The 33 States Where Our Tax Dollars Go To Support The Non-Working Class

The Cato Institute released an updated 2016 study showing that welfare benefits pay more than a minimum wage job in 33 American states, and the District of Columbia.

Even worse, welfare pays more than $15 per hour to stay home in 13 states.

According to the study, welfare benefits have increased faster than minimum wage. It’s now more profitable to sit at home and watch TV than it is to earn an honest day’s pay.

Hawaii is the biggest offender, where welfare recipients earn $29.13per hour, or a $60,590 yearly salary for doing nothing.

Here is the list of the states where the pre-tax equivalent “salary” that welfare recipients receive is higher than having a job:

  1. Hawaii : $60,590
  2. District of Columbia :$50,820
  3. Massachusetts : $50,540
  4. Connecticut : $44,370
  5. New York : $43,700
  6. New Jersey : $43,450
  7. Rhode Island : $43,330
  8. Vermont : $42,350
  9. New Hampshire:39,750
  10. Maryland : $38,160
  11. California : $37,160
  12. Oregon : $34,300
  13. Wyoming : $32,620
  14. Nevada : $29,820
  15. Minnesota : $29,350
  16. Delaware : $29,220
  17. Washington : $28,840
  18. North Dakota : $28,830
  19. Pennsylvania : $28,670
  20. New Mexico : $27,900
  21. Montana : $26,930
  22. South Dakota : $26,610
  23. Kansas: $26,490
  24. Michigan : $26,430
  25. Alaska : $26,400
  26. Ohio : $26,200
  27. North Carolina : $25,760
  28. West Virginia : $24,900
  29. Alabama : $23,310
  30. Indiana : $22,900
  31. Missouri : $22,800
  32. Oklahoma : $22,480
  33. Louisiana : $22,250
  34. South Carolina : $21,910

Hawaii, D.C. and Massachusetts pay more in welfare than the average wage their taxpaying citizens earn there.

Is it any wonder that they stay home rather than look for a job. Time for a drastic change. Americans are not stupid.

Note that California is $18.50 an hour. Are we Nuts or what? How do we undo this type of stupidity

Politicians on the Gravy Train

Now if you think paying the unemployed more than the employed s bad, check out these salaries:

  • Salary of retired United States Presidents $180,000 FOR LIFE Salary of House/Senate—$174,000 FOR LIFE.
  • Salary of Speaker of the House $223,500 FOR LIFE!
  • Salary of Majority/Minority Leader $193,400 FOR LIFE!

NOTE: The average Salary of a teacher—$40,065; Average Salary of Soldier DEPLOYED IN AFGHANISTAN—$38,000.

Nancy Pelosi will retire as a Congress Person at $174,000 Dollars a year for LIFE. She will retire as SPEAKER at $223,500 a year Plus she will receive an additional $193,400 a year for when she was Minority Leader, the fact that she has become rich while in office notwithstanding. That’s $803,700 Dollars a year for LIFE including FREE medical which is not available to us, the taxpayers.

She is just one of the hundreds of Senators and Congresspersons that float in and out of Congress every year!

I think we found where the cuts should be made! From the state houses to the White House.

If you agree please share this column with your friends and on your social media sites.

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: States Where Welfare Recipients Are Paid More Than Minimum Wage

Impeachment Republicans Learned Their Fates in Primaries

At least six out of the ten Republicans who voted to impeach Trump in 2021 will not return next Congress.

Impeachment Republicans Learn Their Fates in Primaries

By Allen Zhong, The Epoch Times, August 6, 2022:

Impeachment Republicans Score 2:6

At least six out of the ten Republicans who voted to impeach Trump in 2021 will not return next Congress.

Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.), Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.), Rep. Anthony Gonzalez (R-Ohio), and Rep. John Katko (R-N.Y.) have announced retirements after the current term.

Rep. Peter Meijer (R-Mich.) has been defeated by Trump-backed John Gibbs in the Republican primary.

Gibbs is a former Trump administration official.

Rep. Tom Rice (R-S.C.), a five-term congressman, lost his reelection bid to South Carolina state Rep. Russell Fry, who was endorsed by Trump.

However, Meijer told Sirius XM radio’s Julie Mason that he didn’t regret the impeachment vote.

“I would rather lose office with my character intact than stay reelected having made sacrifices of the soul,” he said.

Rep. David Valadao (R-Calif.) and Newhouse survived the primary.

Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler (R-Wash.) is competing with Trump-backed Joe Kent for the second position in the 3rd Congressional district primary in Washington state. Beutler is leading with a razor-thin margin of 257 votes.
Epoch Times Photo
Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) delivers a closing statement during a hearing by the House Select Committee to investigate the Jan. 6, 2021, U.S. Capitol breach, in the Cannon House Office Building in Washington on July 21, 2022. (Saul Loeb/AFP via Getty Images)

Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) appears to be fighting an uphill battle to survive the primary in a deep-red state Trump won with a landslide in 2020.

The Republican primary for the lone congressional seat in Wyoming will be held on Aug. 16.

However, Meijer told Sirius XM radio’s Julie Mason that he didn’t regret the impeachment vote.


A U.S. House Republican who voted to impeach President Donald Trump advanced to the general election with a weakened advantage.

Rep. Dan Newhouse (R-Wash.), the incumbent congressman of the 4th district in Washington state, received 25.48 percent of all the 139,806 votes in the nonpartisan primary held on Aug. 2. He is going to face Democrat Doug White, who got a very close 25.38 percent, in the general election.

Loren Culp, the Republican candidate who was endorsed by Trump, had around 6,000 fewer votes than the primary winners.

Though President Joe Biden won Washington state in the 2020 presidential election, Trump led him with a 19-point advantage in the 4th Congressional district.

Compared to the results of 2020, Newhouse’s advantage has apparently been weakened over the last two years, which is likely caused by his pro-impeachment stance.

Newhouse won with 57.4 percent of all votes in the 2020 primary, more than double the votes of the second-position Democrat Doug McKinley.

However, he will likely be able to win the general election if the majority of the Republican votes from the primary go to him.

Read the rest.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

RELEASE THE TAPE: Definitive Proof FBI Is Hiding Critical Footage of Jan 6 “Pipe Bomber”

The Bureaucracy’s Democrat Majority Made America a One-Party Government

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

Poll: Majority of Americans Regret Taking Covid Vaccine

Documentary: Uninformed Consent

This is a PDF of government data sources

All the statistics can be found here at this link.


Common sense prevails. What a price to pay.

Poll: Majority Americans Regret Taking Covid Vaccine

By: Sarah Arnold, Townhall, Aug 06, 2022:

In an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal, UCLA Geffen School of Medicine Doctor Joseph Lapado and Yale School of Public Health Doctor Harvey Risch are sounding the alarm that there may be serious underestimated risks involved with the side effects of the Wuhan Coronavirus vaccine.

This comes as an independent pollster found that a significant number of Americans regret receiving the vaccine in the first place.

10 percent of those vaccinated said they wish they hadn’t done so, while 15 percent of adults said they have been diagnosed with a new condition by a medical practitioner weeks or months after the first dose.

Children’s Health Defense (CHD) authorized the poll two years after the first vaccine was rolled out.

“The fact that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports more than 232 million Americans ages 18–65 have taken at least one dose of the COVID-19 vaccine, and 15 percent of those surveyed report a newly diagnosed condition is concerning and needs further study,” Laura Bono, CHD’s executive director said.

The top conditions people reported were blood clots, disrupted menstrual cycles, heart attacks, strokes, lung clots and liver damage. 10 percent of these conditions among people who took the vaccine were severe.

Bono believes the government should have warned Americans that the mRNA vaccine technology is new, thus naturally have no long-term data that shows how the jab will effect people’s health years down the road.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

‘Winter of Death’ 2.0? Dr. Fauci Just Threatened 70% of Americans

RNA Vaccine Doctor And Biochemist: 29,790 Official Deaths Linked to Vaccine in VAERS Likely A Tiny Fraction of True Number

9-Year-Old Dies Two Weeks After Taking COVID-19 Vaccine: VAERS

FIFTH Young Doctor, Triathlete, 27, DIES SUDDENLY

THREE DOCTORS From the Same Hospital “Die Suddenly” in the Same Week After Hospital Mandates Another COVID Shot

D.C. Plans to EXPEL CHILDREN From School If They Don’t Get The Covid Vaccine

Data Proves ‘Sudden Adult Death Syndrome’ Fiction Is Death by Covid Vaccination

Most vaxxed country in Europe now has its worst COVID outcomes

New UK government data shows the COVID vaccines kill more people than they save

MIT: COVID Vaccines ‘Significantly Associated’ with Spike in Heart Attacks in Young People

Survey: More Than 750,000 Dead, 30 Million Injured Because of Covid Vax

Sweden Refuses Covid Vaccines For Children 5 – 11

Long-term disability claims are soaring among pilots

Leading Pathologist Speaks Out About Dangerous COVID Vaccine Effects

Shocking New Studies On The Dangers and Serious Side Effects Of Covid Vaccine

Antibodies From Vaccines Interfering Instead of Neutralizing Because of Spike Protein Changes: Dr. Risch

Vaccines Are Destroying People’s Immunity Through ‘Immune Imprinting’: Dr. Robert Malone [Part 1]

Shocking New Studies On The Dangers and Serious Side Effects Of Covid Vaccine\

COVID Vaccines Increase Menstrual Irregularities Thousandfold, Fetal Abnormalities Hundredfold: Doctors’ VAERS Analysis

75% Of Vaccinated Women Have Miscarriages In The First Trimester

Here’s Why Officials Are Desperate to Get COVID Vaccine on Childhood Schedule Before ‘Emergency’ Ends

CDC Caught Using False Data To Recommend Kids’ COVID Vaccine

Vaccines for 6-Month-Olds ‘Makes Absolutely No Sense’: Dr. Jeffrey Barke

Publix Publicly Announced Its Refusal To Offer Vaccinations For Children Under 5

MIT: COVID Vaccines ‘Significantly Associated’ with Spike in Heart Attacks in Young People

Data Proves ‘Sudden Adult Death Syndrome’ Fiction Is Death by Covid Vaccination

FDA Authorizes Emergency Use COVID Vaccine Boosters for Children Ages 5 -11

3-year-old girl dies of heart attack one day after taking COVID vaccine

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

The Bureaucracy’s Democrat Majority Made America a One-Party Government

Six out of ten federal employees supported Biden.

When former President Trump, Gov. DeSantis, and Senator Ted Cruz, among others, endorsed rolling back the power of bureaucrats and their administrative state, Democrats panicked.

Senator Dianne Feinstein and Hillary’s former running mate, Senator Tim Kaine, introduced a countermeasure which they called, “Preventing a Patronage System Act” according to Kaine, to “protect the merit-based hiring system for our federal workforce”.

Media editorialists claimed that making it easier to get rid of federal employees would bring back patronage or the spoils system. The problem is that patronage never left.

We have spent generations living under a permanent patronage system. The spoils system, as bad as it was, kept one party from permanently packing its supporters into the government. Removing it just meant that the Democrats have permanently packed the federal bureaucracy.

That’s how America became a one-party government at the federal level in Washington D.C.  Politicians of both parties come and go, but it’s the Democrat bureaucrats who call the shots.

The same media outlets now fussing about “patronage” were gleefully reporting how a “resistance” was operating within the federal bureaucracy to undermine President Trump. That same “resistance”, without the public posturing, has quietly sabotaged every Republican administration and any conservative piece of legislation that gets through the process.

Before the 2016 election, one in four federal employees claimed that they would leave if Trump won. Six out of ten federal employees supported Biden. Only 28% backed Trump.

In the 2022 cycle, the American Federation of Government Employees has doled out over a million dollars. 94% of that money has gone to Democrats.

Not only does the federal workforce tilt leftward, but the number of Republicans fell from a third to a quarter over the last generation. The federal machine that controls the lives of most Americans has limited representation for one of the country’s two major political factions.

But even that’s misleading.

The men and women who actually run things are mostly Democrats. 63% of the senior executives, the highest officials within the bureaucracy, are Democrats, while the number of Republicans drops into the low 20s. A National Bureau of Economic Research paper notes that the “the overrepresentation of Democrats increases as we move up the hierarchy”.

“Among employees in grades 1-12 of the GS, we find about 50% of Democrats (30% of Republicans and 20% of independents), which rises to approximately 56% at the top of the GS (grades 13-15), and to 63% among career SES,” the research showed.

This is what a slow-motion coup looks like.

Apologists for the bureaucracy might claim that this reflects a lack of qualifications by Republicans, but the share of independents similarly drops. Only the share of Democrats steadily rises. If we were looking at a similar breakdown of racial groups in which the share of every racial group declined as it moved up the ranks, except one, it would be evidence of bias.

And a political coup is far more corrosive and dangerous to a government than racial bias.

Democrats want us to believe that the consolidation of the civil service by one political faction is somehow a natural occurrence which does not reflect a calculated strategy or patronage.

In between political tests like diversity and equity, the insistence on concentrating federal leadership in Democrat areas, and providing special entryways and promotions to members of identity politics groups more likely to vote for their party, Democrats claim that it’s all “merit”.

After fighting to eliminate merit in college admissions, the military, and federal contracts, they want us to believe that they not only believe in merit, but want to protect it in the civil service.

Democrats created an independent bureaucracy that provides its own patronage. That corrupt system has led to everything from massive theft to IRS investigations of political opponents. And the result is much worse than the rotten spoils system ever was because it’s immune to change.

The modern civil service owes its existence to a crooked bargain between President Grover Cleveland, the first post-Civil War Democrat to occupy the White House, and one of the most personally and politically corrupt men to hold that office in the century, and the Mugwumps, the Never Trumpers of the era. The federal workforce massively exploded from 5,837 before the Civil War to 15,344 after the Civil War to millions over the next century. The civil service “reforms” were a key ingredient in what became a permanent patronage system built to benefit the Democrats and the liberal Republicans who were instrumental in imposing it on Americans.

Where before individuals had traded on their political support and campaign activities to win a few hundred offices during the spoils system, urban political machines packed the civil service with tens of thousands and then hundreds of thousands of their supporters in the next century.

The liberal promises of Wilson, FDR and JFK required a symbiotic growth in government. The government programs never delivered a better life, except by providing government jobs for Democrats. The spoils system was corrupt, but permanent patronage has not only rewarded members of one party with jobs, especially senior roles, to the tune of billions, but it also shifted power away from the voters and elected officials, and to partisan bureaucrats.

The solution to patronage isn’t professionalism, it’s smaller government. Government is not a meritocracy and there’s no point in keeping up the pretense that any part of it is merit based. The most fundamental virtue of our constitutional government is that the public has supreme power over the government. The civil service system has effectively eliminated that power.

Firing federal employees is a long difficult process. The Merit Systems Protection Board has repeatedly intervened to protect even the worst abuses by workers including outright criminal behavior. Americans can lose their jobs, but they can’t do anything about the bureaucrats who control their lives. Politicians come and go, but the Democrat administrative state abides.

A smaller government begins with a much smaller bureaucracy. President Trump’s commitment to wielding Schedule F is important, as are other ideas by conservative politicians. Schedule F would be crucial in rolling back the power of key policy-making bureaucrats, but it’s only the beginning. The Founding Fathers understood that government is innately oppressive. And government, like any parasitic infection, naturally grows unless it’s shrunk or it kills the host.

Apologists for the bureaucracy claim that eliminating the permanent patronage of the civil service would erode “public trust in our government” and “undermine the role of civil servants as stewards of the public good”.

The public has no trust in the government. The one thing most of the country, across political and racial lines, can agree on is not trusting the government. Currently only about 29% of Democrats and 9% of Republicans trust the government. How much more trust is there to lose?

Civil servants are not “stewards of the public good”. The American people are. Monarchies and tyrannies have stewards of the public good. The only true constitutional and democratic virtue of a civil service is that it is easy to fire. A bureaucracy that can’t be gotten rid of isn’t serving the people, it’s mastering them, and that is what the administrative state has long since become.

With the national debt rising, instead of reducing the size of the bureaucracy, Senator Manchin and Democrats have cooked up a plan to direct $80 billion to the IRS to audit the middle class.

Even the Baron of Nottingham had more shame.

The only reason Democrats are panicking over permanent patronage reform is because the ranks and especially the senior management of the federal bureaucracy are full of their people. There’s nothing democratic or merit-based about letting a corrupt partisan faction control the administrative state and the lives of hundreds of millions of people with no recourse.

The next president who isn’t beholden to the administrative state should provide that recourse.

AUTHOR

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.

RELATED ARTICLE: Russian Spies Were Behind Black Nationalist Protest Groups

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

Biden’s Handlers set to Deny School Lunch Funding to Christian School that Refuses to Obey LGBT Mandates

The pontifex maximus enforces his new state religion.

Dems Poised To Pull Free Lunches From Christian School That Refuses to Obey LGBT Mandates

by Elizabeth Troutman, Washington Free Beacon, August 4, 2022:

The Biden administration is poised to deny free school lunch funding from a Florida Christian school that refuses to comply with the administration’s LGBT mandates, despite the school’s qualification for a religious exemption.

Grant Park Christian Academy in Tampa, Fla., represented by Alliance Defending Freedom, is suing President Joe Biden and Florida agriculture commissioner Nikki Fried for enforcing the Biden administration requirement that schools comply with its LGBT mandates or lose federal school lunch funding.

In May, the Biden administration redefined the meaning of “sex” in Title IX to include sexual orientation and gender identity, forcing schools to permit transgender students to use male or female bathrooms and play sports with either sex in order to receive National School Lunch Program funding from the U.S. Department of Agriculture. More than half of state attorneys general rejected the memorandum, with Florida attorney general Ashley Moody saying the Biden administration was “using hungry children to advance a political agenda,” the Washington Free Beacon reported….

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

Air Force hosts drag show at kid-friendly ‘diversity, inclusion’ festival on base

INSANE Video Clip: WOKE Florida School Board Member

The Bureaucracy’s Democrat Majority Made America a One-Party Government

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

INSANE Video Clip: WOKE Florida School Board Member

This week, a Liberal Sarasota County (FL) School Board Member said the quiet part out loud and admitted to doing everything The Left has been accused of in education that the media says isn’t going on when bragged about being WOKE and working from “The Best Strategic Position” by working from “The Inside” and shared that coalitions are forming statewide to promote the WOKE Agenda.

On August 23rd, we can end the madness and get the Sarasota County School District back to focusing on EDUCATION if we vote for these candidates endorsed by Governor Ron DeSantis & the Republican Party of Sarasota County:

  • District 1 – Bridget Ziegler
  • District 4 – Robyn Marinelli
  • District 5 – Tim Enos
Mail-in ballots are now in the hands of Florida voters. Early voting starts August 13th and runs through the 21st. Day of election is Aug 23rd.
THIS IS IT. IT WILL BE DECIDED ON AUG 23RD. THERE IS NO NOVEMBER ELECTION IN THESE RACES. MAIL IN YOUR BALLOTS OR GET TO THE POLLS. DON’T BLOW IT OFF. IT MATTERS AND YOU VOTE COUNTS MORE THAN YOU CAN IMAGINE.

©Christian Ziegler. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: The Real Challenges Facing Public Education

Nikita Khrushchev’s ‘We will bury you’ threat is coming true under Biden and the Democrat Party

“‘Мы вас похороним!’ [We will bury you!]”,  Nikita Khrushchev Premier of the former Soviet Union at reception at the Polish embassy in Moscow on November 18, 1956.


Today many are seeing the collapse of the American economy, end of morality from the school house to the White House and attacks on the inalienable people’s rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as the end of our unique Constitutional Republic called the United States of America.

The Premier of the former Soviet Union Nikita Khrushchev made a number of predictions about America that we present herein to allow our readers to determine if they are coming true.

Nikita Khrushchev’s Predictions

Khrushchev,

“You Americans are so gullible. No, you won’t accept communism outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of socialism until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism. We won’t have to fight you. We’ll so weaken your economy until you’ll fall like overripe fruit into our hands.”

We have seen socialism spread across America since before the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917. It began with the formation of the Intercollegiate Socialist Society which was a socialist student organization active from 1905 to 1921. The first slate of officers elected at the Sept. 1905 organizational meeting included the following: President: Jack London; First Vice President: Upton Sinclair; Second Vice President: Graham Phelps Stokes; Secretary: M.R. Holbrook; Treasurer: Rev. Owen Lovejoy; Executive Committee: Rev. George Willis Cooke, Morris Hillquit, Robert Hunter, Harry Laidler, Katherine M. Meserole, George H. Strobell. Of this group of socialist worthies, only Harry Laidler was actually a current college student.

This was the first gullibility of the American people—embracing the world-wide movement of “industrial democracy” known as socialism.

This was followed by Charles Emil Rothenberg, an American Marxist politician, who on September 1, 1919 founded and became head of the Communist Party USA.

In an article titled “Antonio Gramsci: the Godfather of Cultural Marxism” Bradley Thomas wrote:

There’s little debate that modern-day American universities, public education, mainstream media, Hollywood, and political advocacy groups are dominated by leftists. This is no accident, but part of a deliberate strategy to pave the way for communist revolution developed more than eight decades ago by an Italian political theorist named Antonio Gramsci. [Emphasis added]

Upon this foundation came the next inevitable step—the weakening of America’s economy.

The Weakening of America’s Economy

Nikita Khrushchev,

“We do not have to invade the United States, we will destroy you from within.”

To destroy America from within one must control the U.S. economy. This control of the economy began on December 23, 1913, when Democrat President Woodrow Wilson signed the Federal Reserve Act into law—a decentralized central bank that balanced the competing interests of private banks and populist sentiment.

This was followed by The Social Security Act which was signed into law by Democrat President Franklin D. Roosevelt on August 14, 1935. In addition to several provisions for general welfare, the Act created a social insurance program designed to pay retired workers age 65 or older a continuing income after retirement. It taxed every single America to provide money for a system. As a result of changes to Social Security enacted in 1983, benefits are now expected to be payable in full on a timely basis until 2037, when the trust fund reserves are projected to become exhausted.

This was followed by The Great Society which was a set of domestic programs in the United States launched by Democratic President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964–65. In a book titled Great Society: A New History published in 2019, Amity Shlaes noted,

“[J]ust as the 1960s forgot the failures of the 1930s, we today forget the failures of the 1960s.”

Shlaes’ detailed description and telling digression that traces the arc from the unbridled hopes of the early Sixties to the enormous administrative expansion of the “second New Deal” to the missteps in implementing it that became all too apparent in the Seventies.

This expansion of government was accelerated under the Obama, Obamacare’s take over of the entire U.S. healthcare system, and now the Biden administrations Build Back Better Agenda.

Our Grandchildren living under Socialism

Nikita Khrushchev,

I can prophecy that your grandchildren in America will live under socialism — Our firm conviction is that sooner or later Capitalism will give way to Socialism. Whether you like it or not, history is on our side. We will bury you.

Today many Americans fear for their children and grandchildren. Socialism has become part and parcel of the indoctrination of our children and grandchildren from the public schools, colleges and universities, to woke companies, to the media and social media and now permeates our federal government including our military.

During a speech by titled The Rise of Wokeness in the U.S. Military U.S. Army Lieutenant General (Ret.) Thomas Spoehr wrote:

Let me give some examples of what I mean by wokeness.

In 2015, then Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus rejected out-of-hand a Marine Corps study concluding that gender-integrated combat formations did not move as quickly or shoot as accurately, and that women were twice as likely as men to suffer combat injuries. He rejected it because it did not comport with the Obama administration’s political agenda.

That same year the Department of Defense opened all combat jobs in the U.S. military to women, and Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter committed to “gender-neutral standards” to ensure that female servicemembers could meet the demanding rigors involved in qualifying for combat. Since then, the Army has been working for a decade to put in place the gender-neutral test promised by Carter. But after finding that women were not scoring as highly as men, and under fierce pressure from advocacy groups, the Army threw out the test. Now there is no test to determine whether any soldier can meet the fitness requirements for combat specialties.

In 2015, near the end of his second term, President Obama initiated a change to the Pentagon’s longstanding policy on transgender individuals in the military. Before that change could take effect, the incoming Trump administration put it on hold awaiting future study. Subsequent evidence presented to Secretary of Defense James Mattis—including the fact that transgender individuals suffering from gender dysphoria attempt suicide and experience severe anxiety at nine times the rate of the general population—raised legitimate concerns about their fitness for military service.

This led the Trump administration to impose reasonable restrictions on military service by those suffering gender dysphoria. But only hours after his inauguration in January 2021, President Biden signed an executive order that did away with these restrictions and opened military service to all transgender individuals. Since then, the Biden administration has decreed that active members of the military can take time off from their duties to obtain sex-change surgeries and all related hormones and drugs at taxpayer expense.

Along similar lines, the Biden administration has recently ended support for a longstanding policy prohibiting individuals infected with HIV from serving in combat zones. The policy had been based on sound science tied to the need for HIV medications and the danger of cross-infection through shared blood.

Physical fitness has long been a hallmark of the U.S. military. But in recent years, fitness standards have been progressively watered down in pursuit of the woke goal of “leveling the playing field.” The Army, for instance, recently lowered its minimum passing standards for pushups to an unimpressive total of ten and increased its minimum two-mile run time from 19 to 23 minutes. The new Space Force is considering doing away with periodic fitness testing altogether.

Back in 2016, Navy Secretary Mabus decreed that Navy sailors would no longer be known by traditional job titles such as “corpsman,” adopting instead new gender-neutral titles such as “medical technician.” The resulting blowback was so severe from enlisted sailors who cherished those historic titles that the Navy was forced to reverse the changes. But wokeness has a way of coming back, and last year the Navy released a training video to help sailors understand the proper way of using personal pronouns—a skill Americans have traditionally mastered in grade school. The video instructs servicemembers that they need to create a “safe space for everybody” by using “inclusive language”—for instance, saying “hey everybody” instead of “hey guys.” Can the return of gender-neutral job titles be far behind? 

The Bottom Line: Woke is Code for Socialism

Much of the emphasis of wokeness today is on promoting the idea that America is fatally flawed by systemic racism and white privilege. Our fighting men and women are required to sit through indoctrination programs, often with roots in the Marxist tenets of critical race theory, either by Pentagon diktat or through carelessness by senior leaders who delegate their command responsibilities to private Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion instructors.

Corporations (e.g. Disney, Apple, Facebook, CNN, etc.) have gone woke and by doing so are going broke. Hollywood is producing socialist (woke) propaganda films and TV series that we have reported on repeatedly.

Nikita Khrushchev said,

“I once said, ‘We will bury you,’ and I got into trouble with it. Of course we will not bury you with a shovel. Your own working class will bury you.

The push to go full communist is on and the American people are seeing it’s policies when they buy groceries, gasoline, clothing, homes and even baby formula.

Today Democrats care more about aborting babies, open borders, disarming law abiding citizens and climate change myths than building up traditional families, making people independent, and job creation. Building a strong military to protect and defend American from all enemies foreign and domestic is of little interest to Democrats. While Democrats promote diversity, inclusion and equity our enemies laugh at the U.S.

America is not being buried by the working class rather it is being buried by the political class from the school house to the White House!

Democrats and their allies are burying us! History is repeating itself.

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

REFERENCES:

The Intercollegiate Socialist Society, 1905-1921

Top 25 Quotes by Nikita Khrushchev 

Leftists Dominate FBI Top 10 Domestic Terror List, Despite Warnings About Far Right

Of course they do. But the Democrats are as disconnected from reality as Biden is from a functioning brain.

Under Democrat rule, a complete break in reality is required, imposed actually. The good are evil and the evil are good.

Leftists Dominate FBI Top 10 Domestic Terror List, Despite Warnings About Far Right

Many on list are associated with a leftist group that bombed the Capitol in 1983. Democrats pardoned or commuted the sentences of non-fugitives tied to that group.

By Luke Rosiak • Daily Wire • Aug 4, 2022:

The FBI has sounded the alarm about white supremacists and far-right extremists, but the bureau’s own Top 10 “most wanted domestic terrorists” list includes at least two Communists, three black nationalists, one anti-war activist, and a vegan eco-terrorist.

While the diverse roster doesn’t purport to capture the breadth of domestic terror, it seems at odds with federal law enforcement’s claims that white supremacists pose the biggest threat facing the nation. Some skeptics are accusing the bureau of exaggerating the threat by adopting a misleading definition of such ideologies.

“In the FBI’s view, the top domestic violence extremist threat comes from racially or ethnically motivated violent extremists, specifically those who advocated for the superiority of the White race,” Attorney General Merrick Garland said last year.

A top Department of Justice official doubled down on the claim during a Congressional hearing last week. But Rep. Jim Jordan, an Ohio Republican, said a whistleblower has come forward to cast doubt on the data.

“These whistleblower allegations that the FBI is padding its domestic violent extremist data cheapens actual examples of violent extremism,” Jordan wrote in a letter to FBI Director Christopher Wray.

Read more.

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLE: Why Do Joe Biden And The Democrats Need 87,000 New IRS Agents To ‘Fight Climate Change’ And Inflation? They Don’t.

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

WATCH: President Donald Trump Rally Live In Waukesha, Wisconsin

In need of a heaping helping of hope, Americanism and truth? Nothing better.

President Donald J. Trump, 45th President of the United States of America, will hold a rally in Waukesha, Wisconsin on Friday, August 5, 2022

By: RSBN, August 5, 2022, at 7:00PM CDT

President Donald J. Trump, 45th President of the United States of America, delivers remarks in support of Tim Michels for Governor of Wisconsin and the entire Wisconsin Trump Ticket.

[ … ]

AUTHOR

RELATED ARTICLES:

Pelosi Catastrophe: China Halts Dialogue With USA

VIDEO: Biden Says He ‘Can’t Drive A Vehicle While I’m Vice President’

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

Iran has made $44,700,000,000 in Illegal Oil Sales since Biden took office

Biden’s handlers’ relentless determination to appease the Islamic Republic has ended up lavishly financing the global jihad.

Cash Bonanza: Iran Has Made $44.7 Billion in Illegal Oil Sales Since Biden Took Office

by Adam Kredo, Washington Free Beacon, August 2, 2022:

Iran’s illegal oil trade has boomed under the Biden administration, with the hardline regime selling more than $44 billion worth of its heavily sanctioned oil to malign regimes like China, Syria, and Venezuela, according to figures published by a watchdog group.

From January 2021, when President Joe Biden took office, to June 2022, Iran sold around $44.7 billion in oil primarily to China. The regime’s export revenues between March 2021 and March 2022 from oil, gas, and related products “totaled $39 billion, compared [with] $22 billion for the previous year—a rise of 77 percent and an extra $17 billion,” according to United Against a Nuclear Iran (UANI), a watchdog group that tracks Iran’s network of illegal oil tankers.

“This drastic increase in revenue is not surprising when you look at the increase in oil exports that have occurred under the Biden administration,” UANI chief of staff Claire Jungman told the Washington Free Beacon. “This is the result of terminally lax sanctions enforcement.”

In addition to looser sanctions on Iran, the Biden administration has turned a blind eye to enforcement as it seeks to ink a revamped version of the 2015 nuclear deal. These moves are meant to appease Iran and cajole it into signing a deal that will remove virtually all sanctions on the hardline regime, including its oil trade. China is the primary beneficiary of this policy, with Iranian oil imports quadrupling to the country in 2021 to $23.1 billion. The China-Iran oil pipeline is on pace to hit around $27 billion in 2022, according to UANI’s figures.

If sanctions on Iran are lifted as part of a new nuclear deal, Iran-China trade could reach around $60 billion per year, according to one former U.S. official.

“China made a mockery of the credibility of our sanctions programs and emboldened rogue actors across the world to follow suit,” Gabriel Noronha, a State Department special adviser for Iran during the Trump administration, told the Free Beacon.

Iran’s foreign currency reserves— which were nearly drained under the Trump administration’s maximum pressure campaign—will have “increased nearly tenfold by the end of this year,” according to Noronha.

“The United States refused to enforce its sanctions even while Iran was continuing to advance its nuclear program and its regional terror attacks,” Noronha said. “The result was that Iran’s economy revived itself.”

This financial relief gave Iran a cushion and lessened pressure that could have forced it into accepting a more stringent nuclear deal.

“The Iranian leadership does not feel pressure to finalize the nuclear deal because they’ve already enjoyed the benefits of effective sanctions relief,” Noronha said. “The fact that the Biden administration can’t even manage a return to the notoriously weak [nuclear deal] is evidence of the sheer diplomatic malpractice carried out by the Biden administration, particularly Secretary of State Antony Blinken and U.S. envoy for Iran Rob Malley.”

As Iran and China boost their oil alliance, the U.S. emergency crude stockpiles dropped to their lowest levels in 37 years. This comes after the Biden administration agreed to sell China several million barrels from the U.S. stores, sparking a congressional investigation….

AUTHOR

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

The Rise of Wokeness in the U.S. Military — Let me give some examples of what I mean by wokeness.

The following is adapted from a talk delivered on July 20, 2022, at the Allan P. Kirby, Jr. Center for Constitutional Studies and Citizenship on Hillsdale’s Washington, D.C. campus, as part of the AWC Family Foundation Lecture Series.


Complaints by veteran soldiers about younger generations who lack discipline and traditional values are as old as war itself. Grizzled veterans in the Greek phalanx, Roman legions, and Napoleon’s elite corps all believed that the failings of the young would be the ruin of their armies. This is not the chief worry of grizzled American veterans today. The largest threat they see by far to our current military is the weakening of its fabric by radical progressive (or “woke”) policies being imposed, not by a rising generation of slackers, but by the very leaders charged with ensuring their readiness.

Wokeness in the military is being imposed by elected and appointed leaders in the White House, Congress, and the Pentagon who have little understanding of the purpose, character, traditions, and requirements of the institution they are trying to change. The push for it didn’t begin in the last two years under the Biden administration—nor will it automatically end if a non-woke administration is elected in 2024. Wokeness in the military has become ingrained. And unless the policies that flow from it are illegal or directly jeopardize readiness, senior military leaders have little alternative but to comply.

Woke ideology undermines military readiness in various ways. It undermines cohesiveness by emphasizing differences based on race, ethnicity, and sex. It undermines leadership authority by introducing questions about whether promotion is based on merit or quota requirements. It leads to military personnel serving in specialties and areas for which they are not qualified or ready. And it takes time and resources away from training activities and weapons development that contribute to readiness.

Wokeness in the military also affects relations between the military and society at large. It acts as a disincentive for many young Americans in terms of enlistment. And it undermines wholehearted support for the military by a significant portion of the American public at a time when it is needed the most.

Let me give some examples of what I mean by wokeness.

In 2015, then Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus rejected out-of-hand a Marine Corps study concluding that gender-integrated combat formations did not move as quickly or shoot as accurately, and that women were twice as likely as men to suffer combat injuries. He rejected it because it did not comport with the Obama administration’s political agenda.

That same year the Department of Defense opened all combat jobs in the U.S. military to women, and Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter committed to “gender-neutral standards” to ensure that female servicemembers could meet the demanding rigors involved in qualifying for combat. Since then, the Army has been working for a decade to put in place the gender-neutral test promised by Carter. But after finding that women were not scoring as highly as men, and under fierce pressure from advocacy groups, the Army threw out the test. Now there is no test to determine whether any soldier can meet the fitness requirements for combat specialties.

In 2015, near the end of his second term, President Obama initiated a change to the Pentagon’s longstanding policy on transgender individuals in the military. Before that change could take effect, the incoming Trump administration put it on hold awaiting future study. Subsequent evidence presented to Secretary of Defense James Mattis—including the fact that transgender individuals suffering from gender dysphoria attempt suicide and experience severe anxiety at nine times the rate of the general population—raised legitimate concerns about their fitness for military service.

This led the Trump administration to impose reasonable restrictions on military service by those suffering gender dysphoria. But only hours after his inauguration in January 2021, President Biden signed an executive order that did away with these restrictions and opened military service to all transgender individuals. Since then, the Biden administration has decreed that active members of the military can take time off from their duties to obtain sex-change surgeries and all related hormones and drugs at taxpayer expense.

Along similar lines, the Biden administration has recently ended support for a longstanding policy prohibiting individuals infected with HIV from serving in combat zones. The policy had been based on sound science tied to the need for HIV medications and the danger of cross-infection through shared blood.

Physical fitness has long been a hallmark of the U.S. military. But in recent years, fitness standards have been progressively watered down in pursuit of the woke goal of “leveling the playing field.” The Army, for instance, recently lowered its minimum passing standards for pushups to an unimpressive total of ten and increased its minimum two-mile run time from 19 to 23 minutes. The new Space Force is considering doing away with periodic fitness testing altogether.

Back in 2016, Navy Secretary Mabus decreed that Navy sailors would no longer be known by traditional job titles such as “corpsman,” adopting instead new gender-neutral titles such as “medical technician.” The resulting blowback was so severe from enlisted sailors who cherished those historic titles that the Navy was forced to reverse the changes. But wokeness has a way of coming back, and last year the Navy released a training video to help sailors understand the proper way of using personal pronouns—a skill Americans have traditionally mastered in grade school. The video instructs servicemembers that they need to create a “safe space for everybody” by using “inclusive language”—for instance, saying “hey everybody” instead of “hey guys.” Can the return of gender-neutral job titles be far behind? 

Much of the emphasis of wokeness today is on promoting the idea that America is fatally flawed by systemic racism and white privilege. Our fighting men and women are required to sit through indoctrination programs, often with roots in the Marxist tenets of critical race theory, either by Pentagon diktat or through carelessness by senior leaders who delegate their command responsibilities to private Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion instructors.

These indoctrination programs differentiate servicemembers along racial and gender lines, which runs completely counter to the military imperative to build cohesiveness based on common loyalties, training, and standards. Traditional training and education programs used to combat racial and sex discrimination have been supplanted by programs that promote discrimination by replacing the American ideal of equality with the progressive ideal of equity—which in practice means unequal treatment based on group identity.

The Biden administration’s Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Michael Gilday, decided last year to add Ibram X. Kendi’s book, How to Be an Antiracist—one of the leading sourcebooks on critical race theory—to his list of recommended readings. To give an idea of how radical Kendi’s book is, one of its famous (or infamous) arguments is that “Capitalism is essentially racist,” and that “to truly be antiracist, you also have to be truly anticapitalist.”

Last year, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin told the House Armed Services Committee, “We do not teach critical race theory, we don’t embrace critical race theory, and I think that’s a spurious conversation.” Despite repeated denials by Austin and others in the Pentagon that critical race theory is being taught in the military, there is no shortage of evidence to the contrary.

Indeed, last year a senior officer in the U.S. Space Force, Lt. Col. Matthew Lohmeier, was removed from command for publicly describing the role of critical race theory in indoctrinating servicemembers at his installation. And just this summer, multiple media outlets reported on training materials on the problems of “whiteness” obtained through Freedom of Information Act requests from the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. One training slide read: “In order to understand racial inequality and slavery, it is first necessary to address whiteness.”

Congressmen have obtained curricular materials from West Point showing lectures titled “Understanding Whiteness and White Rage” and classroom slides labeled “White Power at West Point.” When challenged about this, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley became defensive: “I wanna understand white rage, and I’m white,” he said. “I’ve read Mao Zedong. I’ve read Karl Marx. I’ve read Lenin. That doesn’t make me a communist.”

The rationale for reading communist writings in the service academies in the past has been that by doing so, we learned about our Soviet enemies at the time and how they thought. How is that analogous to reading Leftist tracts accusing white people (including servicemembers)—just by virtue of their being white—of racism?

Last year, Secretary Austin alarmingly called for a one-day military-wide stand-down to address the so-called problem of “extremism” in the ranks, despite the fact that there has been no evidence presented—including in testimony by senior officials—that there is a problem of extremism in the military. Commanding officers were required to discuss the topic using a PowerPoint presentation that included Ted Talks asking the question, “What is up with us white people?”

Since 2008, the Air Force has created at least eight “Barrier Analysis Working Groups” to “create an inclusive culture regardless of race, ethnicity, sex, orientation, religion, or disabilities.” These groups include the “Indigenous Nations Equality Team” and the “Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, or Questioning Initiatives Team.” President Biden signed an executive order in 2021 requiring all organizations in the military—as well as in the rest of the federal government—to create Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) offices, to produce strategic DEI plans, and to create bureaucratic structures to report on progress towards DEI goals. The overall goal, Biden said, was “advancing equity for all”—again using the Left’s euphemism for achieving desired outcomes through discriminatory policies.

Wokeness also comes in the form of conflating the mission of the military with environmental ideology. A year ago, President Biden told a group of overseas Air Force airmen that the Joint Chiefs of Staff had determined that the greatest threat facing America was global warming—a claim the Joint Chiefs had to walk back. In the same vein, Biden signed an executive order imposing a massive regime of environmental goals and requirements for the Department of Defense. These goals included transitioning to all electric non-tactical vehicles by 2035, carbon-free electricity for military installations by that same year, and net zero emissions from those installations by 2050. As a result, the Pentagon recently announced it will devote over $3 billion of its already stretched-thin military budget to climate-related initiatives in 2023 alone.

Although direct “cause and effect” studies on the impact of woke policies such as these do not exist, common sense suggests that the consequences for military readiness are dramatic. Spending billions on woke programs while the Chinese are outpacing us on hypersonic weapons, quantum computing, and other important military technologies is one piece of evidence. Recent reports showing the military’s dismal failure to gain new recruits in adequate numbers is another. Is anyone surprised that potential recruits—many of whom come from rural or poor areas of the country—don’t want to spend their time being lectured about white privilege?

These ideological policies move the military in a divergent direction from the American mainstream. In a recent poll of voters, for instance, 69 percent oppose the teaching of critical race theory in schools. Relatedly, Americans are increasingly losing confidence in the military. Between 2021 and 2022, the percentage of Americans who report a great deal or quite a lot of confidence in the military decreased five percentage points, from 69 to 64. In 2012, this confidence level stood at 75 percent.

The bottom line is that precious time and money are being poured into woke programs and projects that would be better applied towards making the military more capable. The billions of dollars that will be spent on Pentagon climate change programs, the time and money spent in creating DEI structures and hiring DEI commissars, and the time spent indoctrinating servicemembers in critical race theory and addressing an imaginary crisis of extremism in the ranks—all this detracts from the purpose of our military: preserving the security and freedom of the American people and nation.

These costs come at a time when the current administration is not even proposing to fund the Department of Defense to keep up with the rate of inflation—and a time when serious threats from China and other adversaries have never been greater.

Last month, Ramstein Air Base in Germany scheduled a drag queen story hour at its base library, where drag queen Stacey Teed was scheduled to read to children. When lawmakers back home got wind of the event and wrote to the Secretary of the Air Force, the event was cancelled. This suggests that pushback can be effective against the tide of wokeness plaguing our military. But there needs to be a lot more pushback.

Legislation introduced this year in Congress would stop the teaching of critical race theory in the military, the creation of the multitudes of diversity offices and officials, and the rolling back of physical fitness requirements. While the ultimate success of these proposals in the legislative process is uncertain, they are a start at least.

The American military remains a faithful and loyal servant of the republic. Most Americans are still proud and trusting of our military. But this trust and support cannot be taken for granted. If Americans perceive that the military is being exploited for political purposes or being used for experiments in woke social policies, that support will evaporate, and the consequences will be dire.

My hope and my prayer are that we figure this out before it is too late.

AUTHOR

Thomas Spoehr

Thomas Spoehr is director of the Center for National Defense at the Heritage Foundation. He served previously for over 36 years in the U.S. Army, attaining the rank of Lieutenant General. He earned a B.A. from William and Mary, an M.A. from Webster University, and an M.A. from the U.S. Army War College. While in the Army, he served in numerous leadership roles, including senior positions in the Pentagon and Commandant of the Army’s Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear School. His operational experiences include service with the 82nd Airborne Division and the 1st Armored Division. He participated in the 1983 invasion of Grenada, and in 2011 he served as Deputy Commanding General, U.S. Forces Iraq.

EDITORS NOTE: This Imprimis Digest column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Is This The End For Pornhub?

On August 4th, 2022 Visa’s CEO announced: “Visa cards will not be able to be used to purchase advertising on any sites including Pornhub or other MindGeek affiliated sites.”

Both Visa and Mastercard suspended payment to ALL of MindGeek’s porn tube sites, which means that, overnight, a massive portion of the Pornhub parent company’s revenue stream was cut off! 

This comes after a California judge recently denied Visa’s request to be dismissed from a lawsuit brought against Visa and Pornhub/MindGeek, indicating that the credit card company could be held accountable for the videos of rape, trafficking, and child sexual abuse posted on Pornhub.

We can’t help but reflect with gratitude on all the #Traffickinghub wins that YOU have helped make possible over the past two years.

It was only after millions of you signed the #Traffickinghub petition and shared our viral video that major media outlets began to cover the story, and Pornhub quickly deleted 10 million suspect videos overnight.

As a result of that campaign, Visa and Mastercard ended payment processing for site visitors on Pornhub.

However, up until yesterday, Pornhub was still able to get paid by advertisers on the site through the use of Visa and Mastercard. Ad payments accounted for over 50% of Pornhub’s revenue.

Those days are now over.

All of this follows on the heels of the resignation of Pornhub’s CEO and COO several weeks ago, and rumors of mass layoffs at MindGeek.

It appears that the MindGeek exploitation empire is crumbling before our eyes.

This is a MAJOR WIN for survivors and all the allies of the #Traffickinghub movement who have relentlessly pushed to see Pornhub and their parent company, MindGeek, held accountable for profiting from the most egregious crimes imaginable.

Together, we are winning this fight.

To all who’ve joined us in this global #Traffickinghub campaign, well done!


Please support Exodus Cry’s fight against exploitative porn, which isn’t slowing down, it’s ramping up. You can give here to help fuel this fight.


EDITORS NOTE: This Exodus Cry column is republished with permission. ©All rights Reserved.

Trump-Endorsed Candidate Kari Lake Wins GOP Arizona Gubernatorial Primary

Republican Arizona gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake won her state’s primary Thursday in a tight race against opponent Karrin Taylor Robson.

Her victory was delayed due to the race remaining too close to call. Lake garnered 46.8% of the vote, while Taylor Robson narrowly tied her with 44 percent, The New York Times reported Thursday night.

Lake prematurely declared victory early Wednesday while addressing a crowd of supporters. She suggested that election officials were delaying the race as they did not want her to win.

A strong supporter of former President Donald Trump, she ran a large portion of her platform on the results of the 2020 presidential election, which she claimed to be fraudulent. She claimed the so-called “rigged election” is the “biggest story out there.”

Taylor Robson has been vague in her response about the 2020 election results, stating they were “not fair” and highlighting changes in election laws, Ballotpedia reported. She recently refused to directly answer whether she accepts the results of the election in an interview with CNN’s Brianna Keilar, saying President Joe Biden is the “wrong guy in the White House.”

Lakes’ claims contradict the findings of federal election security officials, who said the 2020 election was the “most secure in American history,” and there was no evidence of widespread election fraud after recounts.

previous CNN segment called Lake a “rising star of the right-wing” and “proud spreader of lies” about the 2020 election, before turning to an interview between her and CNN senior national reporter Kyung Lah, where the candidate accused Lah of not “giving a damn” about election integrity.

Tensions also arose between the two leading candidates, as Lake said she “detect[ed] some stealing going on” in the weeks ahead of the primary election. Taylor Robson called her statements “meritless” in a July 26 tweet.

“The more Kari Lake panics she is going to lose this #AZgov election, the more she attempts to sow doubt about its results,” she wrote in the tweet. “Her allegations are meritless, reckless and disqualifying in someone who seeks the will of the governed in leading our state.”

Lake’s accusations arose as an OH Predictive Insights poll found Lake and Taylor Robson in a tight race, with Lake garnering 39% support and Taylor Robson gaining 31% favorability in early July. Those numbers changed to largely favor Lake by the end of the month, standing at 51%-33% in favor of Lake. The poll surveyed 502 likely Republican voters on July 27 with a 4.37% margin of error.

The Republican nominee has vowed to strengthen border security, declare the influx of migrants an “invasion” and deploy National Guard troops to the U.S.-Mexico border on day one. During an interview with Just The News, she said the federal government is not upholding its responsibilities listed in Article IV of the Constitution, which guarantees the federal government’s role to “protect” American citizens from invasion.

“We’re going to finish President Trump’s wall. On Day One, I will issue a declaration of invasion, we’re going to send our troops down to the border, Arizona National Guard troops, and we’re going to arm them and allow them to arrest and detain people until we process them and send them back over the border,” she said.

Lake received the endorsements of Trump, Republican Tennessee Sen. Marsha Blackburn, and Republican Reps. Paul Gosar of Arizona and Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia. She received additional endorsements from the Conservative Political Action Coalition and the Arizona Fraternal Order of Police, according to Ballotpedia.

Lake led the polls by an average of 8.5 percentage points, according to RealClear Politics.

AUTHOR

NICOLE SILVERIO

Media reporter. Follow Nicole Silverio on Twitter @NicoleMSilverio

RELATED ARTICLES:

Kari Lake’s New Plan Will Cause Media to Panic

I’m Actually Appalled’: GOP Arizona Candidate Kari Lake And Bret Baier Get Into Heated Exchange Over Drag Queen Story

‘She’s Going To Lose Soundly’: CNN Panel Melts Down Over Trump’s Primary Endorsement Wins, Looming Cheney Loss

Abortion Won’t Save Democrats In The Midterms, Despite Their Newfound Hopes

‘You Can’t Hide The Facts’: Majority Of Americans Think US Is In A Recession, Poll Shows

Republican Senators, Manchin Vote To Revive Trump-Era Energy Reform

Here Are The Dems Refusing To Endorse A Biden Run In 2024

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

Governor Ron DeSantis Appoints Renatha Francis to the Florida Supreme Court

Today, Governor Ron DeSantis announced the appointment of Judge Renatha Francis to the Florida Supreme Court. The appointment took place inside the Palm Beach County History Museum. Francis will replace Justice Alan Lawson who announced in April of this year that he would resign on August 31, 2022.

Judge Renatha Francis currently sits as a trial court judge on the 15th Circuit Court in Palm Beach, a position she was appointed to by Governor DeSantis in 2019 and preceding that she served as a county court judge in Miami-Dade County.

Florida Family Policy Council President John Stemberger issued the following statement today regarding this appointment:

“Judge Renatha Francis is a woman with an extraordinary life story, solid character, and deep faith. She is highly qualified for this position coming from the unique perspective of having served as a County Court judge, a Circuit Court judge, and six and a half years as a judicial law clerk for the First District Court of Appeals in Tallahassee. As a wife, mother, and former business owner, Judge Francis will bring valuable real-life experiences to the court. I know her personally and she is articulate, serious-minded, and an extremely bright judge. Her judicial philosophy is one of restraint and she will interpret the law and the constitution as an originalist and a textualist. As a reflection of this judicial philosophy, in her second Judicial Nominating Commission (JNC) interview she stated, “The job of a justice is not to try and rescue people from the consequences of their decisions. It is to apply the law as we find it, so that we are not exercising force and will–we are exercising merely judgment.

Of interest, Judge Francis’ appointment was supported by many prominent black lawmakers, including the Florida Conference of Black State Legislators and the Legislative Black Caucus. She will make history as the first Jamaican American Justice on the Florida Supreme Court. The Supreme Court has been without either a woman or an African American justice since Justice Peggy A. Quince resigned in 2019.

Francis was previously appointed to the Florida Supreme Court by Gov. DeSantis in 2020.  However, the Florida Constitution requires a Supreme Court justice to be a member of the Florida Bar for ten years prior to be eligible. Initially, she did not intend to take her seat until September 24, 2020, when she reached that ten-year mark.  However, State Representative Geraldine Thompson (D-Orlando) filed a lawsuit with the Supreme Court of Florida to invalidate her appointment.

On August 27, 2020, the Florida Supreme Court ruled that Governor DeSantis did exceed his authority by appointing Judge Francis because she was not yet eligible due to the ten-year requirement. The court also held that the governor should choose another candidate from the list previously submitted to him. Justice Jamie Grosshans from Orlando Florida was appointed in her place.

Justice Alan Lawson, who Francis will replace is 61, and was appointed to the court by former Gov. Rick Scott.  He is stepping down from the court nearly 15 years ahead of reaching the mandatory retirement age for Florida justices of 75.

Personal Background and Professional Bio of Renatha Francis:

Judge Renatha Francis was born in Portmore, Jamaica, in 1977. Francis is a past student of St Hugh’s High School and the University of the West Indies, Mona, where she obtained her Bachelor’s Degree in law. Afterwards, she immigrated to the US, where she received her Juris-Doctor from Florida Coastal School of Law in Jacksonville, Florida in 2010. She primarily represented insurance providers in personal injury protection litigation matters, specializing in the interpretation and application of automobile insurance policies. In 2017, Francis was appointed by Governor Rick Scott to the Miami-Dade County Court. In 2018, she was appointed to the 11th Circuit Court, and in 2019, to the 15th Circuit Court. She lives in South Florida with her husband Philip Fender and their two children.

Judge Francis most recent interview before the Supreme Court Judicial Nominating Commission (JNC) can be watched on video from 2:17:50 to 2:49:25

https://thefloridachannel.org/videos/6-11-22-florida-supreme-court-judicial-nominating-commission-part-1/

Judge Renatha Francis’ previous interview before the Supreme Court Judicial Nominating Commission (JNC) be watched on video from 34:50 to 1:04:40 here: https://thefloridachannel.org/videos/1-11-20-florida-supreme-court-judicial-nominating-commission-part-2/

©Florida Family Policy Council. All rights reserved.

How Airline Regulations Hurt Passengers

To help passengers, airline regulations should be scrapped, not increased.


If you’ve been anywhere near an airport in the last two years, you’ve probably gathered that things in the airline industry have changed. Delays and cancelations are causing more headaches than ever, baggage mishandling is up, unruly passenger cases are up…it’s really a mess. Unsurprisingly, flight complaints remain significantly higher than pre-pandemic levels.

The most common complaint category is refunds. Many passengers feel that airlines have been bad about issuing refunds for missed flights, and some have been calling on the government to do something about this problem.

On Wednesday, the Department of Transportation responded to these calls with new proposed regulations that would create stricter rules for airlines regarding refunds.

According to current regulations, airlines are required to give refunds if a flight is canceled, or if a flight experiences a “significant delay” or change and the passenger chooses not to travel. However, under the current rules, the airline gets to decide what constitutes a “significant delay.” Unsurprisingly, passengers don’t always agree with the decisions airlines make.

“In practice, the circumstances in which airlines are required to make refunds have often been subject to interpretation,” writes Alison Sider in the Wall Street Journal. “The government doesn’t define significant change or delay in current rules, leaving it up to airlines to determine that.”

The new rules being proposed by the DOT are designed to eliminate the ambiguity in the current rules. Under the proposed rules, refunds would be mandatory for passengers who choose not to fly if the departure or arrival time changes by more than 3 hours for a domestic flight or 6 hours for an international flight. The new rules would also require refunds for missed flights if there is a change in the departure or arrival airport, an added connection, or a change of aircraft that constitutes a “significant downgrade” in the traveler’s experience.

Aside from clarifying (and, in practice, expanding) when refunds are mandatory, the proposed rules would also require airlines to issue non-expiring vouchers for passengers who don’t want to fly because of public health concerns or who can’t fly due to public health regulations such as stay-at-home orders or border closures.

“When Americans buy an airline ticket, they should get to their destination safely, reliably and affordably,” Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg said in a press release. “This new proposed rule would protect the rights of travelers and help ensure they get the timely refunds they deserve from the airlines.”

At first glance, it’s easy to think that these regulations would be a pure win for consumers. After all, doesn’t it help to have more refunds and vouchers?

Yes, on the surface. But everything comes with a cost, and airline regulations are no exception. In a world of scarcity, you can’t get something for nothing. There’s no such thing as a free refund.

So where is the cost? Here, as in many cases, the cost is hidden, and it requires some digging in order to find it.

A good place to start is to look at this policy from the airline’s perspective. Now, this isn’t to say that airlines and their profit margins are the only thing that matters. Far from it. What I’m saying is, in order to help consumers, it’s important to understand how airlines make decisions and what incentives they face.

When an airline gets hit with a regulation, whether it be about safety or staffing or refund policies, the airline is essentially forced to take on additional costs. When they have to pay out more for refunds, for instance, their average cost per flight goes up. The result is a leftward shift in the supply curve and a higher price.

Now, some airlines may choose to offset the price increase by cutting back on other perks and services (meals etc.), but consumers ultimately pay somehow for the privilege of having their guaranteed refunds.

To give an analogy, say the DOT decided that, in the name of consumer welfare, every flight needed to have at least 20 flight attendants. Undoubtedly, consumers would have a better experience, but clearly that flight is going to be more expensive than a flight with fewer attendants.

The point is, there’s always a tradeoff between perks and price. Generous refund policies are nice to have, but just like generous staffing and generous safety standards, they come at a premium.

So far we’ve established that, all else equal, the more-consumer-friendly refund policies being proposed by the government will lead to higher prices because they impose higher costs on airlines. The benefit is that more people get refunds. The cost is more-expensive airfare.

So, is this a good tradeoff? Is the benefit to consumers worth the cost? To answer this question, we need to understand how markets deal with tradeoffs. Let’s begin by considering two hypothetical extremes.

Luxury Air is an airline that cares deeply about customer satisfaction. To show this, they have a very generous refund policy, even more generous than what the government requires. They will give anyone a refund for any reason at any time. Naturally, they have to charge a lot more than anyone else to stay in business with that kind of policy, so that’s what they do. Lots of perks. High prices.

Frugal Air is an airline that cares deeply about affordability. To show this, they have the lowest prices in town. They will always match their competitors. Naturally, they can’t afford to be very generous with their refund policies, so they don’t give any refunds for any reason. It’s a bit of a risk, but hey, you get what you pay for.

Now, back to the real world. In the free market, airlines begin by offering a combination of prices and perks somewhere along the spectrum from Frugal Air to Luxury Air. Then, consumers patronize the airlines that best satisfy their wishes. If consumers don’t think it’s worth it to pay for Luxury-Air-style refund policies, the businesses offering those flights will go under. Likewise, if consumers are turned off by “no refunds for any reason,” those kinds of policies will also be weeded out.

What we’re left with is the airlines that offer the optimal tradeoff between perks and price as judged by consumers. Thus, through a process akin to natural selection, consumers “choose” the refund policies and corresponding prices that best suit their wishes. The policies that the market “selects for” are the ones that consumers prefer the most. In other words, the market naturally gravitates toward a sort of goldilocks zone.

Now, consider what happens when a regulator comes in. Essentially, they mandate a specific spot on the Frugal-to-Luxury spectrum and force airlines to be “no less luxurious” than that. A mandate to provide refunds in certain circumstances is a mandate to provide extra perks, which invariably leads to higher prices. But—and this is the key—the “degree of luxury” they mandate is arbitrary, and the fact that they have to force the market up to it indicates that it is not in the goldilocks zone where consumers are happiest.

If consumers really believed those better refund policies were worth the extra expense, they would have favored airlines that offered that tradeoff, and the industry as a whole would have gone in that direction to maximize profits (that is, the goldilocks zone would be at a higher degree of luxury). The fact that the airlines aren’t offering them for the most part is all the evidence we need to conclude that consumers don’t think the benefit of more refunds is worth the cost. Thus, imposing a policy like this is most likely a net harm to consumers.

Again, the analogy to flight attendants is a bit easier to conceptualize. If the market is selecting for 3 attendants per flight and $100 tickets, a government mandate of 5 attendants per flight (which makes for, say, $120 tickets) pushes consumers away from their preferred perk/price combination. Hence, the regulation designed to help consumers ultimately ends up hurting them, because even though they got an extra benefit, it wasn’t worth the extra cost.

Consumers are perfectly capable of regulating airlines through their purchasing decisions—they do it every day. The DOT might think they’re helping, but they’re really not. Airline passengers are far better off when they, not bureaucrats, decide how airlines are run.

This article was adapted from an issue of the FEE Daily email newsletter. Click here to sign up and get free-market news and analysis like this in your inbox every weekday.

AUTHOR

Patrick Carroll

Patrick Carroll has a degree in Chemical Engineering from the University of Waterloo and is an Editorial Fellow at the Foundation for Economic Education.

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