this, I strongly urge you to read “Cussing & Cultural Decay,” a magazine piece I penned last year that I believe is the definitive short work on the subject (it’s hard to find online but is available here).

Put simply, though, an immoral society cannot yield a moral government. Echoing many great thinkers, British philosopher Edmund Burke warned, “It is ordained in the eternal constitution of things, that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters.” (The Founding Fathers often expressed the same principle in different words.) Now, do people who habitually disgorge vulgarity — not to mention indulge decadence in general — strike you as men of temperate minds? Or do you think such habits reflect fetters-forging passions?

Too many suppose we can compartmentalize our virtue and vice. Like believing we can continually pollute one side of a lake yet swim in pure waters on the other, we act as if impurity intensely indulged in certain areas won’t bleed over into areas we’d like to keep pristine. But just as former labor secretary Lynn Martin said in 1992 that “[y]ou can’t be one kind of man and another kind of president,” we can’t be one kind of people and have another kind of polity. Do you really think we can embrace profound vice in language, entertainment and sexuality but then enjoy that for which profound virtue is necessary: fiscal restraint, respect for rights, honesty in government affairs, dutiful law-enforcement agencies, a Constitution-limited judiciary, sound schooling and truth-oriented media? As our second president, John Adams, put it, “Public virtue cannot exist in a nation without private [virtue], and public virtue is the only foundation of republics.”

Thus is it distressing that even some conservative media outlets now lower standards, using terms such as a**, c**p, s***storm and WTF (with everyone knowing the acronym’s meaning). Perhaps they’re not mindful that it was yesterday’s leftists who normalized such vulgarity. Perhaps they don’t care. But it’s why I’ve long said that conservatives are the caboose to liberals’ engine of cultural decay. It’s why, ultimately, they lose political wars. For politics is downstream of culture, and conservatives never saw a culture-war battle they couldn’t lose.

As for Trump, his alleged potty-mouth moment was reported by Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL), a scoundrel with a history of lying about White House meetings, according to Daily Wire. But whatever the president said, he said in private. This is far different from Durbin, who introduced the story. It’s far different from ex-California Democratic Party chairman John Burton, who led a “F*** Donald Trump!” chant at California’s Democratic Party convention in Sacramento early last year. And it’s far different from CNN and the rest of the effluent-stream media, which, like an exhibitionist, just revel in the chance to flaunt publicly what excites them privately.

They are despicable. May they be the first to drown in the wave of tyranny they invite.

Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Twitter or log on to SelwynDuke.com

EDITORS NOTE: In 2014 BlackAndRight published the below video titled “How Liberals Use Children.” It showed children using foul language to promote liberal causes. WARNING: Children using foul language.

NY Times: Trump’s Immigration Remarks Outrage Many, But Many Others Quietly Agree

President Trump is trying to prevent America from the destabilizing immigration mistakes Europe made that they are now trying to correct.

President Trump Is Not A Racist. One can not say the same about a number of his critics who seek to impeach him.

While President Trump’s immigration remarks outrage many, many others quietly agree. Unfortunately most Democrats and a number of Republican hypocrites like to use confusing diplomatic language to obfuscate their true feelings and meaning. Trump doesn’t choose to use language to obfuscate reality and they don’t like it.

There is no reason to believe that if the subjects of immigration came from a lawless uneducated white nation who don’t speak English with many contagious health problems and seek to immediately go on welfare Trump would oppose such immigration as well. Would his opposition call Trump a Black racist?  No they wouldn’t. Trump’s position all along is that he welcomes people who can contribute to America.

People who use racism for political or personal gain are more likely to be the racists themselves.

Based on the New York Times report most of Europe who have been inundated with immigrants from countries that are destabilizing their societies are taking steps to stop  such immigration. Europeans are reevaluating their immigration policies based on what is happening and thus must also be labelled ‘racists.’

Read what’s happening in Europe now  trying to correct its mistakes:

Trump’s Immigration Remarks Outrage Many, but Others Quietly Agree

LONDON — The Czech president has called Muslim immigrants criminals. The head of Poland’s governing party has said refugees are riddled with disease. The leader of Hungary has described migrants as a poison.

This week, Austria’s new far-right interior minister suggested “concentrating” migrants in asylum centers — with all its obvious and odious echoes of World War II.

So when President Trump said he did not want immigrants from “shithole” countries, there was ringing silence across broad parts of the European Union, especially in the east, and certainly no chorus of condemnation.

In fact, some analysts saw the remarks as fitting a pattern of crude, dehumanizing and racist language to describe migrants and asylum seekers that has steadily edged its way into the mainstream. Coming from the White House, such words may be taken by some as a broader signal that racism is now an acceptable part of political discourse.

“What we see now is a conscious policy to reintroduce language that was previously not acceptable in debate,” said Gerald Knaus, the director of the European Stability Initiative, a Berlin-based research organization that has played a leading role in forming recent European migration policy.

Read more.

What You Can Do to Fight Sex Trafficking

January is National Slavery and Human Trafficking Prevention Month. There are an estimated 20 to 30 million human trafficking victims in the world today, with an estimated 4.5 million of those forcibly involved in sex trafficking. In the U.S., an estimated 640,000 are being trafficked for sex.

These numbers are profoundly disturbing, and it can be tempting to feel discouraged that ordinary citizens like us are powerless to help these victims and to help stop the demand for paid sex. In reality, there are a number of ways that all of us can help in the fight. The National Center on Sexual Exploitation and Fight the New Drug have both published a list of practical ways we can all join the cause. Here is a brief summary of what you can do:

1. Do Not View or Pay for Porn

As we have written about previously, porn and sex trafficking are inseparably linked. Each click of pornography creates a demand for more pornography and brings in a profit to the industry. The demand causes traffickers, pimps, and those involved in the sex industry to abuse their victims by filming them in sex acts.

2. Learn How to Identify Potential Victims and Report Suspicious Activity

If you think you see suspicious activity happening wherever you are, be sure you have learned about what to look for. The Department of Homeland Security has published Indicators of Human Trafficking—be sure to look for these warning signs particularly in airports, gas stations, rest stops, and hotels. If you think you see something suspicious, call local law enforcement, or you can contact the 24-hour National Human Trafficking Hotline at 888-373-7888.

3. Use a New App to Take Pictures of Your Hotel Room

Hotel rooms are a hotspot for sex trafficking. Victims are often advertised online through pictures taken of them in hotel rooms. As Fight the New Drug has written on, there is a new app called TraffickCam that catalogs details of different hotel rooms like wallpaper and furniture to help create a database of identifiers, which can then be used by TraffickCam’s algorithm to match images of sex trafficking victims that will help law enforcement identify the possible locations of victims.

4. Participate in Online Activism

The National Center on Sexual Exploitation (NCSE) has organized a number of ways that you can participate in online activism. Here are two:

  • Joining NCSE’s #TACKLEDEMAND social media campaign before the Super Bowl is a way to bring awareness about the problem of large commercial sporting events being used by sex traffickers and buyers for sexual exploitation.
  • Netflix is producing a show called “Baby” that normalizes the sexual exploitation of young teenagers by portraying it as a kind of “edgy” coming of age story. You can protest this repulsive show by sending an email or Facebook message to Netflix executives demanding that they stop producing it.

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


RELATED ARTICLE: Public School Kids Get Assembly on Sex Changes

DACA: The Immigration Trojan Horse — Cost $25 Billion

How the original DREAM act was designed to cover 90% of the illegal alien population in the U.S.

Today DACA (Deferred Action-Childhood Arrivals) is a major issue for the Trump administration, with politicians from both parties attempting to persuade President Trump to provide lawful status for the illegal aliens who had been granted temporary lawful status in an ill-conceived and, indeed, illegal program that had been implemented by President Obama, a politically adept manipulator of language and a master of deception.

On December 18th I participated in an interview on Fox News to discuss DACA and the fact that according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) legalizing the estimated population of “Dreamers” would cost an estimated $26 billion.

On January 9th President Trump conducted a bi-partisan White House meeting to consider a compromise that would provide lawful immigration status for the approximately 800,000 illegal aliens who enrolled in DACA. As the San Francisco Chronicle reported, Trump seeks a “bill of love” from Congress for “Dreamers”

The “deal” would require funding a border wall, ending “chain migration” and perhaps, making E-Verify mandatory.  Of course without an adequate number of ICE agents, mandatory E-Verify would be of limited value since unscrupulous employers could simply hire illegal aliens “off the books” and without agents to conduct field investigations these criminally deceptive employment practices would not be discovered.

President Trump’s previous call for hiring an additional 10,000 ICE agents was not mentioned by the participants in the meeting.  This is extremely worrisome.

A lack of effective interior enforcement of our immigration laws, has for decades, undermined the integrity of the immigration system. In fact the 9/11 Commission cited the lack of interior enforcement as a key vulnerability that terrorists, and not only the 9/11 hijackers, had exploited to embed themselves in the U.S. in preparation to carrying out deadly attacks.

DACA was a travesty foisted on America and Americans by the Obama administration, from its inception, was a scam based on lies and false suppositions. Legalizing these 800,000 illegal aliens would, in point of fact, legitimize Obama’s illegal action.

Obama claimed that he was invoking “prosecutorial discretion” when he stood in the White House Rose Garden on June 15, 2012 and announced that “since Congress failed to act” (to pass Comprehensive Immigration Reform) he was going to act by creating DACA. But in reality Congress did act: it voted down legislation known as Comprehension Immigration Reform and, in so doing, took an action that is consistent with the role of Congress as established by the U.S. Constitution that created the system of “checks and balances.”

For Mr. Obama, however, the problem was that Congress did not act the way he wanted it to act.

Two days after that speech in 2012, I wrote an Op-Ed, “Obama Invokes Prosecutorial Discretion to Circumvent Constitution and Congress,” in which I noted that what Obama had referred to as “Prosecutorial Discretion” should, in reality, be referred to as “Prosecutorial Deception.”

Legitimate use of prosecutorial discretion can provide a pragmatic solution to real-world limitations of law enforcement resources in a manner comparable to a triage.  For example, law enforcement officers frequently ignore relatively minor violations of law so that those limited resources can be available to address more serious violations of law.  Consider, for example, the police officer operating speed radar who ignores cars that exceed the speed limit by a small margin, but are being otherwise driven in a safe manner.  This enables the police officer to focus on vehicles that are being driven dangerously.

Under DACA, however, illegal aliens were not ignored to conserve limited resources.  In fact, limited resources were not conserved but were squandered to provide temporary lawful status to a huge number of illegal aliens without legal authority or justification.

Moreover, DACA constituted the de facto creation of law without the legislative process, but by unconstitutional executive fiat.

Let’s now consider the notion of “deferred action,” the foundation upon which DACA was purportedly created.  There are legitimate provisions in the immigration system to provide aliens with “deferred action” when it is a matter of compassion, for humanitarian purposes.  The key word is “deferred.”  What is deferred is the ultimate required departure of non-immigrant aliens.

For example, if a family from another country lawfully came to the United States as non-immigrants for a temporary visit with friends or relatives in the United States and one of the members of the family was injured in an accident or became ill, those aliens could apply for deferred action so that they would not have to leave the United States until the family crisis was resolved.

As an INS agent I dealt with such cases.  Generally the doctor who was treating the injured or ill family member would provide documentation to immigration authorities to verify the medical situation, with periodic updates.

As an INS special agent I was responsible for conducting investigations to make certain that applications were not fraudulent.

Generally these aliens would not be granted employment authorization except under the most extraordinary of circumstances if they needed to remain in the United States for a protracted period of time. However, DACA essentially “dropped a net” over 800,000 illegal aliens, not out of humanitarian concerns because of an unforeseen emergency but as a means of achieving a political objective.

Obama claimed that his action was to help young people who were brought to the United States by their parents and, consequently, were the victims of their parents’ actions over which they had no control.

Obama was counting on the fact that Americans are among the most compassionate people in the world, especially where children are concerned.  Media reports furthered this narrative and, to this day, many ill-informed Americans believe that all aliens who participated in DACA were teenagers. But in fact, the age cutoff was actually 31.  These aliens simply needed to claim that they had been brought to the United States prior to their 16th birthdays.  Those aliens today might now be as old as 36 years of age.  DACA should have been called DACCA (Deferred Action- Claimed Childhood Arrivals).

There were virtually no interviews or field investigations to verify any information or claims contained in the applications.

(The DREAM Act would have allowed aliens as old as 35 years of age to apply to participate in the amnesty that would have been created had the legislation passed.)

It is vital to note that even the term DREAM Act and the derivative term “Dreamers” is hypocritical.  Ever since the administration of Jimmy Carter, the term “Alien” has been eradicated from the immigration debate, not out of supposed “political correctness” but as a means of Orwellian thought control and Newspeak.

However, the “DREAM Act” is an acronym for Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors Act.  It is maddening that when the imagery of the “American Dream” can be exploited, the term “alien” becomes palatable — but only when used in conjunction with this bit of Orwellian deception.

If the purpose of the DREAM Act was to help young illegal aliens, why did the politicians and “Gang of Eight” not simply limit it to aliens who had not yet attained the age of 21 and who could provide immigration authorities with their current school transcripts and report cards to verify their status as students in good standing?

What was never discussed in the mainstream media is that the whole point to the DREAM Act, pushed by some members of Congress and particularly the “Gang of Eight,” was to construct a legislated immigration “Trojan Horse.”

The DREAM Act established 35 years of age as the cutoff age for this amnesty because it would have covered an estimated 90% of the illegal alien population in the United States.  Furthermore, without the ability to conduct interviews, let alone field investigations, aliens could easily lie about their identities, their dates of birth and even their dates of entry into the United States.

There would be no way for adjuration officers to refute the claims of the aliens who participated in the program.

The DREAM Act was a carefully disguised version of failed legislation known as Comprehensive Immigration Reform.

In 2007, after I testified about Comprehensive Immigration Reform before several hearings in the House and Senate, I wrote an Op-Ed for the Washington Times, Immigration bill a ‘No Go’ in which I suggested that the legislative disaster be renamed the “Terrorist Assistance and Facilitation Act” because under that legislation, millions of illegal aliens who had entered the United States surreptitiously and without inspection, would have been provided with lawful status and official identity documents.

This would have violated the findings and recommendations of the 9/11 Commission, to which I provided testimony.

I was gratified when then-Senator Jeff Sessions quoted my Op-Ed from the floor of the U.S. Senate during the contentious floor debate on Comprehensive Immigration Reform on three separate days, in which he shared my concerns and my proposed new name for that legislation.

The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) created a massive amnesty program that ultimately led to the greatest influx of illegal aliens in the history of our nation.  It has been said that insanity is doing the same things the same way and expecting a different outcome.

As a highly successful real estate magnate, President Trump must especially understand that just as it is unwise to erect a building on a swamp, legislation must be constructed on morally and legally solid ground.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in FrontPage Magazine.

House Republicans Roll Out Immigration Bill Packed With Border Security and Immigration Reforms

A group of Republican lawmakers unveiled Wednesday a bill that pairs granting legal status to younger illegal immigrants with a laundry list of conservative immigration reforms and border security enhancements, including President Donald Trump’s proposed border wall.

The proposal contains all of the changes to immigration law that Trump has demanded as part of a deal to replace the now-canceled Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, a Obama administration order that shielded hundreds of thousands of younger illegal immigrants from deportation.

dcnf-logo

It also incorporates several immigration enforcement measures long advocated by immigration hawks, including penalties for sanctuary cities and foreign nationals who overstay their visas.

Dubbed the Securing America’s Future Act, the bill was teased by its sponsors—GOP Reps. Bob Goodlatte of Virginia, Michael McCaul of Texas, Raúl Labrador of Idaho, and Martha McSally of Arizona—in a Tuesday op-ed in The Wall Street Journal. The official rollout Wednesday comes a day after Trump met with a bipartisan group lawmakers to discuss the framework of a bill that would legalize DACA recipients before the program expires in March.

The bill’s authors say the DACA negotiations present an opportunity to enact tougher immigration law and stave off pressure for a future amnesty of illegal immigrants.

“Americans have been debating how to best fix the country’s immigration system for decades,” they wrote in The Wall Street Journal. “Congress has a unique opportunity to act now, before the country ends up with another large population who crossed the border illegally as children.”

A summary of the bill’s provisions reads like an immigration hawk’s wish list. It would fulfill Trump’s four-point plan for a DACA compromise: legal status for DACA recipients, end to the Diversity Visa Lottery, limits on chain migration, and full funding for the border wall.

The bill also includes several provisions that Trump has not said are necessary to reach a DACA deal, but that immigration hawks have long argued are needed to eliminate the “pull factors” for illegal immigration. Among them are Kate’s Law, which enhances penalties for illegal immigrants who re-enter the country after being deported, and mandatory use of E-Verify, an electronic employment authorization system.

Democrats are almost certain to balk the GOP bill, especially because it does not offer a path to legal permanent residence or citizenship for DACA recipients. The bill instead allows beneficiaries to receive a three-year renewable legal status, essentially reviving the DACA program for the roughly 800,000 illegal immigrants who received protection under the original order.

Despite slim chances of garnering more than a few Democratic supporters, the bill could serve as a starting point for negotiating a DACA replacement.

At Wednesday’s meeting with lawmakers, Trump said he would be willing to place a DACA fix within a “bill of love,” but did not specify what such legislation would entail. The White House clarified Wednesday that any DACA compromise must also do away with chain migration and the Diversity Visa Lottery while also funding the border wall.

RELATED ARTICLE: Who ‘Dreamers’ Really Are and Why They Cost $26B Over 10 Years

EDITORS NOTE: Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities for this original content, email licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org. The featured image is of demonstrators standing on the steps of the U.S. Capitol during a demonstration against the repeal of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program by President Donald Trump, Dec. 6, 2017. (Photo: Alex Edelman/ZUMA Press/Newscom)

Trump Uses the Media to Bypass the Media, Outs Democrats on Immigration

We haven’t seen a ton of President Trump’s negotiating prowess so far for probably two reasons: Negotiating politically in D.C. is just flat different from negotiating in business; and Democrats don’t generally want deals — they want to oust Trump. It does, after all, require two sides to want a deal to get a deal.

And that makes Trump’s recent move on immigration not only brilliant, but also shows he is learning how to deal with the general swampiness of D.C. in yet another realm.

First to set the stage. Most conservative observers have seen for years that Democrats are not really interested in any deals involving illegals in the country short of full legalization and citizenship. This always appeared to be one of the calculating strategies for Democrat elections that have little groundings in principles or what is good for Americans: They want illegals in the country — and the issue of illegals — to garner votes for themselves, even if the illegals demonstrably damage lower end working Americans by depressing wages.

Now we have pretty solid evidence to show Democrat’s callous, duplicitous scheming on immigration.

A memo from Jennifer Palmieri, who served as director of communications for President Barack Obama and candidate Hillary Clinton, demands that Democrats go to the wall — so to speak — over the so-called Dreamers of DACA.

“The fight to protect Dreamers is not only a moral imperative, it is also a critical component of the Democratic Party’s future electoral success,” wrote Palmieri, who is now president of the Center for American Progress Action Fund, perhaps the most influential Democratic political group. News of the memo distributed Monday was first published in The Daily Caller.

Palmieri, whose memo was sent to Democratic allies around the nation, went on about the political imperative:

“Democrats should refuse to offer any votes for Republican spending bills that do not offer a fix for Dreamers and instead appropriate funds to deport them. Political allegiances are made in moments like these…If Democrats don’t try to do everything in their power to defend Dreamers, that will jeopardize Democrats’ electoral chances in 2018 and beyond. In short, the next few weeks will tell us a lot about the Democratic Party and its long-term electoral prospects,” (Author’s emphasis.)

So what we all suspected is now laid bare, like so much else that has happened since November 2016.

Then, in a move that both outs the Democrats on their dishonesty in all things immigration while at the same time using the media to bypass the media, Trump holds the immigration negotiating meeting with Congressional Republican and Democrat leaders — and let’s the media stay for the entire negotiating session.

Media are typically asked to leave after the photo op moment at the beginning, and then the actual meeting takes place behind closed doors. But Trump simply started the meeting before asking the media to leave and the participants — from both parties — eventually realized that the media were staying. Well, that certainly breaks the mold.

And right from the beginning, Trump asked members from both parties what they want and what they are willing to give up while the cameras were rolling and catching all of it. Since it went out live for some, it is now memorialized all over the internet.

This was brilliant for three reasons:

  1. It forced Democrats to actually make proposals rather than play their dishonest games of negotiating in bad faith. Their choice was a real compromise proposal or be revealed.
  2. It used the media to bypass the media. The liberal and virulently anti-Trump media consistently reports along liberal lines, covering only those issues or events that appear damaging to Trump while ignoring most of 2017’s successes. This little arrangement used their own cameras to eliminate their filter.
  3. It put the lie to all the so-called psychiatrists trotted out by CNN and others to analyze Trump via TV and Twitter and determine he has some mental condition. Obviously his mental faculties are just fine — and perhaps better than most of those opining on him.

The only downside was that Trump said at one point that he would sign whatever the people in that room brought back to him. That sent appropriate shivers through law-and-order Americans as the people in that room are the ones responsible for the mess we have. But Trump knows illegal immigration was one of the primary reasons he was elected. He can deeply influence what is brought back to him to sign, and he will.

RELATED VIDEO: President Trump holds bi-partisan immigration meeting.

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