Bernie Is a Capitalist, Whether He Likes It or Not

/in , , , , , /by

Sen. Bernie Sanders belatedly released his tax returns this week. The New York Times reported:

The returns show that Mr. Sanders’s earnings shot up after his first presidential bid, when he built up a vast national following. He and his wife, Jane O’Meara Sanders, reported income that topped $1 million in 2016 and 2017, lifted by proceeds from his books.

The couple had an adjusted gross income of $561,293 in 2018, according to their most recent tax return. Mr. Sanders had about $393,000 in book income last year, and he and his wife reported giving nearly $19,000 to charity.

His income now puts him within the top 1 percent of taxpayers, according to data from the Internal Revenue Service.

Apparently, nothing succeeds like penalizing success.

Sen. Sanders said, “I wrote a best-selling book. If you write a best-selling book, you can be a millionaire, too.” But his incarnation as John Galt didn’t last. In a Fox News town-hall, Bret Baier asked him, “When you wrote the book and you made the money, isn’t that the definition of capitalism and the American dream?”

After an uncomfortable pause, the senator answered, “No.”

But he is wrong. Having an idea, acting on it, and making a pile of money is the very definition of successful entrepreneurship.

Sen. Sanders took a laptop costing a few hundred dollars and produced, in Our Revolution: A Future to Believe In, a document for which he was paid $795,000. Taking an input valued at a few hundred dollars and turning it into an output worth $795,000 is the essence of entrepreneurial capitalism.

And Senator Sanders is right—he deserves that money. In January 2018, an estimated 73 percent of US adults owned either a desktop or a laptop. That’s 187.4 million people. How many of them produced a word document worth $795,000? Very few. No doubt Jersey Shore’s Snooki used a laptop like Sen. Sanders’ to produce Gorilla Beach, her debut novel, but there were more people willing to pay—and pay more money—for Sen. Sanders’ book. Value is subjective, after all. By providing greater satisfaction, Sen. Sanders reaped greater rewards.

Sen. Sanders and his wife paid an effective tax rate of 26 percent, well below the levels of 70 percent or so he claims “the 1 percent”—which includes him—ought to pay. They topped this up with $19,000 in charitable donations, another 3.4 percent of their income.

But if Sen. Sanders really thinks he isn’t having enough of his income taken from him, he can solve this situation unilaterally, and he can do it today—without waiting for Congress. He can donate his money to the federal government.

On Wednesday night, Tucker Carlson asked a Sanders supporter, Nomiki Konst, why he didn’t do just that. “Because that’s not how our government functions,” she replied, “Where do you send that form? The IRS? ‘Hi IRS, here’s a cheque for 70 percent?’”

No, you send it to the Treasury, as their website clearly instructs.

“Who does that?” she went on, “I would love to see one guest on your show that has actually written an entire paycheck.” In fact, so far in 2019, the Treasury has received $3.7 million in “Gift Contributions to Reduce Debt Held by the Public.” Carlson could get one of these donors on his show.

There’s an old line that “Government is simply the name we give to the things we choose to do together.” Konst’s argument shows how hollow that phrase really is.

Sen. Sanders has a choice, as do the members of the so-called Patriotic Millionaires. If they truly feel that politicians are not getting enough money to spend, they can give them some more. They can choose to “Be the change.” But they don’t. They will only act on their professed desire if other people are forced to act along with them. For all their talk about wanting to give the government more money, they make such payment contingent on other people who may not want to do so being forced to by law.

This is a curious form of generosity. It is an even more curious form of choice. Where is the choice for the people who think they already pay enough in tax? Government is not simply the name we give to the things we “choose to do together,” it is the name we give to things where 51 percent of people choose something, and the other 49 percent have to go along. As economist Milton Friedman once wrote, “You may get to vote once a year—on what? On a long, long list of propositions, with very little relationship between your vote and what ultimately happens.”

Sen. Sanders claims to be a socialist, and socialism is often described as “sharing.” But there is nothing inherently socialist about sharing. You can just as easily share under capitalism. Indeed, the latest World Giving Index produced by the Charities Aid Foundation listed the United States, New Zealand, Canada, Australia, Ireland, the United Kingdom, and the Netherlands—all seven of them capitalist countries—in the top 10 most charitable countries over the last five years. By contrast, Venezuela, formerly Sen. Sanders’s poster child for “democratic” socialism, ranked a miserly 115th in 2017.

In 2011, the year when Sen. Sanders was boosting Venezuela, it ranked 118th compared to first place for the capitalist USA. But then, according to the World Bank, in 2011, GDP per capita in the US was $49,000 compared to just $14,000 in Venezuela*. Under capitalism, you actually have something to share. As Margaret Thatcher once put it,

No one would remember the Good Samaritan if he’d only had good intentions; he had money, as well.

Giving your money voluntarily—what most people would think of as sharing—is not what socialists actually mean by the word. That is why Sen. Sanders and the Patriotic Millionaires refuse to give the federal government their money voluntarily while a mechanism exists to do so and others are already using it. Their idea of sharing is that the government takes money from somebody else to hand it out as it sees fit. We already have a degree of this in capitalist societies. Today’s socialists want to increase the amount of people’s wealth that passes through the hands of the government.

The socialist notion of “sharing” is nothing of the kind. Sharing is voluntary, this is coerced. It is not sharing but coercion that is the essence of socialism. As the British author Kingsley Amis—a youthful socialist who came to support Thatcher—put it, “if socialism is not about compulsion, it is about nothing.”

* In constant 2010 dollars

COLUMN BY

John Phelan

John Phelan is an economist at the Center of the American Experiment and fellow of The Cobden Centre.

RELATED ARTICLES:

How Socialists Will Usher in a New Hell on Earth

If Corey Booker Is Serious about Reparations, Here Are Two Better Places to Start

Were the Nazis Really Socialists? It Depends on How You Define Socialism

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission.

SHAME, SHAME, SHAME . . . ON FRANCE: The take down of Notre Dame and its significance

/in , , , , , /by

European Churches are vandalized, defecated on, and torched nearly everyday.  As a consequence of the current on-going Muslim invasion, in 2018, there were 1,063 reported deliberate acts of damage to Christian churches, statues, etc. in France alone.  That is nearly three a day.

The pro-Muslim Brotherhood and terrorism-sponsoring natural gas state of Qatar has recently funded the construction of a mega mosque overlooking the area where Charles Martel inflicted history’s first defeat on advancing Islamic jihadi invaders at the battle of Tours in 732.  Islam, is nothing, if not very cognizant of symbolisms.

So, with this background, the sacred ground of Tours surrendered to Islam, and with an accelerating vandalization and desecration of churches sweeping France, we’re supposed to believe that the take down of Notre Dame at the beginning of one of Christianity’s  most holy weeks was . . . an accident?

Yes, of course.  It was spontaneous combustion.  Such things do happen, you know.  And the pyramids were built by aliens.

Perhaps the Notre Dame fire was nothing more than just another example of “Work Place violence” . . . like Fort Hood, San Berdanino, and the Pulse night club in Orlando.

Let us look at the facts.  Notre Dame was built in 1163, and in nearly 900 years of existence there was never a single fire, yet, this April 2019 fire started “accidentally” in two different places, according to French TV.  Notre Dame Cathedral survived the turmoil of the Middle Ages, the Protestant Reformation, the thirty-years war, the French Revolution, the Franco-Prussian war, WWI, and WWII, only to be taken down by a fire that started “accidentally” in two different places, in a city that had recently seen an accelerating rash of Islamic desecrations of churches, including, Islamic attempts against Notre Dame itself, and coincidentally when the other symbol of France’s identity and existence, Charles Martel’s victory over invading Muslims, had just been desecrated by the terrorism sponsoring state of Qatar.

Of course, it just had to be a self-starting fire.

Oh, excuse me.  French authorities are now saying the fire was caused by an “electrical short.”  Yes, of course, in two places at the same time.

A brief walk through history is in order here:

Islam is obsessed with destroying the culture and the history of countries that it conquers, and the symbols of those cultures and histories.  This is why the Taliban destroyed those historic statues of Buddha.  This why the “Islamic State” destroyed 3,000 year-old Assyrian artwork and sculptures.  This is why the Obama-approved Muslim Brotherhood (when they were in power in Egypt 2012-2013) had been drawing up plans to take down the 5,000 year-old pyramids–before they themselves were taken down by the Egyptian people and military.

Just look at what Islam has done to symbols and centers of other religions during its 1400 years of existence:

First it took over the pagan Arab religious center in Mecca and made it the primary focal point of Islam and the place to which all Muslims were supposed to make a pilgrimage to at least once in their lifetimes.

Then, it took over the Christian patriarchal city of Jerusalem and built two mosques on grounds sacred to Judaism.  Next it took the patriarchal city of Antioch, the patriarchal city of Alexandria, and finally, the patriarchal city of Constantinople.  Only Rome remained out of their grasp.  But not for lack of trying.  Several jihadi invasions during the Middle Ages succeeded in raping nuns on altars and desecrating numerous churches, and killing priests . . . but the Vatican remained safe and sound behind its protective walls.  Walls that really worked. 

With this background we are supposed to be surprised that Islam has built a mega mosque on Charles Martel’s sacred ground?  And, with this historical background, we are supposed to believe that the fire that took down the 900-year old Notre Dame Cathedral and symbol of Western Civilization self-started in two different places, at the beginning of holy week?

Yes, maybe that mega mosque at Tours also self-assembled–by accident.

Let’s be honest now.  There is a prophecy in the ahadeeth about the latter days where Jesus Christ is supposed to “break the cross” (in a reference to post Nicaea Christianity) and “kill the pigs” (a reference to the Jews as pigs, according to Qur’an 5:60).  This prophecy is found in the Ahmad collection of ahadeeth 2:406, where Abu Hurrairah quotes Muhammad as saying:

I am the closest of all the people to Jesus son of Mary, because there is no other prophet between him and myself.  He will come again, and when you see him, you will recognize him.  He is of medium height and his coloring is reddish-white.  He will be wearing two garments and his hair will look wet.  He will break the cross, kill the pigs, abolish the gizya tax, and call the people to Islam.

This prophecy, and a few other similar ones, are why the radical fundamentalist Muslims have been increasing their killing of Jews and their attacks on Christians and symbols of Christianity—because they think that they are doing Allah’s work, helping to speed up the time when Jesus returns to finish the job of “breaking the cross,” and “killing the Jews.”

But, of course, Notre Dame was destroyed by an electrical short.  In two separate places simultaneously, by accident.

But, not to worry.  French President Macron is going to set up a committee to make plans for rebuilding Notre Dame, not in its original manifestation, no, but to make it “more beautiful, and more modern.” 

Yes, I can hardly wait to see what sort of multi-cultural platypus Macron’s Politically Correct committee will come up with.

Wanna bet it won’t have a large worship room for every faith represented in today’s France, except that one worship room will be larger than all the others?  Wanna bet this won’t be the worship room facing Mecca, with prayer rugs and a mihrab for ministering to the faithful?

Shame, shame, shame on you France, for allowing the desecration of the blood of Charles Martel’s heroes–and the stabbing of all Western Civilization in the heart.

Will the tower of London be Europe’s next mega mosque?

RELATED ARTICLES:

Why the Restoration of Notre Dame Seems Doomed to Fail

What Is the Message of the Fire at Notre Dame Cathedral?

RELATED VIDEO: Pour Macron, Notre-Dame n’est pas française! (For Macron, Notre Dame is not French!)

The Lucifer-cation of Hollywood: Films Hellboy, Pet Cemetery & Us go from Satan to Socialism

/in , , , , /by

Hollywood has become the bullhorn for Lucifer and Socialism. Hollywood actors, actresses, directors, producers by enlarge say one thing but consistently do another. Those who are successful in Hollywood become the 1% because of the money paid by the 99% to see their movies. This is called capitalism. But they preach to us that capitalism is evil and socialism is good.

Hollywood has become the center for horror/Science Fiction/occult films. But we are now seeing a new levels of violence, gore and evil, things that the Hollywood elites say they detest but make millions off of each and every day.

Hollywood’s Hypocrisy

Three recent movies show Hollywood’s hypocrisy. Hollywood has do as I say but not as I do persona. While they publicly proclaim that they want to stop gun and other violence, they make millions promoting gun and violence.

Lets look at Hellboy, Pet Cemetery and Us, each of which are boring repeats of the same old plot. The plot is from the depths of the earth, or grave, come creatures (or humans turned into murderous creatures) that kill those living above ground. Hollywood directors and producers, aided by actresses and actors, openly promote the seven deadly sins: Gluttony, Greed, Sloth, Wrath, Lust, Envy and Pride. Not to mention violating all of the Ten Commandments.

Hollywood has going to hell in a handbasket. The phrase ‘going to hell in a handbasket’ is to be rapidly deteriorating – on course for disaster.

Lets look at how each of these films sets Hollywood, and our culture, on a course for disaster.

Hellboy

The latest version of Hellboy is difficult to watch. It is filled with scenes of cannibalism (gluttony), betrayal (envy and pride), blood lust and wrath. There is no winner. There are creatures that come from below grown to kill every human being above grown as the behest of a Satanic witch. There is only blood and gore, followed by more blood and gore. Hellboy has taken graphic scenes of gore to a new level graphic scenes of gore. There is no reason for the blood and gore than the blood and gore itself. Let is hope there will not be a squeal to Hellboy.

Pet Cemetery

Pet Cemetery is a remake of Pet Cemetery. This boring film changes the plot slightly but the ending is the same. The Satanic idea that one can bury a loved one in desecrated ground and bring them back to life without consequences is debunked. A father who is an atheist. A mother who isn’t exactly religious and their two children victims. The perfect family for Satan to work his evil. The greedy and pride filled father wants something that he cannot give, life. The innocent daughter is made into a creature from hell after being buried in consecrated ground the daughter is exhumed by the father and reburied in an unholy patch of earth on his property. A very bad decision. Using Lucifer to reclaim life has dire consequences.

Us

The movie Us is about a normal family on holiday. The family is close knit, middle class and a model family. Then comes their cloned doubles. Their cloned doubles what everything they have (greed, envy). The clones live below ground, like the monsters in Hellboy and those buried in unholy ground in Pet Cemetery. The clones where red jumpsuits, perhaps indicating their socialist bent on taking what they have not earned (sloth, wrath, lust, envy and greed).

I do not recommend any of these films or any other film that Hollywood produces that does not have a positive moral message like the films Unplanned and Breakthrough. If you want to watch films with a positive moral message you may want to stream films like the Ten Commandments or the Passion of Christ. You, your family and our society will be be better off for it.

DEBANKING: Chase Bank “moral character” a Reason They Don’t Do Business w/ “those types of people”

/in , , , , /by

Can your bank ban you for your political views?

It sounds like something from a George Orwell novel or an authoritarian regime.  But in America, can someone restrict the flow of money of their political enemies?

In our Twitter investigation, Veritas has showed you “Deplatforming.” It’s the way big tech removes political commentators from their platforms to thwart political speech.

In our latest investigation, Project Veritas journalists uncover “Debanking.”

Could major U.S. banks like Chase be barring conservative and rightwing organizations from making business transactions because of their political views?

In our newest video, Veritas introduces you to Enrique Tarrio.  Tarrio is the chairman of the controversial Proud Boys and is an entrepreneur who sells provocative tee shirts and merchandise on his website 1776.shop.

Chase Bank refused to tell Tarrio why they suspended his account.  Shocked and frustrated, Tarrio reached out to Project Veritas.

See what our journalists uncovered and view the latest video:

RELATED ARTICLE: MALKIN: Questions For Chase (Away) Bank

EDITORS NOTE: This Project Veritas column with video is republished with permission.

VIDEO: Historic Events Now Begin — Trump on the Offense

/in , , , , , /by

No Collusion No Obstruction

Well, well well, what we have all been waiting for has finally now begun. I for one, have written about this subject for over two years and knew that this day would arrive. No collusion, no obstruction, game over.

Historic events now begin as Trump goes on the offense. Yes, of course we know that the Democrats and the fake news will continue to challenge and go after President Trump on a never ending list of baseless, useless attacks as we know their mission is to de-legitimize this president and our movement for freedom. We know their mission is to remove President Trump from office and to see that Trump is not re-elected in 2020. They will continue on this pathway, attempting to accomplish this by any means whatsoever. Why? Because those guilty of treason, crimes and misdemeanors have everything to lose, thus the frenzied panic we now see before us. They will do whatever they can to double down on the Mueller Report, pursue obstruction and then impeachment with a vengeance, and go after tax returns and who knows what else they will conjure up. Why? Because they know they have been caught. They know they will soon be held accountable. They will rat each other out and eat each other alive. I suspect real suicides and individuals “suicided” over time. The fake news, Hollywood, corrupt elected officials, individuals in the DOJ, FBI, CIA and the deep state apparatus at large, are in meltdown mode. Those who scream the loudest have the most to lose, and there are quite a few noise makers. They are panicking as President Trump and the patriots are now on the offense. Soon, like in a matter of a few short weeks at best, they will lose control over the narrative as Trump goes on the offense. Game over. As always, stay alert for more false flags. Get the popcorn, enjoy the show, it’s a great time to be an American!

Trump on the Offense

With an estimated 93,000 federal sealed indictments prepared against the global deep state syndicate, which includes many elected officials, this will create a cascading avalanche like never seen before in our political history. Everything I talked about on June 13, 2018 in the article I wrote titled Scale of Discovery & Action They are on the Run, particularly steps six, seven and eight has arrived and are now unfolding. What can we look forward to in the coming weeks and months ahead? De-classification. President Trump when asked by Sean Hannity about FISA and the de-class in an interview dated March 27, 2019, the President stated that “I do, I have plans to declassify and release”.  Trump went on to discuss Hillary Clinton in the Hannity interview and indicated he will go after Clinton now as well. So what else can we expect? In the end, Clinton’s, Bush’s and Obama’s will all be held accountable. Lyndsey Graham is pursuing hearings as well for former FBI agents like Comey, McCabe and others. Devin Nunezhas submitted eight criminal referrals to AG Barr with more on the way. And Julian Assange? Can’t wait for this hero to reveal much of what the world needs to hear as soon as he gets in court. He may be the only one who has lived to testify against the Clinton’s.

Conclusion

And so, probes, hearings, subpoenas, indictments, grand juries, trials, as well as the resuming of the military tribunals are what will soon dominate world news. The tens of millions of dollars that GITMO has received will prove to have been well spent. Yes, Trump and team is changing the narrative. Military tribunals you say? This subject I wrote about as well back on August 12, 2017. Yes that’s right, military tribunals. Two individuals have already had their tribunals. John McCain and George Herbert Walker Bush. Oh yeah, and what did the founding fathers say the punishment is for elected officials found guilty of treason, high crimes and misdemeanors? Execution. I’ll let you connect the dots on that. If this subject matter is foreign to you, I suggest you change the channel. Venezuelans are starving for food (thanks to socialism), while Americans are starving for truth. Get on board. Get some skin in the game. I have provided but a few resources below to help guide you. And soon it will be easy for you as all the world will see. From dark to light.

Like what you have just read? Help awaken others. Share this article.

Related Articles

John’s Video Commentary

America’s Starvation for Truth

You Have Little Faith – Trust The Plan

Calm Down and Enjoy the Ride!

Relax Trump Has the Goods

Pedophilia the Achilles Heel of the Deep State

Related Resources

Q – The Plan To Save The World REMASTERED

[DS] Code Words, Panic In DC, Patriots In Control – Episode 1846b

The Great Awakening

Two Thirds Of Congress Just Indicted For Trafficking

What is Q?

Trump directs release of declassified surveillance warrant on Russia probe. What happens now?

Q Drops

The Mueller Dossier is a ‘cover up’ for the DC criminals

Q Proofs

Deep State War Landscape Changes w/ Dave Janda (1of2)

QAnon is coming form the Trump Administration

CORRUPTION and TREASON: Robert David Steele Exposes The Deep State’s Agenda

We are the Plan

KEVIN SHIPP – SHADOW GOVERNMENT, THE DEEP STATE UNMASK

Bank of America’s over $50,000 in Contributions to Planned Parenthood Itemized

/in , , , , /by

Planned Parenthood organizations received at least $51,830 from the Bank of America Charitable Foundation in 2017. The foundation’s IRS Form 990 shows contributions made to 4o different Planned Parenthood affiliates.

Will you help us expose Bank of America’s support for Planned Parenthood’s abortion business? Click here to share our Action Alert, and then sign 2ndVote’s petition asking Bank of America to STOP all funding for the abortion giant.

Planned Parenthood of Northern New England $50.00
Planned Parenthood of Northern New England $500.00
Planned Parenthood of Southern New England $350.00
Planned Parenthood of Southern New England $100.00
Planned Parenthood of Southern New England $50.00
Planned Parenthood of Metropolitan New Jersey $100.00
Planned Parenthood Federation of America $3,655.00
Planned Parenthood Federation of America $1,200.00
Planned Parenthood Federation of America $3,795.00
Planned Parenthood Federation of America $275.00
Planned Parenthood Federation of America $325.00
Planned Parenthood Federation of America $100.00
Planned Parenthood Federation of America $3,756.00
Planned Parenthood Federation of America $2,485.00
Planned Parenthood Federation of America $875.00
Planned Parenthood Federation of America $265.00
Planned Parenthood Federation of America $225.00
Planned Parenthood Federation of America $25.00
Planned Parenthood of Delaware $250.00
Planned Parenthood Carol Whitehill Moses Center $3,000.00
Planned Parenthood of Greater Ohio $200.00
Planned Parenthood Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota $100.00
Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast $750.00
Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast $600.00
Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast $25.00
Planned Parenthood Arizona $125.00
Planned Parenthood Arizona $100.00
Planned Parenthood Arizona $50.00
Planned Parenthood Arizona $50.00
Planned Parenthood Los Angeles $100.00
Planned Parenthood of the Pacific Southwest $500.00
Planned Parenthood Shasta Diablo $650.00
Planned Parenthood Shasta Diablo $3,000.00
Planned Parenthood of the Columbia Willamette $250.00
Planned Parenthood of League of Massachusetts $200.00
Planned Parenthood of League of Massachusetts $200.00
Planned Parenthood of League of Massachusetts $250.00
Planned Parenthood of Northern, Central and Southern New Jersey $100.00
Planned Parenthood of Northern, Central and Southern New Jersey $50.00
Planned Parenthood of New York City $200.00
Planned Parenthood of New York City $300.00
Planned Parenthood of New York City $500.00
Planned Parenthood Federation of America $500.00
Planned Parenthood Federation of America $1,706.00
Planned Parenthood Federation of America $250.00
Planned Parenthood Federation of America $150.00
Planned Parenthood Federation of America $75.00
Planned Parenthood Federation of America $25.00
Planned Parenthood Federation of America $50.00
Planned Parenthood Federation of America $250.00
Planned Parenthood Federation of America $50.00
Planned Parenthood Hudson Peconic $500.00
Planned Parenthood of Nassau County $200.00
Planned Parenthood of the Mid-Hudson Valley $75.00
Planned Parenthood of Western Pennsylvania $1,180.00
Planned Parenthood of Western Pennsylvania $375.00
Planned Parenthood Keystone $50.00
Planned Parenthood Keystone $350.00
Planned Parenthood Federation of America $1,375.00
Planned Parenthood Federation of America $4,358.00
Planned Parenthood Federation of America $25.00
Planned Parenthood Federation of America $200.00
Planned Parenthood Federation of America $25.00
Planned Parenthood of Metropolitan Washington, DC $300.00
Planned Parenthood South Atlantic $950.00
Planned Parenthood South Atlantic $25.00
Planned Parenthood South Atlantic $100.00
Planned Parenthood South Atlantic $100.00
Planned Parenthood of Pasco $500.00
Planned Parenthood of Southwest and Central Florida $50.00
Planned Parenthood of Southwest and Central Florida $50.00
Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky $375.00
Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky $100.00
Planned Parenthood of the Heartland $500.00
Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin $2,000.00
Planned Parenthood of Wisconsin $1,035.00
Planned Parenthood of Illinois $50.00
Planned Parenthood of the St. Louis Region & Southwest Missouri $50.00
Planned Parenthood of the St. Louis Region & Southwest Missouri $50.00
Planned Parenthood of the St. Louis Region & Southwest Missouri $75.00
Planned Parenthood of the St. Louis Region & Southwest Missouri $75.00
Planned Parenthood of the St. Louis Region & Southwest Missouri $50.00
Planned Parenthood Great Plains $50.00
Planned Parenthood of Greater Texas $30.00
Planned Parenthood of Greater Texas $50.00
Planned Parenthood of Greater Texas $30.00
Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood $1,000.00
Rocky Mountain Planned Parenthood $100.00
Planned Parenthood Salt Lake Health Center $300.00
Planned Parenthood of the Pacific $50.00
Planned Parenthood of California Central Coast $25.00
Planned Parenthood Mar Monte $150.00
Planned Parenthood Mar Monte $50.00
Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest and the Hawaiian Islands $500.00
Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest and the Hawaiian Islands $1,000.00
Planned Parenthood of the Great Northwest and the Hawaiian Islands $500.00
Planned Parenthood of Greater Washington and North Idaho $35.00
Planned Parenthood of Greater Washington and North Idaho $75.00

More information on Bank of America’s activism can be found here.

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

RELATED ARTICLE: Court Rules President Trump Can Defund Planned Parenthood, Will Cut Almost $60 Million in Taxpayer Funding

A Message to Mayor Pete from a Latina Mama: ‘DON’T FORCE YOUR SEXUAL IDEOLOGY ON ME AND MY CHILDREN’

/in , , , , , /by

By Ana Samuel

Yes, be polite to us, and we will be polite to you. But we know that we are in an intense battle over the hearts and minds of our children. Mothers are very good at educating and protecting our children from harm when we believe they are in danger. This time, that danger is the harmful sexual ideology of the Left.

I would like to respond to a tweet by Pete Buttigieg, newly announced Democratic presidential candidate. Last week, he tweeted:

People will often be polite to you in person, while advancing policies that harm you and your family. You will be polite to them in turn, but you need not stand for such harms. Instead, you push back, honestly and emphatically. So it goes, in the public square.

Buttigieg, the mayor of South Bend, Indiana, is a man in a same-sex marriage. The tweet’s sub-text is that anyone who refuses to cheer for same-sex marriage or support the Left’s sexual ideology is a bigot — someone who is out to harm Mayor Pete and his family.

Mayor Pete, it cuts both ways. As a Latina mama in touch with a number of other Latinas with traditional family values, I can tell you we are faced every day with people who are “polite to us in person” but who advance and execute policies that assault our values, harm our families, and hurt our children.

Enough Is Enough

I’m talking about policies that undermine our parental rights and duties by seeking to indoctrinate our children in progressive sexual ideology without our consent and sometimes in spite of our explicit protest. Consider just a few examples:

  • The public schools in my area where reading assignments from the Language Arts curriculum ask: “What is heteronormativity and how is it harmful?” (Mind you: this is a question from the school district’s recommended language arts curriculum for eighth graders, not from a single health teacher or counselor. It is not unusual for the LGBT theme to find its way into history classes, foreign language studies, and even STEM courses. The explicit goal is to normalize LGBT lifestyles throughout curricula).
  • Pediatricians who ask to see our teenagers alone and then push to prescribe them contraceptives or ask them about sexual behaviors that we find offensive. Our teens themselves bring these pediatricians’ inappropriate behavior to our attention. (One OBGYN slipped a prescription for oral contraceptives stealthily to a 14-year-old daughter of a Mexican friend of mine, after she had explicitly stated to his face that she did not wish to see her daughter on oral contraceptives.)
  • Sex education classes in which our kids are taught unproven Freudian-Kinseyan doctrines that “sexual repression” will cause neuroses (“express yourself, don’t suppress yourself”), and which preach about topics like abortion, masturbation, condom use, sex toys, “outercourse,” oral stimulation, and rectal intercourse, with all the humor and scientific grounding of a Saturday Night Live sketch, while refusing to seriously address the short and long-term medical and psychological health risks of those actions.
  • Public library programming where unicorns, rainbows, gingerbread persons, drag-queen story hours, and other symbols of progressive sexual ideology make an appearance, so that we must regularly steer our toddlers clear of the propaganda. With our middle-school children, it’s much harder to opt out. Trendy middle-school books (published after 2014) that appear to have fairly innocuous plots frequently feature an LGBT teen or gay couple, ever-so-gently normalizing the ideas that are so conflicting to our consciences. (Avoiding these storylines isn’t easy, since book-review websites regularly delete or block parents’ reviews that warn of LGBT elements, so we cannot even alert other parents of the real content within these books.)
  • And last but not least, the latest round of violence against children: efforts to entice children to question the reality of their sex through school gender-transitioning ceremonies, pronoun-sensitivity training, and other transgender propaganda. Parents have historically enjoyed the right to direct the education and upbringing of their children, under the correct presumption that parents—rather than school counselors, psychiatrists, teachers, government bureaucrats, or any other persons—are best able to act in their children’s best interests. Now, activists are pushing courts to allow minors to receive puberty-blocking drugs and cross-sex hormones against their parents’ objections.

Mr. Mayor, it is hypocritical for you to cry foul about policies that “harm you and your family” while your side pushes for government intrusions into the parent-child relationship at the most fundamental levels.

At some point, we say “enough is enough.” Basta.

Toleration for You, but Toleration for Me Too

Mothers tend to emphatically care about the welfare of all children, regardless of their family’s origin or current form. We also tend to emphatically care about every LGBT person—recognizing our common humanity even when we do not agree with their lifestyle choices. When we are polite to you, we are coming from a place of deep moral principle and authenticity. It’s not a superficial cover up for our true beliefs about you. You are rights-bearing individuals (like all of us) endowed with human dignity.

Although our home countries have often been viciously anti-gay places, there is a deep understanding among Hispanic mothers that those who identify as LGBT have suffered a lot, and that many have lived a life of hurt, harm and pain. We feel great sympathy for your suffering. But the ideas you have developed from painful experiences are not always sound ones. And we can distinguish between the two: between affectionate concern for you as a person and disagreement with your ideas. So please stop shutting us out of the conversation by the intellectually dishonest rhetorical expedient of implying or saying that we are bigots. We are the opposite of bigots.

We are prepared to co-exist peacefully and tolerate a great deal of what you propose, but not at the expense of losing our own ability to practice and preach our own values and freedoms. We are happy to work side-by-side with you, to have you as our coaches, neighbors and friends, but don’t cross the line and tell us what sexual values to cherish and uphold.

Check Your Financial Privilege

Blacks, the poor, and children have always paid a disproportionately heavy price for the breakdown of marriage and sexual morality in society. Marriage between husband and wife has historically been the institution that best offers women, children and the poor a decent shot at a peaceful, stable, financially secure, socially connected life.

Please note that I’m not blaming the erosion of marriage on the LGBT movement. No, we in the mainstream did that all on our own. However, the LGBT movement has further eroded marriage, and in a more shocking way. It is not a good idea to tell society that you don’t need a member of the opposite sex to have a baby or that kids don’t need a mom and a dad because they will do fine in any kind of arrangement. That’s not true, and there’s plenty of empirical data to prove it.

Respecting the truth about sexuality and marriage is also the least expensive. Friend, it takes a lot of money to circumvent nature. It takes upscale health insurance to pay for those doctor’s visits to the urologist, OBGYN, and additional medical care linked to sex outside of marriage, rectal intercourse, or cross-sex hormones. It takes a lot of money to pay for that surrogate rent-a-womb so that two men can have a baby. Even if she’s from a third world country—and easily exploitable—it’s still expensive (and the ethics don’t look good). It also takes a lot of money to go through IVF, usually requiring dual-income households.

The fact is, permanent, monogamous, exclusive marriage between husband and wife is the cheapest and highest quality deal on the market. It’s the most financially accessible way to have a child and the safest way to experience sexual pleasure. It also provides some built-in sexual complementarity: a family environment that educates in sexual diversity by example and is more likely to offer balanced childcare, with both sexes offering their unique and invested perspectives on how to raise the children.

Amigo, I’m sorry, but these are the truths of nature. Hijacking nature with cutting edge technology may sound attractive to those who can afford the niceties of upper-class life, but not to those working to meet their basic daily needs. (Do you think getting a sex change is cheap? Don’t you think the poor have other things to think about?) Your agenda requires a lot of extra cash—either that, or socialized medicine. And many of us Hispanics have fled from countries like Cuba and Venezuela (and increasingly Argentina and Mexico) precisely because socialist policies in our home countries turned despotic.

Ask yourself: is the lifestyle you are setting up as a pattern for others to follow replicable and sustainable? Or does it further destabilize the family form that has provided the greatest financial and social stability to women, children, and the poor? The evidence consistently points to the latter.

You play the victim card, but it’s well-off same-sex couples who can afford to cushion themselves and their children from the costly effects of the progressive sexual lifestyle. You can redirect your children’s attention away from the gaping absence of a mother or a father towards a good education, nice clothes, memorable experiences, and recreation. However, your lifestyle cannot be sustained by millions of people who make less money than you. The mothers in my circles know this, and we care about those poor children — and their mothers and fathers, too.

The weight of the past fifty years of social science evidence is virtually unanimous in its conclusion: children — and societies — do best when kids are raised by their married, stable, biological parents. Separate a child from his or her biological mother or father, and you’ve made that child much more likely to experience internal conflict, significant pain and suffering, relational struggles, and a host of other issues.

Challenge Accepted

So yes, be polite to us, and we will be polite to you. But we know that we are in an intense battle for the hearts and minds of our children. We mothers may be underground and quiet, we may not be marching in the streets, and we may not be debating you in public. But we are meeting for coffees in our homes, talking privately with our school teachers, spreading thoughts the media refuses to print, and speaking freely while the First Amendment still means something. Yes, so long as we still enjoy the freedom of association in this country, we will continue to meet and organize, to speak and teach.

Mothers are very good at educating and protecting our children from harm when we believe they are in danger. This time, that danger is the sexual ideology of the Left.

Finally, to my Latina sisters, my message is this: ¡Encuentren su voz! ¡No dejen que la ideología de genero de la izquierda borre nuestros valores culturales sobre la familia! ¡No dejen de ejercer sus derechos de madres! ¡Mamas del mundo: únanse!

This essay originally appeared at Public Discourse: The Journal of the Witherspoon Institute and is reprinted with permission.

COLUMN BY

Ana Samuel

Ana Samuel, PhD, is the daughter of Mexican immigrants, the wife of an Argentine immigrant, and the mother of six awesome children. She completed her undergraduate studies at Princeton University and her doctoral degree from the University of Notre Dame before becoming a founding mother and the Academic Director of CanaVox.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Growing Up, She Thought She Was a Man. Now She’s Fighting the Patriarchy.

Thousands of Boy Scout Leaders Face New Child Sex Allegations; Names Expected to Be Released Tuesday | NBC New York

Drag Queen ‘Quiet Revolution’ Exposed by Brave Catholics

Have a news tip? Submit news to our tip line.

EDITORS NOTE: This Church Militant column is republished with permission.

America and the Family Business Rule — Can We Save ‘The American Dream’?

/in , , , , , /by

There is an old saying in family businesses, “The first generation starts a business. The second generation runs it. The third generation ruins it.”

Metaphorically, our American family business is in the third generation.

Our Founding Fathers rejected monarchy, oligarchy, aristocracy, theocracy, and formed the United States of America as a Constitutional Republic – the greatest experiment in individual freedom and upward mobility anywhere in the world. What happened?

To answer that question we must examine the historical context of the three generations.

Our Founding Fathers lived at a time in history when “We the people” had little value. Societies were structured along binary feudal lines and divided between the ruling elite and the enslaved population who served them. Slavery was a matter of degree – from physical chains and ownership of another human being, to caste systems that predetermined social position, to social structures where populations were subjects of ruling monarchs, oligarchs, or subjects of the tyranny of religious theocratic rule.

Our Founding Fathers had a different idea. They decided to build a more perfect union, a representative democracy that valued the people of society and entrusted them with the responsibility of elections to choose their own leaders. It was a radical experiment in social policy that reflected a seismic shift in social attitudes.

A government of the people, by the people, and for the people offered unparalleled opportunities for upward mobility and the freedom to pursue one’s dreams. Capitalism and the free market economy allowed workers to keep the fruits of their labor and created a thriving middle class. Public education that taught competency, literacy, and a patriotic regard for freedom and the American ideal was mandated. What was the catch?

The freedom and opportunity that defined the American ideal required its citizens to become responsible, self-sufficient adults. The early years of the American experiment were particularly harsh and difficult years but living free was worth the effort – individual freedom, religious freedom, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of the press, and freedom to petition the government were rights that required adulthood.

Living free and dying free was something that was not taken for granted in the 18th century. The success of the American ideal depended upon the shared American spirit of commitment to personal freedom by both government and the governed. It was understood that the freedoms guaranteed by our Constitution and Bill of Rights were a promise of equal opportunity not a guarantee of equal outcome.

The 19th century was a period of enormous growth in America and change for our metaphorical American family business. The industrial revolution transformed America from an agrarian society of handmade goods to an industrial society of machine made goods. The agrarian farm economy gave way to an industrial urban economy of wage labor, factories, trade unions, banking with an expanded credit system, the man-made Erie Canal, and a railway system to move manufactured goods from factory to market.

The growth of America during the 19th and early 20th centuries was supported by the American spirit, the American ideal, and the American dream:

“The American Dream is a national ethos of the United States, the set of ideals (democracy, rights, liberty, opportunity, and equality) in which freedom includes the opportunity for prosperity and success, as well as an upward social mobility for the family and children, achieved through hard work in a society with few barriers. . . The American Dream is rooted in the Declaration of Independence, which proclaims that ‘all men are created equal’ with the right to ‘life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness.’”

The ethos of freedom and equal opportunity is what ended slavery in the United States with the 13th Amendment in 1865, and what provided women the equal right to vote in the United States with the 19th Amendment in 1920. The early and mid-20th century in America were marked by world wars that threatened American ideals of freedom and strengthened the bonds of the American family in common cause.

There was a decade of calm and rebuilding at the end of WWII that ended with America’s involvement in the disastrous Vietnam War 1955-1975.

The third generation of America’s family business began in the 1960s with the Cultural Revolution that continues to threaten the American ideal and the American dream. The anti-establishment generation began their assault on the vision of the Founding Father’s and rejected its intrinsic requirement to become fully functional emotional adults who accept the responsibilities of life in a free society. These emotional children disguised as chronological adults were determined to enjoy the benefits of freedom without accepting the responsibilities of freedom. They preferred the dependency model of collectivism and its seductive promises of social justice and income equality.

The Declaration of Independence is an ideological document of limited government of the people, by the people, and for the people. The first generation wrote the document and started the American family business based on freedom, equal opportunity, and responsible adulthood. The second generation embraced the ideals of freedom, equal opportunity, and adult responsibility and ran the family business. The third generation demands freedom, demands equal outcome, and rejects the adult responsibility required for success. The third generation is ruining the American family business. This is how it works.

The third generation of our American family identifies themselves as “progressive” by demanding a centralized government that “frees” Americans from the burdensome responsibilities of freedom and guarantees equal outcome. Progressive is truly a misnomer because their demands are entirely regressive. The Regressives’ demand is for eternal childhood where the government (Mommy and Daddy) takes care of its citizens from birth to death. Here is the problem.

Freedom is never free. The cost of freedom is adult responsibility.

The Regressives’ demand for birth to death government control is a return to the binary feudal lines of the ruling elite and the enslaved population who served them. Mommy and Daddy provide for little Johnny but they also control every aspect of little Johnny’s life. The cost of dependence is freedom.

The Regressives and their identity politics form the base of the Democrat party in America today. They are taking aim at capitalism, the free market, the electoral college, the Supreme Court structure, and the Constitution itself by insisting that the Constitution is a “living” mutable document and not the solid infrastructure of a free America.

Children are entitled to expect their parents to care for them until they are adults able to care for themselves – it is the cycle of life that supports an independent, adult, successful society. Chronological adults who demand the government care for them as if they were children have perverted the cycle of life and will eventually collapse the society. The collectivist promise of social justice and income equality promised by socialism and its deceitful leaders and has been proven false in every society it has been tried.

Collectivism, whether it is socialism or communism is a return to the binary feudal system of elite rulers and the population who serve them. Socialism/communism ALWAYS benefits the leaders at the expense of the population. There is no private property, upward mobility, or middle class in socialism/communism because the government owns and controls everything. There is only scarcity and servitude for the masses.

BUYER BEWARE!

The third generation of America’s family business represented by the Democrat party, socialist Bernie Sanders, and the colluding mainstream media has embraced the dependence of collectivism and is ruining America’s family business. The Mueller “investigation” and its ongoing Democrat initiative to impeach President Trump is an attempt at a hostile takeover of America’s independent family business. We the people are all shareholders in America’s family business and the only way to save the business is to vote at the shareholder meeting in November, 2020.

Americans must reassert their commitment to personal freedom, responsible adulthood, and life in a free society by casting their votes for America-first businessman President Donald J. Trump in 2020. We simply cannot allow the third generation to ruin America’s family business. Attendance at the November 2020 shareholder meeting is mandatory.

The Cross Still Stands Amid the Ruins of Destruction

/in , , , , /by

Europe is no longer Europe, it is Eurabia, a colony of Islam, where the Islamic invasion does not proceed only in a physical sense, but also in a mental and cultural sense.  Italian Journalist Oriana Fallaci

Free speech is the soul of our nation and the foundation of all our other freedoms. If we can’t speak out against injustice and evil, those forces will prevail. Freedom of speech is the foundation of a free society. Without it, a tyrant can wreak havoc unopposed, while his opponents are silenced.  Pamela Geller, FATWA: Hunted in America

One of the most marvelous cathedrals in the world, Notre Dame of Paris, an absolute jewel, has been partially destroyed!  Yet the Cross of Christ still stands amid the ruins.

The cathedral was built on a small island called the Île de la Cité, in the middle of the Seine and is consecrated to the Virgin Mary. Construction began in 1163, during the reign of King Louis VII, and was completed in 1345. It is considered a jewel of medieval Gothic architecture. It is the most famous of the Gothic cathedrals of the Middle Ages and is distinguished for its size, antiquity, and architectural interest.

Notre Dame Cathedral is part of the World Heritage site of “Paris, Banks of the Seine” inscribed on the World Heritage List in 1991.  UNESCO is the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. UNESCO’s programs contribute to Sustainable Development Goals defined in UN Agenda 2030, adopted by the UN General Assembly in 2015.  World Heritage sites are land grabs controlled by the United Nations.  Link

The burning of this magnificent structure brought tears, not only to the eyes of all Christians, but to all architectural historians as they watched the destruction of this gothic French cathedral.

Videos posted on social media show a segment of the French population rejoicing over the burning of Notre Dame Cathedral on Monday, including laughing and smiling emojis by users with Arab names.  Thousands of Muslims on Twitter rejoiced.

France’s Churches Vandalized

One wonders how many refugee Muslims were working on the restoration and refurbishing of the 850-year-old cathedral.  Isn’t that a question that should be asked inasmuch as the fire started in two different places according to LCI, a French TV station, and during Christians’ Holy Week?  During nine centuries there was never a single fire in Notre Dame.

While Notre Dame is undoubtedly the most well-known landmark to be affected, Paris’ second largest church, Saint Sulpice, briefly burst into flames on March 17, the fire damaging doors and stained glass windows on the building’s exterior. Police later reported that the incident had not been an accident.  An illegal Muslim immigrant had tried to burn down Saint Sulpice.

In 2016, two veiled Muslim women tried to detonate a car filled with explosives in front of Notre Dame.

In mid-March, an illegal Muslim immigrant tried to burn down the organ of the Saint-Denis basilica, (another jewel) and destroyed stained glass.  Link

European Destruction

Countless churches throughout Western Europe are being vandalized, defecated on, and torched.  In France, two churches are desecrated every day on average. According to PI-News, a German news site, 1,063 attacks on Christian churches or symbols (crucifixes, icons, statues) were registered in France in 2018.

Similar reports are coming out of Germany. Four separate churches were vandalized and/or torched in March alone. “In this country,” PI-News explained, “there is a creeping war against everything that symbolizes Christianity: attacks on mountain-summit crosses, on sacred statues by the wayside, on churches…and recently also on cemeteries.”

Who is primarily behind these ongoing and increasing attacks on churches in Europe? The same German report offers a hint: “Crosses are broken, altars smashed, Bibles set on fire, baptismal fonts overturned, and the church doors smeared with Islamic expressions like ‘Allahu Akbar.’”

For similar examples in other European countries, please see Austria, Rome, Italy, and Spain, and so many others.

Free Speech Terminated by Fox News

Ahh yes, the newsroom narrative never touched on arson of this beautiful Notre Dame cathedral.  Instead, it had to be an accident, probably because of renovation.  Somewhere a spark from some tool ignited the cathedral in two different places, and this beautiful place of worship went up in flames while the world watched.  Yeah, sure!

Not surprisingly, but wholly choreographed, two Fox News anchors actually prevented guests from discussing the recent rash of churches being attacked which included arson. Both Shephard Smith and Neil Cavuto cut off their guests.

Bill Donahue, President of the Catholic League in the United States was speaking with Neal Cavuto.  Donahue commented that we don’t know that it was an accident, “But forgive me for being suspicious. Just last month a seventeenth century church was set on fire in Paris. We’ve seen tabernacles knocked down, crosses have been torn down, statues have been smashed.”  Cavuto cut him off, but Donahue continues saying, “But I’m sorry, I mean, when I find out that the eucharist is being destroyed and excrement is being smeared on crosses.”  Then Cavuto hangs up the phone on Bill.  Watch the video of the three-minute exchange.

Shephard Smith’s guest was French media analyst and former elected official Philippe Karsenty, who said the blaze burning at the Parisian landmark was “like a 9/11.”  Smith interrupts him and states they are not going to speculate. But Karsenty continues, “The church was there for more than 850 years. Even the Nazis didn’t dare to destroy it.”

He said there have been churches “desecrated each and every week in France, all over France” in recent years. “So, of course, you will hear the story of the political correctness which will tell you it’s probably an accident,” Karsenty said before Smith interrupted and cut him off.  Philippe Karsenty took to twitter to share the harsh and censored interview.  Link

Any logical discussion of an anti-Christian or anti-Catholic arson was terminated.  As Diana West stated in her recent article, “Given what we have all been through as veterans of the jihad, lo, these nearly 18 years, it is the pathetic height of absurdity to try to stop a rational being from wondering whether there is an Islamic connection to the burning of Notre Dame — amid all of the other possibilities, including criminal negligence on an epic scale.”

Media are no longer willing or able, to robustly defend their Judeo-Christian roots.

French Catholics Speak Out

Frenchman Maxime Lepante believes Islam represents a mortal danger for all non-Muslims.  “And when our churches, our cathedrals, our cemeteries, our monuments, are destroyed by Muslim immigrants, Macron uses our policemen to protect…the mosques!  Macron is an absolute criminal; he supports the Muslim invaders who are slaughtering us and destroying our country!”

Former French President, Francois Hollande will be infamously remembered for the November, 2015 Muslim terrorist slaughter in the Bataclan Café in Paris.  The Islamic State terrorists who attacked the Bataclan theater in Paris not only killed scores of innocents — they also gouged out the eyes and sliced up the genitals of some of the victims, according to testimony in a disturbing French report.

Some victims’ bodies from the second floor of the theater had been beheaded, eviscerated and otherwise mutilated, according to two secondhand accounts reported to a parliamentary commission set up to investigate the attack.

Now France’s President Macron will also be remembered in history for the very destruction of Notre Dame Cathedral by his beloved Muslim thugs.

Islamic Destruction of Historic Artifacts

Italian journalist Oriana Fallaci is a legend and was one of the bravest souls who wrote the truth of Islam.  The Rage and the Pride and The Force of Reason were books written by a woman who fought fascism in Italy as a kid, as an adult was shot three times and left for dead by police in Mexico City, went to Viet Nam to personally report on the war and was ultimately the recipient of an imam’s “fatwa” – a fatwa designed to permanently silence Fallaci’s criticism of Islam.

The fearless journalist interviewed Ayatollah Khomeini in 1979. Forced into a chador in order to enter the Ayatollah’s presence, she ended up in a row about why women should be forced to wear such a garment, and became so enraged that she stood up and ripped off “this stupid medieval rag,” letting it fall to the floor “in an obscene black puddle.”  The Ayatollah rushed out…afraid of a woman with chutzpah!

Oriana interviewed Henry Kissinger in 1972 and he confessed in his memoirs that this interview was one of the most disastrous decisions of his career. But I digress…

In her 2001 book, The Rage and the Pride, she exposed the destruction throughout the world of historic artifacts demolished by Islam. She took up her pen to write this book after the horrors of 9-11. She told of the ruination of archeological monuments…the Bamiyan’s Buddhas of Afghanistan blown up by the Taliban on order of Mullah Omar.

It was the verdict of the Islamic Supreme Court of Kabul and their pronouncement that every pre-Islamic statue will be destroyed, every pre-Islamic symbol will be wiped out, every idol condemned by the Prophet to be pulverized.

It was pronounced on the 26th of February 2001, the same day in which the Taliban regime authorized the public hangings in the stadiums, and the last women’s rights were withdrawn.  Islamic decimation of historic architecture and documents continues, and is unabated despite being declared UNESCOs Sustainable Development World Heritage sites. Link

Fallaci tells how these people invade a country, how they live in the heart of a society that hosts them without that country questioning their differences and how the country is forced to capitulate to their so-called “religious” demands because of their own laws.

She tells of a synod held by the Vatican in October 1999 to discuss the rapport between Christians and Moslems, and an eminent Islamic scholar addressed the stunned audience declaring with placid effrontery: “By means of your democracy we shall invade you, by means of our religion we shall dominate you.”

The report was given by one of the participants, His Eminence monsignor Giuseppe Bernardini, archbishop in the Turkish Diocese of Smyrna.

Oriana says, “Dealing with them is impossible.  Attempting a dialogue, unthinkable.  Showing indulgence, suicidal.  And, he or she who believes the contrary is a fool.  The moment you give up your principles, and your values, you are dead, your culture is dead, your civilization is dead. Period.”

Heed her words…she is right!

Conclusion

European churches are vandalized, defecated on, and torched every day, historic monuments in the Middle East are destroyed, sharia law is forced on host countries who have allowed Islamic “refugees” to enter into their sovereign nations.

As for our country, the United States has been infiltrated thoroughly.  Robert Spencer in his book, Muslim Brotherhood in America, told that the Muslim Brotherhood’s infiltration of the Washington establishment is remarkable by any standard. Former FBI Special Agent John Guandolo of UnderstandingtheThreat noted in October 2011, “What we’re seeing not just inside the White House, but inside the government entities, the national security entities, the State Department – is a strong push by the Muslim Brotherhood to get their people not just into operational positions, but policy positions – deeper, long term, bureaucratic positions.”

In 2016, hundreds of Islamists were elected to local, state, and federal government, the invasion continues, and with it will come the destruction of our culture and our heritage and our historic monuments.

At the siege of Vienna in 1683, Islam seemed poised to overrun Christian Europe.  We are in a new phase of a very old war.

VIDEO: President Trump Vindicated

/in , , , , , /by

President Trump has been vindicated. The Mueller investigation failed to find any evidence to support the big lie that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russian government and failed miserably to prove any obstruction.

We’re pleased that Attorney General Barr saw through the 448-page smear of President Trump by highlighting the simple conclusion that there is no collusion and no obstruction.

Neither Mueller, the Obama FBI, DOJ, CIA, State Department, nor the Deep State ever had a good-faith basis to pursue President Trump on Russia collusion. Russia collusion wasn’t just a hoax, it was criminal abuse, which is why Judicial Watch has fought and will continue to fight for Russiagate documents in federal court.

The targeting of President Trump served to protect Hillary Clinton and her enablers/co-conspirators in Obama administration from prosecution. Attorney General Barr can begin restoring the credibility of the Justice Department by finally initiating a thorough investigation of the Clinton email and related pay-to-play scandals and the abuses behind the targeting of President Trump.

We have long called for the shutdown of the Mueller special counsel operation and have pursued dozens of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuits in connection with the illicit targeting and other abuses of President Trump. Judicial Watch FOIA litigation exposed, for example:

  • The Dossier-based Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) warrant applications targeting President Trump
  • Eleven FBI payments to Christopher Steele
  • FBI firing of Steele
  • Extensive DOJ (Ohr) collusion w/Steele, Simpson, Fusion GPS
  • No court hearings by defrauded FISA courts before warrants were issued
  • Anti-Trump bias by Mueller deputy Andrew Weissmann

You can be sure your Judicial Watch will continue to “investigate the investigators”! We already have over 40 FOIA lawsuits on Obama/Clinton/Deep State effort to illegally spy on and overthrow President Trump. This assault on our Republic is the worst corruption scandal in American history and Judicial Watch is on it – no matter what Congress or the Justice Department does.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Can the Media Survive Mueller?

Judicial Watch Statement on the Mueller Report

Mueller’s Report Speaks Volumes

Mueller Shouldn’t Have Taken the Job

U.S. Intelligence Institutionally Politicized Toward Democrats

EDITORS NOTE: This Judicial Watch column with video is republished with permission.

President Trump and Vice President Pence to speak at the NRA-ILA Leadership Forum

/in , , /by

FAIRFAX, Va.— President Donald Trump will address NRA members at the NRA Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) Leadership Forum on Friday, April 26, 2019 in Indianapolis, Indiana. This is the third consecutive year that President Trump will deliver the keynote address at the NRA-ILA Leadership Forum. 

“Donald Trump is the most enthusiastic supporter of the Second Amendment to occupy the Oval Office in our lifetimes. It is truly an honor to have President Trump address NRA members for the fifth consecutive year,” said Chris Cox, NRA-ILA Executive Director. “President Trump’s Supreme Court appointments ensure that the Second Amendment will be respected for generations to come.  Our members are excited to hear him speak and thank him for his support for our Right to Keep and Bear Arms.”

WHAT:
NRA-ILA Leadership Forum

WHO:
President Donald Trump
Keynote Speaker

WHERE:
Indiana Convention Center—Lucas Oil Stadium
100 South Capitol Avenue
Indianapolis, Indiana 46255

WHEN:
Friday, April 26, 2019
11:00 – 4:00 p.m.

MEDIA CREDENTIALS:
To obtain media credentials please click HERE.		 TICKETS:
For attendees, purchase your tickets today at bit.ly/NRAILALeadershipForum!

NRAAM media credentials will not be accepted for the NRA-ILA Leadership Forum. Separate media credentials are required for NRA-ILA Leadership Forum. 

Is the American Church Dying?

/in , , , , /by

One often hears dire reports in the media about the impending doom of the Christian church. But Glenn Stanton of Focus on the Family recently wrote an article in the Federalist that showed such reports may be premature.

Stanton notes, “Religious faith in America is going the way of the Yellow Pages and travel maps, we keep hearing. It’s just a matter of time until Christianity’s total and happy extinction, chortle our cultural elites. Is this true? Is churchgoing and religious adherence really in ‘widespread decline’ so much so that conservative believers should suffer ‘growing anxiety’? Two words: Absolutely not. New research published late last year by scholars at Harvard University and Indiana University Bloomington is just the latest to reveal the myth.” [emphasis his]

Stanton is summarizing the research of Landon Schnabel of Indiana University and Sean Bock of Harvard University from their article in Sociological Science. They write, “Recent research argues that the United States is secularizing, that this religious change is consistent with the secularization thesis, and that American religion is not exceptional.”

But their own research leads them to deduce otherwise: “We conclude that intense religion in the United States is persistent and exceptional in ways that do not fit the secularization thesis.”

I interviewed Glenn Stanton on my radio show recently on this subject: Is the American church dying?

He told me, “You hear that everywhere, and you even hear it in the church from good Christian speakers, leaders, and pastors. They say that young people are leaving the church in droves, and there may not even be a Christian church in America in the next couple of years. And it’s just simply not true.” [emphasis his]

Stanton is the author of eight books, and he has a new one coming out soon, called, The Myth of the Dying Church, with a Foreword by Baylor’s Byron Johnson.

Stanton said the research shows that, “far from dying, “the best parts of Christianity (biblical Christianity, or what C. S. Lewis called ‘mere Christianity’) are growing in the United States and just blossoming around the world.”

He said the key is to understand the difference between the mainline churches (the older and now generally more liberal churches—and the evangelical, Bible-based churches). The former are in “freefall,” with members leaving en masse. But that’s because these churches have “long abandoned the basics of the Christian faith.”

The Apostle Paul tells us in 1 Corinthians 15 that the essence of Christianity is that Christ died for our sins, according to the Scriptures; He was buried; and on the third day, He rose from the dead, according to the Scriptures.

Paul even says about these basic truths, “By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.” This is a good thing to be reminded of at this Easter time.

Yet, Stanton notes, many of the more liberal Protestant churches and their leaders have long abandoned these basics of the faith. They have also compromised on biblical morality (e.g., sexual issues, including abortion). These are the churches in America that are dying.

Stanton told me, speaking of these liberal churches, “They are bailing on the basics of Christianity, and, guess what? People are bailing on them. People are leaving those churches as if the buildings are on fire, and do you know where they are going? They are not going nowhere. They are going to the biblically faithful churches, and those are the churches that are growing. So basically what we have here is a great, great good news story. Yes, some parts of Christianity are declining, but those are the people that are compromising the faith. They might as well become Unitarians or something like that.”

I remember reading that only 20 percent of modern day Unitarian Universalists even call themselves Christians. Why pretend?

Jesus said to the professing Christians of Laodicea, “I would that you were hot or cold, but because you are lukewarm, I will spew you out of My mouth.”

In his article for the Federalist, Stanton observes, “The percentage of Americans who attend church more than once a week, pray daily, and accept the Bible as wholly reliable and deeply instructive to their lives has remained absolutely, steel-bar constant for the last 50 years or more, right up to today.”

Stanton adds, “The number of church attendees has continued to rise each and every decade over our nation’s history right up until the present day.”

So, as has been said, “The good news is: the bad news is wrong.”

True Christians are taking the time to worship the crucified and risen Christ.

He is risen. He is risen indeed.

Why Even the Nonviolent Own Guns

/in , , , /by

Gun rights are pretty much common knowledge. A lot of Americans have a handgun in their possession and they’re ready to use it if needed. However, there are many people who are against guns, or they are just not violent individuals in particular. In times when mass shootings have become usual occurrences on the news, it only makes sense that more and more people would turn their backs on weapons.

Even so, there are many citizens who don’t give up on executing their right to wield a gun. People who are big opposers of violence are in the same boat. But why is that? Here we take a look at some reasons why even nonviolent people have a handgun in their household.

Guns Boost Confidence

The aftermath of mass shootings and the increase in criminal activities overall are causing people to feel unsafe wherever they go. Usually, people put themselves in a victim’s shoes and try to think about what they’d do if they were there. They begin to worry about their safety, as well as the safety of their loved ones to the point that they become paranoid and obsessive. While nobody should take their safety for granted, too much of these thoughts can be detrimental to one’s mental state.

People are so afraid because they don’t see any way to protect themselves in case they would be involved in such a dangerous situation. This is where guns come into play. Obviously, these are tools that can injure someone just at the pull of a trigger. So, they can make any holder feel significantly safer than they would without a gun.

Therefore, even if they are against violence and don’t want to use guns, they can simply buy one to feel better and safer in a world where danger can happen anytime.

Looking Cool

There are many types of people, and among those who just want to live normally, there are those who love attention and being praised. Even those who are against violence might feel this way at one point. That’s why they could end up spending money on a weapon.

Yes, there are people who love the idea of being cool and intimidating, so flaunting a handgun around is what they settle for. Just like some people love bragging about their money/cars/possessions, there are Americans who take pride in showing off their gun collection. Being against violence doesn’t stop them from having that feeling of empowerment.

Protection Can Be Increased through Guns

A thief coming into your home during the night is a scary scenario that you’ve probably only seen in movies so far. Still, it’s enough to send shivers down anyone’s spine. In such a situation, the right thing to do is calling the police, but what would one do until the police arrive? The time that the authorities take to rush to the scene may be just enough for the perpetrator to finish their act and even end up injuring someone.

With a gun, though, someone who’s in danger can save some time until police arrive. The trigger doesn’t have to be pulled – just threatening the criminal might be enough to make him keep the distance. A woman holding a handgun in her small lady hands, for example, doesn’t automatically make her violent. It just means that she values her safety, as well as the family’s safety too much and wants to protect it.

That’s why the majority of gun owners declare that guns make them feel much safer, and it’s usually the main reason why Americans choose to own a weapon.

Hunting

Hunting is one interesting and unconventional hobby. Although hunting requires the use of a gun to kill an animal, that doesn’t mean the one handling the weapon is a violent person. Despite people’s thoughts, it is an activity that can be done in order to save someone’s farming livelihood. In other words, it might have to be done as a last resort, and the one pulling the trigger could be a very nice and considerate person.

At the same time, hunting can be done for food – either for the hunter himself or his family.

Shooting Can Improve the Mental State

Guns can be used for something else besides protection and hunting. Improving mental health is something that can be done through target shooting, so this might be another reason why a nonviolent person could wield a gun.

Basically, shooting takes a particular amount of concentration in order to help the shooter focus on hitting the target. The one holding the weapon has to be careful at what’s in front of him/her, as well as what’s around so that he/she doesn’t do any wrong move. As a result, the respective person will forget about stress and any other problems and will focus on precision and carefully holding the weapon.

In addition, shooting can help release a lot of stress that’s put on a human’s shoulders. Instead of taking their feelings out through less rational methods, they can simply engage in target shooting and take all of their negative emotions out.

Simply put, shooting can serve as a different form of meditation. It’s a way to cleanse your mind of all the negative thoughts and polish it. The benefit of meditation is that it makes the mind stronger and helps with concentration. In fact, studies have proven how meditation plays a huge role in the performance of sports professionals’. Therefore, meditation doesn’t have to be just about sitting and contemplating life – it can also be done through target shooting.

Final Thoughts

Some individuals might be against violence, but that doesn’t mean that they don’t want to protect themselves or their loved ones against potential dangers. Sometimes, guns are the only things that can save them from a threat, even if they don’t end up pulling the trigger. Being a gun owner might often be misunderstood, but personal safety and mental health are more important than other people’s opinions.

VIDEO: Churchill and the Jews….simply fascinating!

/in , , , , /by

Thanks to my friend Ann Alexander for this riveting historical piece.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Sen. Joseph McCarthy’s Passover Message: Jews as “Champions Of Liberty”

America’s Jewish Left Just Declared War On Israel

RELATED VIDEO: ZOA President Mort Klein Tells Congress: Islamic Jew Hatred Threatens American Jews (April 9, 2019)

PODCAST: Mueller Report Proves Russian Collusion Claim Is a Hoax

/in , , , , /by

The Heritage Foundation’s Hans von Spakovsky analyzes the redacted report about the findings from special counsel Robert Mueller, and why it’s time to investigate why President Donald Trump was ever suspected of collusion in the first place. Read the transcript, posted below, or listen to the interview in the podcast:

We also cover these stories:

  • Democrats are trying to get Mueller to testify in May.
  • North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper vetoed a bill that protects the lives of abortion survivors.
  • New York City is actually losing residents for the first time in recent years.

The Daily Signal podcast is available on Ricochet, iTunes, SoundCloud, Google Play, or Stitcher. All of our podcasts can be found at DailySignal.com/podcasts. If you like what you hear, please leave a review. You can also leave us a message at 202-608-6205 or write us at letters@dailysignal.com. Enjoy the show!

Kate Trinko: Joining us today to discuss the newly released Mueller Report is Heritage Foundation’s Hans von Spakovsky, a legal expert. Hans, have you looked at the report? What are your takeaways?

Hans von Spakovsky: Yes, I’ve been skimming through it all day, putting my speed-reading lessons to work.

Trinko: It’s only 400 or so pages, right?

von Spakovsky: Right. The key thing that I get out of it is that, remember when the Attorney General William Barr sent his letter to Congress in which he basically gave what the conclusions of the report were? One, there was no evidence of any collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government and two, there was no obstruction of justice.

There were a lot of claims by Democrats, including people like Jerry Nadler, who’s head of the Judiciary Committee, that, “Oh, well, we don’t believe you. We think you’re leaving things out.”

Well, reading through the report, it’s very clear that Barr was 100% accurate in his summary of it and that the two-volume report—half of which is the Russian collusion claim, the other half is the obstruction of justice claim.

No one can read that and come to any conclusion other than the whole Russian collusion claim was a hoax. There was just nothing to that at all. And none of the actions that were taken by the president could be considered obstruction of justice.

Now, it’s very clear when you read it, and you see they relate some of the internal conversations in meetings at the White House about this, it’s clear the president was very angry. But that is a sentiment that I think most people would share if they’ve been falsely accused of a crime and that’s exactly the situation here.

The key thing is that he took no official actions of any kind that could in any way actually be considered obstruction of justice.

Daniel Davis: Yeah. On that point, the report says that he gave orders to do things that were not obeyed, so Mueller says, quote, “The president’s efforts to influence the investigation were mostly unsuccessful, but that is largely because the persons who surrounded the person declined to carry out orders or accede to his requests.”

So it’s kind of a moot point then because it didn’t happen, but is that even a crime if he tried to get them to break the law but they didn’t?

von Spakovsky: No, I don’t think so, particularly because, and this is something that General Barr and others have talked about, is that it’s very clear when you read the report that he had no corrupt intent.

And what I mean by that is it’s one thing if you act because you’re innocent and you don’t believe the government should be investigating you because you haven’t committed a crime. That’s very different from having a corrupt intent to interfere with an investigation because, in fact, you did commit a crime and you want to cover it up.

Davis: So legally there’s a distinction there?

von Spakovsky: There is a distinction and they talk about the fact that the president’s anger over this makes it clear to General Barr that there was no corrupt intent with any of his hot talk, if I can call it that, over what Bob Mueller and others were doing.

And again, key point there, remember there were no restrictions placed on Bob Mueller. He had all the resources he needed, he had 19 lawyers, 40 FBI agents, and he did a very comprehensive, wide-ranging investigation.

I’ve already heard some folks claiming, “Well, he didn’t have everything he needed to do a complete investigation.” Again, that’s just not correct.

Trinko: The report says that President Trump did try to remove Mueller, or presumably a special council, but that people didn’t follow his orders … it didn’t happen. Is that telling or significant?

von Spakovsky: I don’t think so when it comes down to the obstruction of justice charge. It didn’t happen and the investigation was completely and thoroughly done. So again, I just don’t see how you could bring an obstruction of justice charge and the attorney general agrees with that assessment.

Davis: The report also said that Trump was asked a lot of written questions by Mueller and that Mueller was sort of unsatisfied with those answers.

I’ll just read from the report here. Mueller says, “The President stated on more than 30 occasions that he does not recall or remember or have an independent recollection of information called for by the questions. Other answers were incomplete or imprecise.”

It sounds like maybe he just got good legal advice.

von Spakovsky: It could be, and so what that Mueller wasn’t satisfied with that? That’s just Mueller’s claim. He hasn’t proved in a court of law that somehow those answers were untruthful. So again, I don’t pay much attention to accusations by a prosecutor who in the end concludes there’s not enough evidence for a prosecution.

Trinko: Liberals are calling for Mueller to testify before Congress—

von Spakovsky: Right.

Trinko: … in May. Is that a good idea? Is that something he should do? What do you think?

von Spakovsky: Well, he can do it, but if Democrats think they’re going to somehow get something out of it more than they’ve already gotten in his report, I think they’re going to be sadly disappointed.

If they believe that Mueller’s going to come up with some kind of smoking gun that’s not in the report, I just don’t believe that. I think Mueller put everything he could into that report and they’re just not going to discover anything else.

Trinko: That’s a real problem for all the liberals with the Mueller tattoos and all that other stuff, there’s going to be no smoking gun.

Davis: But it seems like there’s enough in this report for both sides to really build a narrative. Trump clearly has the no collusion and no criminal charges, no indictment, but Democrats do have what seemed like the president potentially trying to undermine the investigation, although that didn’t happen. What do you think is the political fallout?

von Spakovsky: I actually don’t think, from the standpoint of an ordinary American, that there’s going to be much fallout because I think the ordinary American will look at what happened and say, “Boy, if I was falsely accused of a crime in my neighborhood or at my work, I would have been just as angry and just as frustrated as the president.” And I also probably would have wanted to tell off the prosecutor who was investigating me with no valid reason to do so.

Davis: In light of the fact that they found no collusion despite two years of efforts, a huge amount of manpower, and financial resources, frankly, applied this, they’re talking about looking into further the spying on the Trump campaign and how this whole thing began.

Do you think there needs to be much more of a investigation and why they even thought there was collusion to investigate in the first place?

von Spakovsky: The answer to that is yes, and the reason being that people should not forget that this did not start off as a regular law enforcement investigation, it started off as a counterintelligence operation. Because, in fact, what the FBI did is they went to the secret FISA Court. That’s the court set up by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.

That’s the court that our intelligence agencies and the FBI go to when they suspect there’s a foreign spy in the United States and they want to, for example, initiate secret electronic surveillance.

There are certain evidentiary standards you have to meet to justify that and never before in the history of the United States has a counterintelligence operation been opened, sanctioned by a court against a presidential campaign.

And now that we know that in fact there was no basis for the claims that were being made and the claims that were used to open up the investigation, we need to find out: Was there actually a sufficient basis? Was there sufficient evidence for them to open up the investigation?

If there wasn’t, then people at the FBI and DOJ abused their law enforcement powers and not only do they need to be punished for that, but we need to be sure that never happens again.

Davis: As Sen. Lindsey Graham has pointed out, usually when those FISA investigations happen, it’s to protect the American entities and they will notify them and say, “Hey, these Russians or whoever are trying to spy on you,” but that never happens. So, it certainly allows for the possibility that there was some foul play.

von Spakovsky: Yeah. I have to say I heard the senator say that and I have to agree with him, that makes what happened highly suspicious to me.

If the FBI had knowledge that Russians were contacting the campaign, and as we now know in many efforts, there were many efforts where they were disguising themselves and trying to fool folks into not realizing they were Russian, why didn’t they go to the campaign and warn them about it?

Davis: Right. So how does this investigation into the FISA warrant happen? Does the attorney general now launch this or does Senator Graham have a special investigation?

von Spakovsky: Well, they both could happen at the same time because obviously the Senate and the House intelligence committees, and the judiciary committees, potentially, have jurisdiction over this.

But, in fact, if I was the attorney general, I would appoint a special inside task force. Not a special council, but a group of lawyers on the inside who can take a look at this and examine all the documents, interview the FBI agents and original DOJ lawyers involved, and find out did they actually have a real basis for opening up the investigation?

Trinko: Hans, thanks so much for making time and pulling away from the 400-page tome to talk to us today.

von Spakovsky: Sure, thanks for having me.

PODCAST BY

Katrina Trinko

Katrina Trinko is editor-in-chief of The Daily Signal and co-host of The Daily Signal Podcast. Send an email to Katrina. Twitter: @KatrinaTrinko.

Daniel Davis

Daniel Davis is the commentary editor of The Daily Signal and co-host of The Daily Signal podcast. Send an email to Daniel. Twitter: @JDaniel_Davis.

RELATED ARTICLES:

‘Russian Collusion’ a Giant Smokescreen to Obscure DNC Leaker?

Publisher of DCLeaks Contradicts the Mueller Report

Key Takeaways From the Mueller Report on Trump and Russia

Dear Readers:

With the recent conservative victories related to tax cuts, the Supreme Court, and other major issues, it is easy to become complacent.

However, the liberal Left is not backing down. They are rallying supporters to advance their agenda, moving this nation further from the vision of our founding fathers.

If we are to continue to bring this nation back to our founding principles of limited government and fiscal conservatism, we need to come together as a group of likeminded conservatives.

This is the mission of The Heritage Foundation. We want to continue to develop and present conservative solutions to the nation’s toughest problems. And we cannot do this alone.

We are looking for a select few conservatives to become a Heritage Foundation member. With your membership, you’ll qualify for all associated benefits and you’ll help keep our nation great for future generations.

ACTIVATE YOUR MEMBERSHIP TODAY

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal podcast and column is republished with permission.