The Decline of the Democrats

More than 20 years ago, the American political commentators John Judis and Ruy Teixeira wrote The Emerging Democratic Majority.

In this influential work, they argued that America’s changing demographics would result in the Democratic Party achieving lasting political dominance.

The growth of Democratic-leaning minority populations (particularly Hispanics and Asians) combined with the increased preference for Democratic candidates shown by college-educated professionals and single women all suggested that America’s future was blue, not red.

Admirably, Judis and Teixeira have spent recent years publicly recalibrating their initial assessment in the face of subsequent evidence.

Their new book, Where have all the Democrats gone? The Soul of the Party in the Age of Extremes, is the fruit of this process, and is immensely valuable for any observer of American politics.

In short, they describe how millions of working-class voters of all races have been abandoning the Democratic Party.

Observing their party’s failure to learn the lessons of 2016 and anticipating the closeness of the coming battles, they urge its leaders to refocus their priorities.

“They need to press economic reforms that benefit the working and middle classes, but they need to declare a truce and find a middle ground in today’s culture war between Democrats and Republicans so that they can once again become the party of the people,” Judis and Teixeira argue.

Losing ground

The statistical evidence of the declining support for the Democrats is striking.

Working-class white voters have gravitated to the Republican Party for many years.

What is more remarkable is the degree to which low-income minority groups are following the same path: the Democrats shed a whopping 25 percentage points off their advantage over the GOP among the non-white working class between 2012-2022.

It is not just about the 2016 shock. Previous reversals for the Democratic Party can also be explained by declining working-class support, as the authors demonstrate by focusing on electoral data from the disastrous 1994 and 2010 midterms.

While Joe Biden defeated Donald Trump in the 2020 election, warning signs were obvious here, too. Biden lost the white working-class by 27 points, and his support among non-white voters was 11 points lower than Hillary Clinton’s four years earlier.

In the 2022 midterms, Republican candidates made strong gains among Asian voters angered by the Democrats’ support for racial quotas. Elsewhere, historic gains by Trump in majority-Hispanic counties in Texas were cemented.

Judis and Teixeira’s description of how the socio-economic profile of the Democratic Party has changed makes for essential reading.

Although they initially make the common left-wing error of failing to place the decline of labour unions in the context of wider social atomisation, their description of how corporate interests gained power is accurate.

Advocacy groups focused on particular issues like abortion or the environment have strengthened their hold.

In one particularly interesting interview carried out with the Democratic Congressman Ro Khanna, the Congressman explains how his hyper-prosperous voters in Silicon Valley are drawn to the Democrats mainly because they are “vehemently pro-choice, vehemently pro-gay marriage [and] vehemently for reasonable gun safety legislation.”

Policy matters

Judis and Teixeira identify four key policy components of the Democrats’ overall problem with working-class voters.

First, there is the issue of race. Key figures within the liberal intelligentsia have pushed for greater use of race-based quotas while increasingly suggesting that all American institutions are structurally racist.

Racial quotas are deeply unpopular with voters, even in liberal states like California. In spite of this, activists within the Democratic coalition remain rabidly supportive, and the Biden Administration has boasted of prioritising minorities when it comes to the allocation of business grants and other measures.

Second, there is mass immigration. More than 20 million immigrants entered America between 1965-1995, triple the number that came in the previous 30 years.

Large-scale illegal immigration across the southern border with Mexico has heightened public unease.

Concern from unions about the effect this was having on the wages of American workers led the Democratic Party to consider a more restrictive approach along with stronger border security in the 1990s.

However, no such compromises can be countenanced in today’s party, beholden as it is to a radical minority that often appears to believe that national borders can no longer be defended in theory, let alone in practice.

As a result, Trump and other border security advocates are gaining ground.

Third, there is the range of gender-based issues that the authors cleverly categorise as ‘Sexual Creationism.’

Just as a majority of Americans support the usual legal protections for transgender people, a clear majority also break with the Democratic elite by telling pollsters that gender is determined at birth and that trans athletes should be required to compete in sports categories corresponding to their biological sex.

Last of all, there is the issue of environmental policy, where a clear class divide exists.

While left-wing activists adopt apocalyptic rhetoric in discussing the problem, only 3 percent of respondents in a 2022 Gallup poll said that climate change was the ‘most important problem.’ Working-class voters were far less likely to do so, and they are of course far more likely to be adversely impacted by increased energy costs caused by the shift from fossil fuels to renewables.

For all the talk of green-collar jobs, the authors point out that so far, employment opportunities within the renewable energy sector appear far less attractive than the huge numbers of jobs that still exist in fossil fuel-related industries.

They are also admirably brave in acknowledging that the great majority of the world’s energy consumption is from fossil fuels and that humanity’s overall reliance has barely budged in the last two decades.

Utopian and unachievable policy proposals like the ‘Green New Deal’ plan for America to become carbon neutral by 2030 are not just bad policy; they are bad politics too, considering the number of American swing states where such a plan would cause devastating job losses.

The authors are critical of President Joe Biden for not doing more to check the radicalism of his party, but they do commend him for his pro-union stance and his overall economic agenda.

Biden’s measures to improve America’s infrastructure, accelerate the energy transition and increase the domestic production of all-important semiconductors are notable, they write, for the emphasis that this recent legislation has placed on the need to ‘buy American’, as well as the inclusion of measures designed to boost wages and counteract the effects of regional deindustrialisation.

Considering the scale of Biden’s legislative accomplishments in these areas, it is surprising that they are not discussed more frequently.

This in itself points to the degree to which cultural issues have taken centre stage in American politics.

Spiritual malaise

Interestingly, though they are firmly of the Left, the authors identify a spiritual dimension to the crisis in American society.

“People’s sense of their own self-worth depends on the ways in which they can think of themselves not as isolated collections of cells destined to disintegrate but as people having multiple identities that transcend their own biological individuality. They need affirmation from others, and they need to feel they are part of not only families or neighbourhoods but also larger communities,” they write.

College-educated Americans in large cities, they go on to write, can feel part of the new economic and global order more easily than those living in those smaller and often economically depressed communities where factories, unions and churches are all less vibrant than they were several decades ago.

Donald Trump’s rallying cry to ‘Make America Great Again’ was not for such voters about rolling back the clock on racial equality or other forms of progress. Instead, it was about restoring the widespread prosperity and tranquillity which has been lost.

In several instances, Judis and Teixeira hint at the impact that the secularisation of America has had in propelling progressives in a socially and politically self-destructive direction.

Citing the work of Columbia Professor John McWhorter on racial radicalism, the authors speculate “that the absence of conventional religion and of expected economic opportunity had created among the college-educated young a search for identity, lifestyle, and salvation that had led some into a moralistic radical politics.”

Similarly, they correctly describe today’s environmental movement as having been “hijacked by a millenarian, quasi-religious commitment to rapidly zeroing out fossil fuels and creating a renewables-based economy.”

Though they are also slowly showing a greater willingness to consider Republican candidates, the African-American community offers a useful case-in-point of a stable component of the Democratic coalition.

Disproportionately religious, culturally moderate black voters act as a bulwark against even greater radicalism within a Democratic Party where the ancient quest for community continues to push the rootless towards utopian and even authoritarian causes.

This is not likely to change. As America continues its drift away from Christianity, the main left-wing party is not likely to make its way back towards the centre, no matter how cogently Judis and Teixeira express themselves.

Their book is nonetheless outstanding. As the United States veers towards what could be the most contentious election in the country’s history, these brilliant minds explain better than anyone else exactly why it is surely going to be incredibly close.


James Bradshaw writes on topics including history, culture, film and literature.


Biden Regime’s Legacy: Human Trafficking, Sex Slavery and Invasion

TIK History: The Cult many are in but don’t realize (explaining Hegelian dialectics)

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

UPS Cuts 12,000 Jobs

“Our members just ratified the most lucrative agreement the Teamsters have ever negotiated at UPS. This is the richest national contract I’ve seen in my more than 40 years of representing Teamsters at UPS. There are more gains in this contract than in any other UPS agreement and with no givebacks to the company.” — Teamsters General Secretary-Treasurer Fred Zuckerman, Teamsters website

Thank the Teamsters.

They got huge raises …. ” the most lucrative agreement the Teamsters have ever negotiated at UPS.” which led to massive layoffs.

UPS is cutting 12,000 jobs

By Chris Isidore, CNN

UPS announced Tuesday that it will cut 12,000 jobs as part of a bid to save $1 billion costs. Managers and contractor positions will make up most of the layoffs.

The job cuts come as UPS issued a disappointing sales outlook for this year, saying it expects global revenue of between $92 billion to $94.5 billion. That would be up from the $91 billion in revenue it reported for 2023, but analysts surveyed by Refinitiv had been expecting revenue of at least $95.6 billion.

UPS lost business last year as customers concerned about a possible strike by the Teamsters shifted shipments to rival carriers, such as FedEx. Although UPS said it expects to get most of that business back, it had won back only about 60% of that lost business…

Read more.



EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Executives From Sanofi Caught on Leaked Zoom Call Discussing Discriminatory Hiring Practices

I hope this message finds you well. As a community deeply committed to integrity and transparency, we believe it’s crucial to keep you informed about the pressing issues we uncover. Today, I want to share a disturbing revelation that has come to light through our relentless investigative efforts.


Our recent investigation has unveiled troubling practices within Sanofi, one of the world’s largest pharmaceutical companies. A brave whistleblower has come forward with evidence that raises serious ethical and legal questions about the company’s hiring policies.

In a leaked video, Carole Huntsman, the former Senior Vice President at Sanofi, is heard explicitly stating the company’s racial hiring quotas. She says, “Every hiring manager knows… 1 in 5 hires needs to be a black employee… 1 in 10 has to be a Latinx employee for us to meet our goals.” This candid admission is not just a statement; it’s a reflection of a deeply ingrained policy.



But the story doesn’t end with the video. We’ve obtained internal documents that corroborate these statements, showing a deliberate strategy to manipulate the company’s demographic makeup. These documents outline ambitious targets and track progress towards these racial quotas.

This isn’t just about Sanofi. Our investigation has revealed that the company is part of the CEO Action for Racial Equity, a coalition of companies with similar commitments. Shockingly, we’ve discovered that other members, like Best Buy, have also been implicated in practices that raise significant concerns, with our breaking story of Whistleblower Ennis Sujak on both racial and religious discrimination within Best Buy and Geek Squad.


The implications of these findings are far-reaching. They challenge the ethical boundaries of corporate diversity initiatives and raise legal questions under the Civil Rights Act. This story is a stark reminder of the complex issues at the intersection of corporate policy, ethics, and the law.


At OMG we are dedicated to uncovering the truth and fostering a dialogue on these critical issues. We believe that awareness is the first step towards change. By staying informed and engaged, you are part of a community that values integrity and transparency.

We encourage you to share this story, discuss it within your networks, and stay tuned for further updates. Your awareness and involvement are vital as we continue to shed light on these crucial issues.

Thank you for your continued support, your encouragement, and your belief in our important mission. Together, we are shaping the future of journalism.

In Truth.

EDITORS NOTE: This O’Keefe Media Group exposé is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Senate Democrats Demand Amnesty in Return for Tightening Asylum Laws and Border Security

With a foreign aid package scheduled to hit the Senate floor as early as this week, eleven Senate Democrats issued a joint statement to demand that any agreement to tighten U.S. asylum laws and improve border security also include an amnesty for illegal aliens.  The Democrats who signed the statement included Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and Sen. Alex Padilla (D. Calif.), Chairman of the Judiciary Subcommittee on Immigration, Citizenship and Border Safety.  They were joined by Senators Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Edward Markey (D-Mass.), Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.).

The statement signals the concern that some Democrats have about ongoing negotiations in the Senate, where Republicans have demanded that negotiators include meaningful immigration policy changes as part of a foreign aid package that would spend billions on Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan.  It reads: “As negotiations surrounding the supplemental aid package progress, we are concerned about reports of harmful changes to our asylum system that will potentially deny lifesaving humanitarian protection for vulnerable people, including children, and fail to deliver any meaningful improvement to the situation at the border.” Ironically, the statement also criticizes Republicans for seeking immigration policy changes as part of the foreign aid package, saying that the addition of policy provisions to the aid package would set a dangerous precedent and forsake our allies.  Yet, at the same time, these Democrats are demanding amnesty.

By issuing the stern statement, the Senators hope to rein in their Democrat colleagues negotiating the immigration provisions and ultimately stop them from making meaningful changes to the law. The Democrats’ negotiators include Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), and Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (I-Ariz.). The Republican negotiators include Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.), Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), Lindsay Graham (R-S.C.), and Tom Cotton (R-Ark.).

Senators Durbin, Padilla and others promoting open borders are beginning to feel the heat as the White House ramps up pressure for Congress to act on the foreign aid package.  On Friday, White House national security spokesperson John Kirby told reporters, “We want to see all four priorities taken up by Congress and all four funded. The reason why it’s a supplemental is because they’re all urgent.  And as I said earlier, we’re running out of runway on Ukraine, and I would tell you the same thing for Israel.”

Early last week, Biden press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said the Administration has “had conversations with members of Congress” regarding the supplemental request.  Jean-Pierre strongly objected to H.R. 2, the Secure the Border Act, but did not comment specifically on the negotiations.  According to the Associated Press, the Biden Administration is not overtly involved in the negotiations on Capitol Hill, but it has not told Democrats not to make a deal with the Republicans. Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas has been on calls with senators of both parties in recent days as talks continue.

With immigration on the table, the question now is whether Senate Republicans will hold the line and demand real reforms, such as the provisions found in H.R. 2, or whether they will be satisfied with half measures that sound good on paper, but have little impact on the crisis.  For his part, Senator Thom Tillis has signaled he will not support a border security package that does not garner support from at least 25 Republican senators.


FAIR staff


Senate Negotiations on Border Security Package May Stall

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals Orders Texas to Remove Buoys from Rio Grande

In the Netherlands’ Parliamentary Elections, Restricting Mass Immigration Won the Day

U.S. Immigration Reaching 15 Percent Milestone, New Record With No End In Sight



‘A Hit Job On Michigan And On Detroit’: Trump Calls Biden EV Push A ‘Government Assassination’ Of Auto Jobs

Former President Donald Trump ripped President Joe Biden’s push for electric vehicles, calling it a “hit job” on Detroit and the auto industry.

Trump spoke in Clinton Township, Michigan, to a crowd of union workers instead of attending a debate at the Reagan Presidential Library in Simi Valley, California, that aired on Fox Business Network Wednesday. Trump currently leads a 42.2% lead over Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida among Republican primary voters in the Real Clear Politics average of polls from Sept. 14 though September 26, drawing 56.6% of the vote, compared to 14.4% for the Florida governor.


“Biden’s mandate isn’t a government regulation. It’s a government assassination of your jobs and of your industry. The auto industry is being assassinated, and it makes no difference what you get,” Trump told those attending the speech. “I don’t care what you get in the next two weeks or three weeks or five weeks, they’re gonna be closing up and they’re going to be building those cars in China and other places. It’s a hit job on Michigan and on Detroit.”

The UAW walked off the job at three auto manufacturing plants in Ohio, Michigan and Missouri at midnight Sept. 15, after failing to reach an agreement with Ford, General Motors and Stellantis (formerly Chrysler). The union sought a four-day work week and a 36% salary increase over five years, according to Bloomberg.

“But on the electric vehicles, this year to comply with the mandate, a sixty thousand loss. They’re gonna lose sixty thousand dollars for every car produced. That sounds like a great deal, but honestly, for UAW and for auto workers and for everybody and for the country, it’s not sustainable,” Trump said.

Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act, which spends $370 billion to combat climate change, into law in August 2022. The legislation is loaded with green energy provisions, including a $7,500 tax credit for electric vehicles.

Despite Biden’s push for electric vehicles, the Biden administration blocked efforts to start mining for copper and nickel near the Boundary Waters Canoe Area in January, the Wall Street Journal reported. In addition, the Environmental Protection Agency made a determination Jan. 31 that would block the mining of 1.4 billion tons of copper, gold, molybdenum, silver and rhenium in Alaska in order to protect salmon.





‘Workers Of America Are Getting Screwed’: Here’s What To Expect From Trump’s Visit To Detroit On Debate Night

‘You Can’t Blame Them’: Former Trump Official Tells Viewers To ‘Think Twice’ Before Bashing UAW Over Strike

‘Wipe Us Out’: Striking UAW Workers Rip Biden’s Push To Force Americans Into EVs

E-Buses Bought From Now-Bankrupt Manufacturer By Blue Enclave Are Now All Out Of Commission


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

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact

UAW Announces Massive Expansion Of Strike Against Major Automakers

The United Auto Workers (UAW) announced on Friday that more workers will go on strike as the union and automakers continue to be unable to reach a deal.

The union announced that 38 new plants across the U.S. will join the partial strike at noon against the Big Three automakers as negotiations continue to fail to produce a new contract for the 146,000 workers, with strikes expanding against GM and Stellantis but not Ford, as the company has cooperated more than the others, according to the UAW announcement. The UAW first announced its partial strike on Sept. 14, striking at three plants: GM’s plant in Wentzville, Missouri; Ford’s plant in Wayne, Michigan; and Stellantis’ Jeep plant in Toledo, Ohio.

“So, today at noon Eastern time, all of the parts distribution centers at General Motors and Stellantis will be called to stand up and strike,” Shawn Fain, president of the UAW, said in the announcement. “We will be striking 38 locations across 20 states, across all 9 regions of the UAW.”

In negotiations, Ford has offered to reinstate cost-living-of-allowance benefits, given the right to strike over plant closures, job security for up to two years in the event of an indefinite layoff, enhanced profit sharing and the conversion of temporary employees into full-time, according to the announcement. General Motors and Stellantis had reportedly not offered the same benefits, resulting in the expanded strike.

“We are focused on moving the companies at the bargaining table,” Fain said in the announcement. “That means managing our flexibility and our leverage as we need to. We can and will go all out if our national leadership decides the companies aren’t willing to move. Right now, we think we can get there. Stellantis and GM are going to need some serious pushing.”

“Ford is working diligently with the UAW to reach a deal that rewards our workforce and enables Ford to invest in a vibrant and growing future,” Ford said in a statement to the Daily Caller News Foundation. “Although we are making progress in some areas, we still have significant gaps to close on the key economic issues. In the end, the issues are interconnected and must work within an overall agreement that supports our mutual success.”





Dems Are Freaking Out Over Trump’s Plan To Visit Striking Auto Workers: Report

UAW Sings the Blues Because of the Greens

Biden DHS Clears Path For Hundreds Of Thousands Of Migrants To Stay In The US, Get Work Permits

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

All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact

12 TWEETS ON BIDEN’S BORDER BUST: The plan to replace America’s workers with ‘cheap labor’ foreign illegal aliens

Here are the top Tweets on the border invasion that is the keystone of the Democrat Party’s plan to replace America’s workers, voters and the middle class with “cheap labor” foreign illegal aliens.

Biden’s Border Bust

James Woods understands the social, cultural and national security implications of the Biden administration policy of open borders.

Here’s the Democrat Mayor of Chicago lying. But that is their mantra.

It’s not just Democrats who are all in, its also Republicans. Watch.

Here’s the White House’s reply to the massive illegal alien invasion.

Here’s one Democrat who sees the writing on the wall.

Anita has is right.

©2023. Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.


Fathers and Sons

John Grondelski: This year is the centennial of Calvin Coolidge’s inauguration and recalls not only a different age for fathers and sons, but much more.

The day that Calvin Coolidge succeeded Warren G. Harding as president his son, Calvin Jr., started work on a tobacco farm.  Coolidge writes, “When one of his fellow laborers said to him, ‘If my father was president, I would not work in a tobacco field.’  He replied, ‘If my father were your father, you would.’”

It’s not that Calvin didn’t love Calvin Jr., a son he would lose within a year, likely from sepsis, it’s that Coolidge believed in honest work.  A father who thought a 16-year-old son should work and have a summer job was not unusual in 1923.  It is today, given data that Nicholas Eberstadt includes in his study, Men without Work, of men’s flight from the workplace.

The value of earning one’s wages, of being responsible, of honest labor (including hard manual labor) were self-evident in Coolidge’s expectations for his son. We could do with a strong dose of those simple truths again.

The historical records tell us that his son’s death devastated Coolidge.  But with his usual understatement, the president – who had believed his son would have made something of himself – accepted that the “ways of Providence are often beyond our understanding. . . .I do not know why such a price was exacted for occupying the White House.”

This year is the centennial of Coolidge’s inauguration, and it recalls not only a different age for fathers and sons, but much more.

His inauguration was unique: the only time a father swore in his own son as president.  Vice President Coolidge was visiting his father in Plymouth Notch, Vermont when news came that Harding had died.  That corner of America was still quaint enough that the notice arrived in a telegraph office eight miles away.  At 2:47 AM, local justice-of-the-peace/notary John Coolidge administered the Constitutional Oath to his son by the light of a kerosene lamp.  Electricity was also still a bit of a novelty in rural America.

Painters have tried to capture the moment. What’s telling is that the scene depicted in the paintings (and not just the cropped versions showing father and son) show other people gathered around and everybody – including father and son – in their “Sunday best” at 2:47 AM on a Friday.

Coolidge relates the events of that night in his AutobiographyIf you have not read it, please do. It’s been a long time since the obvious humility that suffuses that book has been found in a presidential memoir.  In a self-effacing way, Coolidge admits that it “has undoubtedly been the lot of every native boy of the United States to be told that he will some day [sic] be President. . . .My own experience. . .did not differ from that of others.  But I never took such suggestions seriously, as I was convinced. . .I was not qualified to fill the exalted office of President.”

In retrospect, Coolidge was a better president than Harding but he confesses that, in 1920, he felt far better being nominated for the number two slot.  “I could have accepted it [the presidency] only with a great deal of trepidation.”  He admits, however, that when that office descended upon him unexpectedly in the middle of a Green Mountains night, he felt far more at peace with the situation because “I felt at once that power had been given me to administer it.”

He remembers his father awakening him in the middle of that night – something he usually did only when a relative died – to inform him.  “Before leaving the room I knelt down and. . .asked God to bless the American people and to give me power to serve them.”  He recalls the kerosene lamp and his mother’s Bible, laying on the table by his hand.

He concludes, reflecting on the people and place.  In kingdoms, a father might invest a son, “but in republics where the succession comes by election, I do not know of any other case in history where a father has administered to his son the oath. It seemed a simple and natural thing to do at the time, but I can now realize something of [its] dramatic force.”

His remarks clearly show a sense of Providence leading him to that night in that place.

Many presidents since have spoken about the value of faith and family.  Coolidge’s actions embodied both.  His father and mother shaped a man, from boyhood to that night by light of the kerosene lamp.  He reciprocated the devotion: Coolidge vacationed in Plymouth Notch, not Martha’s Vineyard.  He stopped at his mother’s grave before heading off to Washington and the White House.

Regarding humility, Hubert Humphrey once said someone needs “fire in his belly” to go through the four-to-eight-plus-year slog to win and exercise the presidency.  Calvin, by contrast, seemed the embodiment of his 1924 campaign slogan: “Keep cool with Coolidge.”

Coolidge’s religious roots were Puritan (his first name is a giveaway) and he grew up opposite the Union Christian Church (which was essentially Congregationalist) in Plymouth Notch.  As president, he attended Washington’s First Congregational Church.

But from the perspective of a century later, the values Calvin Coolidge espoused were very much in the classical mainstream of the whole Judeo-Christian tradition: faith in God, family, and humility.  They’re the kind of values Prof. Robert George wants to rekindle by his initiative to make June “Fidelity Month.”

These are things – American but also universally human things – very much worth remembering – and imitating – as this Sunday we observe Father’s Day.


John M. Grondelski

John Grondelski (Ph.D., Fordham) is a former associate dean of the School of Theology, Seton Hall University, South Orange, New Jersey. All views herein are exclusively his.

Job Board Hosting Only ‘Non-Woke Employers’ Gains Popularity

Thanks to this viral video….hiring based on merit not left-wing discriminatory polices.


Job board hosting only ‘non-woke employers’ gains popularity with viral video

By: Jenny Goldsberry, Washington Examiner, June 09, 2023:

A job board established after the pandemic is offering job hunters and employers a new niche market.

RedBalloon promises in its Instagram bio that its platform is “connecting serious job seekers with non-woke employers who won’t force employees to compromise their faith or values.” On its website, it promises employers that “finding the right employees shouldn’t be stressful” because “at RedBalloon, we start with values-alignment. Because if a job candidate doesn’t have the right work ethic, nothing else really matters.”

The company shared a video Tuesday poking fun at what some work cultures include. A variety of children are seen sharing what sort of job they want when they grow up, satirically saying they want to be hired “based on what [they] look like” and their “chromosomes” over their “skills.” The children pretend to look forward to a day when they are “offended by [their] co-workers and walk around the office on eggshells and have [their] words policed by HR.”

Keep reading.



YOU’RE FIRED! Fox News CRUSHED, Loses #1 Cable News Position That It Held For Years

Disney Family Sues Company For Creative Control: “They’ve Lost Their Way”

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The GOP Is Clueless To The Dems’ Sinister Immigration Agenda — And It Has Nothing To Do With Elections

The GOP has been very good at diagnosing the problems we will face from the illegal migrant invasion following the end of Title 42. Americans will pay more taxes while seeing cartel activity, gang violence, and other crime skyrocket. Housing and healthcare will become scarcer and more expensive, and the labor market will worsen as a larger labor supply suppresses American wages.

Republicans have mostly attacked the Democrats’ plan to create a “permanent majority” or accused them of enabling crime. Ultimately, this short-sighted approach focuses on the short-term electoral game. As usual, the Democrats and their handlers hide their true intentions, and the GOP is none the wiser.

The final Democrat goal is to turn America into a communist state in which Washington and its mega-corporate partners control every aspect of life. But Americans increasingly realize they are better off controlling their own affairs. So what is Uncle Sam to do?

Enter a pair of 60s radicals from Columbia University. Professors Richard Cloward and Frances Piven taught at the Ivy League university during Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty and Great Society. In 1966, they argued that Johnson’s welfare program was not going far enough because most welfare was the purview of state and local authorities. In order to get everyone on the federal teat, a crisis had to be created to give the feds the excuse to step in. Their proposal was to have massive numbers of poor people overwhelm local and state governments that they would beg Uncle Sam for help.

This general idea is the long-term strategy behind mass immigration.

If the Democrats cannot get Americans to accept a neo-communist, technocratic, oligarchic state run by billionaires and their political marionettes, they will import those who will. And the masses of impoverished foreigners, who are already accustomed to socialism and heavy-handed government, are the perfect trojan horse.

AOC may be dumb, but the people behind her aren’t. They want to overwhelm their own cities – and then everywhere else. They know that if NYC and Chicago can’t handle migrants, then the rural counties these cities are shipping migrants to definitely won’t – let alone the 750 million people who want to come here. The only entity left to pick up the tab is the federal government (in practice, this means you), which will use demographic chaos, poverty, and declining standards of living as a pretext to “save” the day. Coincidentally, Eric Adams has called for just that.

So what do you do when people can’t afford to live as a result of both low wages and high taxes to pay for all these illegals (among other things)? Enact universal basic income, preferably with a trackable CBDC that will control what you can buy, and when and whether you can buy it at all. Can’t afford healthcare because the system is strained and clogged up? Roll out Medicare for all, which of course gets to prioritize certain patients over others according to federal whims. No doubt diversity and inclusion will be criteria. Local and state police can’t handle the out of control crime anymore as a result of illegal immigration and soft-on-crime DAs? Create a national police force.

COVID-19 was a good try from the feds. They got tons of people to wear masks, take experimental shots, and hate their neighbors, but it didn’t result in the economic collapse and massive run to the welfare rolls that they had hoped for. So now, they’ve hit upon an all-too-commonly seen plan in history: when your own people hate you, bring in dependent outsiders.

Oh, and one more thing. When the millions of military-aged male migrants don’t get what they want from the Dems (who basically promised them the world), the Dems will blame you (Americans) and turn their newly imported constituency against you to save themselves.

And you won’t be able to defend yourself. All that violence that is happening thanks to cartels, sex/drug trafficking, and gang violence – all the product of letting in massive numbers of military-aged males? That’s your fault too, which means: get ready to surrender your guns. Uncle Sam doesn’t like competition.



Michele Gama Sosa is an opinion editor for the Daily Caller and a historian by training.

The views and opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Daily Caller.


Now is the Senate’s Turn to Act on H.R. 2, the Secure the Border Act

Biden Stops Bike Ride to Pat Himself on the Back and Insult Americans

More Than 200 Bodies Recovered, 600 Still Missing In Alleged Starvation Cult


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

Federal Employees Say Forcing Them Back Into The Office Endangers The Planet

This is where your hard earned taxpayer dollars go – to these sloths. They should all be fired. Clearly, they are not needed. The U.S. government is the nation’s largest employer. It’s obscene.

Federal Employees Say Forcing Them Back Into The Office Endangers The Planet

The largest union of federal employees is arguing against a return to the office because it would be harmful for the environment, The Washington Post reported Wednesday.

By: John Hugh DeMastri, Daily Caller, February 22, 2023

President Joe Biden has been under increasing pressure from Republican Rep. James Comer of Kentucky and Democratic Mayor Muriel Bowser of Washington, D.C., to send federal employees back to the office, the Post reported. In response, representatives from the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) told the Post that a return to the office would have negative environmental impacts.

“We all know that personal automobiles are responsible for a tremendous amount of pollution through the burning of fossil fuels,” Jacque Simon, public policy director at the AFGE, told the Post. “So every car trip not taken has an environmental benefit.”

This sentiment was echoed by AFGE Local 1236 President Bethany Dreyfus, who represents employees at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in Hawaii, California, Nevada and Arizona, according to the Post. The calls to return to the office have “unsettled” EPA employees in that region who tout the environmental and work-life balance benefits of remote work.

“So many of us work on reducing emissions in our daily jobs at the EPA,” Dreyfus told the Post. “So to be able to do that not only through our work, but how we get to work, is really important.”

The U.S. federal government owns or leases roughly one-third of properties in D.C., and accounted for approximately one-fourth of the city’s pre-pandemic jobs, ABC News reported. D.C. is the U.S. city with the highest work-from-home rate, putting pressure on businesses, who are seeing less foot traffic, and city officials are concerned that tax revenue may take a permanent hit.

“We need decisive action by the White House to either get most federal workers back to the office, most of the time, or to realign their vast property holdings for use by the local government, by nonprofits, by businesses and by any user willing to revitalize it,” Bowser said in her inaugural address Jan. 2, ABC News reported.

Keep reading…..



EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Biden Claimed He Created 1 Million Jobs. Actual Number, 10,500

Come on, man. What’s a little rounding error between friends?

What’s a little rounding error between a corrupt hack and the country he’s running into the ground?

“In the second quarter of this year, we created more jobs than in any quarter under any of my predecessors in the nearly 40 years before the pandemic,” Mr. Biden said on July 8.

“The economy created more than 1.1 million jobs in the second quarter, or around 375k jobs per month,” the White House said in a statement on July 22.

A million or ten thousand. Come on, man. Who’s keeping track?

The Philadelphia Fed’s new assessment shows that employment numbers in 29 states and the District of Columbia were significantly lower than the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported for the March-through-June period.

The BLS, a division of the Department of Labor, estimated net job growth of 1,047,000 jobs in the second quarter. The Philadelphia Fed now says its data shows that 10,500 net jobs were created in that period.

Another reminder that anything from BLS or anything under the control of administration political appointees cannot be trusted. The Biden administration is actually worse than the Obama administration in this regard. Everything is corruptly politicized and appointees will flat-out tell the most outrageous lies.

Not that this comes as a surprise even to the media. How many times has this happened already?

Biden’s bogus boast of 1 million ‘construction jobs’ – Four Pinocchios – Washington Post

AP FACT CHECK: Biden’s fuzzy math on 1 million new auto jobs

Biden will still keep on lying anyway.



Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Open Borders): Only the ‘far right’ care about immigration

India: Muslim kills his daughter for constantly talking on the phone

Spain: Muslim migrant takes a hammer to a Nativity display

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

Soros-Funded Nonprofit Gets $12 Mil from U.S. to Empower Workers in Latin America

The Biden administration is giving a nonprofit partially funded by leftwing billionaire George Soros’s Open Society Foundations (OSF) $12 million to strengthen labor rights and empower workers in three Latin American countries. The U.S. taxpayer dollars will go to the Solidarity Center, a Washington D.C.-based group closely allied with OSF as well as the country’s largest union conglomerate, the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO). The Solidarity Center’s mission is to help workers across the globe fight discrimination, exploitation and systems that entrench poverty. It claims to accomplish this by empowering workers to raise their voice for dignity on the job, justice in their communities and greater equality in the global economy.

The group will use the $12 million to “strengthen democratic, independent workers’ organizations in Brazil, Colombia and Peru,” according to the Department of Labor (DOL) announcement issued this week. The project will bolster unions and advocate for the full and free exercise of collective bargaining rights and freedom of association, the agency writes, adding that the focus will be on underserved communities and advancing gender and racial equity. Specifically, the American taxpayer dollars will support activities that improve respect for the rights of Brazil’s Afro-Brazilian, migrant, women and LGBTQI+ workers in the digital platform economy and the manufacturing sector. In Colombia, the focus will be on increasing the capacity of women, migrants, and indigenous people to organize and advocate for workers’ rights. In Peru, the goal is to improve access to mechanisms for labor rights compliance in the mining and agriculture sectors, particularly for indigenous and migrant workers.

The Solidarity Center, which claims to be the largest U.S.-based international worker rights organization, also operates in Africa, Asia, Europe, and the Middle East. Most of its funding comes from Uncle Sam, but private groups like OSF also contribute generously. In 2020, the Solidarity Center received nearly $39 million in federal awards, according to its latest annual report. In 2019, the center got over $36 million from the U.S. government. Additionally, the group gets millions annually in “other revenues” that are not broken down. However, records obtained by Judicial Watch show that the OSF has given a lot of money to the Solidarity Center in the last few years. In 2020, the latest available reporting period, OSF gave the Solidarity Center $980,000. In 2019 the center received $785,000 from OSF and in 2018 it got $400,000 from the Soros nonprofit that has dedicated billions of dollars to leftist causes around the world. Soros’s global foundation explains that the grants are for economic equity and justice, access to justice for migrant workers in the U.S., to improve labor rights in Mexico and Central America, and the empowerment of vulnerable workers in the domestic and agricultural sectors in the Middle East.

The U.S. government has long funded Soros groups as well as those with close ties to them like the Solidarity Center. Judicial Watch has reported on it for years and obtained records that show the disturbing reality of American taxpayers financing Soros’s leftwing plots abroad. This includes uncovering documents showing State Department funding of Soros nonprofits in Albania to attack traditional, pro-American groups and policies; U.S. government funding of Soros’s radical globalist agenda in Guatemala , Colombia, Romania and Macedonia. The cash usually flows through the State Department and U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). Details of the financial and staffing nexus between OSF and the U.S. government are available in a Judicial Watch investigative report. Domestically Soros groups have pushed a radical agenda that includes promoting an open border with Mexico, fomenting racial disharmony by funding anti-capitalist black separationist organizations, financing the Black Lives Matter movement and other groups involved in the Ferguson Missouri riots, weakening the integrity of the nation’s electoral systems, opposing U.S. counterterrorism efforts and eroding 2nd Amendment protections.

RELATED ARTICLE: Another Biden Family Corruption Cover-up Is Unraveling

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

Court Orders New York City To Reinstate Unvaccinated Employees, Give Backpay

The New York State Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that New York City cannot fire employees for not getting vaccinated against COVID-19, dealing a blow to Democratic Mayor Eric Adams’ pandemic policy.

The court ordered the city to reinstate all fired employees and grant them backpay, citing the fact that being vaccinated against COVID-19 does not stop an individual from catching or spreading the virus, and thus being vaccinated does not grant enough community-wide benefit to warrant a mandate. The health commissioner “acted beyond his authority” by issuing an indefinite vaccine mandate rather than a temporary one, according to the court.

Adams said earlier this year his administration would not bring back workers who had been fired due to being unvaccinated. Roughly 1,400 workers were ultimately let go, including a number of firefighters and police officers. Adams came under fire for not allowing an exception to the mandate for those workers after he granted one to celebrities who were competing in sports or putting on performances in the city.

“States of emergency are meant to be temporary,” the court said in its ruling. “The question presented is whether the health commissioner has the authority to enact a permanent condition of employment during a state of emergency.”

The court ultimately found that the commissioner did not have that right.

Many COVID-19 vaccine mandates were put in place based on the rationale that the vaccines could drastically reduce the chances of a person becoming infected or transmitting the virus if they were infected, so getting vaccinated was not only a benefit to the individual getting the shots, but everyone around them.

However, as more data emerged to indicate that the vaccines are only marginally effective at stopping spread, particularly against newer variants of the virus, that rationale became less convincing. The New York Supreme Court pointed this out in its decision, saying “being vaccinated does not prevent an individual from contracting or transmitting COVID-19… the Petitioners should not have been terminated for choosing not to protect themselves.”



Healthcare reporter. Follow Dylan on Twitter

RELATED ARTICLE: Vaccine Mandate Protests Explode Across New York City, With Some Chanting ‘F*ck Joe Biden’

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

Major Rail Union Rejects Biden-Backed Deal, Reigniting Strike Fears

One of the largest rail unions in the country rejected a Biden administration-brokered deal with railways Monday over concerns regarding working conditions, forcing both sides back to the bargaining table and raising the specter of a potentially devestating strike next month.

The vote drew record turnout, with nearly 12,000 members of the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes Division of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters (BMWED) casting a ballot, rejecting the deal with 56% opposed, according to a BMWED press release. The Biden-sponsored deal includes a 24% raise over the next five years, $5,000 in annual bonuses and attendance policy exemptions for medical purposes, but BMWED President Tony Cardwell said that workers were still concerned about working conditions and sick leave, the Associated Press reported Monday.

“The majority of the BMWED membership rejected the tentative national agreement and we recognize and understand that result,” said Cardwell in the BMWED press release. “BMWED members are concerned with the direction of their employers and the mismanagement and greed in which they have consistently implemented, and are united in their resolve to improve their working conditions across the entire Class I rail network.”

“We are disappointed that members of the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees Division of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters (BMWED) have declined to ratify the recent tentative agreement (‘TA’) between the BMWED and the nation’s freight railroads,” the National Railway Labor Conference (NRLC) said in a Monday statement. The NRLC went on to discuss the benefits of the deal, including travel reimbursements of up to 50% for those employees in traveling roles.

While four of the dozen rail unions have thus far ratified, if the members of any union fail to agree to the terms, all 12 unions will go on strike, the AP reported. By rejecting the deal, the BMWED will return to negotiations with railways, entering a “status quo” period where unions cannot strike until Nov. 19, five days after Congress reconvenes, the BWMED stated.

A strike could have disastrous consequences for the U.S. economy, which relies on railways to ship key products such as oil, coal and chemicals used in fertilizers, leading to disruptions that could cause $2 billion in economic damages per day, according to the Association of American Railroads, who represent railway management. Nearly 40% of all long-distance trade in the U.S. occurs on rail, and replacing them with trucks would require a fleet of nearly half a million trucks, a logistical impossibility, according to the American Trucking Association.

When asked by the Daily Caller News Foundation about what the BMWED’s management would consider to be a fair deal, Communications Director Clark Ballew said “The union’s management is the BMWED rank and file members and they rejected the tentative agreement.”

The American Association of Railroads referred the DCNF to the NRLC’s statement. Neither the White House nor the Department of Labor immediately responded to the DCNF’s request for comment.




RELATED VIDEO: ESPN’s Stephen A Smith Calls Out Progressives for “Extreme Agenda”

RELATED ARTICLE: The Impending Railroad Strike Could Grind The Entire Economy To A Halt, Experts Warn

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