VIDEO: Planned Parenthood Minds Its Ps and LGBTQs

Imagine how upset you’d be to find out that your tax dollars were funding radical sexual propaganda targeted at your kids. Well, thanks to Planned Parenthood, you already are. Apparently, the nation’s biggest abortion business isn’t content with destroying innocent lives anymore. Now it wants to undermine your moral values too.

Of course, Americans got a whiff of this back in 2016, when then-president Cecile Richards surprised people by saying, “Planned Parenthood believes that reproductive rights are deeply connected to LGBTQ rights…” In an announcement that raised more than a few eyebrows, because there is no obvious connection, she made it clear that the organization was quickly becoming one-stop shopping for the Left’s social agenda. “[Our] affiliates now provide hormone treatments for transgender people in 26 centers across 10 states.”

Now, the group that enjoys more than a half-billion of your hard-earned tax dollars a year is already wrapping its tentacles around another hot-button topic: the transgender debate. And based on the firestorm in Sarasota, Florida, Planned Parenthood is off to a flying start. Its idea of a sex education video — men groping women and same-sex couples making out — made parents hit the fan.

Despite the backlash in Florida, the group is back at it this week with a special project for “Trans Awareness Week.” In partnership with the LGBT activists at GLAAD, Planned Parenthood has taken it upon themselves to teach people to be less offensive to men who identify as women and vice-versa. The campaign, called “Beyond the Binary,” includes a new vocabulary list that makes the abortion group the newest members of the politically-correct language police.

Among other things, Breitbart points out, the “linguistic guide” scraps the terms “boys and girls” for the more generic “children.” “His” or “her” should be “their” — which is not only ridiculous, but grammatically incorrect. Apparently, science isn’t the only casualty of the Left’s gender-free march. If activists get their way, English will be the next to go. Group salutations like “guys” are supposed to give way to “folks.” “‘Brothers and sisters,’ should simply be ‘siblings,’ while ‘ladies and gentlemen’ should be ‘distinguished guests.'” All of this, Williams goes on, with a backdrop of rainbow birth control. “With its cheery backdrop of multi-colored condoms, one could almost forget that Planned Parenthood’s chief business is killing little children in their mothers’ wombs.”

Although LGBT activism can’t be as lucrative as the group’s biggest moneymaker — abortion — it certainly diversifies their already fanatical portfolio. And with Planned Parenthood’s latest hire, Dr. Sara Flowers, the organization shows no signs of slowing down. Flowers may not be a household name — but she’s about to become a household presence, now that the former director at the Gay Men’s Health Crisis has just been put in charge of Planned Parenthood’s “education” efforts. And, as far as she’s concerned, sex ed is “more than learning about birth control and sexually-transmitted infections. Ideally, sex education should address… gender identity and sexual orientation…” If you think the public-school indoctrination is bad now, just wait. Planned Parenthood has unlimited access to more than 1.5 million kids through sex education. Is yours one of them? Make sure you contact your local district office and find out.

Meanwhile, when the group isn’t busy brainwashing children (or aborting them), it’s spreading plenty of misinformation online. In new videos targeting moms and dads (no doubt also funded by unwilling taxpayers), Planned Parenthood has disturbing answers to questions like “How do I know if my kid is transgender?” Children, they insist without a scrap of science to back it up, can know their gender identity by age three, the group suggests. And, “there’s nothing you as a parent can do to change [it].” Some little kids, the narrator says, “may understand that the gender that everyone says they are is not who they really know they are inside. And that’s the definition of transgender.” If you want to try counseling, the videos urge, talk with someone who’s “supportive of transgender identities.” Forcing them into a gender box, Planned Parenthood warns, will hurt them. That’s hardly the advice of the real experts at the American College of Pediatricians, who insist this kind of guidance is “child abuse.”

After its baby body parts sales, overbilling scandals, sexual abuse cover-ups, gender targeting, unsanitary clinic conditions, botched abortions, falsified medical information, and political campaigns, Planned Parenthood didn’t have a lot of credibility to fall back on. Now, with this stampede into LGBT activism, whatever shred of credibility Planned Parenthood had in claiming to be a “health care provider” should be put to rest. This is all the more reason for Congress to finish the job it started last fall and cut off Planned Parenthood’s funding at the source: the federal government.


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


RELATED ARTICLES:

ICE Queen: Harris Compares Immigration Workers to KKK

Truth Erased by Hollywood in Film Attacking Counseling Choice

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images is republished with permission.

VIDEO: D.C. Carry Permits Skyrocket After Recent Move From “May Issue” to “Shall Issue”

Washington, D.C. concealed carry permits jump over 1440% since District went ‘shall issue.’

NRATV’s Kerry Picket joins Dana Loesch with the latest.

DeSantis Cheers Brenda Snipes’ Resignation, Says Broward County ‘Dropped the Ball’

Republican Florida Gov.-elect Ron DeSantis appeared on “Fox & Friends” Monday to applaud the resignation of Broward County Election Supervisor Brenda Snipes and said there was “no way as governor that [he] was going to let her preside over another election.”

“Obviously we’re going to have to address some of the problems with the election administration in places like Broward and Palm Beach County,” DeSantis said.

dcnf-logo

“I think it’s good that Brenda Snipes has submitted her resignation.”

DeSantis claimed he would not have let Snipes continue under his administration and said she “dropped the ball” during the statewide recount.

“There was no way as governor that I was going to let her preside over another election down there after all the problems that they had,” he continued. “So we had 65 counties do a good job. We had two that dropped the ball. We want to make sure all 67 counties do these elections in a fair way.”

Snipes could have faced an “embarrassing suspension from office at the hands of either Gov. Rick Scott or his likely successor, Ron DeSantis,” according to Politico.

Host Ainsley Earhardt asked DeSantis what the next step in the process is and he said either he or outgoing Republican Gov. Rick Scott would appoint her replacement after she officially leaves office.

“It depends on when her resignation is effective. I heard it was going to be effective sometime in early January, about the time I’m being sworn in. So, yeah, then that will fall to me to appoint her replacement. If she has resigned immediately, then Gov. Scott would have a window to appoint it before he leaves office,” DeSantis said.

COLUMN BY

Nick Givas

Nick Givas is a reporter for The Daily Caller News Foundation. Twitter: @NGivasDC

RELATED ARTICLES:

School Choice Moms’ Tipped the Governor’s Florida Race: DeSantis owes his win to unexpected support from minority women.

The “Found Ballot” Fraud

Palm Beach County Techs Tell Tales Of “Total Incompetence” In Operating Voting Machines

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images is republished with permission. Photo: SMG/ZUMA Press/Newscom. 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.Nick Givas is a reporter for The Daily Caller News Foundation.

Indulgences for Hollywood as Movie Studio Buys Gun Offsets

In 2014, Hollywood movie mogul and fierce NRA critic Harvey Weinstein appeared to acknowledge the movie industry might be able to have a positive impact by reducing its glorification of criminal violence. Weinstein explained,

I have to choose movies that aren’t violent or as violent as they used to be… I know for me personally … I can’t continue to do that. The change starts here. It has already. For me, I can’t do it. I can’t make one movie and say this is what I want for my kids and then just go out and be a hypocrite.

To his credit, Weinstein eventually made good on his promise. Following a widely reported sexual harassment scandal, in 2018 The Weinstein Company declared bankruptcy.

In the meantime, the rest of Hollywood has picked up the slack by continuing to churn out depictions of graphic violence. As Weinstein knew, the glorification of violence sells. So one enterprising film company sought to develop a way to quell their moral pangs while continuing the on-screen carnage.

According to an October 25 press release, startup studio Level Forward (a partnership between gun control activist and Disney heiress Abigail Disney and Killer Content) will now only produce content that is “gun neutral.”

The press release explained,

For each prop gun that appears in a production, financiers and producers will add a “GUN NEUTRAL” budget line item to cover the cost of destroying real-world guns and to invest in community-based arts programs targeting youth in the most gun violence-ridden communities. An average of $15 per prop gun will be charged.

As part of the program, Level Forward has pledged the money to destroy 10 guns for every prop gun that appears in one of their productions. And Level Forward does not appear to be toning down the on-screen violence due to budgetary concerns. In its first three Gun Neutral films, 166 prop firearms were used, resulting in a pledge to destroy 1,660 real firearms.

The Gun Neutral concept will remind some of carbon offsets. Carbon offset policy attempts to apply market forces to reduce carbon emissions and can be government mandated or voluntary. In the U.S. in the mid-2000s it became fashionable for elites to purchase carbon offsets to repent for their jet setting high-consumption lifestyles. Critics charged that this hypocritical approach to environmentalism was akin to the medieval practice of buying indulgences for sins.

However, perhaps a comparison to the medieval Catholic Church isn’t fair to the church in this instance.

In order to carry out the Gun Neutral program, Level Forward has partnered with the group One Less Gun. On the One Less Guns website, visitors are told that for a donation of £5 (about $6.50) they too can assure one gun is destroyed. At an average of $15 per prop gun, Level Forward appears to be paying $1.50 per gun purported to be destroyed.

We’re not sure if the Catholic Church ever offered a bulk rate on indulgences.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Jamie Lee Curtis Made Sure ‘Halloween’ Only Used Firearms for Self-Defense and Aligned With Her Views on Gun Control

Hollywood hates guns, except in movies like ‘Peppermint’

Gun control advocates turn to Hollywood for messaging help

Nancy Pelosi Emailed A ‘Critical Priorities’ Survey. You Won’t Believe What’s In It.

I am on the Democratic Party email list. I just received a survey from Nancy Pelosi titled “📎 need input. NOT money.” The email states:

I’m coming to you one more time this week to make sure you have your voice heard.

BEFORE MIDNIGHT: Take my critical priorities survey before our new members head to their home districts. I can’t wait to share your thoughts with them. >>

I’ve been able to meet with all our new Democratic members of Congress.

They have inspired me so much, and I’m so ready to work with them to stop President Trump’s agenda and rescue President Obama’s legacy.

And I must be honest with you, in order to make that a reality, I need you with me.

Please, can I count on you to take 3O seconds and share your top priorities with me and all our new Democratic Congress members?

NOTE: While the title states that Nancy is not seeking money, the last question requires you to send money.

It appears from the email that Nancy Pelosi’s and the Democrat’s agenda is to “stop President Trump’s agenda and rescue President Obama’s legacy.”

Here are the “Critical Priorities”:

Which issues do you want our Democrats to know matter most to you right now? (Check all that apply)

  • Restoring the Voting Rights Act and protecting voting rights
  • Protecting DREAMers and immigrants
  • Protecting Robert Mueller and his investigation
  • Continued funding for Medicare and Social Security
  • Protecting our environment and slowing climate change
  • Health care coverage for pre-existing conditions
  • Building on the progress of Obamacare
  • Gun violence prevention
  • A $15 minimum wage
  • The economy
  • LGBTQ rights
  • Preserving President Obama’s Medicaid expansion
  • Making tuition affordable for all

The only questions on the survey that are a priority with President Trump, and Republicans in the House, are funding Medicare and Social Security, Health care coverage for pre-existing conditions and the economy.

All the rest of the critical priorities are for narrow constituencies. It’s interesting that Nancy is still focused on former President Obama’s legacy.

Well, at least there are some things that Nancy is in sync with Republicans and the American people.

A good sign? Or a bad sign?

RELATED ARTICLE: Migrants Chant ‘Si Se Puede’ and Mexican Nationals say ‘No Way Jose’….Out, Out, Out!’

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is from Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi’s Facebook page.

Democrat Socialism and Sodomy: Two Social Poisoned Pills

I became interested in links between democrat socialism and sodomy. During my research I found, to my surprise, that today they are inextricably linked.

Socialism and sodomy have the same goals, the destruction of heterosexuality and the traditional nuclear family.

The targets are straight males and fathers who are married with children. But why is this the goal? Isn’t this a poisoned pill for every society?

Sodomy predates Christianity

Many look at sodomy from a biblical perspective citing the story of Sodom and Gomorrah in Genesis 19:1-30. However, sodomy predates Christianity. It was a political issue for centuries that ancient nations dealt with in different ways both socially and in law. In her 2014 column “Did Spartan Warriors Embrace Homosexuality?” Kayla Jameth wrote:

Crete, Athens, Corinth and Thebes practiced classic pederasty. A homosocial institute that encouraged love in a myriad of forms between an older man (erastês) and a youth (erômenos). The terms carry certain connotations that directly or indirectly influence modern views on this relationship.

The mentor, or erastês, is intended to be an older man who guides the youth through the upper echelons of society. This was an ancient form of social networking. Erastês means “lover”. This has been taken to imply a sexual relationship. Especially as erômenos means “beloved”. These are not so much descriptions of the individuals as titles for their place in the relationship.

Were all pederastic relationships sexual? I doubt that was the case, as the majority of men now, and likely then, identify as straight/heterosexual. That’s nothing more than statistics. Were there bisexuals and bi-curious individuals? Without a doubt, but once again not to the exclusion of straight individuals.

The article “Before Homosexuality: Sodomy” notes:

Same-sex sexual acts have a history; today they are called homosexuality. Before homosexuality they were called sodomy. In England during the reign of King Henry VIII sodomy became a civil offense with the passage of the buggery Act of 1533. In Germany in the late 1860s the transition from a religious model to a medical model for same-sex sexual acts begin. It was at this time the term homosexual came about. [Emphasis added]

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports:

Gay and bisexual men are the population most affected by HIV in the United States. In 2016, gay and bisexual men accounted for 67% of the 40,324 new HIV diagnoses in the United States and 6 dependent areas. Approximately 492,000 sexually active gay and bisexual men are at high risk for HIV; however, we have more tools to prevent HIV than ever before.

Download the Fact Sheet

Where does Socialism fit in?

Thomas Harrison, co-director of the Campaign for Peace and Democracy and a member of the editorial board of New Politics, in his 2009 column “Socialism and Homosexuality” wrote:

MARX AND ENGELS NEVER SUBJECTED homophobia to the sort of historical materialist criticism that they, especially Engels, applied to the family and the oppression of women. Indeed, Engels in particular evinced all the prejudices of high Victorianism when it came to homosexuality. 

[ … ]

Engels’ pioneering analysis, published in 1884 as The Origins of the Family, Private Property and the State, tried to show that the family and the oppression of women were not embedded in “human nature,” but arose historically in conjunction with the emergence of class societies2; the abolition of class society, therefore, could be expected to free women and abolish the family, at least as a site of gender inequality. At the same time, Engels presents heterosexuality as unproblematically “natural.” Homosexuality is briefly mentioned, disparagingly, in connection with ancient Greece as nothing but a product of misogyny.

Harrison then outlines the new Democrat Socialist view on sodomy stating, “Without excusing Engels’ ugly homophobia, and that of Marx, it seems short sighted to simply equate them with the standard-issue bigots of their time. Marxism, as a method of historical analysis and a theory of democratic revolution from below, created the tools for understanding the relation of gay oppression to misogyny and compulsory heterosexuality, and for pointing the way toward liberation.”

The neo-Marxist must embrace gays as victims of oppression. In the United States, gays are not oppressed and are subject to equal protection under the law. The United States Supreme Court ruled in favor of gay marriage in Obergefell v. Hodges. Overt oppression of gays is seen in predominantly Muslim countries such as Iran.

Anyone who criticizes sodomy is labeled homophobic, unless they are Muslims. The great oxymoron is the political joining at the hip of Democrat Socialists with Islamists. In the end one will win politically. If the Islamists win then sodomy will be outlawed. If the Democrat Socialists win then heterosexual males and families will be outlawed. These are two poisoned pills that will kill any society.

RELATED ARTICLE: ‘Good Morning America’ promotes child drag queen

EDITORS NOTE: The edited featured photo is by Marc Schäfer on Unsplash.

President Trump’s Proclamation on Mass Migration

The whole idea of Democratic operatives’ well funded caravans is to overwhelm the U.S. asylum system and turn thousands of illegal aliens loose into our country in order to become “undocumented Democrats” and fraudulently vote in elections.

President Trump’s new rule on asylum fixes a dangerous loophole.

President Trump signed a presidential proclamation (below) that prevents migrants from claiming asylum unless they do so at an official border crossing. Despite pushback from the leftist organizations, like the ACLU, the order merely directs people to one of more than 300 ports of entry to legally present their asylum claims, which will be evaluated in a fair and orderly process. Heritage experts say this new rule will fix a loophole that has been used to overwhelm the immigration system, destabilize the border region, and make millions for human trafficking cartels.

RELATED ARTICLES:

What Congress Can Do Now to Fix Immigration Enforcement

REPORT: Noncitizens, Voting Violations and U.S. Elections

Heritage’s latest report on how to fix immigration law and enforcement.

‘It’s Your Right to Go to the US’: What I Saw When I Visited the Migrant Caravan

Presidential Proclamation Addressing Mass Migration Through the Southern Border of the United States

IMMIGRATION Issued on: November 9, 2018

The United States expects the arrival at the border between the United States and Mexico (southern border) of a substantial number of aliens primarily from Central America who appear to have no lawful basis for admission into our country. They are traveling in large, organized groups through Mexico and reportedly intend to enter the United States unlawfully or without proper documentation and to seek asylum, despite the fact that, based on past experience, a significant majority will not be eligible for or be granted that benefit. Many entered Mexico unlawfully — some with violence — and have rejected opportunities to apply for asylum and benefits in Mexico. The arrival of large numbers of aliens will contribute to the overloading of our immigration and asylum system and to the release of thousands of aliens into the interior of the United States. The continuing and threatened mass migration of aliens with no basis for admission into the United States through our southern border has precipitated a crisis and undermines the integrity of our borders. I therefore must take immediate action to protect the national interest, and to maintain the effectiveness of the asylum system for legitimate asylum seekers who demonstrate that they have fled persecution and warrant the many special benefits associated with asylum.

In recent weeks, an average of approximately 2,000 inadmissible aliens have entered each day at our southern border. In Fiscal Year 2018 overall, 124,511 aliens were found inadmissible at ports of entry on the southern border, while 396,579 aliens were apprehended entering the United States unlawfully between such ports of entry. The great number of aliens who cross unlawfully into the United States through the southern border consumes tremendous resources as the Government seeks to surveil, apprehend, screen, process, and detain them.

Aliens who enter the United States unlawfully or without proper documentation and are subject to expedited removal may avoid being promptly removed by demonstrating, during an initial screening process, a credible fear of persecution or torture. Approximately 2 decades ago, most aliens deemed inadmissible at a port of entry or apprehended after unlawfully entering the United States through the southern border were single adults who were promptly returned to Mexico, and very few asserted a fear of return. Since then, however, there has been a massive increase in fear-of-persecution or torture claims by aliens who enter the United States through the southern border. The vast majority of such aliens are found to satisfy the credible-fear threshold, although only a fraction of the claimants whose claims are adjudicated ultimately qualify for asylum or other protection. Aliens found to have a credible fear are often released into the interior of the United States, as a result of a lack of detention space and a variety of other legal and practical difficulties, pending adjudication of their claims in a full removal proceeding in immigration court. The immigration adjudication process often takes years to complete because of the growing volume of claims and because of the need to expedite proceedings for detained aliens. During that time, many released aliens fail to appear for hearings, do not comply with subsequent orders of removal, or are difficult to locate and remove.

Members of family units pose particular challenges. The Federal Government lacks sufficient facilities to house families together. Virtually all members of family units who enter the United States through the southern border, unlawfully or without proper documentation, and that are found to have a credible fear of persecution, are thus released into the United States. Against this backdrop of near-assurance of release, the number of such aliens traveling as family units who enter through the southern border and claim a credible fear of persecution has greatly increased. And large numbers of family units decide to make the dangerous and unlawful border crossing with their children.

The United States has a long and proud history of offering protection to aliens who are fleeing persecution and torture and who qualify under the standards articulated in our immigration laws, including through our asylum system and the Refugee Admissions Program. But our system is being overwhelmed by migration through our southern border. Crossing the border to avoid detection and then, if apprehended, claiming a fear of persecution is in too many instances an avenue to near-automatic release into the interior of the United States. Once released, such aliens are very difficult to remove. An additional influx of large groups of aliens arriving at once through the southern border would add tremendous strain to an already taxed system, especially if they avoid orderly processing by unlawfully crossing the southern border.

The entry of large numbers of aliens into the United States unlawfully between ports of entry on the southern border is contrary to the national interest, and our law has long recognized that aliens who seek to lawfully enter the United States must do so at ports of entry. Unlawful entry puts lives of both law enforcement and aliens at risk. By contrast, entry at ports of entry at the southern border allows for orderly processing, which enables the efficient deployment of law enforcement resources across our vast southern border.

Failing to take immediate action to stem the mass migration the United States is currently experiencing and anticipating would only encourage additional mass unlawful migration and further overwhelming of the system.

Other presidents have taken strong action to prevent mass migration. In Proclamation 4865 of September 29, 1981 (High Seas Interdiction of Illegal Aliens), in response to an influx of Haitian nationals traveling to the United States by sea, President Reagan suspended the entry of undocumented aliens from the high seas and ordered the Coast Guard to intercept such aliens before they reached United States shores and to return them to their point of origin. In Executive Order 12807 of May 24, 1992 (Interdiction of Illegal Aliens), in response to a dramatic increase in the unlawful mass migration of Haitian nationals to the United States, President Bush ordered additional measures to interdict such Haitian nationals and return them to their home country. The Supreme Court upheld the legality of those measures in Sale v. Haitian Centers Council, Inc., 509 U.S. 155 (1993).

I am similarly acting to suspend, for a limited period, the entry of certain aliens in order to address the problem of large numbers of aliens traveling through Mexico to enter our country unlawfully or without proper documentation. I am tailoring the suspension to channel these aliens to ports of entry, so that, if they enter the United States, they do so in an orderly and controlled manner instead of unlawfully. Under this suspension, aliens entering through the southern border, even those without proper documentation, may, consistent with this proclamation, avail themselves of our asylum system, provided that they properly present themselves for inspection at a port of entry. In anticipation of a large group of aliens arriving in the coming weeks, I am directing the Secretary of Homeland Security to commit additional resources to support our ports of entry at the southern border to assist in processing those aliens — and all others arriving at our ports of entry — as efficiently as possible.

But aliens who enter the United States unlawfully through the southern border in contravention of this proclamation will be ineligible to be granted asylum under the regulation promulgated by the Attorney General and the Secretary of Homeland Security that became effective earlier today. Those aliens may, however, still seek other forms of protection from persecution or torture. In addition, this limited suspension will facilitate ongoing negotiations with Mexico and other countries regarding appropriate cooperative arrangements to prevent unlawful mass migration to the United States through the southern border. Thus, this proclamation is also necessary to manage and conduct the foreign affairs of the United States effectively.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, DONALD J. TRUMP, by the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including sections 212(f) and 215(a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) (8 U.S.C. 1182(f) and 1185(a), respectively) hereby find that, absent the measures set forth in this proclamation, the entry into the United States of persons described in section 1 of this proclamation would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, and that their entry should be subject to certain restrictions, limitations, and exceptions. I therefore hereby proclaim the following:

Section 1. Suspension and Limitation on Entry. The entry of any alien into the United States across the international boundary between the United States and Mexico is hereby suspended and limited, subject to section 2 of this proclamation. That suspension and limitation shall expire 90 days after the date of this proclamation or the date on which an agreement permits the United States to remove aliens to Mexico in compliance with the terms of section 208(a)(2)(A) of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1158(a)(2)(A)), whichever is earlier.

Sec. 2. Scope and Implementation of Suspension and Limitation on Entry. (a) The suspension and limitation on entry pursuant to section 1 of this proclamation shall apply only to aliens who enter the United States after the date of this proclamation.

(b) The suspension and limitation on entry pursuant to section 1 of this proclamation shall not apply to any alien who enters the United States at a port of entry and properly presents for inspection, or to any lawful permanent resident of the United States.

(c) Nothing in this proclamation shall limit an alien entering the United States from being considered for withholding of removal under section 241(b)(3) of the INA (8 U.S.C. 1231(b)(3)) or protection pursuant to the regulations promulgated under the authority of the implementing legislation regarding the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, or limit the statutory processes afforded to unaccompanied alien children upon entering the United States under section 279 of title 6, United States Code, and section 1232 of title 8, United States Code.

(d) No later than 90 days after the date of this proclamation, the Secretary of State, the Attorney General, and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall jointly submit to the President, through the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs, a recommendation on whether an extension or renewal of the suspension or limitation on entry in section 1 of this proclamation is in the interests of the United States.

Sec. 3. Interdiction. The Secretary of State and the Secretary of Homeland Security shall consult with the Government of Mexico regarding appropriate steps — consistent with applicable law and the foreign policy, national security, and public-safety interests of the United States — to address the approach of large groups of aliens traveling through Mexico with the intent of entering the United States unlawfully, including efforts to deter, dissuade, and return such aliens before they physically enter United States territory through the southern border.

Sec. 4. Severability. It is the policy of the United States to enforce this proclamation to the maximum extent possible to advance the interests of the United States. Accordingly:

(a) if any provision of this proclamation, or the application of any provision to any person or circumstance, is held to be invalid, the remainder of this proclamation and the application of its other provisions to any other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby; and

(b) if any provision of this proclamation, or the application of any provision to any person or circumstance, is held to be invalid because of the failure to follow certain procedures, the relevant executive branch officials shall implement those procedural requirements to conform with existing law and with any applicable court orders.

Sec. 5. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this proclamation shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This proclamation shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This proclamation is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this ninth day of November, in the year of our Lord two thousand eighteen, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and forty-third.

DONALD J. TRUMP

EDITOR NOTE: This column is republished with permission. The featured photo is by Don Ross III on Unsplash.

Blaming the Victim in the Digital Age

Consider the following scenario:

A murder investigation is underway to determine the identity of the shooter. The detective questioning the suspect accuses him of shooting the woman he robbed. The suspect indignantly retorts, “BUT SHE WOULDN’T GIVE ME HER PURSE!!”

WHAT? The robber is blaming the victim because she refused to give him what he wanted! The victimizer is rationalizing his behavior and misrepresents himself as the victim.

The facts of this case are not in dispute – the suspect admits he shot the woman he was robbing. It is the interpretation of those facts that are being disputed – WHO is to blame – victim or victimizer?

In a sane society the shooter is blamed for the murder and is held criminally responsible. In today’s upside down world of Leftist Democrat identity politics, society accepts the shooter’s interpretation and the victim is being blamed for not surrendering to the demands of the victimizer. The perpetrator has been allowed to frame the argument.

The escalating antisemitism in Europe and America illustrates the same operating principle of blaming the victim where the perpetrators are being allowed to frame the argument. This is how it works.

Tabitha Korol’s recent article, “Paradise Long-lost,” documents the blatant falsehoods and misrepresentations in Randa Siniora’s October 25, 2018 anti-Semitic address to the UN Security Council. So, let’s investigate Ms. Siniora’s odious “blame the victim” presentation.

Ms. Siniora begins her address with a lofty self-aggrandizing introduction to frame the argument:

“Mr. President, Excellencies, Civil Society colleagues, Ladies and Gentlemen, Good morning. Today, I speak in my capacity as the General Director of the Women’s Centre for Legal Aid and Counselling (WCLAC). I also speak on behalf of the NGO Working Group on Women, Peace and Security. I speak to you as a peace leader and as a human rights defender who has witnessed, documented, and spoken out about violations in the Occupied Palestinian Territory for three decades.”

The body of Siniora’s 1500 word speech typifies the deliberate worldwide effort to demonize Israel. The incessant repetition of lies, distortions, and blaming Jews for Arab violence defines the current echo chamber that is propagandizing adults on the Internet and indoctrinating children in schools worldwide.

It is Hitler’s old tried and true political strategy – if you tell a lie big enough and long enough it will be believed as the truth.

Propaganda is a far more powerful tool than bullets in Western societies. Ever since oil was discovered in Saudi Arabia the greedy West has allowed itself to be propagandized by the anti-Semitic Jew hatred of the Arab world. Politicians were bribed, university chairs were bought, Internet behemoths began curating/censoring content, and pro-Arab policies became normative resulting in sharia compliant anti-Semites serving in public office.

We live in a 21st century digital world that is indoctrinating the public to blame the victim and believe that the Jews are the problem. Rational arguments and documented facts are not persuasive to those who embrace their political self-interest with emotional religious zeal. The anti-semitic echo chamber in Nazi Germany transformed a sovereign country into a killing machine. Today, the United Nations represents a worldwide anti-Semitic echo chamber united against Israel. The United States and Israel are powerful sovereign nations and formidable obstacles in the globalist campaign for one world government.

We are now at a global tipping point. The liberal Leftist Democrats in the United States and the ultra-left Labor party in England have been exposed for embracing the anti-Semitic lies of the echo chamber. The Leftist leaders will collapse their countries’ economies if they gain power and will blame the Jews for the collapse.

It is not enough for rational people to shake their heads confused by how it is possible for lies, inconsistencies, and distortions to be believed. They must fight back by exposing the deliberateness of the propaganda effort to blame the Jews and recognize that antisemitism is a galvanizing political tool. The lying echo chamber that promotes the Boycott Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement and supports Ms. Siniora is the same lying echo chamber that facilitated Obama’s catastrophic anti-American anti-Semitic Iran deal.

The Constitution of the United States has been America’s enduring, non-partisan, foundational document guaranteeing our individual rights and freedoms for 242 years. Leftist Democrats are seeking to transform our Constitution into a living breathing document that will reflect their partisan political aspirations. This partisan transformation will allow the institutionalization of antisemitism and legalize its blame the victim infrastructure.

It is essential to recognize that masses of illegal immigrants bring antisemitism with them when they cross the border. Population shifting and forced illegal immigration is a political strategy designed to collapse the economies and sovereignty of Western nations in preparation for one world government.

Like Hitler in the 1930s, Leftist leaders here and abroad are using the unifying tool of antisemitism to gain partisan power and control over their respective governments. They have embraced the Islamists and Globalists in a bizarre alliance of common cause.

Here is the problem.

The Leftist/Islamist/Globalist axis is the short term head of a poisonous three-headed snake. The Islamists believe they will prevail. The Globalists believe they will prevail. The Leftists are the useful idiots for both sides. Time will tell the outcome.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on the Goudsmit Pundicity. It is republished with permission. The featured photo is by Toa Heftiba on Unsplash.

U.S. Bishops, Vatican Slapped with Simultaneous Lawsuits. Church leaders accused of conspiracy, deception, concealment.

WASHINGTON (ChurchMilitant.com) by Stephen Wynne– On Tuesday, as the U.S. bishops were still absorbing the news that the Vatican had blocked action on clerical sex abuse, they were slapped with two simultaneous lawsuits, with one naming the Holy See as a defendant.

Both lawsuits seek to force open diocesan secret archives by court order, compelling the U.S. Church to reveal the identities and histories of its predators.

One suit, launched by six clerical sex abuse victims, was filed in federal district court in Minnesota. It alleges that the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) concealed “the known histories and identities from the public, parishioners and law enforcement of clergy accused of sexually abusing children across the country.”

Speaking Tuesday, Jeff Anderson, attorney for the six plaintiffs, warned the Church “maintains” a threat to public safety.

The same day, a class-action suit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia against both the USCCB and the Vatican itself — an unprecedented legal move.

It accuses the Church of conspiracy and running a criminal enterprise under federal racketeering statutes.

According to the 80-page class-action suit:

This case is about the endemic, systemic, rampant, and pervasive rape and sexual abuse of Plaintiffs and Class Members perpetrated by Roman Catholic Church cardinals, bishops, monsignors, priests, sisters, lay leaders, members of Catholic religious orders, educators, and other of Defendants’ personnel, members, agents, and representatives (collectively, “Clergy” or “Catholic Clergy”) while serving in active ministry — with the knowledge of Defendants.

It accuses Church leaders of promoting a public hazard by covering up the crimes of predator priests:

Rather than safeguarding and protecting Plaintiffs and Class Members — who were minor children at the time — Defendants protected the abusive Clergy, took extraordinary measures to conceal their wrongful conduct, moved them from parish to parish, without warning church members or the general public, thereby further facilitating their predatory practices, failed and refused to report the abusive Clergy to law enforcement or other responsible authorities as required by law, and — incredibly — even promoted the abusive Clergy. Defendants’ wrongful acts are ongoing and continuous.

The class-action suit accuses the Church of violating the federal Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, which was originally devised to target organized crime syndicates. It seeks to triple financial damages for “unlawful and intentional schemes, actions, inaction, omissions, cover-up, deception, and concealment, obstructive behavior regarding investigations, and conspiracy of silence,” which “constitute assault, breach of fiduciary duty, negligence/gross negligence, negligence per se, intentional infliction of emotional distress, wrongful death, public nuisance, conspiracy, and aiding and abetting.”

The class-action suit is historic, in that it attempts to hold the Vatican liable in the United States for the actions of its clergy — a first. Up to now, the Vatican has avoided liability by claiming it has no direct authority over clergy.

But this assertion was shattered on Monday when the Holy See blocked the USCCB vote in Baltimore.

“If that’s not command responsibility, I don’t know what is,” said attorney Mitchell A. Toups, who is helping lead the class-action suit.

EDITORS NOTE: This column with video and images is republished with permission.

How Goes Maine, So Goes the Nation

$1.3 Million was spent to influence Maine voters on the the issue of Ranked Choice Voting. The bill passed and Maine become the first State in the Nation to institute this voting process. Now before we go further, let’s talk about what Ranked Choice Voting is…

Ranked choice voting is a method of ranking the candidates of your choice in order of your preference. In order to be elected to office, the candidate must reach 50 plus 1 percent of the vote. The candidate who reaches that mark wins the race. But what if it is a closely contested race and no candidate reaches the 50 plus 1 threshold to claim victory. That’s where Ranked Choice comes into play.

In the recent 2nd District race for Congress here in Maine, the two major candidates were Republican Congressman, Bruce Poliquin and his Democratic challenger, Jared Golden. Neither candidate, however,  reached the 50 plus1 percent of the vote to be declared winner. So in Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) we then turn to the “also ran” candidates to settle  the issue.

Previously, those votes cast for the candidates that were mathematically eliminated from the race in the first round of ballot counts were just thrown out, but now those ballots will be counted in a second round of counting when no candidate reaches the 50 plus 1 threshold. If you voted for one of the lesser candidates that was eliminated, your vote on that ballot for your second choice will now be added to the vote tally of that individual. This will keep going until one of the candidates reaches the 50 plus 1 threshold to win.

So let’s take a race, as was the case here in Maine, with four candidates on the ballot: A Republican, Democrat, Progressive and Independent. Progressives and Independents are by and large, liberal, so If you voted for the Progressive or Independent as your first choice….who do you suppose your second choice is likely to be?  The Democrat of course, and so your second choice for office, the democrat, will get your vote!  So is RCV fair? I think not. It is a system of voting that is designed to stack the deck against a Conservative candidate.

In the recent mid term elections, Maine’s Republican Congressman, Bruce Poliquin was challenged by Democrat, Jared Golden who is backed by Pelosi and the far left. Liberal organizations pumped millions into Golden’s campaign in hopes of unseating the Republican incumbent. This was the most expensive Congressional Campaign in the Country and keep in mind that Maine’s population is only around a million people. Poliquin received more votes than Jared Golden in the election. Sadly, though, that wasn’t enough to win because remember, the candidate needs 50 plus 1 percent of the vote to be declared winner. Neither of these candidates received the required 50 plus 1 percent of the vote and so the remaining 23,013 votes were assigned to the voters second choice candidate. This placed Golden over the 50 plus 1 percent of the required votes needed to be declared winner. Even though, after the votes were counted, the incumbent Republican Congressman, Bruce Poliquin received more votes, Golden received more second choice votes on the ballot than did Poliquin and…presto, Jared Golden wins and becomes the new Congressman representing Maine’s 2nd district.

Added questions to this skewed voting process come in the form of Article 1, Clause 4 of the United States Constitution:

“The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing (sic) Senators.”

The sticking point seems to come from the word, “Manner,” and what the Founders meant by this word. I would argue that they were clearly referring to the way in which the electorate would show their support, either by a show of hands, or written ballot. I do not believe that ever in their wildest dreams would these learned and astute men who so meticulously hammered out the greatest Republic the wold has ever known, concoct a methodology of choosing a candidate that was so convoluted. They meant to give each and every American a voice and how he chose to use that voice was up to him; one man, one vote.

Bruce Poliquin has filed suit to challenge the Constitutionality of RCV and to retain his seat in the Congress. The case is set to be heard in Federal Court here in Bangor on December 4th. The judge has promised a decision before the December 14 deadline when all certified votes for office must be submitted to Congress by Maine’s Secretary of State. I do not have a great deal of faith that RCV will be overturned in Federal court. The result of this election should be placed on hold and the case fast tracked to the Supreme Court and the decision made there on its Constitutionality.

Remember Maine’s Motto is “Dirigo,” or “I lead.”

“How Goes Maine….So Goes the Nation!!!”

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images is republished with permission. The featured photo is by Mercedes Mehling on Unsplash.

The Golan Heights: Its History and Biblical significance

Why Historical Correctness must always trump Political Correctness.

In the cesspit known as the United Nations – an oxymoron as most nations are not united except when depressingly voting as political fodder within murky voting blocs – one shining star remains above the UN’s corrosive hypocrisy. That principled star and lady is UN Ambassador, Nikki Haley, who declared in a statement previewing the perennial anti-Israel vote that “the United States will no longer abstain when the United Nations engages in its useless annual vote on the Golan Heights.” As she so resolutely said:

“If this resolution ever made sense, it surely does not today. The resolution is plainly biased against Israel. Further, the atrocities the Syrian regime continues to commit prove its lack of fitness to govern anyone. The destructive influence of the Iranian regime inside Syria presents major threats to international security. ISIS and other terrorist groups remain in Syria.

And this resolution does nothing to bring any parties closer to a peace agreement. The United States will vote no.”

But here is a telling and inconvenient truth for the assorted delegates to hear as they sit squirming in their comfortable chairs in the General Assembly of the United Nations. Israel has been in possession of the Golan Heights for 51 years, Syria occupied it for 44 years.

You see, the British tore the Golan away from Mandatory Palestine and gave it to France’s Syrian colony in 1923. Syria attacked Israel in 1967 and lost the Golan. Who then has possessed the Golan the longest?

Even as modern day Syria is convulsed in a murderous and bloody civil war with untold thousands dead and maimed; even as its tyrant, Bashir al-Assad, the minority Alawite Shiite dictator, now allies himself with Iran and Russia as he fights for his political and physical life; even with all this, he nevertheless spews forth his hatred of Israel and his call to take away the Golan Heights from the Jewish state.

Russia, as it has since the time of Peter the Great and Catherine the Great, seeks a warm water port in the Mediterranean and a physical presence south of the Black Sea. Syria provides both.

Iran, under the irrational yoke of ayatollahs and mullahs who desire one thing – a cataclysmic nuclear war that they believe will usher in the Muslim messiah; the twelfth Mahdi – are already bringing thousands ofIslamic terrorists to the Golan border between Syria and Israel in order to fulfill the extermination of the Jewish state, which it calls the Little Satan, and later to destroy with ICBMs the Big Satan; the United States of America.

Iran has already built military bases in Syria and continuously arms its huge terror proxy army in Lebanon and Syria, Hezb’allah, with advanced missiles and weapon systems. This terrorist horde has an army bigger than most European forces can deploy and has over 130,000 missiles aimed at Israel from southern Lebanon; all hidden in private homes, schools, hospitals and UN facilities constituting a crime against humanity and a massive threat to the civilian population of the Jewish state. At the same time, Iran which is the leading fomenter and financier of worldwide terror, directs the Hamas terrorists who occupy the Gaza Strip.

Those of us who have stood on the Golan’s 1,700 foot steep escarpment, are struck by its immense strategic value overlooking Israel’s fertile Hula Valley and the beautiful harp shaped lake below, called in Hebrew,Kinneret (the Sea of Galilee.)

But during Syria’s occupation of the territory, no agriculture of any significance took place and no restoration of its terrain was ever undertaken. Instead, the Golan was a giant Syrian army artillery encampment whose sole purpose was to deliberately rain down upon Israeli farmers, fishermen and villagers an endless barrage of lethal artillery shells.

So what is the history of the Golan Heights and what is its overwhelming Biblical significance to the reconstituted Jewish state? Perhaps we should return primarily to the biblical books of Joshua and Numbers.

Before the Tribes of Israel would cross the River Jordan and enter the Promised Land, the first among them had already taken possession of territory east of the River Jordan. These were the half tribes of Manasseh, Gad and Reuben who liberated the Bashan and Gilead from the Amorites.

Biblical Bashan incorporates today’s Golan Heights. Gilead is the fertile land, which lies in what is the north eastern area of today’s Kingdom of Jordan:

” … a little balm, and a little honey, spices and myrrh, nuts and almonds” (Gen 43:11.)

It was Canaan, correctly known by its time immemorial Biblical Jewish names (Judea and Samaria) west of the Jordan, (erroneously known by its Jordanian Arab occupation name of the so-called West Bank) which would pose the formidable challenge to Joshua bin Nun, the general leading the Israelite tribes. So it was that Moses, the Lawgiver, spoke to the children of Gad and Reuben thus:

“Shall your brethren go to war, and shall you sit here?” (Numbers 32:6)

The leaders of the two tribes replied that they would indeed send their combat men west into Canaan and fight alongside their brethren while their families would remain behind.

“We will build sheepfolds here for our cattle and cities for our little ones. But we ourselves will go ready armed before the children of Israel until we have brought them unto their place: and our little ones shall dwell in fenced cities because of the inhabitants of the land. We will not return unto our houses until the children of Israel have inherited every man his inheritance.” (Numbers 32: 16-18)

The story of reconstituted Israel and its people is mirrored in the Biblical story of those ancient ancestors. The young men and women of modern Israel have gone again and again from their homes; be they villages, towns or cities, to the borders and established communities there in times of danger and peril, just like those young men did from the Biblical tribes of Gad and Reuben.

The Jewish pioneers of today in Judea and Samaria – the Biblical heartland – are no different. But the world has chosen to demonize them as “obstacles to peace” and an impediment to the creation of a fraudulent Arab state to be called Palestine; a state that has never existed in all of recorded history – certainly not as a sovereign independent Arab state.

The pioneers are now pejoratively called “settlers” and their homes and farms derisively called “settlements.” It matters not to the infernal chorus that sings the international siren song of hate and ignorance that these pioneers are returned to their ancestral homesteads and seek to take up their ploughshares to sow, to plant and re-possess their ancient homeland.

But the purpose of this article is also to learn about the Biblical and post-Biblical history of the Jewish descendants of Gad, Reuben, Manasseh and all the original Jewish tribes.

The Bashan region, now known as the Golan Heights, is a part of the Biblical territory promised to the Patriarch Abraham and the people of Israel for an everlasting covenant – the Covenant of the Parts – recounted in Genesis 15. The city of Bashan was a refuge city (Deut, 4:43).

During the Biblical period of the Jewish Kings, a battle high on the Golan took place between King Ahab and the army of Aram. A Jewish victory took place at the present site of Kibbutz Afik, which lies a few miles east of Lake Kinneret, the Sea of Galilee.

After the end of the Babylonian Exile, and during the Second Temple Period, Jews returned to their homes on the Golan. Subsequently the returnees were attacked by hostile neighbors and Judah Maccabee brought his forces up to the Heights to defend them.

At the conclusion of the Hasmonean Period, King Alexander Yannai finally re-conquered the Golan and Jews returned yet again. They rebuilt communities in central Golan, including the major cities of Banias and Susita, which formed part of the defense of the Golan.

Their residents fought heroically against the Roman legions during the Great Revolt of 135 AD, known also as the Second Uprising. It was led by the charismatic Shimon Bar Kokhba, known as the “Son of a Star” and an authentic historical Jewish folk hero. Some 10,000 residents of Gamla alone perished fighting against Rome.

Second century Jewish coins were found on the Golan after its liberation during the last days of the June, 1967 Six Day War. These ancient coins were inscribed with the words, “For the Redemption of Holy Jerusalem.”

In the succeeding Talmudic Period, Jewish communities flourished and expanded. Archaeologists have found the remains of 34 synagogues on the Golan. Jewish life on the Golan largely ended after the defeat of the Byzantine army by Arabs from Arabia carrying the new banner of Islam and the region descended into a long period of neglect.

But Jewish life returned yet again in the latter years of the 19th century when members of the Bnei Yehuda society from Safed purchased land on the Golan. In 1891, Baron Rothschild purchased around 18,000 acres in what is present day Ramat Magshimim.

The Jewish pioneers of the First Aliyah (immigration) began to farm land they had purchased in the Horan region until the Turkish Ottoman occupiers evicted them in 1898. Their land was then seized, and in 1923 the entire Golan was given away by Britain to the French Colonial Mandate over Syria and Lebanon.

Zionist leaders had earlier demanded the Golan be included within the new Jewish National Home because of its immense historical roots in Biblical and post-Biblical Jewish history. But Jewish liberation of the ancestral land was not possible until Israel was forced to fight for its very survival during the 1967 Six Day War.

The Golan is only 60 miles from Haifa. The lofty snow-capped slopes of Mount Hermon, the highest point in the region, have been the eyes and ears of Israel. The Golan Heights were officially annexed to Israel in 1980. But it was the left wing Israeli Prime Minister, Yitzhak Rabin, who first offered to give the Heights away in 1994.

Since then, Israelis have winced at the wrenching offers made by subsequent left leaning Israeli governments and politicians who declared publicly their desire to give the entire Heights to the Syrians in return for a delusional peace. The overwhelming majority of Israelis, however, are adamantly opposed to any such suggestion.

The Baker-Hamilton Iraq Study Group suggested that a way out for the United States from its Iraqi imbroglio would be for Israel to give the Golan Heights away to Syria. This sop, it was believed by the ISG, would bring Syria into responsible nationhood and wean her away from support of the “insurgents” attacking Iraqi and U.S assets. Of course this was before the successes of the “Surge” instituted by General Petraus made such appeasement moot.

“Obama’s carrot to the Syrian dictator, inevitably was to be the Golan Heights.”

U.S. President Obama mistakenly renewed diplomatic relations with Syria as a way, he believed, of distancing the Arab dictatorship from its alliance with Iran. This was yet another delusional act by the then U.S. President whose foreign policy was predictably in tatters.

But Obama’s carrot to the Syrian dictator inevitably was to be the Golan Heights. After his re-election he chose to yet again appease Arab and Muslim dictatorships by applying brutal pressure upon Israel and to force it to give away yet more of its Biblical patrimony. Fortunately his malign pressure was successfully resisted.

To put any trust in a Muslim nation, especially the Iranian backed Syrian regime, is truly risky. Besides which, Iran has already stated that it’s ambition is also to take the Golan from Israel at the same time that it plans on making Syria, Iraq and vast swathes of Muslim lands a future part of an all-encompassing Islamic Caliphate.

And consider this again. The British colonial power gave the Golan to France’s Syrian colony in 1923. Syria attacked Israel in 1967 and lost the Golan. Syria had occupied it for 44 years. Israel’s liberation of the Golan has lasted 51 years. Ask yourself then, who has possessed the Golan the longest and who has millennial historic, religious, Biblical and post-Biblical attachment to it?

Victor Sharpe is a prolific freelance writer with many published articles in leading national and international conservative websites and magazines. Born and educated in England, he has been a broadcaster and has authored several books including a collection of short stories under the title, The Blue Hour. His four-volume set of in-depth studies on the threats from resurgent Islam to Israel, the West and to Judeo-Christian civilization is titled, Politicide: The Attempted Murder of the Jewish State.

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images is republished with permission. The featured photo is by Josh Appel on Unsplash. © Victor Sharpe 2018

Nationalism Versus Globalism

Nationalism versus Globalism. Let’s explore the basics of Nationalism versus Globalism, as Clinton can easily be defined as a Globalist and Trump can easily be defined as a Nationalist. So an important question to ask is where will the Globalist agenda lead us vs. the Nationalist agenda? Please listen to a brief podcast commentary relating to this post at the bottom of the page.

Nationalism Versus Globalism

Nationalist / Trump

Sovereign nation. Protecting borders, language and culture. A restoration of the once great U.S. Constitutional Republic. We went from a Constitutional Republic (“If you can keep it” – Ben Franklin), to a Democratic System, to an Oligarchy on the verge of complete collapse into a controlled police state via Global Governance. When you look at the policies of Donald Trump you will see that he understands the importance of global trade and global alliances, however with his “America First” approach as outlined so well in his foreign policy speech, you can see that Donald Trump if elected, will strive to return the U.S. back to its roots. Easier said than done but never under estimate what one man can do and Donald Trump has and will continue to have increasing global support in my opinion. Yes he is up against the deeply rooted ruling elites NWO, I get it. But we have a choice, Clinton the Globalists or Trump the Nationalist. No Trump-No Hope.

Globalist / Clinton

One world government. One world justice system. One world military and one world currency. Globalism is the more user friendly term for New World Order since NWO has gotten its rightly deserved bad reputation over the decades. So what is Globalism? Well one definition from Oxford defines Globalism as “The process by which businesses or other organizations develop international influence or start operating on an international scale”. Organizations and treaties such as NAFTA, the United Nations, the WTO, The TPP (Trans Pacific Partnership), Agenda 21, UN Agenda 2030 and scores of others are all part of Globalization. I covered a much more in depth analysis of this in a VI part series of posts. Here is part VI and at the end of each post you can click to the preceding posts on the subject. You see Globalism goes hand in hand with Global Governance which aims to control every single aspect of your life and have each and every one of us more and more dependent upon the government for our very survival. Learn more by reading this post as well as Global Governance By Design. Clinton is a Globalist and her agenda aligns completely with that of the NWO / Globalism agenda. With a Hillary Clinton election there is no turning back. Not for a very, very long time if ever.

The Most Important Book Of 2016

What One Man Can Do” the new Donald Trump book to help swing voters. America and freedom itself is at a crossroads. Civilization as we know it is about to change. This is the most important book of 2016. This is America’s last stand as the world awaits, No Trump-No Hope. Learn more by visiting this page. Congrats! You’ve made it this far you’re and engaged reader. What are your thoughts? Share your comments here on this blog post. I would like to hear from you. Also share this post on your social media accounts.

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images is republished with permission.

Where to Shop this Christmas

With Black Friday next week and Cyber Monday soon after, it is clear Christmas shopping is about to be in full swing. Maybe you’ve received a few Christmas gift lists, maybe you’ve sent them out, or maybe you’re left to your own devices this year for your loved ones. Whatever your situation, Christmas shopping can easily send you scrambling all over town in search of those perfect gifts, so here are a handful of stores that we suggest doing your Christmas shopping at this year.

Ace Hardware
Is there a handy guy or gal in your life that would like some new tools? Ace Hardware, rightfully coined the helpful place, is your destination. There variety of tools and helpful service make it the perfect alternative for Home Depot and Lowe’s.

Anthropologie
Anthropologie is the gift destination this year for the trendsetter in your family. The store is packed full of trendy home decor and the latest fashion. Buying their gift from Anthropologie will transform you into the ”cool one” this Christmas.

Overstock.com
Overstock is the website to check out if the idea of visiting a store during Christmas time makes you nauseated. They have everything from furniture to jewelry. If you have a long list filled with variety and in need of convenience, Overstock is a great alternative to Amazon this year.

When you’re rushed, it’s easy to forget to check 2ndVote scores to make sure your dollar is aligning with your values. That’s why we’ve made the list and checked it twice so you don’t have to stress about where to go this season. Here is our complete Christmas List:


Ace Hardware – 4
Anthropologie – 3
Bass Pro Shops – 5
Bed Bath & Beyond – 3
Dillards – 3
Hobby Lobby – 5
J.Crew – 3
Kay Jewelers – 3
Overstock.com – 4
World Market – 3


Click here to find out what stores to avoid shopping at this Christmas!


EDITORS NOTE: This column with images is republished with permission.

Black Friday Deals That Don’t Compromise Your Values

With Black Friday just a week away, it’s almost officially Christmas shopping season.

Here at 2ndVote, we want to help you shop for your loved ones by finding the best deals possible, but we also want to encourage you to shop with your values in mind.

Along with our newly released Christmas Shopping Guide, we’ve compiled a list of some of the best Black Friday deals around to help you find the perfect gifts at rare prices. Not only are you getting great deals, but you can keep your mind at ease knowing that your hard-earned dollars won’t be funding a liberal agenda that opposes your beliefs and values.

Top Black Friday Deals For Conservatives

All of the following companies have a current score of at least a 3 (Neutral) in our 2ndVote Database:

Bass Pro Shops (5 – Conservative)

5 days of sales starting on November 25th, and a special 6-hour sale on Black Friday from 5-11am.

ACE Hardware (4 – Lean Conservative)

Black Friday sale is currently underway and will last until November 26th.

Overstock.com (4 – Lean Conservative)

Up to 70% off and free shipping for certain items.

Tractor Supply Co. (3.1 – Lean Conservative)

Numerous days of sales running from November 21-25.

Bed Bath & Beyond (3 – Neutral)

In-store customers will receive a 20% off entire purchase coupon between 6am – Noon.

Kay Jewelers (3 – Neutral)

Kay Jewelers is offering special Black Friday deals on a variety of their jewelry.

Academy Sports & Outdoors (3 – Neutral)

Running a variety of sales on the morning of Black Friday starting at 5am – till supplies last.

Petco (3 – Neutral)

Up to 50% off select items November 23-24 only.

Aeropostale (3 – Neutral)

60% to 70% off every item online or in the store on Black Friday.

Cost Plus World Market (3 – Neutral)

40% off all furniture with promo code FURNDEAL.

We encourage you to check out these stores on Black Friday and throughout the Christmas shopping season! To view our entire score database, click here.


Help us continue our #AnywhereButTARGET campaign and providing this important research for conservative consumers by becoming a 2ndVote Member today!


EDITORS NOTE: This column with images is republished with permission.

The President MUST Appeal The Acosta Ruling

Judge Timothy Kelly, a Trump appointee, verbally ordered the President of the United States to reinstate CNN Reporter Jim Acosta’s hard pass to access the White House on Friday.  The judge, who sits in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, has not posted his ruling yet, forcing us, at least temporarily, to rely on press reports for details.

Predictably, CNN has called the ruling a huge victory for the First Amendment.  However, according to numerous press reports, Judge Kelly took issue, not with any alleged affronts upon the First Amendment, but rather, the process used to revoke Acosta’s hard pass.  According to one news outlet, the judge said that Sarah Huckabee Sander’s “belated efforts at [answering Acosta’s concerns] were hardly sufficient to satisfy due process.”  Additionally, according to Breitbart, the judge found that in creating press conferences, the President created a public forum to which limited due process rights attach.

I disagree.  Contrary to Judge Kelly’s view, the White House press conference is an internal working of the executive branch done solely for a public relations and communications purpose and at the pleasure of the President of the United States. As such, and as reported previously by The Federalist Pageswhen the Court interferes with how the President conducts his press conferences, it is essentially intruding into the rightful powers of the President of the United States, as Chief Executive, in conducting the internal dealings of the executive branch.

Seen from this angle, which is the dominant issue in this matter, it becomes clear that the President must zealously pursue this case for the sake of the preservation of the autonomy of the executive branch.

Let’s be clear.  There is no finality to Friday’s ruling.  

The judge’s order was the implementation of a temporary restraining order against the President until such time that the case actually goes to trial.  Strategically, the President now has a couple of opportunities available to him.  First, he can let the case play out at the District Court, and if the judge should rule against him at the trial, he can appeal.  Alternatively, the President may appeal the temporary injunction as a matter of law, right now.  Either way, it is imperative that the President take the case to the next level. If he does so, it is likely that a higher court would not accept the invitation for the judiciary to intrude into the inner workings of another branch of government.  If argued as a matter of separation of powers and the comity between the branches of government, it is likely the district court’s position will not be upheld.  If it does, I am equally confident the Supreme Court will take this case because of the constitutional implications it carries to the inner workings of government, and will reverse it.

Make no mistake, although this case is being painted with a brush held by Acosta and the media, it actually represents, yet another small but significant intrusion onto the proper balance of powers; an intrusion with which the Framers, except for John Marshall, would be in total disagreement.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in The Federalist Pages. The featured photo is by rawpixel on Unsplash.