How Democrats Spawned The Border Crisis

Sacrificing national security on the altar of open borders.

When I was growing up my mom sagely told me, “Where there’s a will, there’s a way.”

For the past several decades, where actual border security and effective immigration law enforcement are concerned, the political elites of both parties have consistently exclaimed, “No way!”

Rather than devise strategies to effectively enforce our immigration laws, secure our borders and deter massive illegal immigration, our political leaders worked mightily to devise excuses and subterfuges to scam Americans by perpetrating Theft By Deception: The Immigration Con Game.

Politicians from both parties have declared that since we cannot deport all of the illegal aliens in the United States, the best we can do is legalize them to ostensibly “get them out of the shadows.”

That lunacy does not deter illegal immigration but encourages it — in essence, firing the starter’s pistol for aspiring illegal aliens from around the world. That is why a succession of caravans is now heading to the United States.

Indeed, the betrayal of America and Americans by our politicians was the predication for my articles, “Caravan Of ‘Migrants’ – A Crisis Decades In The Making: America is on the edge of forfeiting its sovereignty and security” and “Sanctuary Country – Immigration failures by design.”

I urge you to take the time to read both of those articles in which I provide an insider’s view of how the leadership of both parties have come to see in the immigration system not so much a law enforcement system that protects America and Americans from aliens, irrespective of race, religion or ethnicity, whose presence would pose a threat to national security, public safety, public health and the jobs of Americans, but rather a delivery system for an unlimited supply of cheap and exploitable foreign workers, an unlimited supply of foreign tourists and, for the lawyers of both parties, an unlimited supply of clients.

This is why the critical interior enforcement mission has always been severely understaffed. TSA, for example, has more than 45,000 employees, the NYPD has more than 36,000 officers just to protect the City of New York, but ICE only has about 6,000 agents for the entire United States of America and half of them are not even doing immigration law enforcement but are engaged in investigating narcotics, financial crimes, kiddie porn and intellectual property theft.

The very creation of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) as a key component of the Department of Homeland Security (that I have come to refer to as the Department of Homeland Surrender) by President George W. Bush in the wake of the terror attacks of 9/11, was designed to undermine, not enhance, border security and/or immigration law enforcement. 

Customs has nothing to do with immigration law enforcement and merging immigration with other non-related agencies and then bifurcating the immigration mission into ICE and Customs and Border Protection (CBP) created what John Hostettler, the former Republican Chairman of the House Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security and Claims, referred to as “immigration incoherence.”

With all of the threats that America and Americans face from transnational gangs, drug cartels and international terrorist organizations, President Trump has tried to get the funding for a border wall. The Republicans didn’t do anything to help him when they controlled the House of Representatives and the Democrats not only won’t help him but have accused him of creating a false crisis on the border when he declared a “national emergency.”

In response to Trump’s declaration of the national emergency to move money from related programs to fund the border wall, the Democrats are employing the tactic that the ACLU refers to as “lawfare,” filing a blizzard of lawsuits.

Evidence of the dire threats we face have been provided in abundance in a series of Congressional hearings predicated on government reports and threat assessments authored by the intelligence community and DEA.

Democrats created “Sanctuary Cities” and “Sanctuary States” and now the Democrats are calling for the dismantling of ICE altogether and the elimination of America’s borders even though the preface of the official government report, “9/11 and  Terrorist Travel, begins with this paragraph:

It is perhaps obvious to state that terrorists cannot plan and carry out attacks in the United States if they are unable to enter the country. Yet prior to September 11, while there were efforts to enhance border security, no agency of the U.S. government thought of border security as a tool in the counterterrorism arsenal. Indeed, even after 19 hijackers demonstrated the relative ease of obtaining a U.S. visa and gaining admission into the United States, border security still is not considered a cornerstone of national security policy. We believe, for reasons we discuss in the following pages, that it must be made one.

While a wall on the border by itself would not ameliorate the threats, it would represent a vital element of what needs to be a coordinated program to address all of the vulnerabilities in the immigration system.

I have come to compare a secure barrier along the southern border with a wing on an airplane: without the wing the airplane won’t fly; however, a wing by itself goes nowhere.

We need to prevent the entry of illegal aliens and contraband by whatever means they are able to enter the United States. I have frequently referred to the multiple means by which aliens enter the United States as the “Immigration Colander.”  This is why we must understand that the United States has 50 “border states.”

Here are the cold, hard facts that illustrate the severe threats we face that any rational adult would certainly consider a crisis.

To begin with, I would argue that the flood of narcotics into the United States should be seen as a Weapon of Mass Destruction (WMD).

Fentanyl is as lethal as cyanide.

Furthermore, Americans pay for the poisons to the tune of tens of billions of dollars that flow into the coffers of drug trafficking organizations and terrorist organizations.

My article, “New York City: Hub For The Deadly Drug Trade‘Sanctuary’ policies attract foreign drug traffickers, fugitives and terrorists” was, in large measure, predicated on a November 13, 2017 Washington Post news report“Mexican traffickers making New York a hub for lucrative — and deadly — fentanyl.”

Here is how that Washington Post report began:

NEW YORK — The middle-aged couple in the station wagon went shopping at a New Jersey Walmart on a warm night in August. They stopped for dinner at an IHOP on the way home. And when they arrived at their apartment building in a quiet residential section of Queens, the narcotics agents following them got a warrant to go inside.

They found several suitcases loaded with brick-shaped bundles of what appeared to be heroin. But lab tests determined that most of it — 141 pounds — was pure fentanyl, a synthetic and supremely dangerous opioid 50 times more powerful than heroin.

It was the largest fentanyl seizure in U.S. history. There was enough inside the apartment to kill 32 million people, according to the Drug Enforcement Administration. 

Let’s imagine that a terror plot has been uncovered for international terrorists to enter the United States to blow up a football stadium filled with 60,000 fans, as in the 1977 cinematic thriller Black Sunday.

Such a huge attack would be devastating and send fear not just across America but across the world.

However, My article “DEA Reports Record Deaths From Drug Overdoses How a broken southern border allows narcotics to flood America” was predicated on the DEA’s 2018 National Drug Threat Assessment that included the following:

  • In 1999 drug poisoning in the U.S. accounted for 16,849 deaths, while deaths from suicide, homicide, firearms and motor vehicles accounted for more deaths than did drug poisoning.
  • In 2009 deaths attributed to drug poisoning moved into first place with 37,004 such fatalities.
  • Since 2009 drug poisoning has accounted for more deaths than did the other causes of death, with a sharp upward trend in the number of such fatalities.  In 2013, 43,982 deaths were attributed to drug poisoning, in 2014 that number increased to 47,055, in 2015 the number jumped to 52,404 and in 2016 that number had skyrocketed to 63,632 deaths.

Because those 63,632 tragic deaths attributed to opiate overdoses did not occur en masse and there was no dramatic explosion, they got very little attention.

Those deadly drugs are pouring into the United States primarily across our southern border and through ports of entry, between ports of entry, as well as through international airports.

A small quantity of fentanyl can kill millions of people, yet the Democrats quibble about whether or not we should construct barriers, not to prevent anyone from entering the United States, but to make certain that all who do enter the country are inspected the same way that passengers who seek to board airliners must undergo a search by TSA.

While the Democrats argue that the wall would be too expensive, not unlike insulation on a house, the wall would pay for itself. That was the premise for my article, “America Needs A Border Wall Like Houses Need Insulation.”

As for the threats posed by international terrorists, my article, “Border Security Is National Security” referenced an April 12, 2017 Washington Times report, Sharafat Ali Khan smuggled terrorist-linked immigrantsMy article included the following excerpt:

Khan is a citizen of Pakistan who had established himself as a permanent resident in Brazil and then smuggled numerous illegal aliens from the Middle East into the United States through Mexico.  ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) issued a press release about this case, Foreign national extradited and pleads guilty to human smuggling conspiracy.

That Khan first became a resident of Brazil prior to beginning his smuggling operation is of particular concern. 

Terror training camps run by Hamas and Hezbollah are to be found in the Tri-Border region of Brazil (where Brazil abuts with Argentina and Paraguay).  While there was no specific mention of Khan making use of those camps, given the nature of his crimes, this is a very real and troubling possibility.

It is also entirely possible that members of ISIS and al-Qaeda are present in those terror training camps.

Concerns about the Tri-Border Region were ably reported on in a paper, Islamist Terrorist Threat in the Tri-Border Region that was published by Jeffrey Fields, Research Associate, Center for Nonproliferation Studies.

The U.S./Mexican border is all that stands between America and Middle Eastern terrorists operating throughout  Latin America. As I noted in my recent article, “The Impending Alien Invasion,” Latin America has become a hotbed for terrorist activities, a fact that was highlighted at a hearing conducted on April 17, 2018 by the House Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence on the topic, “State Sponsors of Terrorism: An Examination of Iran’s Global Terrorism Network.”

My article included an excerpt of the prepared testimony of one of the witnesses, Dr. Emanuele Ottolenghi of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies:

In recent years, Hezbollah’s Latin American networks have also increasingly cooperated with violent drug cartels and criminal syndicates, often with the assistance of local corrupt political elites. Cooperation includes laundering of drug money; arranging multi-ton shipments of cocaine to the United States and Europe; and directly distributing and selling illicit substances to distant markets. Proceeds from these activities finance Hezbollah’s arms procurement; its terror activities overseas; its hold on Lebanon’s political system; and its efforts, both in Lebanon and overseas, to keep Shi’a communities loyal to its cause and complicit in its endeavors.

This toxic crime-terror nexus is fueling both the rising threat of global jihadism and the collapse of law and order across Latin America that is helping drive drugs and people northward into the United States. It is sustaining Hezbollah’s growing financial needs. It is helping Iran and Hezbollah consolidate a local constituency in multiple countries across Latin America. It is thus facilitating their efforts to build safe havens for terrorists and a continent-wide terror infrastructure that they could use to strike U.S. targets.

For the Democrats the only crisis that concerns them is not if hundreds of thousands of Americans lose their lives, but if they lose their next elections.

RELATED ARTICLE: Congressional Incompetence Forced Trump’s Hand on National Emergency Declaration

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images originally appeared in FrontPage Magazine. It is republished with permission. The featured image is by Pixabay.

The Left Wants to Transform Our Election System. It’s a Recipe for 1-Party Rule.

Democrats intend to save “democracy” by putting themselves in charge of elections.

As absurd as that sounds, it really is a part of the inappropriately named “For the People Act of 2019,” or H.R. 1, moving through the House of Representatives.

The Heritage Foundation created a list of the law’s provisions, which you can read here. The Conservative Action Project also provided this quick rundown of the bill:

• Forces states to implement mandatory voter registration, removing civic participation as a voluntary choice, and increasing chances for error.

• Mandates that states allow all felons to vote.

• Forces states to extend periods of early voting, which has shown to have no effect on turnout.

• Mandates same-day voter registration, which encourages voter fraud.

• Limits the ability of states to cooperate to see who is registered in multiple states at the same time.

• Prohibits election observers from cooperating with election officials to file formal challenges to suspicious voter registrations.

• Criminalizes protected political speech by making it a crime to ‘discourage’ someone from voting.

• Bars states from making their own laws about voting by mail.

• Prohibits chief election officials in each state from participating in federal election campaigns.

• Mandates free mailing of absentee ballots.

• Mandates that states adopt new redistricting commissions.

The bill is more or less a grab bag of progressive priorities, much like the Green New Deal.

Like the misguided movement to abolish the Electoral College, H.R. 1, in the name of democracy, takes a blow torch to the concepts federalism and self-government enshrined in our Constitution.

As the above summary makes clear, H.R. 1 has numerous provisions that would undermine free speech rights, upend the way America conducts elections, encourage voter fraud, and turn election oversight into little more than a partisan weapon to bludgeon foes.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., who seems to have positioned herself at the forefront of every piece of radical legislation coming out of the House, dismissed the idea that H.R. 1 is a “power grab” by Democrats.

She had to make an almost immediate correction after that tweet, as the legislation has not yet passed the House. Even if it did, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has said it wouldn’t pass in the Senate, where Republicans hold a majority.

Ocasio-Cortez has a penchant for missteps, but she’s a good barometer for where the progressive base in America is.

In this bill, the left has shown it is willing to make a “naked attempt to change the rules of American politics to benefit one party,” as McConnell noted. But beyond that, H.R. 1 is most concerning for the devastating effect it would have on our federal republic.

National Review’s David French summed it up perfectly:

At its essence, the bill federalizes control over elections to an unprecedented scale, expands government power over political speech, mandates increased disclosures of private citizens’ personal information (down to name and address), places conditions on citizen contact with legislators that inhibits citizens’ freedom of expression, and then places enforcement of most of these measures in the hands of a revamped Federal Election Commission that is far more responsive to presidential influence.

Certainly, the effort to get around the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision through a constitutional amendment to get money out of politics is misguided and an assault on free speech. It is at odds with our right to free speech and, in the end, would mostly benefit insiders and incumbents who know how to play the Washington game of navigating arcane campaign finance laws.

Further, it would require donors to disclose their own private information in the name of “transparency.”

This is how democracy descends into mob rule. It’s why the Founders erected barriers to guard against a tyrannical majority. Given the way progressives brazenly attack and shame dissenters on college campuses—and increasingly in public life—it is all the more urgent that individual privacy rights be protected. Privacy is a cornerstone of liberty.

Perhaps the most concerning aspect of H.R. 1 is what it would do to American election laws and how it would not just undermine, but bulldoze any semblance of federalism left in our political system.

H.R. 1 would stop state legislatures from drawing up their own congressional districts and would mandate independent commissions in their place.

As I’ve written in the past, getting rid of legislative redistricting, sometimes known as “gerrymandering,” is a “cure” worse than the disease. Redistricting will always be partisan, no matter who does it. Laws to prevent this would simply drive partisan redistricting underground, where it would be done in secret by an unelected, uncountable commission rather than openly by a legislature.

Again, even if this were good policy, it assumes that the federal government has the right to dictate how states run their elections. It would take away the right of the citizens of a state to make their own choices on these issues.

H.R. 1 contains other violations of federalism—and the Constitution—including mandates to restore voting rights to felons as soon as they are released from prison and stop states from finding and removing ineligible voters.

And it gets worse.

After nationalizing American election laws, H.R. 1 would put them all under the watchful eye of a “revamped” Federal Election Commission. This is perhaps the most brazenly partisan element of the bill.

The Federal Election Commission currently allows six members (though it currently only has four), with a requirement that four members sign on to any decision in order for it to pass. It has an even number of Republican and Democratic appointees—thus, it takes both parties to agree to prosecute a violation of federal law. This prevents the party in control of the White House from enforcing the law in a partisan fashion.

H.R. 1 would change that by making the commission a five-person body comprised of the president’s appointees, with the president’s party able to appoint three of the five. This would make the commission into a partisan body beholden to the president. 

Proponents say this would end the current “deadlock,” but in reality it would turn the commission into a partisan tool to be used by the president. It would be an egregious concentration of power, especially given the way the rest of the bill would nationalize American elections.

While the Framers weren’t unanimous about how much power states should have relative to the federal government, none would have thought it a good idea to give near-tyrannical power to an unelected body of five people, which is what H.R. 1 would essentially do.

The “For the People Act” really is little more than a progressive power grab intended to manipulate election rules to favor liberals, and it is an anti-democratic bill that would upend America’s electoral system.

As with the Green New Deal, it is a vehicle for introducing ideas that would fundamentally transform our republic into something we would not recognize at all.

COMMENTARY BY

Portrait of Jarrett Stepman

Jarrett Stepman

Jarrett Stepman is an editor and commentary writer for The Daily Signal and co-host of “The Right Side of History” podcast.Send an email to Jarrett. Twitter: @JarrettStepman

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

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column with images is republished with permission. The featured photo is by Arnaud Jaegers on Unsplash.

Coups, Cover-ups and Context

After much media hype and online snippets the prime time CBS News interview of Andrew McCabe finally aired last night 2.17.19. It was a well-choreographed editorial hit-piece masquerading as journalism worthy of study by any legitimate journalism school if any still exist.

60 Minutes correspondent Scott Pelley interviewed McCabe for the show. Pelley handled McCabe with the deference, tenderness, and soulfulness of a dance partner, completely inappropriate for interviewing the disgraced former acting head of the FBI involved in an unprecedented coup attempt against President Donald J. Trump. CBS entertained America with their well-rehearsed dance sequence.

The stage is set for two. Pelley’s gentle voice leads McCabe as they tango around the political dance floor justifying motivations for removing the president. A dip here, a dramatic pause there.

McCabe, dressed in his best red white and blue dance costume takes the lead and reveals that he ordered an investigation into whether President Trump obstructed justice by firing FBI director James Comey. Dancing McCabe’s Tango Walks naturally curve to the left as he claims he initiated the probe to safeguard and document the ongoing investigations into Russian interference in the 2016 election so they could “not be closed or vanish in the night without a trace.”

Pelley turns and moves his partner in a different direction. McCabe follows for a Reverse Slip Pivot and in a staggering admission that has gone viral on the Internet but being virtually ignored by the mainstream media, McCabe describes how the Justice Department considered enacting the 25th amendment to remove President Trump from office.
Britain’s online newspaper The Independent reported on the admission in its stunning 2.15.19 article titled, “Trump 25th amendment: Justice Department considered attempt to remove president after Comey firing, former FBI chief reveals.” 

Section four of the 25th amendment allows the removal of a sitting US president if the vice-president and a majority of the Cabinet declare him unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. There was actually DOJ speculation regarding which tango dancers would sign up for the program and how it could be accomplished. 

Pelley slows McCabe in the slow, slow, quick, quick, slow tango pattern and McCabe responds. “Rod raised the issue and discussed it with me in the context of thinking about how many other cabinet officials might support such an effort.”
McCabe quickens and leans in close to Pelley for an Outside Swivel and reveals that deputy attorney general Rod Rosenstein, another gifted tango dancer, even offered to wear a wire into the White House to record potentially incriminating conversations with the president. WHAT??? There are rules in tango!

Rod Rosenstein should be disqualified.

Law professor and competition judge Alan Dershowitz mocked the DOJ suggesting they must be watching the TV drama “House of Cards” instead of reading the Constitution. On 2.15.19 Dershowitz speaks unequivocally about the 25th amendment to Fox News:

“The Constitution is clear as can be. The 25th amendment is applicable only if you’re incapacitated. It’s not a substitute for impeachment, it’s not suitable for an election and if Rod Rosenstein actually thought about and suggested wiring the president, invoking the 25th amendment, he should be fired before he has the opportunity to resign. He should be disgraced.”

But there is a problem.    

The Tango Championships are sponsored by the Deep State and their media outlets CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC, and MSNBC so the dancing continues on mainstream media.  The Pelley/McCabe tango partnership is now competing in the finals of the Worldwide Tango Championships and must be seen in context. Other dancers include James Comey, Robert Mueller, Rod Rosenstein, Bruce Ohr, Nellie Ohr, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, Chris Wray, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, and senior tango dancers competing in the elder division James Clapper and John Brennan who have been with the Tango Association since its inception.   

The Grand Prize winners receive lifetime achievement awards in political tango for planning and pulling off the most seditious plot in American history – the coup against a sitting president. The key to the coup and the cover-up is its context.

The foundation of the Russian investigation was the infamous 2016 Steele dossier. Christopher Steele, a British tango dancer and former head of the Russia desk for British Intelligence MI6, wrote the dossier for the private investigative firm Fusion GPS. The dossier was opposition research bought by Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee for the purpose of smearing and delegitimizing candidate Trump. 

The Steele dossier was never legitimate intelligence but it was deceitfully used to acquire the FISA warrants required to spy on the Trump campaign. Robert Mueller, another world-class tango dancer, is now using it to cover-up and legitimize the seditious coup attempt against President Trump. 

Spygate is the political dance routine of world champion tango partners Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton first used in 2016 to delegitimize candidate Trump and now being used in the coup attempt against President Trump. Scott Pelley’s tango dance with McCabe was just more steps in the dance.

EDITORS NOTE: This Goudsmit Pundicity column is republished with permission. The featured image is from Pixabay.

Beware of Politicians who Covet Your Stuff!

Image may contain: 1 person, suit and text
Image from Facebook.

On Facebook there is a meme (right) based upon what President Donald J. Trump said at his “Choose Greatness” 2019 State of the Union. President Trump said:

America was founded on liberty and independence, and not government coercion, domination, and control. We are born free and we will stay free. 

Tonight, we renew our resolve that America will never be a socialist country. 

Coveting

When I saw this meme I posted this:

Exodus 20:2-17 NKJV – “You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor’s.”

A Facebook friend Randy Rioux asked, “What is that for?”

I responded to Randy with, “Communism and Socialism is based upon the core belief of coveting other peoples things. It is a violation of the Tenth Commandment. At some point Communists and Socialists run out of other peoples things.” Randy replied, “Thanks for clarifying.” I believe Randy got it.

Merriam Webster defines coveting as, “to desire (what belongs to another) inordinately or culpably.”

Synonyms for covet include: ache (for)cravedesideratedesiredie (for)hanker (for or after)hunger (for)itch (for)jones (for) [slang], long (for)lust (for or after)pant (after)pine (for)repine (for)salivate (for)sigh (for)thirst (for)wantwish (for)yearn (for)yen (for).

The Individual vs. The Collective

Ayn Rand’s 1946 monograph “Textbook of Americanism” explains in the simplest terms possible what made America unique and great.

Rand opens with an explanation of two starkly contrasting ideas.

What Is the Basic Issue in the World Today?

The basic issue in the world today is between two principles: Individualism and Collectivism. Individualism holds that man has inalienable rights which cannot be taken away from him by any other man, nor by any number, group or collective of other men. Therefore, each man exists by his own right and for his own sake, not for the sake of the group.

Collectivism holds that man has no rights; that his work, his body and his personality belong to the group; that the group can do with him as it pleases, in any manner it pleases, for the sake of whatever it decides to be its own welfare. Therefore, each man exists only by the permission of the group and for the sake of the group.

These two principles are the roots of two opposite social systems. The basic issue of the world today is between these two systems.

President Trump clearly threw the gauntlet down against the “collective” when he said, “America was founded on liberty and independence, and not government coercion, domination, and control. We are born free and we will stay free.” 

2020 Presidential Primary

This is what every America should be alert for as we enter the 2020 Presidential primaries. There will be dozens of debates as both political parties field candidates at the national, state and local levels.

The defining issue in 2020 will be coveting.

Coveting takes on many forms. Here are some core coveting issues to watch out for:

  1. Coveting other peoples freedom of speech. There are those politicians who hunger for the power to limit free speech. Many social media giants have become gate keepers and salivate over denying some freedom of expression.
  2. Coveting other peoples ability to defend themselves. This ongoing battle will heat up as politicians use tragedies to yearn for the day that all Americans are disarmed and unable to defend themselves from thieves, criminals and the government.
  3. Coveting other peoples religious beliefs. Some politicians will use hatred of Jews to promote their political agenda.
  4. Coveting other peoples wealth. Taxes is the tool of politicians at every level to take what is not theirs and redistribute it as they wish.
  5. Coveting other peoples individualism. The great battle since the beginning of mankind is the struggle between the individual and the collective (government).
  6. Coveting other peoples children. This is perhaps the most dangerous form of coveting. This form of coveting takes on many forms: the brainwashing of children to turn on their parents, the sexual assaults on children to feed a craving (pedophilia and pederasty) and the using of children for personal gain (human trafficking and prostitution).
  7. Coveting another persons life. The law recently passed in New York and the law proposed in Virginia are the definition of infanticide.

All of these forms of coveting, and many more, will be on full display during the 2020 Presidential primaries.

Coveting leads to worshiping false images (the earth), disrespecting your parents, adultery, stealing, lying (bearing false witness) and even murder.

Watch for them. Beware of them. Vote to end coveting.

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is by Pixabay.

Podcast: Obama’s Border Patrol Chief Explains Why Walls Work

On today’s podcast, we’re featuring an exclusive interview with Mark Morgan, who was chief of the U.S. Border Patrol under President Barack Obama. Now Morgan is speaking out in favor of President Donald Trump’s border wall. Find out why on today’s show.

Also on today’s show:

  • We’re celebrating Presidents Day, or what rightfully should be called George Washington’s Birthday. Listen to a timeless speech from President Ronald Reagan from Feb. 22, 1982.
  • Your letters to the editor. Next week your letter could be featured on our show; write us at letters@dailysignal.com or call 202-608-6205

The Daily Signal podcast is available on the Ricochet Audio Network. You also can listen on iTunesSoundCloudStitcher, or your favorite podcast app. All of our podcasts can be found at DailySignal.com/podcasts.

If you like what you hear, please leave a review or give us feedback. Enjoy the show!

PODCAST BY

Portrait of Rob Bluey

Rob Bluey

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

Portrait of Rachel del Guidice

Rachel del Guidice

Rachel del Guidice is a reporter for The Daily Signal. She is a graduate of Franciscan University of Steubenville, Forge Leadership Network, and The Heritage Foundation’s Young Leaders Program. Send an email to Rachel. Twitter: @LRacheldG.

RELATED ARTICLES:

16 states sue Trump over emergency wall declaration

Supreme Court Expedites Citizenship Question in Census Case

We Hear You: Declaring a National Emergency at the Border

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

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column with images is republished with permission. The featured image is by Pixabay.

The True Meaning of That Green New Deal

It would be easy to dismiss the Green New Deal as an impossible progressive dream, but that would be a mistake.

The Green New Deal is not the bucket list of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and her fellow travelers, but a blueprint to turn America into a socialist state. It is the culmination of a 90-year campaign, begun with FDR and the first New Deal.

“The first obligation of government is the protection of the welfare and well-being, indeed the very existence, of its citizens,” presidential nominee Franklin D. Roosevelt said at the 1932 Democratic National Convention.

Roosevelt said that in the depths of the Great Depression. In electing him, a panicky American people, faced with 25 percent unemployment, a plummeting stock market, and cashless banks, accepted a new leading role for the federal government after 150 years of free markets and representative democracy.

Since then, successive waves of progressives have worked to expand and extend the government through Harry Truman’s Fair Deal, LBJ’s Great Society, Bill Clinton’s Third Way, and Barack Obama’s transformative Obamacare. The only president who sought to reverse the swing to socialism was Ronald Reagan, and even he said he would not attempt to do away with the New Deal.

Sponsors of the Green New Deal—including Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass.—list these goals: Phase out conventional fuels (that is, oil, natural gas, and coal) by 2030, only a decade from now; implement a federal jobs guarantee; retrofit all U.S. buildings; overhaul transportation with high-speed rail; and provide universal health care.

Scant mention is made of the cost of this radical “retrofit” of America and who would pay for it. It’s easy being green when all you have to do is pick other people’s pockets.       

No wonder that, according to one poll, half of millennials say they would prefer to live under socialism rather than capitalism. Entitlement is all they and their parents and their grandparents have known. They think they are entitled to a free education, free health care, a job whether they want one or not, subsidized housing, and (who knows?) free pot.

No one has bothered to teach millennials the lessons of socialism, such as the tragic story of Venezuela. Once one of the wealthiest countries in Latin America, it is now ravaged by runaway inflation and massive government corruption and ruled with an iron fist by a socialist dictator.

No one has bothered to teach millennials about the miracle of India, which has switched from a broken socialist system to an expanding, neocapitalist economy that has created a middle class of 300 million, the largest in the free world.

No one has bothered to teach millennials the first law of socialism—abolish private property. So, millennials, hand over your iPhone and iPad.

No one has bothered to teach young Americans that the second law of socialism is that religion is an opiate of the people and will be terminated. Instead, you will be obliged to worship Big Brother.

No one has bothered to teach millennials that neither Denmark nor Sweden is a socialist country, but have put their industries in the hands of entrepreneurs who live by the rules of a free market economy.

The Green New Deal is a direct threat to the American spirit, which would be transformed irretrievably if it became law. But its introduction as a nonbinding resolution in Congress represents an opportunity to promote the American spirit.

As Ed Feulner and Brian Tracy wrote, in 1776 the American spirit—courageous, optimistic, enterprising, devout, generous, and devoted to liberty—gave rise to a novus ordo seclorum, a “new order for the ages” that allowed ordinary men and women to chart their own destiny. 

As it was then so it is now, if Americans are willing to accept their destiny.

COMMENTARY BY

Portrait of Lee Edwards

Lee Edwards

Lee Edwards is the distinguished fellow in conservative thought at The Heritage Foundation’s B. Kenneth Simon Center for Principles and Politics. A leading historian of American conservatism, Edwards has published 25 books, including “Just Right: A Life in Pursuit of Liberty.”

RELATED ARTICLES:

The Green New Deal Mirrors Mao’s Great Leap Forward

AOC’s Green New Deal Is a U.S. Version of Mao’s Disastrous Great Leap Forward

New Congress Members Support Green New Deal

Science is Falsifiable. Take Climate Change As An Example.

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

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column with images is republished with permission. The featured image is from Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Facebook page.

Breaking Leftists’ Deception of Black Americans

With earbuds in my ears and wired to my phone, I listen to national Christian broadcasts during my daily walk. Back to back, I heard two black pastors with large congregations. It was stunning hearing how clueless both men were regarding the truth of various political issues.

Both pastors parroted Democrats’ and fake news media’s lies in their sermons. Between the two, they rebuked Republicans for hatefully wanting to build a wall to “keep people out”. They blamed Republicans for foolishly shutting down the government which caused 800,000 employees to suffer unpaid. They scolded Republicans for cruelly separating children from their parents. Each allegation against Republicans was a misrepresentation of the truth; rooted in Democrats’ and fake news media’s longtime lie that Republicans are racist and mean.

The Border Wall. Americans welcome immigrants who enter our country legally. The border wall is to stop the invasion of illegals which includes sex traffickers, drug dealers and violent criminals. Stats confirm that walls are effective. Hypocritically, Democrats who preach that building a wall to keep Americans safe is racist and mean live in highly secured communities behind walls.

The Government Shutdown. In essence, Democrats shutdown the government by refusing to sign a budget with a piddly $5 billion towards the border wall. Democrats claim the wall at a cost of $25 billion is too expensive. Meanwhile, we are spending $135 billion annually for freebies to illegals. Democrats want the free flow of unskilled needy illegals invading our country to become new Democrat voters. The dirty little secret is illegal aliens are already illegally voting for Democrats in our elections. 

Separating Children. Democrats authored the law separating children from their parents at the border. Trump said he hates the law. Fake news and Democrats are using this Democrat law to portray Trump as a villain. Meanwhile, Democrats and fake news elevate to sainthood irresponsible foreign parents who send their children unaccompanied to make the extremely dangerous journey to America. Border agents report 12 year old illegal alien girls armed with birth control, Plan B pills, due to the high probability of being raped along the way. What kind of parents subject their children to such horrors?

A white friend left a tearful message on my phone. Kelly was heartbroken over the loss of her 40 year friendship with a black woman. The two women and their husbands vacationed together; shared family joys and sorrows together. They never discussed politics. Out of the blue, the black woman phoned Kelly to rant about Trump’s racism. Kelly gave numerous examples of why Trump is not a racist. She touted Trump’s excellent record of hiring blacks. She included how Trump fought the old guard racism of Palm Beach golf clubs. Trump opened Mar-a-Lago and insisted that blacks and Jews be admitted

The conversation between Kelly and her longtime friend ended with the black woman saying, “I never thought you would support a racist.”

I returned Kelly’s heartfelt phone call. I told Kelly to pray that God will open the eyes of her deceived black friend. I handed the phone to my wife. Mary counseled Kelly to mourn the loss of her friend and trust God to fill the void.

The next day Kelly sent me a note saying she decided to send her black friend a letter telling her that she loves her. Kelly said she will include my article, “State of the Union Destroys Trump is Racist Lie”.

My younger brother Jerry is the only Republican in his all black Baptist church in Baltimore. He confronted his black pastor about routinely including rants about how Trump and Republicans are racist in his sermons. Jerry told the pastor about how years ago, Trump gave Jesse Jackson office space for his PUSH organization. Jerry explained that the KKK was founded by Democrats. He touted Democrats’ history of perceiving blacks as inferior and opposing black liberation. None of these truths impacted his pastor’s disdain for Trump and Republicans. Jerry feels led to remain in his church, letting his light shine and speaking out for what is right.

Jerry said since political facts seem useless in breaking his pastor’s blind loyalty to Democrats, he will approach it using biblical scripture. What can I say folks, our dad was a preacher.

Jerry has scheduled a meeting with his pastor and the church elders. He will speak to them using, Matthew 16:33. “But seek ye first the kingdom of God and his righteousness….” Jerry will go down the list of all the things Democrats are pushing which are in conflict with the kingdom of God and his righteousness.

I applaud my brother Jerry and my friend Kelly for not giving up. Both are seeking ways to break leftists’ stronghold on the hearts and minds of deceived black Americans. The Bible says,”Seek and ye shall find.”

My dad, Dr Rev Lloyd E. Marcus, recently passed at age 90. I brought home a book from Dad’s library titled, “The Magic of Thinking Big” by David J. Schwartz. The book says your mind is a “thought factory” either dominated by Mr Triumph or Mr Defeat. Both are extremely obedient, triggered by your instructions. Mr Triumph produces ways for you to win. Mr Defeat nurtures ways for you to fail. I can testify to the truth of this concept in the book.

Frustrated, I whined about how unfair it was that nothing I did seemed to lower my blood sugar. Committed to win, I put Mr Triumph in charge, thinking of things I needed to do differently. After several adjustments in my diet and exercise, my blood sugar numbers have dramatically improved. I focused totally on thinking of ways to win. The Bible says, “As a man thinks in his heart, so is he.”

My fellow Americans, we can whine about how evil leftists control mainstream and social media. Or, we can place Mr Triumph in charge of our thinking, focusing on creative ways to educate our fellow American low-info voters. I fully intend to continue praying, trusting God and spreading truth.

Why Do American Jews Vote Against Their Interests?

Congresswoman IIhan Omar, a Radical Islamist and ardent anti Semite, accuses the Jews in America of paying Congress to support Israel. She particularly accuses AIPAC (American-Israel Affairs Committee) of paying Congressional members money, which is untrue. 

The reason Omar is an anti Semite is obvious. She is a Radical Islamist.  The question is why have the Democrat leadership given her a  coveted position on the powerful Foreign Affairs Committee which deals with U.S.- Israel relations. As a first term Congresswoman she has no foreign policy experience. Her only claim to fame is that she hates Jews and Israel.

So why did the Democrats give her this coveted appointment?

The obvious answer is that the Democrats are trying to coral the Muslim vote.  No one knows how many Muslims reside in the U.S. There are estimates between three and five million or more. This means there are probably as many Muslims as Jews in the U.S. That being the case the question is why elevate a antisemitic Radical Muslim to the Foreign relation Committee against Jewish interests? 

The Jewish Vote is Being Taken For Granted 

The reason that the Democrat leadership feel they can appoint an Anti-Semite to a powerful position is because the Democrats believe Jews based on past history will vote for Democrats no matter what Democrats do to them.   

The Democrats believe they have the Jewish vote in their pocket. 

President Obama  attacked Israel’s Prime Minister and arranged for the entire Black Caucus to walk out of the Congressional Joint Session when Netanyahu raised the issue of the Iran nuclear agreement which we all know is a direct threat to Israel and the U.S.  Obama succeeded in turning millions of Democrats against Israel.

A Pew poll indicated that 73% of Americans (mostly Republicans) while only 27% of Democrats support Israel.

This shift occurred during the Obama administration. Notwithstanding this fact a large majority of Jews continue to vote for Democrats. Sad but true. Perhaps the elevation of anti Semites in the Democrat ranks to high position will change this.

The Progressive Assault on Israel 

By Bret Stephens (New York Times)

  • Last month in Detroit, pro-Palestinian demonstrators seized the stage of the National LGBTQ Task Force conference and demanded a boycott of Israel. Conference organizers did nothing to stop the disruption or disavow the demonstrators, who were met with sustained applause by the audience.
  • What’s unsettling is that anti-Zionism – rejection not just of this or that Israeli policy but also of the idea of a Jewish state itself – is becoming a respectable position among people who would never support the elimination of any other country in any other circumstance. And it is churning up a new wave of anti-Jewish bigotry in its wake.
  • Israel’s enemies were committed to its destruction long before it occupied a single inch of Gaza or the West Bank. In proportion to its size, Israel has voluntarily relinquished more territory taken in war than any state in the world. Israeli prime ministers offered a Palestinian state in 2000 and 2008; they were refused both times. Nearly 1,300 Israeli civilians have been killed in Palestinian terrorist attacks in this century: That’s the proportional equivalent of about 16 Sept. 11s in the U.S.
  • Israel is now the home of nearly nine million citizens, with an identity that is as distinctively and proudly Israeli as the Dutch are Dutch or the Danes Danish. Anti-Zionism proposes nothing less than the elimination of that identity and the political dispossession of those who cherish it, with no real thought of what would likely happen to the dispossessed.
  • To say that Jews are “colonizers” in Israel is anti-Semitic because it advances the lie that there is no ancestral or historic Jewish tie to the land. To claim that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza, when manifestly it is not, is anti-Semitic because it’s an attempt to Nazify the Jewish state. To insist that the only state in the world that has forfeited the moral right to exist just happens to be the Jewish state is anti-Semitic, too.
  • But the most toxic assumption is that Jews, whether in Israel or the U.S., can never really be thought of as victims or even as a minority because they are white, wealthy, powerful and “privileged.” Jews in Germany were economically and even politically powerful in the 1920s. And then they were in Buchenwald. Israel appears powerful vis-a-vis the Palestinians, but considerably less so in the context of a broader Middle East saturated with genocidal anti-Semitism.

RELATED VIDEO: Ben Shapiro: Why Jews Vote Leftist?

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is by Pixabay.

The Green New Deal Mirrors Mao’s Great Leap Forward

The Mises Institute’s William L. Anderson published an article titled “AOC and the Green Great Leap Forward.” Anderson wrote:

When Baby Boomers were in college a half-century ago, many saw Mao as their political hero, a man with great vision who had the political will to do what was necessary to advance the fortunes of his own people. That he was a murderous tyrant who presided over mass death that exceeded even the killings of World War II was irrelevant or even ignored.

Today, we are told by her adoring press that Alexandria Occasio-Cortez is the New Visionary, a person who is far-seeing and knows what we have to do in order to survive the coming consequences of climate change. That her grand vision is little more than a mass-depopulation scheme is ignored, and we ignore it at our peril.

I believe that Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is a clear and present danger to our Constitutional Republican form of government.

The Great Leap Forward

It is important to understand history in order to realize how dangerous the Green New Deal is. Let’s look at the last time this type of massive government reorganization of society happened. It was tried in China under Mao Zedong. According to the Encyclopedia Britannica:

Overall, the radicalization of policy that led to the Great Leap Forward can be traced back to the anti-rightist campaign of 1957 and a major meeting of China’s leaders at the resort city of Qingdao in October of that year. 

In the Encyclopedia Britannica’s study of the Great Leap Forward found:

[I]n Chinese history, the campaign undertaken by the Chinese communists between 1958 and early 1960 to organize its vast population, especially in large-scale rural communes, to meet China’s industrial and agricultural problems. The Chinese hoped to develop labour-intensive methods of industrialization, which would emphasize manpower rather than machines and capital expenditure. Thereby, it was hoped, the country could bypass the slow, more typical process of industrialization through gradual accumulation of capital and purchase of heavy machinery. The Great Leap Forward approach was epitomized by the development of small backyard steel furnaces in every village and urban neighbourhood, which were intended to accelerate the industrialization process.

[ … ]

After intense debate, it was decided that agriculture and industry could be developed at the same time by changing people’s working habits and relying on labour rather than machine-centred industrial processes. An experimental commune was established in the north-central province of Henan early in 1958, and the system soon spread throughout the country.

Under the commune system, agricultural and political decisions were decentralized, and ideological purity rather than expertise was emphasized. 

What were the outcomes of the Great Leap Forward?

Encyclopedia Britannica’s study of the Great Leap Forward found:

The program was implemented with such haste by overzealous cadres that implements were often melted to make steel in the backyard furnaces, and many farm animals were slaughtered by discontented peasants. These errors in implementation were made worse by a series of natural disasters and the withdrawal of Soviet support. The inefficiency of the communes and the large-scale diversion of farm labour into small-scale industry disrupted China’s agriculture seriously, and three consecutive years of natural calamities added to what quickly turned into a national disaster; in all, about 20 million people were estimated to have died of starvation between 1959 and 1962.

This breakdown of the Chinese economy caused the government to begin to repeal the Great Leap Forward program by early 1960. 


In an article titled “AOC’s Green New Deal Is a U.S. Version of Mao’s Disastrous Great Leap Forward” the Foundation for Economic Education’s Dr. William Anderson, a Professor of Economics at Frostburg State University, wrote:

In what its supporters have claimed is “visionary,” congressional media darling Alexandria Occasio-Cortez (AOC) has released her short-awaited Green New Deal, and she has called for nothing short of the destruction of life as we have known it:

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said she has no qualms about acknowledging a so-called “Green New Deal” will mean unprecedented governmental intrusion into the private sector. Appearing on NPR, she was asked if she’s prepared to tell Americans outright that her plans involve “massive government intervention.”

We cannot predict what would be the outcome if the Green New Deal Resolution was fully implemented. What we can say is it would require a massive government takeover of all means of production with the stated goal of “saving the planet.”

As George Santayana wrote, ” “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it”

RELATED ARTICLES:

Trump on Venezuela: ‘The days of socialism are numbered’

New directions in national policy, 1958–61

Great Leap Forward

AOC’s Green New Deal Is a U.S. Version of Mao’s Disastrous Great Leap Forward

EDITORS NOTE: The featured photo is by Alfonso Castro on Unsplash.

VIDEO: America’s Starvation for Truth

In Venezuela they are starving for food (thanks to Socialism), while Americans are starving for truth. A raised understanding is needed as to the realization that a major paradigm shift is under way and that we have been living in a web of deceitful lies designed to entrap us. It’s time to break free from the Matrix. Break free from the fake and faux news. “The searching-out and thorough investigation of truth ought to be the primary study of man” – Cicero. Let’s begin.

Of course You Don’t Feel So Good

We are bombarded with negative news. Fake news. Out right lies. Half truths, propaganda and the like. The news, (majority of which is owned by six major corporations who do not serve your best interests), has put you on the edge of your seat. You feel we are losing this battle to MAGA. As you watch the news, you feel that many battles are being lost. You are fearful that President Trump may be impeached or removed from office one way or the other. Even though you are not watching CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC etc, you are still doused with fake news and propaganda via social media and FOX. Yes FOX News, Rush, Levin and so on. FOX and Rush? Yep. Why? That’s an easy one.

FOX News And the Rest of Them

Well there is the obvious like Shep Smith and Juan Williams for example. But I am talking about the not so obvious. Yes FOX news, Rush, Levin and the rest of them I believe are in fact on our side. They do in fact support our President but they cannot cross the line. They can only go so far or face being fired, sued, skeleton’s in the closet exposed, or far worse. If you think about it, all they do, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingram, Tucker, Rush is spend half of their program showing you the CNN Fake News talking points (it’s no wonder you don’t feel so good and feel we are being defeated), then they spend the second half of their airtime defending, (and sometimes even criticizing), the President. Well better than nothing if that’s all that we have. But it is not all that we have. Change the Channel.

News Behind The News

Eventually after six more years of Trump, media, censorship and the like will be transformed. Until then, compile a list of alternative sources for data. Intel sources including Q. Qanon, and many others. Compile a list of alternative on line news feeds and commentators and as always do your due diligence.

I put together a free digital e-book titled “How to Detect Truth from Lies in the Age of Fake News” and recently did an interview with Will Johnson along with EX CIA Robert David Steele. Visit my website JohnMichaelChambers and request a copy of this free e-book which also provides a list of most valuable links and alternative Intel and resources.

Come aboard. Deliver a blow to the fake news and the enemy. Knowledge is power. Applied knowledge is wisdom. You just may start feeling better in this dark and dangerous deceptive world. You will move from effect to cause. Things will become increasingly confusing and dangerous and upsetting unless you are dealing in truths. Sign up for my free RSS feed on my home page to receive a notification each time I write an article straight to your in box. You can also learn more about my paid weekly subscription to the John Michael Chambers Report. America is starving for the truth. Seek it. You shall find it.

We are winning my friends and in 2019 and 2020 we are embarking upon multiple unprecedented turn of events and soon the world will know. Trust the plan. Stay the course. Do not waiver from our President. Freedom, it’s up to us!

RELATED VIDEO:

RELATED ARTICLES:

Trump Has All The Goods

Q-Plan to Save the World

Q- We are the Plan

Q – Dark to Light

Rats in DC Panicking

EDITORS NOTE: This Course Corrections Consulting column with images is republished with permission of the author.

Toxic Femininity

Randall Smith: If we want adult men, then we need boys to spend time with responsible, mature adult men, probably working.

Those who study “inflected” languages such as Latin soon confront the problem of modifiers. Once you realize that the genitive “Marius” is modifying the nominative “book” (“the book of Marius”) then you must ask whether the book was written by Marius, belongs to Marius, or is about Marius. So too, in English, when you say, “Silly men don’t ask for directions,” the question is whether you mean “Men who are silly don’t ask for directions” or “Men, who are silly (as a group), don’t ask for directions.” Vocally you could indicate this by saying, “Silly men don’t ask for directions” (are you one of that kind?), or “Silly men never ask for directions.”

All of this might seem fussy and pedantic until we come across the sort of confusion generated by Gillette’s new “Toxic Masculinity” ad. Is masculinity what’s toxic? Or is there a special category of toxic masculinity? I haven’t seen the Gillette ad, so I have no idea. Nor would I turn to an advertisement to get my ideas about “masculinity.” What am I supposed to say to my friends with beards? “Hey, Gillette says that real men shave!” I don’t think so. But having not seen the commercials, I have nothing to say about them.

I also have nothing to say about the dispute the ads have generated among people who care about such things, other than to take this occasion to point out that grammar and logic matter. So why aren’t we teaching them? You want better civic discussions? Then you have to give people the tools to engage in them.

Gillette has made the usual apologia for the controversy, claiming that they have done a service by “generating an important discussion.” Virginia Governor Ralph Northam’s comments about letting a child born alive die “generated an important discussion,” but that didn’t make those comments any less odious or repulsive.

You wonder what the response would have been if the ad had been called “Toxic Femininity.” Would the same people now be saying that it generated a helpful discussion or would they be demanding the heads of the people at the offending company?

I don’t think femininity is toxic, and I actually have no idea what a toxic femininity would be, but I gave this column that title just to test the proposition. Be honest: were you extremely offended by that title in a way you simply weren’t by the words “toxic masculinity”?

I don’t know what it would mean if you did, but it might be worth thinking about. I am, after all, simply trying to generate a useful discussion.


Amazon Woman by Anne-Louis Girodet-Trioson, 1812 [private collection]

Serena Sigillito has written a very good piece on the “toxic masculinity” brouhaha, pointing out that, “as distasteful as the term may initially seem to conservatives, the concept of ‘toxic masculinity’ shouldn’t be alien to those who adhere to traditional norms of morality.”

Indeed, there used to be a term for a young man who had learned the appropriate sort of behavior he ought to show others, whether they were parents, teachers, the elderly, his fellow workers, or women he didn’t know well. It was called “being a gentleman.” Mothers and fathers would say to their teenaged boys: “Be a gentleman!”

Now people mock that idea. As C.S. Lewis once pointed out: “We make men without chests and expect from them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honor and are shocked to find traitors in our midst.” If “being a gentleman” seems too quaint and Victorian, then perhaps the Gillette people could have said something like this: “Hey, guys, the country needs men, not adolescent boys.”

I would not be the first person to note the critical lack of eligible men available to date all the beautiful, talented, and very eligible women I know. The endless horror stories of women who have ventured onto Catholic Match.com suggests that Catholic men are not doing much better than their secular counterparts.

Catholics are right to be critical of the forces of society when they persist in ignoring the basic principles of nature about our embodied existence and about the relationship between sex and families. But are there some other enduring truths about the nature of human development we are ignoring?

So, let’s review. Human beings are biologically “adult” (meaning they can reproduce the species) at roughly 14 or 15 – women sometimes a little earlier, men a little later. Wise cultures find ways to make these young adults capable of taking on adult responsibility, especially with regard to marriage and family; unwise cultures who don’t suffer the consequences.

We, especially from the 1950s on, have simply decided to suffer the consequences. We created “adolescence,” an absolutely absurd construction of a developmental stage where emerging adults are given all the freedoms of adulthood and none of the responsibilities. And we’re surprised when problems arise?

Instead of doing what wise cultures do, which is to take “young adults” and make sure they spend their time with actual adults so that they can learn the disciplines and virtues they need to take on adult responsibilities and manage adult freedom, we have our young adults spend all their time with other young adults, who are mostly as clueless as they are, doing mostly childish things.

Don’t get the young women in my classes started on the young men at the university, their addictions to video gaming, texting, and social media, and their inability to carry on an actual conversation with an actual, living, intelligent woman.

What do I propose? The “Dating Project” at Boston College is a good idea. Training young men and women in ballroom dancing would be another. But nothing is going to work very well until we stop treating our “emerging adults” like children and start incorporating them into adult society.

If you want adult men, then you need boys to spend time with responsible, mature adult men, probably working. Teens spending all their time with teens is a recipe for disaster. It creates – pardon the expression – toxic teens.

COLUMN BY

Randall Smith

Randall Smith

Randall B. Smith is the Scanlan Professor of Theology at the University of St. Thomas in Houston. His most recent book, Reading the Sermons of Thomas Aquinas: A Beginner’s Guide, is now available at Amazon and from Emmaus Academic Press.

EDITORS NOTE: This Catholic Thing column with images is republished with permission. © 2019 The Catholic Thing. All rights reserved. For reprint rights, write to: info@frinstitute.org. The Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own. The featured image is by Pixabay.

Dr. Mordechai Kedar, Upcoming Speaking Tour to the U.S. and Canada

Our contributor Dr. Mordechai Kedar will be on a speaking tour of the United States and Canada from May 1 to June 4, 2019.

Dr. Kedar sent out the following in an email to friends and colleagues:

These days the Middle East is undergoing a profound and historic transformation. Many Middle East scholars are attempting to understand the developments in the Arab world and in the Arab and Muslim culture and religion. Additionally, Iran’s nuclear aspirations are the cause of a deep concern to many all over the world. 

Dr. Mordechai Kedar, the Director of the Center for the Study of the Middle East and Islam (under formation), a research associate of the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies and a lecturer in the Department of Arabic Studies at Bar-Ilan University in Israel, is one of Israel’s leading figures in understanding the Arab world. Until recently he was the Middle East analyst of the daily newspaper “Makor Rishon” as well as other publications. Dr. Kedar is a frequent guest in the Israeli, Arab and international media. In January of 2011, Dr. Kedar gave a very insightful presentation on Capitol Hill on “Why is the Middle East Such a Difficult Area for Americans and Westerners to Understand?” 

Dr. Kedar will be on a speaking tour, visiting North America, between May 1 and June 4, 2019. He is available to be booked for lectures and various presentations. He can be a scholar-in-residence for a weekend or give presentations and lectures during the weekdays. 

His lectures are about the Middle East, Israel’s existence within the Middle Eastern environment, the struggle over Jerusalem, Anti-Semitism in the Islamic world and Iran, combatting the BDS etc. Please see the list of topics below.

A number of Dr. Kedar’s lectures in English are on YouTube.

You might have watched Dr. Kedar’s famous interview on al-Jazeera about the right of Jews to build in Jerusalem.

In May 2012 Dr. Kedar spoke in a conference about the problems of the Israeli public diplomacy.

Dr. Kedar’s weekly analysis about the Middle East.

Dr. Kedar would like to offer his lectures (see list below) to Synagogues, Churches, Mosques, universities, colleges, schools, community centers, organizations etc. He does not need a 5 star hotel and prefers to stay overnight with a family. Dr. Kedar travels in economy class and his fee is reasonable. 

Dr. Kedar is planning to be in North America between May 1 and June 4, 2019. 

If you would like to view a sample lecture or if you have any ideas or suggestions please feel free to contact Dr. Kedar at the e-mail: kedar.tour@gmail.com

Dr. Mordechai Kedar 

Director of the Center for the Study of the Middle East and Islam (under formation); Research Associate at the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies; Lecturer in the Department of Arabic, Bar-Ilan University, Israel. Phone and WhatsApp in Israel: +972-544-778-908. US Mobile (while in North America): 917-868-3551 
Kedar.tour@gmail.com

Possible Topics:

Israel and its neighbors

1.Trump, Putin and the Middle East – What Can We Expect?
2.Israel at 71: Achievements and Challenges
3.Israel in a Changing Middle East – Challenges and Opportunities
4.Israel and the Palestinian Issue – Possible Solutions
5.The Middle East – where to?
6.Peace in the Middle East – What does it Need?
7.Iran – Where to?

Understanding Arab and Muslim Culture

1.“The Arab Spring” – Why did it fail?
2.Tribalism in the Middle East and its influence on politics and state building.
3.Turkey – What went wrong?
4.What is the struggle over Jerusalem all about?
5.Why do many Muslims hate the West?
6.Understanding the Iranians – What motivates the Ayatollahs?
7.Hezbollah – Ideology, politics and modus operandi.
8.Hamas – Ideology, politics and modus operandi.
9.Islam – A culture in crisis.
10.Islam in Democratic State – The Islamic Movements in Israel.
11.Democracy in the Middle East – Opportunity or danger?
12.Islamic Radicalism – Causes, ideology and ways to face it.
13.Sunnis and Shi’is – Why do they hate each other so?
14.Islamic Women between Tradition and Modernity.
15.Palestinian Political Illustrations – Cartoons and messages.
16.The Right of Return in the Palestinian National Ethos.
17.Hizballah, Hamas, and Israel – Living with the enemy.
18.Clash of Values: Gender and Family Issues – Sources of tension between Islam and the West.
19.Arab Intellectuals – Where are they?
20.Arab Mass Media – their role in ME societies.
21.The Other Voice in the Arab World – My personal experience.

Lecture Subjects Concerning Military Intelligence:

1.Flawed intelligence assessments and mistaken policies resulting from cultural differences.
2.What motivates Arab states, societies and armies?
3.How to understand the Arab state media?
4.Major mistakes made by the Western coalition in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Lectures on Israeli domestic issues can also be considered.

Fact Checking The “Fact Checkers” On Illegal Aliens — “Outing” Orwellian fake news.

On Monday, February 11th I was a guest on a radio show, “The Americhicks” on radio station KLZ to discuss a Feb 4, 2019 CBS News article, The facts on immigration: What you need to know in 2019– CBSN fact-check on immigration.

The CBS article ostensibly responded to nine questions about immigration raised by President Trump.  I was asked to weigh in about the honesty and accuracy of the “Facts” published by CBS to discredit what the President had said.

I reviewed the article during the weekend that preceded that show and found that falsehoods permeated this supposed “fact-check on immigration.”

Unfortunately this sort of deceptive “reporting” is all too common. 

By understanding how to unravel the tapestry of lies contained in this article will provide a methodology that can be brought to bear to critically analyze all supposed “news” articles.

To begin with, the late criminal defense attorney Johnnie Cochran remarked at the O.J. trial, “If you can’t trust the messenger, you cannot trust the message.”

Voltaire wisely said, “You should judge a man’s intelligence by the questions he asked.”  The trick is to devise the incisive questions that provide you with the insight you need to determine whether the material you are reviewing is honest or propaganda.

The CBS News article quoted a number of organizations that provided the supposed “Facts” that were used to counter what President Trump said.  The first issue is to find out who these sources (messengers) are.  It is particularly helpful to find the organization’s website online and review its mission statement.  It may be posted under “About” or “About Us” at the top of the website.

The first source quoted in the CBS article was the Center For Migration Studies.  Here is how its mission statement (under “About” on its website) begins:

The Center for Migration Studies of New York (CMS) is a think tank and an educational institute devoted to the study of international migration, to the promotion of understanding between immigrants and receiving communities, and to public policies that safeguard the dignity and rights of migrants, refugees and newcomers.

Simply stated, this organization is not an objective think tank but a biased advocacy group that seeks to increase the numbers of aliens admitted into the United States and is determined to quash any objections about the influx of aliens irrespective of how they enter the United States.

The CBS article used information provided by CMS to answer the question:  How do most unauthorized immigrants enter the United States?

The answer provided in the CBS article was described as a “Fact”

Fact: Two-thirds of the recent unauthorized immigrant population entered the U.S. on valid visas, then stayed in the country after that visa expired.

This supposed “Fact” was provided to oppose the construction of the border wall, claiming that since so many aliens don’t run our borders, we don’t need to build the wall.

In reality, the actual number of illegal aliens in the United States is unknown.  Therefore it is impossible to determine what percentage of illegal aliens entered the U.S. by evading the inspections process at ports of entry vs the number of aliens who violate their visas.

Recently Harvard and MIT conducted studies that showed that although it has been estimated by many organizations that there are about 11 million illegal aliens, the number, according to the university studies may be double that number or even higher.

For more information about this issue, check out my recent article:  Twice As Many Illegal Aliens In US According To MIT.

Additionally, on February 8, 2019 ABC News reported:  Border arrests up 85 percent over same period last year: US Customs and Border Protection.

In fact, on February 11th I participated in a discussion on Fox & Friends First about the latest statistics provided by CBP.

Fox News posted the video under the title, A new report reveals the problem at the border is only getting worse:  Retired INS agent Michael Cutler weighs in on the crisis at the southern border.

No matter what the actual statistics are, given the huge number of illegal aliens present in the United States and the now routine onslaught of a human tsunami in the form of an endless succession of “caravans” of illegal aliens flowing northward from Central America to the United States, the percentage of illegal aliens who enter the U.S. without inspection is certainly great enough to be considered a true crisis that poses a threat to national security and public safety that must be effectively dealt with.

This brings us to the second question in the CBS News article, the actual number of illegal aliens who are present in the United States. 

The sources quoted by CBS in response to this question were the Pew Research Center and the Migration Policy Institute.  Both organizations have historically attempted to downplay the magnitude of the immigration crisis.

In point of fact, Doris Meissner, the Commissioner of the INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service) under the Clinton administration, joined the Migration Policy Institute about a year after it was formed as a senior fellow.  Meissner, as INS commissioner, was responsible for implementing a massive naturalization program known as CUSA (Citizenship USA) that sought to naturalize as many new citizens as possible and resorted to shortcuts including approving applications for citizenship before fingerprint records were consolidated with the immigration files.  Under CUSA approximately 1.1 million aliens were naturalized and because of the extreme shortcuts and threats of extreme discipline against INS District Directors if quotas were not met, concerned employees of the INS contacted the Office of the Inspector General.

The eye-opening OIG report about the allegations of malfeasance of this program was published and is well worth reading.

INS Commissioner Meissner had an adversarial relationship with the special agents of the INS and was hostile towards immigration law enforcement justice.

On May 4, 1999 the House Immigration Subcommittee conducted a hearing on the Designations Of Temporary Protected Status And Fraud In Prior Amnesty Programs

John F. Shaw, the former Assistant Commissioner for Investigations, Immigration and Naturalization Service, testified at that hearing.  His testimony about his frustrations with Doris Meissner provides insight into her hostility to immigration law enforcement.

Here is an excerpt from his testimony:

In its determined efforts to establish control of the border by tightening security on the perimeter, Congress has seemingly ignored the critical, complementary roles and responsibilities of Interior Enforcement . . . and these fall mainly on the shoulders of Investigations.

I believe that the concept of Interior Enforcement, supported by a well articulated strategy document, ought to be as familiar in the nomenclature of immigration enforcement as the concept, or term, Border Control. Although, I must admit that even in-house at INS, the Commissioner has said that Interior Enforcement is a term of usage invented by Investigations and devoid of meaning.

The CBS article also made much of how the majority of drugs are seized at ports of entry and therefore more needs to be done to prevent smuggling through ports of entry and not be concerned about the amount of drugs that are smuggled across the border between ports of entry.

The fact is that we don’t know what we don’t know.  Obviously, DEA has no way of knowing the total amount of narcotics that is successfully smuggled between ports of entry.  There is no shortage of heroin in the United States and therefore with all of the seizures made by CBP at ports of entry, huge quantities are still getting into the U.S.  Clearly open borders must be considered as a serious threat to the integrity of our efforts to interdict smuggled drugs as well as smuggled aliens.

The article additionally asks the absurd question, “Is asylum a form of illegal immigration?”

The article then provides the assertion:

Fact: No. “If you are eligible for asylum you may be permitted to remain in the United States.”  Source: U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS)

Of course, while filing for any immigration benefit does not constitute “illegal immigration”, lying on such applications and therefore committing fraud is a felony.

The issue of asylum fraud was, in fact, the focus of a November 21, 2013 Washington Times news report, “Mexican drug cartels exploit asylum system by claiming ‘credible fear.’”

That article was predicated on two House Judiciary Committee hearings: Asylum Abuse: Is it Overwhelming our Borders? and Asylum Fraud: Abusing America’s Compassion?

The CBS article ignored that the majority of applications filed by aliens from Central America are denied and that immigration fraud was a key concern of the 9/11 Commission.  That was the predication for my article, Immigration Fraud: Lies That Kill-9/11 Commission identified immigration fraud as a key embedding tactic of terrorists.

The CBS article claimed that the majority of aliens who applied for asylum attended their hearings.  They did not, however, divulge how many aliens whose applications were denied subsequently absconded and failed to depart from the United States.

The CBS article also asked (and answered):

Do illegal immigrants commit more violent crimes than legal residents?

Fact: Studies say that undocumented immigrants are less likely to commit violent crimes than American-born citizens.

Source: The Cato Institute and The University of Wisconsin.

My article, Illegal Immigration And Crime: The stunning numbers the Left cannot refute includes this excerpt:

President Trump’s Executive Order on Enhancing Public Safety in the Interior of the United States requires the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to collect relevant data and provide quarterly reports on data collection efforts. On Dec. 18, 2017, DOJ and DHS released the FY 2017 4th Quarter Alien Incarceration Report, complying with this order.  The report found that more than one-in-five of all persons in Bureau of Prisons custody were foreign born, and that 94 percent of confirmed aliens in custody were unlawfully present.

Here is an excerpt from the press release that provides some quick statistics and a paragraph that addresses the lack of information about aliens in city and state facilities.

A total of 58,766 known or suspected aliens were in DOJ custody at the end of FY 2017, including 39,455 persons in BOP custody and 19,311 in USMS custody. Of this total, 37,557 people had been confirmed by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to be aliens (i.e., non-citizens and non-nationals), while 21,209 foreign-born people were still under investigation by ICE to determine alienage and/or removability.

Among the 37,557 confirmed aliens, 35,334 people (94 percent) were unlawfully present. These numbers include a 92 percent unlawful rate among 24,476 confirmed aliens in BOP custody and a 97 percent unlawful rate among 13,081 confirmed aliens in USMS custody

This report does not include data on the foreign-born or alien populations in state prisons and local jails because state and local facilities do not routinely provide DHS or DOJ with comprehensive information about their inmates and detainees—which account for approximately 90 percent of the total U.S. incarcerated population.

The rest of the material in the CBS News article can be similarly discredited, proving that, as John Adams famously observed, “Facts are stubborn things.”

RELATED VIDEO: FAIR Discusses the Crisis on the Southern Border.

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images originally appeared in FrontPage Magazine. It is republished with permission. The featured image is by Pixabay.

Panera Bread’s Socialism Experiment in Ends in Failure

The last vestige of Panera Bread’s pay-what-you-want Utopian business model will succumb to reality on February 15th.

In 2010, Panara Cares launched as a “non-profit” experiment that allowed patrons to pay whatever amount they felt for meals. Not surprisingly, all five of the locations were unable to sustain operations as, according to Panera founder Ron Shaich, “people ultimately came to the locations for a handout.”

Shaich once defended the the Panera Cares concept saying, “In many ways, this whole experiment is ultimately a test of humanity.”

However, the “donations” at the original Panera Cares location in Portland, Oregon only covered 60 to 70 percent of the total operating costs. Either “humanity” doesn’t appreciate the costs associated with running a restaurant, or people just happen to view a “free lunch” for exactly what it is.

Indeed, when the St. Louis Panera Cares location closed in 2018, Shaich admitted, “The nature of the economics did not make sense.”

The decision to close the last Panera Cares store in Boston, Massachusetts was made by Panera’s new owner, the JAB Holding Company, which is also the parent company of Peet’s Coffee (3 – Neutral), and Krispy Kreme (3 -Neutral). JAB also holds a majority ownership stake in Keurig Dr. Pepper (3 – Neutral).

Help us continue highlighting how corporations support the left’s agenda by becoming a 2ndVote Member today!

RELATED ARTICLES:

Socialism Has Already Hurt America

Panera’s Utopian “Pay What You Can Afford” Experiment Meets a Predictable End

EDITORS NOTE: This 2ndVote column with images is republished with permission. The featured image is by Shutterstock.

Wars We Were Never Meant to Win

It has been over 17 years since George Bush announced the war on terrorism and 47 years since Richard Nixon announced the war on drugs. 

Does anyone wonder why the most powerful nation on earth has not won either? I do.

The current border war and heated debate over the building of a security wall on our southern border sounds disturbingly familiar.

Terrorism, illegal drugs, and the flow of illegal immigrants are all weapons in the hybrid war being waged against America by those with common cause to destabilize and collapse America from within. Unlike a traditional military war using bombs and bullets, the hybrid war uses political warfare, lawfare, and fake news to destroy the enemy – but exactly WHO are the players in this unconventional war? Who is the enemy? What is at stake?

America is threatened by domestic enemies within who are collaborating with foreign enemies to destabilize America and bring her into the fold of internationalized one world government. Americanism is being attacked by globalism.
Globalism is not to be confused with global trade. Globalism is a system of internationalized government – a new world order of global citizenship with global citizens being ruled by the globalist elites under the auspices of the corrupt United Nations. So, what is the problem? What is wrong with the globalist vision of one world government? EVERYTHING if you value your freedom! This is the way it works.

America-first President Donald J. Trump is the existential enemy of globalism. He is an American patriot who insists upon national sovereignty, secure borders, and adherence to the Constitution.

So, who are the domestic enemies of American sovereignty, secure borders, and adherence to the Constitution?

● Obama and his entire resistance movement.

● Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer who are leading the seditious Democrat party in Congress.

● RINOS – Republicans in name only like Mitch McConnell and Richard Shelby who subvert POTUS’ America-first initiatives.

● Mueller and his team of lawfare specialists leading the smear campaign against President Trump designed to destroy his re-election chances in 2020.

● FBI deep state operatives Rosenstein, Comey, McCabe, Strzok, Page et al.

● CIA operatives Brennan, Clapper et al.

● Muslim Brotherhood terrorist organization and its offshoots like CAIR, ISNA, MSA et al.

● 9th circuit court and the radical leftist judges across America who legislate from the bench and use lawfare to stop POTUS from enacting his America-first policies.

What is most unconventional about the hybrid war against America is the staggering list of participating American politicians who are RINOS or members of the radical leftist Democrat party leading the attempted coup against duly elected President Trump.

We have come to expect that Pelosi and Schumer will obstruct President Trump’s initiatives. The Washington Post reported that Democrat leaders directed their deputies on the 2019 security panel not to gloat – concerned that if they celebrated their victory they might anger Trump enough to veto the deal.

In a stunning display of political disloyalty, malfeasance, and collusion, RINOS on the security panel led by Mitch McConnell (KY) including Richard Shelby (AL), Shelley Capito (VI), John Hoeven (ND), and Roy Blunt (MO) hid the the Democrat border security wins from President Trump!  

War tactics are being used by Americans against Americans in a seditious attempt to destroy President Trump. Why? Why would RINOS and leftist Democrats collude to destroy President Trump?

The answer is in President Trump’s promise to drain the Washington swamp because exposing the deep state and its colluding politicians explains why the most powerful nation on earth has not won its war against drugs, its war against terrorism, or its current border wars. 

War is big business. Drugs finance wars and President Trump is the first American president in decades who is serious about stopping the flow of illegal drugs into America.

Illegal immigration is big business. Illegal immigrants vote illegally for Democrats and provide cheap labor for companies that don’t care if American workers are unemployed. President Trump is the first American president in decades who is serious about election integrity and about protecting the jobs of American workers.

The hybrid war being waged inside America has targeted President Donald Trump specifically because he is committed to making America great again by winning the war on drugs, winning the war on terrorism, winning the border wars, and ultimately winning the globalist war against Americanism.  

As President Trump’s America-first policies continue to strengthen our country, the domestic and foreign enemies arrayed against him will continue their unconventional warfare. We must ask ourselves if this is the future we want for America? I certainly don’t.  

I am an American. I am horrified by the deep state – I prefer the United States. I am outraged by deep state actors in the Washington swamp and their coordinated efforts to destabilize the country and overthrow a sitting president. I demand a return to a Constitutional America where election outcomes are determined by honest elections and respected by the entire country. 

We have presidential elections every four years so that we can maintain the peaceful transfer of power that distinguishes America from the military coups in third world countries. We cannot allow the deep state and the radical leftist Democrat party to dissolve our Constitution and transform America into a tyrannical socialist/globalist new world order of one world government.

We must resist the resistance. We can win the war on drugs. We can win the war on terrorism. We can win the border wars. We can make America great again and win the wars we were never meant to win.

America first is very presidential!

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the Goudsmit Pundicity. The featured image is by Pixabay.