Florida Governor’s Race – A Jewish Perspective by Rabbi Sanford Olshansky

/in , , , , , /by

The following column by Rabbi Sanford Olshansky originally appeared in Heritage Florida Jewish News.

This year’s election for governor of Florida presents a great challenge to Jewish voters.  Historically, most Jews vote consistently for Democratic candidates, at all levels, largely on the basis of domestic social issues.  Most American Jews also feel some emotional commitment to Israel.  Until recent years, this has not been a problem because most Democratic government officials and office seekers used to express support for Israel, even if this was not always borne out by their actions. Now the Democratic nominee for governor of Florida, Andrew Gillum, has welcomed support from an organization that is openly hostile to Israel and he has chosen an openly anti-Semitic running mate.

According to the Miami Herald, Gillum received financial support during his primary campaign from Dream Defenders, a Miami-based organization which receives funding from the Tides Center, linked to anti-Israel billionaire George Soros.  There is a 2014 photo online of Gillum embracing Dream Defenders co-founder and executive director Philip Agnew, now known as Umi Saleh, about which Gillum wrote “Could not be prouder…” On November 26, 2014, Agnew/Saleh declared on Facebook “I am not an activist, I am a militant.”

Another co-founder of Dream Defenders is Ahmad Abuznaid. He led two Dream Defenders trips to “Palestine,” in 2015 and 2016.  On the 2016 trip, Dream Defenders employed Mahmoud Jedda as one of their guides.  Jedda is a former member of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), who spent 17 years in an Israeli prison for planting four hand grenades on a Jerusalem street, wounding nine civilians.

Also according to the Miami Herald, in 2016 Gillum, then serving as mayor of Tallahassee, gave an introductory speech at a Muslim advocacy event that was organized by the Council of American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).  During that event, participants lobbied lawmakers against a bill to divest the state from entities engaged with the Boycott Divestment and Sanctions movement (BDS).  That bill was later modified to prevent Florida from entering into any contracts with businesses or other entities that support BDS.  It was passed in the State Legislature with overwhelming bi-partisan support and was signed into law by Governor Rick Scott.

In 1998, Gillum’s running mate, Chris King, ran for president of the student government at Harvard.  He lost the race, and when commenting on it the next year in a Newhouse News Service article, King blamed the Harvard student newspaper, the Crimson, for his loss.  King wrote “I was nailed to the cross…. And most of the editorial staff that was so hard on me, the vast majority were Jewish.”  According to Florida State Representative Randy Fine, King was playing on the old anti-Semitic slur that Jews control the media, banks, etc.  Also according to Fine, when this quote became known during the primary campaign for governor of Florida this year, King blamed a Jewish primary opponent.

Many of Florida’s Jews have never pulled a voting machine lever or marked a ballot for a Republican.  This year those voters are faced with a difficult and perhaps agonizing choice when it comes to the governor’s race.  Will they vote for an ultra-liberal Democrat who is associated with an openly anti-Israel organization and has an openly anti-Semitic running mate, or will they be open-minded enough to vote for Republican Congressman Ron DeSantis, a military veteran and a staunch supporter of Israel?

DeSantis supports pro-growth, low-tax policies.  DeSantis opposes Gillum’s plan to increase Florida business taxes by 40%, which will surely hurt small business, reduce hiring and raise the cost of everything Floridians buy.  DeSantis supports vigorous efforts to protect Florida’s environment.

Could this be the year when some of Florida’s Jews break an old habit?  Could this be the year when more of Florida’s Jews vote for a Republican who supports Israel over a Democrat who embraces anti-Israel support?  For all our sakes I hope this is that year.

ABOUT RABBI SANFORD OLSHANSKY

Rabbi Sanford Olshansky has served congregations in New Jersey and Central Florida.  He teaches in the Judaic Studies Program at the University of Central Florida (UCF) and is a member of the Republican Jewish Coalition at the national Leadership Level.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured photo is by Blake Campbell on Unsplash.

Fellow Alum of Andrew Gillum’s running mate: “[Chris] King is an anti-Semite, plain and simple.”

/in , , , , /by

Florida State Representative Randy Fine went to Harvard College with Chris King. King was named by Socialist Andrew Gillum to be his running mate for governor of the Sunshine State.

In a Sun Sentinel op-ed titled “Why Chris King’s comments matter and why as a fellow Harvard alum I know” Representative Fine wrote:

In 1998, while a student at Harvard College, Chris King ran for president of the Harvard student government, the Undergraduate Council. He lost. In reflecting on his campaign the following year in a Newhouse News Service article, King blamed the Harvard Student newspaper, the Crimson, for his loss. “I was nailed to the cross,” said King, in referring to the coverage of his race by the Crimson. “And most of the editorial staff that was so hard on me, the vast majority were Jewish.”

After the comment surfaced earlier this year during his ill-fated race for governor, King did not deny making the statement, apologized and claimed it was “at odds with [his] beliefs.”

Baloney. King is an anti-Semite, plain and simple. I’ll tell you how I know. I was a Harvard undergraduate around the same time as King. I graduated in 1996; two years before King’s ill-fated election. I was involved in the Undergraduate Council as well, and I even had my own run-ins with the Crimson. Oh, and I’m Jewish.

Read more.

Representative Fine states:

So why would Andrew Gillum select someone with King’s record, when there were so many other options? Because he either shares those views or is willing to tolerate people with those views. You don’t cavort with CAIR — an unindicted co-conspirator in financing terrorism — or work with the Dream Defenders, modern day anti-Semites who openly glorify terrorists, if you don’t subscribe to it.

If Andrew Gillum and Chris King are elected, how will they treat our large Jewish population here in Florida? No one can question Ron DeSantis’ record on supporting Israel and fighting anti-Semitism.

Read more.

In a FrontPage Magazine article titled “Who Is Andrew Gillum?” Discover The Networks reports on the school and political background of King’s running mate Gillum stating:

A few days ago, 39-year-old Andrew Gillum – the Tallahassee, Florida mayor who proudly embraces the socialist political and economic agenda of Bernie Sanders – won his party’s gubernatorial primary race in that state. This sets the stage for November, when Gillum will face Republican Ron DeSantis in the election for governor. Gillum’s campaign has been endorsed not only by Sanders, but also by Our Revolution, an activist organization that explicitly promotes the Vermont senator’s agenda.

Gillum has a long history of political activism that stretches back to his school days. When he was enrolled at Florida A&M University, for instance, he was very active in the Student Government Association. In early 2000, Gillum helped organize a large “March on Tallahassee” to protest Governor Jeb Bush’s 1999 executive order abolishing affirmative action in state university admissions and state contracting. To reward Gillum’s activism vis-a-vis this and other matters, the Center for Policy Alternatives recognized him as the nation’s top student leader in 2001.

In 2002, Gillum became the Florida Field Organizer with the People For the American Way Foundation (PFAWF), spearheading its “Arrive With 5” initiative – a pro-Democrat voter-mobilization campaign whereby young people pledged to bring five additional voters with them to the polls on Election Day.

Read more.

Discover the Networks lists Gillum’s positions on a variety of key political issues:

  • strongly favors the expansion of Obamacare as a step toward a government-run, single-payer, “Medicare-for-all” healthcare system;
  • strongly favors government-enforced affirmative action policies designed to compensate nonwhites and women for the effects of past and present discrimination;
  • strongly favors a steeply progressive income-tax structure where high earners pay disproportionately high rates, and where corporate taxes are increased significantly;
  • strongly favors the implementation of a pathway-to-citizenship for illegal aliens;
  • strongly favors the enactment of carbon taxes, higher CAFE standards for automobiles, and federal funding for the research-and-development of wind and solar power technology;
  • strongly opposes Voter ID laws as racist schemes that are designed to suppress minority voting;
  • believes that the enactment of voucher programs through which low-income parents can take their children out of substandard public schools and send them instead to superior private schools, constitutes bad public policy;
  • believes that the availability of guns should be severely restricted, even for law-abiding citizens who have never been convicted of a crime, and that the 2nd Amendment does not guarantee Americans the right to possess a firearm;
  • supports a complete ban on so-called “assault weapons”;
  • believes that the federal government should inject large amounts of funding – in the form of cash as well as federal job-creation programs – to help the U.S. economy recover from downturns that it may experience;
  • believes that the nationalization of banks and corporations is more appropriate than government bailouts of those entities when they fail economically;
  • calls for a national $15-per-hour minimum wage requirement for all workers; and
  • advocates the repeal of Florida’s “stand-your-ground” gun laws which permit people to use deadly force if they feel that their lives are threatened by an aggressor or assailant.

“Gillum also has released a video demanding that President Trump be impeached because he allegedly “obstructed justice” by firing former FBI Director James Comey.” notes Discover The Networks.

Anti-Semitic Chris King teams up with Socialist Andrew Gillum. You just can’t make this stuff up.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Andrew Gillum’s ‘Maoist’ Support Network

FL GOP Gives 10 Reasons Andrew Gillum is Too Radical/Corrupt for Governor but Misses Number 11

Who is Steve Phillips and why is he backing Andrew Gillum for Governor of Florida?

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is from Democrat running mate Chris King’s Facebook page.

Letter from the President of Shalom International: Sen. Bill Nelson Is A Fraud

/in , , , /by

EDITORS NOTE: The following letter to the editor was sent to us by Bob Kunst, President of Shalom International. It is published with permission.

Subject: Sen. Bill Nelson Is A Fraud

Letters to the Editor
P.O.Box 1121 St. Petersburg, Fla. 33731

In the Tampa Bay Times, 10/7/18, backing the re-election of Sen. Bill Nelson, you cited his ‘ethical service’ and ‘personal integrity’, I take issue with.

On April 26,2018, Trump nominates and gets passed an openly Gay man, Rick Grenell, as Ambassador to Germany and its Holocaust past. All the Republicans supported Grenell, but 42 Democrats voted against him, including Sen. Bill Nelson, because they didn’t want to give Trump a victory, nor change the narrative that Trump is anti-gay, when he isn’t. They want our money and votes and then stab us in the back and why this Democrat will not vote for Nelson, who lacks ethics and integrity.

Having led the opposition to Anita Bryant and Jerry Falwell, through 5 elections (1976-1980) that made Dade County, the ‘Holy Land of Gay Rights’, the treacherous Democrats are playing very dangerous and evil games and can’t be trusted.

Nelson failed U.S. by supporting the awful Iran Nuke deal and giving $150 Billions to this international terrorist state.

Nelson is silent about Obama/Hillary/Kerry ‘politics’, costing 1 million lives in Middle East and North Africa.

Nelson is silent about Obama/Hillary/Kerry wanting to divide Jerusalem, Jewish for 3000 yrs. and Israel, Jewish for 5000 yrs. and give it to the very Arabs aligned with Hitler to ‘kill All Jews’, while denying their role in the Holocaust and dancing in the streets after ‘9/11’, and making cartoons on this tragedy in October, 2018.

Where is Nelson, when Obama/Hillary//Kerry illegally gave $2 Billion to Hamas and Fatah, both committed to Israel’s destruction?

Where is Nelson, when the Democrats exploit the Holocaust, Auschwitz and Kristolnacht, for votes, which is so disgusting, to compare a child’s center for refugees, which Obama also had, and these kids getting 3 meals a day and playing soccer and compare this to millions of Jews being exterminated at Auschwitz. Unbelievable!

For all the screaming about racism and sexism from the Democrats, apparently anti-semitism is okay with them. Farrakhan hates all Whites, Jews, Gays and Nelson is silent, like the rest of the Democrats. Shame on them and shame on Nelson who needs to be retired.

Where is Nelson, when Gillum for Gov. wants to ‘impeach Trump’, ‘divide Jerusalem’ and ‘abolish ICE’, while his running mate said 20 yrs. ago that Jews at Harvard Crimson ‘Nailed Him To The Cross”, while wanting to boycott Israel are backing this disastrous candacy[sic].

And where was Nelson, when Obama took over $700 billions from Medicare for Obamacare? Now Nelson votes against Kavanaugh for the Supreme Ct., before the awful attempts by the Democrats to destroy him and his family.

The D.C. ‘sewer’ was exposed as to its dirtiest and sadistic politics and any lovers of America, need to throw the bums out this November and Nelson tops the list of these sell outs, willing too take down America to ‘get Trump’.

Yours in Shalom,

Bob Kunst
Pres., Shalom International
305-864-5110
525 W. 49th St.
Miami Beach, Fla. 33140

Trump Administration: Favoring Freedom, Not Faiths

/in , , , /by
After eight years of Barack Obama, it must come as a shock to a lot of people that Christians are finally getting a fair shake from the White House. The country’s largest faith group spent the better part of a decade dodging blows – not just in speeches (like this doozy equating Christians to terrorists) – but in policies designed to drive them out of the public square. It’s no wonder Americans feel a little disoriented under an administration that shows Christianity more respect than reproach.

And while a lot of people would argue that President Trump’s tolerance was a long time coming, others aren’t so happy. In today’s Politico, a few human rights groups grumble that the administration is showing favoritism to Christians by trying to free Pastor Andrew Brunson or moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem. Even the idea that the president would make international religious freedom a priority has rankled some – despite the fact that the State Department has poured as much energy into protecting Muslim minorities like the Rohingya as anyone. “The sense that human rights apply universally doesn’t carry weight with most people in this administration,” said Sarah Margon of Human Rights Watch.

This Christians-first bias, as Politico called it, is ridiculous, fired back White House officials. “Helping persecuted religious minorities abroad is a top priority of the Trump administration,” one said, before calling the allegation “demonstrably false.” Maybe people are getting that perception because the Obama administration – and others – so rarely talked about the plight of Christians. It feels different because it is. It’s never been done with this level of openness and intentionality.

But just because the administration is focusing on Christians doesn’t mean it’s ignoring other faiths. The president’s policies have been incredibly even-handed. Obviously, such a dramatic course-correction from the Obama years doesn’t feel that way, but the truth is, Trump’s work on religious groups is more diverse than any administration before it.

FRC’s Travis Weber made that same point earlier today. “As one who has attended both the State Department’s Ministerial, and the DOJ Religious Freedom Task Force announcement, I can attest to the variety of faith backgrounds present – and to the fact that the policy and advocacy this administration presented advanced protections for all faiths equally. The only way one could come away with a different conclusion is if they simply had no interest in actually assessing the truth about the administration’s policies. If one was present at those events, and examines the policies behind them – such as that contained in the Potomac Declaration — the only reasonable conclusion is that the Trump administration is seeking to advance religious freedom around the world for all people — regardless of their faith.”

Just yesterday, Vice President Mike Pence took the opportunity to fire back at China for its crackdown on religion. “For a time, Beijing inched toward greater liberty and respect for human rights, but in recent years, it has taken a sharp U-turn toward control and oppression…” There was a time, he pointed out, when we “hope[d] that freedom in China would expand in all forms – not just economically, but politically, with a newfound respect for classical liberal principles, private property, religious freedom, and the entire family of human rights… but that hope has gone unfulfilled.”

Obviously, the Chinese government can’t stand the idea of a power to which its people owe a higher allegiance, and thus it severely represses religious freedom. But as Christians, we’re called to honor God above men. That’s why we advocate for the freedom of everyone to worship God as they see fit, and to freely live out their beliefs. I applaud the Trump administration for calling out the threat China poses for religious liberty. Whether they’re tearing apart Uighur families and indoctrinating them in internment camps, or its prosecuting Christians like Pastor John Cao, China needs to be taken to task. Thank goodness we finally have a president up to that challenge.

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

RELATED ARTICLE: Bus Tour Drives Home The Importance of November

Red-State Democrats Are Scared to Death of the Midterm Elections

/in , , , , /by

“So everyone is making a prediction on what the fate of Judge Kavanaugh will be, I’m making a prediction on what the fate of the Democratic party will be. The Democrats unleashing an all-out smear fest may go down as the best campaign move they ever made—for Republicans.” —Grant Stinchfield

EDITORS NOTE: The featured photo is by Kevin Morris on Unsplash. This video is republished with permission.

VIDEOS: Why Socialist Andrew Gillum is “Unfit to Lead” Florida

/in , , , , , /by

The Republican Party of Florida (RPOS) in support of Republican Ron DeSantis for Governor has launched a series of ads concerning the record of Socialist Andrew Gillum’s record as Mayor of Tallahassee, Florida. In the past week the Gillum campaign saw a 9 point lead vanish. The RPOS shows why Gillum is “unfit to lead” the state of Florida.

In an email the DeSantis campaign states:

The Republican Party of Florida (RPOF) today launched two new ads titled “Unfit to Lead” that will be airing television statewide.

The spots, which feature Tallahassee residents who were left without power following Hurricane Hermine, expose Andrew Gillum’s failed leadership and his refusal of assistance during the recovery efforts.

Here are the RPOF ads:

RELATED ARTICLE: Gillum Aligns With Groups That Support Boycotts of Israel

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image of Andrew Gillum is from Facebook.

A Month Ago, Levi’s Wanted Your Guns. Now They Want You To Elect People To Take Them

/in , , , , , /by

Levi Strauss is a clothing company with an agenda. It has a “1” ranking in all five of 2ndVote’s categories where it takes corporate action and just a month ago launched a million-dollar anti-gun campaign.

Now it’s pushing an ad to get out the vote — and we know from their corporate actions which way they want voters to go:

“Levi’s is all about authentic self-expression,” said Jen Sey, senior VP and chief marketing officer of Levi Strauss & Co. in a statement. “And there is no purer form of self-expression than voting.”

Levi’s left-wing values can’t be hidden by its ad’s blue-collar workers. Levi’s matches corporate donations to Planned Parenthood and has aligned its company to get approval from the Human Rights Campaign. It backs environmental policies which harm U.S. workers and do scant good for the environment, like cap-and-trade.

In short, Levi’s is part of the same movement as the demagogues in Congress who are right now smearing Judge Brett Kavanaugh as a sexual assailant. These folks are so fixated on their dangerous ideologies that they can’t even see how they are standing against traditional American values.

2ndVote shoppers, we need you to act. Click the button below to tell Levi’s to stop sticking its nose into politics. And be sure to consider shopping at Eddie Bauer, Carhartt, Anthropologie, Tommy Hilfiger, J. Crew, and Van Heusen — all neutral companies which focus on impressing you, the customer, not a few loud liberal talking heads.

Send Levi Strauss an Email!

EDITORS NOTE: The featured photo is by Bogdan Glisik on Unsplash.

See Who’s Funding The ACLU’s Claim That Kavanaugh Is Just Like Weinstein, Clinton, & Cosby

/in , , , , , /by

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) is a mainstay of left-leaning civil rights advocacy. Its stories history used to include defending the First Amendment rights of Nazis, of all people. It has abandoned those free speech principles in recent years, suing a Washington State florist on behalf of a gay couple and suing to force Catholic hospitals to provide abortions and contraceptives.

This week, it gave up all pretense at not being an arm of the Democratic Party. The following ad compares Brett Kavanaugh to Harvey Weinstein, Bill Cosby, and Bill Clinton:

Got that? According to the ACLU, Kavanaugh is as bad as Bill Cosby — who was recently convicted of sexual assault. He’s as bad as Harvey Weinstein — a man accused of decades of sexual assaults, harassment, spying on women, and more who was arrested in May on charges. And he’s as bad as Bill Clinton, who used his power as first governor and then president to have his way with women. Clinton has also been credibly accused of raping Juanita Broaddrick.

These (Democratic Party) men’s behavior is atrocious, immoral, and illegal. The evidence backing their accusers is enormous, and accusers’ stories frequently have corroboration. Compare that to the accusations against Kavanaugh, which are a) politically motivated, b) new, c) uncorroborated, d) full of holes, and e) refuted by those who know Kavanaugh best.

The facts are clear. Kavanaugh is nothing like these (Democratic Party) men. Yet the ACLU is putting one million dollars behind this ad to target five Senators they believe can be convinced to oppose Kavanaugh.

This hit job cannot be allowed to stand. 2ndVote conservatives can make their voices heard by demanding the ACLU’s corporate backers stop funding this new arm of the Democratic Party. Specifically, we recommend telling Bank of America, Walgreens, Lyft, Yahoo, and Verizon to demand the ACLU return to its civil rights roots — or these corporations will lose you as customers.

Help us continue creating content like this and educating conservative shoppers by becoming a 2ndVote Member today!

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image by Shutterstock and column originally appeared on 2nd Vote. Republished with permission.

The Secret’s Out: Corporate America Is Standing With Soros & Steyer Against American Values

/in , , , , , , /by

George Soros and Tom Steyer are two of conservative America’s biggest boogeyman. Each has donated untold millions to various liberal groups — including election efforts — to turn America against its core values of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

But corporate America is just as bad. For just one example, Levi Strauss — the iconic designer of jeans for blue-collar, hard-working Americans — launched a Get Out The Vote ad. It was bad enough that their 2ndVote rank is “1” in the five areas where they engage in politics. It was worse when they put $1 million to push gun control. Now they’re outright telling Americans to vote for Levi’s liberal agenda.

The ACLU has likewise become part of the Democratic Party/left-wing smear machine. Rather than stick to their historically left-leaning civil rights principles, they put $1 million into an ad accusing Brett Kavanaugh of being a sexual predator like Bill Clinton, Bill Cosby, and Harvey Weinstein. That ad went into five states to target five Senators the ACLU believes could be persuaded to vote against Kavanaugh for the U.S. Supreme Court.

There is only one solution to stopping the Soros-Steyer-Corporate left-wing charge, and that’s to create a culture of informed 2ndVoters. Tell your family, friends, and neighbors how their shopping habits have real economic and political power. Urge them to use that power by backing good companies and abandoning bad ones.

Corporate America and allegedly “non-partisan” non-profits like the ACLU think they’re pulling a fast one on the American people. Let them know they’re wrong today, tomorrow, and after election day with your network’s 2ndVote power.

Help us continue holding corporations and non-profits accountable for their activism by becoming a 2ndVote Member today!

Trump’s new counterterrorism strategy singles out ‘radical Islamists’

/in , , /by

Bolton says: “Radical Islamist terrorist groups represent the preeminent transnational terrorist threat to the United States, and to United States’ interests abroad. The fact is the radical Islamic threat that we face is a form of ideology. This should not be anything new to anybody. King Abdullah of Jordan has frequently described the terrorist threat as a civil war within Islam that Muslims around the world recognize, and he is, after all, a direct descendent [sic] of the Sharif [inaudible], the keepers of the holy cities. If that’s how King Abdullah views it, I don’t think anybody should be surprised we see it as a kind of war, as well.”

The idea that there is a significant pushback to the jihad ideology within the Islamic world is a trifle overstated. The concept of jihad as meaning warfare against unbelievers in order to establish Islamic law’s hegemony over them is deeply rooted in Islamic texts and teachings, as well as in Islamic law. Nonetheless, in 2011 the Obama Administration removed all mention of Islam and jihad from counterterror training; this is a strong step in the right direction, toward once again enabling counterterror analysts to study and understand the motivating ideology of the enemy.

“New White House Counterterrorism Strategy Singles Out ‘Radical Islamists,’” by Adam Kredo, Washington Free Beacon, October 4, 2018:

The Trump administration is implementing a new, government-wide counterterrorism strategy that places renewed focus on combatting “radical Islamic terrorist groups,” marking a significant departure from the Obama administration, which implemented a series of policies aimed at deemphasizing the threat of Islamic terror groups.

In releasing the first national counterterrorism strategy since 2011, the Trump administration is working to take a drastically different approach than that of the former administration, according to senior U.S. officials.

While the Obama administration sought to dampen the United States’ focus on Islamic terror threats, the Trump administration has made this battle the centerpiece of its new strategy.

National Security Adviser John Bolton acknowledged in remarks to reporters Thursday afternoon that the new strategy is “a departure” from the former administration’s strategy, which has been characterized as a failure by Republican foreign policy voices due to the increasing number of domestic terror attacks and plots across the United States

“Radical Islamist terrorist groups represent the preeminent transnational terrorist threat to the United States, and to United States’ interests abroad,” Bolton said.

“The fact is the radical Islamic threat that we face is a form of ideology,” Bolton said. “This should not be anything new to anybody. King Abdullah of Jordan has frequently described the terrorist threat as a civil war within Islam that Muslims around the world recognize, and he is, after all, a direct descendent [sic] of the Sharif [inaudible], the keepers of the holy cities. If that’s how King Abdullah views it, I don’t think anybody should be surprised we see it as a kind of war, as well.”

“One may hope that the ideological fervor disappears, but sad to report, it remains strong all around the world, and even with the defeat of the ISIS territorial caliphate, we see the threat spreading to other countries,” Bolton added.

The Trump administration strategy also shifts the focus to Iran, characterizing the country as the foremost state sponsor of terror across the globe.

“The United States faces terrorist threats from Iran, which remains the most prominent state sponsor of terrorism that, really, the world’s central banker of international terrorism since 1979,” Bolton said. “And from other terrorist groups. Iran-sponsored terrorist groups such as Lebanese Hezbollah, Hamas, and Palestinian Islamic jihad, continue to pose a threat to the United States and our interests.”…

EDITORS NOTE: This column with photos originally appeared on Jihad Watch. The featured photo is by Sophie Keen on Unsplash.

VIDEO: Moms for Kavanaugh

/in , , , , , , /by

The below video was published by CatholicVote.org:

This says it all.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured photo is by Zach Lucero on Unsplash.

Three ‘Green’ ballot initiatives to shut down fossil fuels this November

/in , , , , /by

Three initiatives are on the ballot this November in Colorado, Arizona, and Washington State, all aimed at severely restricting fossil fuel use and development within these states’ borders.

With the Trump administration putting a stop to aggressive action on climate change at the federal level, environmentalist groups across the nation are trying to achieve their goals through action on the state level.

In Colorado, Proposition 112 seeks to increase the “setback” requirement for new oil and gas activity on non-federal land – increasing it from 500-ft to 2,500-ft from designated structures and vulnerable areas. In laymen’s terms, this means that there can be no new drilling within 2,500 feet of essentially any structure – whether it is a house, fire station, garage, or whatever — on non-federal land.

Colorado Rising, the group pushing for the enactment of Proposition 112, says that the 2,500 feet setback is necessary “…based on peer-reviewed health studies indicating that health impacts are greatest within a half mile of a ‘fracking’ site.” In fact, the group even hints that this distance is not far enough. “Some studies indicate that a more appropriate minimum setback should be 1 mile, and the average evacuation distance for a well blowout is 0.8 miles.”

But such statements are rebutted by numerous other studies, including a four-year long one carried out by President Obama’s EPA which found that fracking created no adverse impact on water quality.

The Colorado Oil & Gas Conservation Coalition (COGCC), a Colorado State government agency, also provided a report showing that at least three of the top five oil and gas producing counties in Colorado would be significantly impacted by the measure. The initiative would make it almost impossible to develop oil and gas east of the Rockies.

Also, according to an analysis performed by a coalition of the Colorado Association of Realtors, the Colorado Bankers Association, Colorado Concern, Common Sense Policy Roundtable and Denver South Economic Development Partnership, the definitions of what the language in the measure refer to is very unclear. Proposition 112 says that there will be no new drilling within 2,500 feet of an “occupied structure and any area designated for additional protection.”

The analysis states that “it is likely that ‘Occupied Structure’ would encompass far more buildings than ‘High Occupancy’ thus increasing not only the distance of new oil and gas activity from structures but also increasing the number of structures subject to setback.”

Bob Schaffer, a former congressman from the state, wrote an op-ed in the Coloradan against Proposition 112, formerly known as Initiative 97. He said, “85 percent of Colorado’s non-federal land would be off-limits to new natural-gas harvesting. A restriction of Initiative 97’s magnitude, according to a June analysis released by the Colorado Alliance of Mineral and Royalty Owners, could cost our state an unfathomable $26 billion in lost revenues, and legal takings claims.”

In Arizona, Proposition 127 would amend the Arizona State Constitution to mandate that 50% of power derived from public utilities must come from renewable resources by 2030. Nuclear power is not counted as a “renewable” option under the measure.

Clean Energy for a Healthy Arizona Committee claims passage of this initiative will create “thousands of good jobs.” They claim that the number of jobs in Arizona’s solar industry is diminishing when compared to the national average, and Proposition 127 is needed to reverse that trend. Few specific data are referenced.

In contrast, analysis performed by the W.P. Carey School of Business at Arizona State University paints a starkly different picture. Their research found that Proposition 127 would hardly be an economic boon to the Grand Canyon State – in fact it would cause disposable personal income to plummet by a hefty $23.0 billion in the coming decades (2018-2060). In addition, the study also found that Prop 127 would cause some 305,000 “job years of employment” to be lost, and the Arizona economy as a whole would lose a whopping $36.8 billion in Gross State Product.

Added to this are other concerns. According to group “NO on 127,” the ballot measure would also cause the Palo Verde nuclear power plant to close by 2025, costing the State $55 million in property tax revenue annually.

In Washington State, Initiative 1631 proposes to enact a “fee” on carbon emissions of $15 per ton, starting in 2020, which then goes up $2 per ton every single year. The Atlantic reports that in 2035, the fee is projected to reach $55 per ton. At that point state lawmakers will have the option to either freeze the cost in place or continue to let it increase by $2 per year.

The reason proponents are calling this a “fee” and not a “tax” is because the revenues generated by this Initiative can only be spent on projects relating to climate change, carbon emissions, and transitioning from fossil fuels. Lawmakers would thus be unable to use the money generated for other purposes. A 15-member board would be in charge of deciding how to spend the funds. It remains unclear, however, exactly how this roughly $1 billion in new revenue every year would be spent by the board.

Dana Bieber, spokeswoman for the “No on 1631 Coalition” said, “This very powerful 15-member panel will be responsible for doling out billions upon billions of dollars … I think when we are talking about the greatest challenge of our time — and that’s climate change — I don’t think we should leave it in the hands of 15 unelected people.”

The Atlantic further explains that supporters of Initiative 1631 claim the measure will only cost residents $10 a month in a “worst-case scenario.” But opponents say this is unrealistic.

The Seattle Times reports that Puget Sound Energy, which relies on coal and gas for 60% of its power generation, would be hit much harder by this policy than Seattle City Light, which is supported by hydroelectricity in the region. When utilities pass the cost of the fee onto consumers, some ratepayers will be hit much harder than others.

Monty Anderson, the Executive Secretary of the Seattle Building & Construction Trades Council, which represents some 20,000 workers, is opposed to Initiative 1631. “It’s just a large gas tax. That’s the way we see it, and that’s the problem,” Anderson said. “And I don’t think they are going to stop investing in alternative energy just because we don’t have a special gas tax here.”

The voters of Colorado, Arizona, and Washington State will be making important choices this November. Their decisions will either inspire, or deflate, future efforts by environmentalist groups to continue pushing radical green policies at the state level.

About the Author: Adam Houser

Adam Houser coordinates student leaders for CFACT’s collegians program and writes on issues of climate and energy.

EDITORS NOTE: This column and image originally appeared on CFACT. Republished with permission.

Puerto Rican Governor Spinelessly Stabs His Greatest Advocate In The Back: Rick Scott.

/in , , , /by

It seems a week doesn’t go by where I am not astounded at the level of ungratefulness and hypocrisy in politics. This week, the Ungrateful Backstabber Award goes to Puerto Rican Governor Ricardo Roselló for having endorsed Senator Bill Nelson in his reelection bid against Governor Rick Scott.

Why? You ask. To be sure, a Democrat endorsing another Democrat is no shocking development.  But here’s the thing: no national public figure has been more active in bringing assistance to Puerto Rico nor done more to accommodate displaced Puerto Ricans than Governor Rick Scott.

Hurricane María hit the island territory on September 20, 2017.  Although the initial casualty figures were amazingly low, everyone knew the true scope of the devastation and humanitarian crisis was going to be colossal.  This was an island far removed from the mainland that had essentially lost the totality of its power grid.  There was no drinkable water for its 3,327,917 inhabitants. Its roads were blocked or destroyed.  There was no ground access to the island’s interior.  No access to the rural, poorer communities far from Puerto Rican harbors and docks.  There were no schools for kids, and countless roofless homes stood as irregularly shaped remnants stripped of their abilities to provide protection or comfort from the elements.

By September 21, 2017, it was clear that Puerto Rico was America’s greatest humanitarian challenge.  Of course, the federal government helped, eventually approving $2.2 billion of aid.  Cargo ships made their way to the beleaguered island to drop off supplies and personnel. The U.S. military set up around-the-clock operations inclusive of countless helicopter sorties to send water and food into the island’s interior.  And, of course, President Trump visited the island on October 3.

But consider the actions of Governor Scott.  On September 28, a mere eight days after the hurricane hit, Governor Scott, at Roselló’s request, traveled to Puerto Rico, not for a show of support, but to coordinate the island’s response and recovery efforts!  Let’s not forget, Scott was already juggling Florida’s response to Hurricane Irma, the largest natural disaster to have ever hit the state, from a mere ten days earlier.

On October 5, through the actions of Governor Scott, Florida became a FEMA host-state for Puerto Rico, the only state to do so.  Throughout the month of October, Scott traveled to Washington, D.C to meet with the Chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, Congressman Michael McCaul, and the Chair of the House Appropriation Committee, Congressman Rodney Frelinghuysen, among countless others, to advocate, not just for Florida, but for Puerto Rico.

Scott sent a letter to the Office of Management and Budget pleading for assistance for Floridians and Puerto Ricans.  He sent a contingency of utility workers to Puerto Rico to help in the infrastructure reconstruction efforts.  He aided Puerto Rican families that had been displaced by the effects of the hurricane by activating Florida’s Emergency Response Team.  He adjusted Florida’s school requirements to accommodate displaced Puerto Rican children and insisted that the legislature provide funding to accommodate for the influx of these students.  And on January 11, 2018, Scott met with Puerto Ricans, in a town hall in Puerto Rico, with Governor Rosselló at his side to discuss the status of the island’s ongoing relief efforts.

Truly, the list of documented, selfless and life-saving activities by Governor Scott in support of people not in his jurisdiction who were suffering from the devastating effects of a massive natural disaster while responding to his own state’s challenges cannot be recorded.

Of course, Senator Nelson did his part.  He visited Puerto Rico on October 16, 2017. During his visit, he flew with Roselló in a helicopter to go inland.  And while speaking in San Juan, he encouraged displaced Puerto Ricans to register to vote in Florida because “they have been very embracing of my public service.” Of course, he clarified that he was not encouraging them to depart forever.

Nelson also assured Puerto Ricans that FEMA would do its part while again noting that he has a close tie to Puerto Rico because he lives in Orlando. And, of course, Nelson stood out by supporting the delivery of aid to the island at the federal government’s expense, along with every other member of the United States Senate.

One would think that in light of the colossal work Governor Scott has done on behalf of Puerto Rico, work that is unparalleled by any other national figure and truly stands as being beyond the call of duty, that Puerto Rico’s own governor would demonstrate some semblance of gratitude towards him.  But instead, what Roselló did on Monday was to deploy the political knife, sharpen it, and insert it into the back of Puerto Rico’s greatest advocate and champion, Governor Rick Scott.

But that’s par for the course for Democrats today.

Even Roselló has recognized his own hypocrisy by clarify that, in his opinion, both Nelson and Scott are “great people running for office,” and that, “In no way should one take this as a negative toward somebody. It’s a positive for somebody.  This might fall on deaf ears, but we need to steer away from, in every contest, to see who the villain is and the superhero is. In many cases we have find folks running for office.”

Indeed! And in the world of political endorsements one’s position in such circumstances is to stay out of it.

The truth is that Governor Roselló’s endorsement isn’t going to make a hill of beans of difference to the outcome of Florida’s senatorial race.  But in supporting Nelson, Roselló has made a resounding statement about his lack of values, integrity, and loyalty.  The big loser in this endorsement exercise is not Governor Scott, who Roselló was aiming to injure, but Roselló himself who has cheapened the value of his word and demonstrated himself to be a political hack.

Clearly, in this case, Roselló’s best option was to simply shut up.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in The Federalist Pages.

The Political Pasts of the Lawyers Representing Kavanaugh Accusers

/in , , , , , /by

The lawyers for the three women accusing Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct all have been on the legal battlefields of either celebrity or politics.

One ran for office multiple times as a Democrat. Another was a federal appointee of both Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. Still another defended the alleged misconduct of Democrat politicians.

Kavanaugh has denied allegations made by each woman.

Here’s a look at the political pasts of the lawyers representing the accusers in one of the most politically charged Supreme Court confirmation processes in recent times.

From Iran Contra Prosecutor to McCabe Advocate

Michael Bromwich is one of the lawyers for Christine Blasey Ford. Bromwich and another lawyer, Debra Katz, sat on either side of Ford during the Sept. 27 hearing by the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Ford claims that in the early 1980s, during a small gathering of teens, a drunken Kavanaugh pinned her to a bed and forcefully tried to remove her clothing.

Before going into private practice, Bromwich was a prominent federal prosecutor.

In the 1980s, he served as associate counsel for the Office of Independent Counsel during its investigation of the Iran-contra affair.

He was one of three courtroom lawyers leading the prosecution against Lt. Col. Oliver North, then a National Security Council aide. North’s conviction was overturned on appeal in 1990.

In 1994, Clinton nominated Bromwich and the Senate confirmed him as inspector general for the Justice Department. The Office of Inspector General acts as the internal watchdog to investigate waste, fraud, and abuse, and in some cases, make a criminal referral.

A little over a decade later, Obama tapped Bromwich to lead an effort to reform the Minerals Management Service in response to the Deepwater Horizon explosion in 2010 off the Gulf of Mexico.

Bromwich oversaw reorganization of the agency to eliminate conflicts among its different missions, which included establishing safety standards, regulating industry compliance, and collecting royalties, according to the Obama White House.

Starting this year, Bromwich began representing Andrew McCabe, who had been deputy FBI director under James Comey since 2016 and, for a short time after President Donald Trump fired Comey, was the acting FBI director.

McCabe’s wife, Jill McCabe, ran an unsuccessful campaign for state Senate in Virginia, receiving about $500,000 from a political action committee run by then-Gov. Terry McAuliffe, a political ally of Bill and Hillary Clinton.

Bromwich, the Justice Department’s former inspector general, represented McCabe as he was under a probe by the current Justice Department’s Office of Inspector General that determined he was not honest with investigators.

The FBI’s Office of Professional Responsibility recommended that McCabe be fired. Attorney General Jeff Sessions followed up by firing him.

Bromwich consistently has contributed to Democrats, including Obama’s 2008 and 2012 presidential campaigns, John Kerry’s 2004 presidential campaign, and Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign. He also has made donations to the Democratic National Committee.

Bromwich did not respond to email and phone inquiries.

Defender of Al Franken and Bill Clinton

Debra Katz has hit the talk show circuit, speaking up for Ford’s allegations more than Bromwich has. And she is no stranger to commenting for the media.

Last year, Katz provided commentary defending Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn., before he resigned in disgrace after multiple reports of groping women.

“Context is relevant,” Katz said about Franken. “He did not do this as a member of the U.S. Senate. He did this in his capacity of someone who was still functioning as an entertainer.”

In the 1990s, Katz was also a strong defender of Bill Clinton amid charges of sexual harassment made by Paula Jones.

In April 1999, Katz said on “CBS Evening News”:

Clearly a one-time incident that took place in 10 to 12 minutes, she was not forced to have sex, she left on her own volition, the courts increasingly are finding that that is not enough to create a sexually hostile work environment claim.

Katz also talked about the Jones case to The New York Times in March 1998.

“If a woman came to me with a similar fact pattern, that is someone in the company above her propositioned her but only once and she suffered no tangible job detriment, I would probably tell her that I’m sorry, it’s unfair, but you don’t have a case,” Katz told the Times.

Clinton eventually settled his case with Jones, and was found in contempt of federal court.

In a follow up point in the Times, Katz continued: “If it’s one time, it has to be severe, almost a sexual assault, not just a touching of somebody’s breast or buttocks or even forceful kissing.”

Katz is a donor to Obama’s presidential campaigns and Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign, and to numerous Democratic congressional candidates across the country.

In a Facebook post in March 2017, Katz, referring to a Hillary Clinton line during the campaign, said of advisers to President Donald Trump: “These people are all miscreants. The term ‘basket of deplorables’ is far too generous a description for these people who are now Senior Trump advisors.”

Katz did not respond to phone and email inquiries.

He Has an Eye on 2020

While most of the lawyers involved in the Kavanaugh accusations have a past in politics, Michael Avenatti hints at a significant political future.

Avenatti already has asserted that he is considering running for president in 2020.

Over the past year, he has built a high-profile legal resume to raise his name recognition, making well more than 100 TV appearances.

One of his clients, Julie Swetnick, made the most serious accusation against Kavanaugh—one that the nominee and current D.C. Circuit Court judge called a farce.

Swetnick claims in an affidavit that when she was a young adult, she was present at multiple parties where Kavanaugh, as a high school student, participated in gang rapes.

She said that she eventually was gang-raped at one of the parties she attended. She said she couldn’t remember whether Kavanaugh was one of her attackers—only that he was present at that party.

Avenatti also represents porn star Stormy Daniels, a stage name for Stephanie Clifford, who has said she had a consensual one-night stand with Trump in 2006. Daniels was trying to get out of a nondisclosure agreement that she signed shortly before the 2016 election.

While in college and later in law school, Avenatti worked for Rahm Emanuel’s Democratic-affiliated opposition research firm the Research Group. Emanuel is now mayor of Chicago.

However, most of Avenatti’s career has been with the entertainment industry in Los Angeles, where he once sued businessman Trump.

Avenatti wasn’t a major political donor, but contributed to the presidential campaign of former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards, Kerry’s presidential campaign, and at least one of Sen. Barbara Boxer’s campaigns.

Democratic Candidate

Deborah Ramirez claims that as a college freshman Kavanaugh exposed himself to her during a party when they were both students at Yale.

The two lawyers representing her, according to reports, are Stan Garnett and John Clune, both of Colorado.

Garnett is a former district attorney for Colorado’s 20th Judicial District in Boulder County, an elected office he held for about a decade, according to an online biography.

In 2010, Garnett was the Democratic nominee for Colorado attorney general. He lost the race to Republican John Suthers.

In private practice during 2003, Garnett represented Rep. Mark Udall, D-Colo., in his capacity as an individual in the case of Salazar v. Davidson, which led to a court’s striking down a redistricting plan approved by a Republican-led state legislature.

He contributed to Democratic congressional candidates across the country, and also to Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign.

High-Profile Cases

Clune, also an attorney for Ramirez, hasn’t been as transparently political as most of the other lawyers involved in the allegations against Kavanaugh.

Many of his high-profile cases involve sexual assault, however.

Clune has represented students and families on campus rape and Title IX matters.

Clune represented clients alleging sexual assault in civil litigation against pro basketball’s Kobe Bryant, as well as in a civil lawsuit against pro baseball’s Johan Santana and several actions against schools alleging Title IX violations.

In 2009, Clune co-founded and served as the first legal director for Rocky Mountain Victim Law Center, a pro-bono nonprofit organization dedicated to enforcing the rights of crime victims, according to an online biography.

COLUMN BY

Portrait of Fred Lucas

Fred Lucas

Fred Lucas is the White House correspondent for The Daily Signal and co-host of “The Right Side of History” podcast. Send an email to Fred. Twitter: @FredLucasWH.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Sen. Flake, I Was Assaulted by a Stranger. Here’s Why I Want Kavanaugh Confirmed.

I Was a Crime Reporter in Maryland in the Early ’80s. I Never Heard of Teen Gang-Rape Parties

The Daily Signal Podcast: The Media’s Shameful Handling of Kavanaugh Accusations

Harvard Students Want Kavanaugh Banned From Public Life, Because of #MeToo

The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now.

EDITORS NOTE: This column with all images was republished with permission. The featured image of Christine Blasey Ford is joined by her lawyers, Debra Katz, left, and Michael Bromwich as she testified Sept. 27 before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Katz and Bromwich both have partisan pasts. (Photo: Win McNamee/Zuma Press/Newscom)

Why is the anti-Florida farmers ‘dark money’ group Bullsugar.org endorsing Senator Bill Nelson?

/in , , , /by

According to PR Newswire:

In the race for US Senate Bullsugar.org endorsed Nelson for his public acknowledgement that Florida’s flawed water management has fueled toxic algae and red tide blooms on both coasts, and for Nelson’s support for solutions that protect the health and safety of waterside communities, as well as the health of Everglades National Park and Florida Bay.

Who is Bullsugar.org?

This is a questions that two Florida newspapers have tried to answer.

TC Palm, part of the USA Today Network, in an article titled “Editorial: Bullsugar should be sweeter on transparency” wrote:

If Bullsugar.org didn’t exist, someone would have to invent it.

The group was formed in 2013, but it came to prominence this past summer as blue-green algae choked our waterways.

[ … ]

Judy Sanchez, spokeswoman for Clewiston-based U.S. Sugar, suggests it’s because Bullsugar and other Everglades environmental groups are working in tandem, likely all funded by the same “out-of-state hedge fund billionaire” (Paul Tudor Jones II) in an effort to push their “anti-farming, anti-rural communities agenda.

[ … ]

And its critics are complaining, we suspect, because Bullsugar has drawn rhetorical blood in its criticism and its activism.

Nonetheless, the secrecy doesn’t reflect well on Bullsugar’s cause. Given the severity of this summer’s algae crisis, it might have been tempting to fight fire with fire, to counter the sugar industry’s political donations funneled through myriad PACs, “grass roots” organizations and, yes, “dark money” groups with similar tactics.

Politico in an article titled “Targets of Bullsugar.org’s criticism wonder where group gets its funding” noted:

Who is Bullsugar.org?

The group supporting a water reservoir to divert and store discharges from Lake Okeechobee has brought harsh rhetoric to the debate on Everglades issues this past year after being formed just two years ago.

Group members have criticized politicians who have received donations from the sugar industry. But the group would not provide a list of its donors when requested by POLITICO Florida.

“OK, so, I can’t really give you a list of our donors,” co-founder Kenan Siegel said. “I don’t think they’d really want to be named.”

Bullsugar.org is a 501(c)(4) organization, which means it doesn’t have to reveal its donors. Such organizations in political circles often are called “dark money” groups.

The Nelson for Senate Campaign in an email stated:

Friends – our campaign has been outspent 5-to-1, and right now our fundraising is falling behind. If we let Rick Scott buy this seat, Democrats have NO chance to take back the Senate.

He and his right-wing allies have already spent more than double what my campaign spent in 2012, and recent polls show this race within a single point – that’s why this fundraising deadline is so important.

Perhaps Florida’s Senator Bill Nelson should come forward and ask Bullsugar to reveal from where it gets its funding in the name of honesty and transparency? Who is buying whose seat?