Death of America: Why This Presidential Election isn’t as Important as People Think

It’s easy to get wrapped up in men and moments. In the current election season, for instance, we may see a candidate appearing to embody all our hopes and dreams (or at least many) and come to assign him country-savior status. Even the great Thomas Sowell — a man for whom I have tremendous respect — has called the November choice “the last chance for America.” Yet even if we do choose the “right” president, it will only amount to a stay of execution.

Many people lament that “Obama has destroyed America these last eight years” or, alluding to same, will say “I don’t recognize my country anymore.” This is much like viewing a woman who marries a greasy-haired, dope-smoking, heavily tattooed and pierced, unemployable reprobate and saying that her matrimonial decision destroyed her, when the real problem was that she was the kind of person who could make such a choice in the first place. Do you really think Obama isn’t a symptom at least as much as a cause? Do you think the 2000 A.D. America that elected him would have been recognizable to 1950 Americans?

And even if the next president is an anomalous good result, he won’t even be a pause that refreshes, but will at best slow down the runaway train racing toward the precipice. This is because our main problems aren’t illegal migration, trade deals or health care, as significant as those things are. Our problems are more fundamental.

Do you really want to save America?

Okay, then completely transform the media, academia and entertainment so they’re not brainwashing citizens 24/7 with anti-American, anti-Christian, multiculturalist, socialist, feminist and a multitude of other lies. End legal immigration, which, via the importation of massive numbers of Third Worlders, is changing our country into a socialistic non-Western culture. Even more significantly, convince the 70-plus percent of Americans who are moral relativists to believe in Truth; these are people who, as the Barna Group research company put it, believe that what we call “truth is always relative to the person and their situation” and whose most common basis for moral decision-making is “doing whatever feels right….”

Why does this matter? Well, if we saw a child who didn’t obey rules and simply made up his own “rules” — changing them as was convenient — would we say that he was governed by anything worthy of being called “rules” (principles)? Or would we conclude that the word had simply become a euphemism for flights of fancy and feelings-based decisions?  Alright, now, is it any different when an adult does it? Furthermore:

Is it any different when large groups of adults do it — even country-size groups?

We can put as much lipstick on this pig of preference-oriented decision-making as we want, but it amounts to this striking reality: we are a people that, to a great extent, now operates by the credo “If it feels good, do it.” Yet there’s another way of putting it, one clarifying matters even more.

Many of us now believe, in essence, there are no rules governing man.

And we often behave that way.

Oh, we know there are things called laws, regulations, social codes and “values,” but too many of us don’t believe they could have a basis in anything objective (God’s law), anything beyond our own collective desires. I know of a seemingly sociopathic man who once said to someone close to me, “Murder’s not wrong; it’s just that society says it is.” How could the relativistic majority among us answer him? “Well, yeah, I guess. But most of us really, really, really don’t like it”?

To understand the effects of this no-rules mentality, a little analogy is instructive. Imagine that baseball players came to believe there were no rules governing the sport, that it was “whatever works for you.” A pitcher might decide there should be only one strike, while a batter might reckon there should be five. A first baseman might insist that the hitter shouldn’t be able to run past first base, while the hitter might say he should be able to run past all of them. And things would continue degenerating, with everyone writing his own ticket and battling over standards, until, perhaps, players began tackling one another and sometimes wielding the bats as weapons. Games can’t work without agreed-upon rules.

Civilizations can’t work without them, either. And there won’t be agreement when people believe everything is “relative.” This is our lot, and we see the effects all around us. Far from Middle Age Europe, where, as G.K. Chesterton put it, everyone agreed “on what really mattered,” today we agree on nothing that matters. We’re not just balkanized racially and ethnically, but ideologically, philosophically and spiritually. There are conservatives, liberals, libertarians, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims, existentialists, Wiccans, atheists, just to name a handful, and a multitude of variations within most of the categories; reflecting this disagreement on “First Things,” other things are equally fractured. There are nationalists and internationalists, feminists and male-rights activists, multiculturalists and cultural Americanists, patriots and perfidious scoundrels, activists and the apathetic, Marxists and free-market defenders, etc., etc., etc., ad infinitum. Heck, many of us don’t even know what marriage or sexual propriety is anymore, the difference between a tissue mass and a baby, or even what boys and girls are, as we dial back our maturity level to the infantile stage during which a child can’t distinguish between male and female.

With our agreeing on almost nothing, it’s not surprising most everything ends up in court, as we enrich lawyers and empower judges to become the Ultimate Arbiters of All. Meanwhile, not-so-huddled masses, Muslim jihadists and perhaps weapons of mass destruction pour across a border that’s still not porous enough for the miles-wide fifth column in our midst. And the same people tell us voter-ID is oppressive, as our government prints official documents in dozens of languages and we press one for English and hope the customer service representative we get to help us with our crummy Chinese-made product will have a decipherable accent.

Speaking of which, why is China often called the “world’s oldest civilization”? It has seen governments come and go, endured tyranny, disease and starvation, but certain things have remained: the Chinese people, language and culture. China truly is a nation, meaning, an extension of the tribe, which itself is an extension of the family (hence, there’s no such thing as a “nation of immigrants” — unless they’re all from the same country). We’re now the opposite, a federation of competing sub-cultures — some imported, some domestically made — not all of which are trying to coexist within the same borders. Many of us simply hate each other’s guts.

Given that all civilizations rise and fall, being able to determine when yours is close to its terminus may be helpful. Imagine you knew a man who was drinking, taking drugs and indulging sexual perversion more and more over time. It was increasingly difficult for him to retain employment, act responsibly, pay his bills and get along with others, as his devolving mindset led to accidents and violent outbursts. You’d recognize that his life was spinning out of control and wouldn’t be surprised to later hear he was in prison or dead. Such is the last stop on the road of inexorable moral decay. Now, would your expectations be any different if it were a group of people exhibiting such self-destructive behavior?

Okay, what about an even larger group — let’s say, a country?

Of course, not all of us are that nigh-to-the-grave reprobate. But America’s collective face does increasingly resemble him.

We can also hark back to the baseball analogy. With people tending to make up their own rules, our “game” is breaking down. Why do you think we have candidates who scoff at enforcing immigration law and a president and judges who wipe their paws and claws on the Constitution? In a land where all is relative, laws are relative to the men; then you become a nation of men, not laws.

This is why none of our “solutions” will solve anything. We can talk about Ted Cruz and constitutionalism. But was John Adams a fool when warning in 1798, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other”? We are now the “other.”

We can echo Donald Trump echoing Ronald Reagan and say “Make America great again!” But as an apocryphal quotation oft repeated by Reagan goes, “America is great because America is good, and if America ever ceases to be good, she will cease to be great.”

And we can bellow “Freedom!” Braveheart-style. But as British philosopher Edmund Burke noted, “It is written in the eternal constitution of things that men of intemperate minds cannot be free. Their passions forge their fetters.”

Intemperate minds abound. Passions we’ve got. Fetters we’re getting. Of course, I’ll choose to, if possible, add a few more pages to the American republic’s story. But I know that, even now, her last chapter is being written.

EDITORS NOTE: Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Twitter or log on to SelwynDuke.com

VIDEO: A New Crusade Rising

Islam is the same violent false religion it has always been with the same goal of overrunning all nations and cultures. But people all over the world are rising up to defend freedom, just as the Crusaders of old did.

RELATED ARTICLES:

White Washing Islam

To Know Islam, Know Mohammed

VIDEO: The Broadest Interpretation of Islam

VIDEO: Gun Control Propaganda Debunked

A thorough debunking of the propaganda presented by Vox in their video on gun control and “mass shootings” in the U.S.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Scotland Gun Control: Where Nightmares Are Reality

Gun Violence Is a Serious Problem – Gun Confiscation Isn’t a Serious Solution

The Evil of Gun-free Zones

EDITORS NOTE: Read more at http://LouderWithCrowder.com including all sources at http://louderwithcrowder.com/vox-gun-…

As John Kerry declares a ‘Christian Genocide’ in the ME, Muslim leaders label Ted Cruz ‘Islamophobic’

The Council on American Islamic Relations labeling of presidential candidate Ted Cruz and his advisers as “Islamophobic” is ill timed. This declaration comes on the same day as U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry declares that the Islamic State is perpetrating a Christian genocide in the Middle East.

Secretary of State Kerry asserted:

In my judgment, Daesh [the Islamic State] is responsible for genocide against groups in areas under its control, including Yazidis, Christians, and Shia Muslims. Daesh is genocidal by self-proclamation, by ideology, and by actions — in what it says, what it believes, and what it does.” This official American genocide designation is a critically important step. Genocide is internationally recognized as the most heinous human-rights offense. Legally, it is known as the “crime of crimes.

And while the Genocide Convention does not prescribe specific action to “prevent and protect” against genocide, the conscience does.

So, is Senator Cruz “Islamophobic” given this statement about the Islamic State? According to the Council for American Islamic Relations (CAIR) National Executive Director Nihad Awad, he is.

Awad said:

“Who a candidate picks for his or her advisers says volumes about that candidate’s worldview. By choosing infamous Islamophobes as foreign policy advisers, Senator Cruz indicates that he subscribes to their conspiratorial worldview and to the anti-Muslim bigotry that would inevitably shape their policy recommendations. We ask Senator Cruz to drop any adviser who has a past history of promoting conspiracy theories or religious bigotry.

Awad objects to Senator Cruz having on his advisory team two men: Frank Gaffney and Lieutenant General Jerry Boykin, U.S. Army (Ret.). Mr. Gaffney is is the Founder and President of the Center for Security Policy in Washington, D.C. The Center is a not-for-profit, non-partisan educational corporation established in 1988. Under Mr. Gaffney’s leadership, the Center has been nationally and internationally recognized as a resource for timely, informed and penetrating analyses of foreign and defense policy matters.

Lieutenant General Jerry Boykin is serves as Family Research Council’s Executive Vice President. He was one of the original members of the U.S. Army’s Delta Force. He commanded SOF Delta in combat operations. Boykin commanded all the Army’s Green Berets as well as the Special Warfare Center and School. Boykin spent 36 years in the army, serving his last four years as the Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence. He is an ordained minister.

Awad on MSNBC’s Chris Matthews show has referred to Gaffney as “one of the country’s leading anti-Muslim conspiracy theorists.”

Interestingly, according to Discover the Networks, Nihad Awad is a supporter of Hamas, he rejects Israel’s right to exist, he suggested that Israel and Egypt played a part in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, he maintains that “many Presidents” of the United States “are servants to Israel” and to “the political authority of Jewish interests” and claims that America bore some of the blame for the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

Who is the real conspiracy theorist?

Awad is a Muslim migrant who was born in a Palestinian refugee camp in Amman, Jordan. Awad came to America via “the Bosnian Refugee Committee—an Islamic aid organization based in Minnesota—Awad in late 1992 spent a month in war-torn Bosnia during a time when Muslim intransigents from around the world were flocking there to wage jihad.”

It appears Awad is continuing to wage Jihad, but this time with attacks against Senator and presidential candidate Ted Cruz.

Neither Barry Goldwater nor Ronald Reagan Could Get Elected by Today’s GOP

Emphatically stating that well respected Republican leaders of the past like Senator Barry Goldwater and President Ronald Reagan could not get elected in the current climate of the GOP, conservative consultant Vic Gold says that neither would even try.

Goldwater was a true classical liberal who wrote this in his book “The Conscience of a Conservative“:

“I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution, or that have failed their purpose, or that impose on the people an unwarranted financial burden. I will not attempt to discover whether legislation is “needed” before I have first determined whether it is constitutionally permissible. And if I should later be attacked for neglecting my constituents’ “interests,” I shall reply that I was informed that their main interest is liberty and that in that cause I am doing the very best I can.”

This Constitutionally based ideal is lost on those who call themselves the Republican establishment.

Gold — who served as a press secretary to Barry Goldwater in 1964 and has a long, distinguished history in conservative political circles — discussed the current state of the party and how things have gotten to the point they are at now in a Focus Washington interview (see the video below) with Chuck Conconi.

“The breakdown of the republican party starts with Newt Gingrich and the 104th Congress in 1994.” The party’s polarization started when Gingrich and Republican members of Congress spent their time focused on government shut downs and impeaching Bill Clinton. According to Gold that injected a venom into the party that has snowballed into vicious partisan politics.

Venom, polarization and partisan politics are code words for political correctness, something the American people are tired of.

Gold has lived through 24 elections, however it is questionable that he knows a classical liberal (e.g. conservative) stands for. In referencing the current candidates he says, “[T]hese people are not conservatives… they are practically anarchists.” Gold is correct in that there is a political insurgency sweeping across America. And that the insurgency is being led by the Republican Donald Trump. An insurgency that is focused on stopping an out of control federal government.

The Founding Fathers created a Constitutional  Republic, which is just to the left of anarchy. The Constitution of the United States was designed to protect the people against a democratic form of government. This is because democracy inextricably leads to mob rule and tyranny.

Gold labels the current crop of Republicans as largely “anti-liberals” who have have little in common with traditional conservatives. Gold has it wrong as many Republicans are in fact “classical liberals” following the ideas of notable individuals whose ideas have contributed to classical liberalism including John Locke, Jean-Baptiste Say, Thomas Malthus, and David Ricardo. Classical liberalism drew on the economics of Adam Smith and on a belief in natural law, utilitarianism, and progress..

This is where the establishment in both political parties have lost their way.

Gold questions how the Democratic party could only come up with Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders, as candidates. He laments, “Where are the Democratic leaders today?”

Moreover, Gold asserts that each party has contributed to the rise of Donald Trump and his domination of the GOP. The political system used to let politicians enter the presidential race despite financial status and now democrats such as Joe Biden don’t enter because he “doesn’t have the money”. He points to Bernie Sanders’candidacy as an ideal scenario for elections, “He doesn’t have the money but he [runs] anyway—we used to have that.”

It appears that Gold favors are return to the time when money was not the driving factor in elections. We agree, that is why Donald Trump is self-funding his campaign and people love him for it.

The political atmosphere is like non the American people have witnessed since the candidacy of Barry Goldwater. It was then that the GOP establishment helped defeated Goldwater giving the election to Lyndon B. Johnson. Will history repeat itself? That is the question.

Watch the full interview:

RELATED ARTICLES:

Republicans Are Addicted to Increasing Federal Spending

Gimmicks Are Preventing Congress From Honestly Balancing the Budget

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of United States Senator Barry Goldwater (left) meeting with then Governor Ronald Reagan during the 1972 Republican National Convention in Miami, Florida. Photo: White House via CNP/Newscom.

VIDEO: Why Gay Marriage Is A Form of Political Control

Eugene Michael Jones is a writer, former professor, media commentator and the current editor of Culture Wars magazine. Jones’s work has primarily been concerned with the relationship between the Catholic Church and secular culture as well as the sexual revolution and the wider cultural effects of the Second Vatican Council.

In this video he discusses social engineering and why gay marriage is a form of political control.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Vatican Rocked by Gay Sex Scandals

Vatican Rocked by Gay Sex Scandals

Islamic State throws two Gay Men off a Roof then Muslim Children Stone them

Why There’s No Right to Gay Marriage in 6 Short Video Clips

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is by Jacquelyn Martin / AP

Islamic State ‘Caliphate Cyber Army’ Posts ‘Hit List’ of Minnesota Cops

The Islamic State’s Caliphate Cyber Army posted a “kill list” of names, addresses and other personal details of 36 policemen in Minnesota.

The FBI confirmed the list included full names, phone numbers, home and email addresses. The agency is investigating how the information came to be posted online.

The website Vocativ, which conducts investigations on the “Deep Web,” says individual cards with the information on them were shared through the mobile phone app Telegram, an encrypted messaging service (similar to Whats App).

“It is troubling to have that type of information online for the public to see,” FBI spokesperson Kyle Loven said.

Officer safety is the agency’s first concern, Loven added.

“We’re not going to look into whether or not this is a legitimate threat or an illegitimate threat,” he continued. “We’re going to take it and move forward with respect to what it is that we have to do in addressing this matter.”

Minnesota police officers confirmed their site had been hacked and the officers listed were those employers who had requested a quote for auto insurance,CBS local news in Minnesota reported.

The FBI advised officers on the list to maintain a heightened state of awareness “in case there would be someone who, unfortunately, would be inspired by this type of information being available,” Loven said.

The fact that Islamic extremists in Minnesota have successfully recruited and trained terrorists in the past is being taken into consideration by the FBI.

Most of the officers on the list live in or around the Twin Cities (Minneapolis and St. Paul). The area’s Cedar Riverside neighborhood is home to the largest Somali community in the U.S. Since 2007, 24 men from Cedar Riverside have left the community to join extremist groups.

According to a congressional report released last November, one in four Americans who have attempted to joined the Islamic State are from Minnesota.

The Caliphate Cyber Army (CCA) has previously hacked into sensitive material on a number of occasions:

  • Last week, the CCA published a file containing information on 55 New Jersey police officers. The file was downloaded 300 times in 24 hours.
  • Also last week, the CCA posted a threat to financial institutions, saying they would target “banks, money transfer services, stocks and so on.” The threat, made on the group’s Telegram channel, continued, “Beware of us, economical war has just started.”
  • In November, a group called the Islamic State Cyber Army posted names and addresses of a number of people who have worked for American security agencies (although some of the details were already public).
  • In October, a UK citizen connected with the Islamic State published the home address of Robert O’Neill, the Navy Seal who killed Osama Bin Laden.
  • In January, 2015, ISIS hackers were able to command the YouTube and Twitter accounts of the U.S. Army’s Central Command.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Social Media Emerges as a Valuable Terrorist Fundraising Tool by Abha Shankar

Guidelines for a National Cyber Strategy

Kerry: Not Enough Information to Call ISIS Attacks Genocide

VIDEO: ISIS Orphans – A Next-Gen Recruiting Ground?

ISIS Releases Video of Burning Christian Books

Women in Raqqa Make Secret Film: Life Under ISIS

Director Department of Homeland Security: Syrian and Iraqi refugees ‘pose security threat’

They must really be seeing something they aren’t telling us about for Homeland Security Director Jeh Johnson to be so forthcoming at a Congressional hearing yesterday.

And, it isn’t just the Syrians and Iraqis we should worry about!

Jeh_Johnson_official_DHS_portrait

Jeh Johnson, Director of the Department of Homeland Security.

From The Hill:

The head of the Department of Homeland Security on Wednesday said that the United States’s acceptance of Syrian refugees could pose a national security threat.

Even as President Obama has called for the U.S. to welcome 10,000 Syrian refugees this year, Secretary Jeh Johnson maintained during a hearing on Capitol Hill that the initiative is not risk-free.

“In all candor, I do agree that the refugee flow coming out of Iraq and Syria represents a potential opportunity for terrorist organizations to move its members into other nations for potential attacks,” Johnson testified before the House Homeland Security Committee. “So I agree that there is that potential, which is why just within the last several months we have enhanced our vetting for refugees.”

The claim hints at the problems vexing the Obama administration as it seeks to ramp up the number of refugees brought into the country.

The administration is so far falling far behind Obama’s pledge to bring in 10,000 new Syrian refugees this fiscal year. Since October, the U.S. has brought in just 1,115 of the refugees.

Meanwhile, during this same time period, Canada has admitted 25,000 Syrians with apparently little concern for thorough vetting.

Rohingya at sea

How about security threats from other countries? What do the numbers look like?

(The 2016 fiscal year began on Oct. 1, 2016, numbers below are through February 29th—5 months).

Truth be told:  they can’t screen the others below any better than the Syrians!

Syria: 955 (with 946 of those being Muslims).   Not sure where The Hill got the 1,115.

Iraq: 3,476 (2,856 are Muslims)

Somalia: 3,036 (3,034 are Muslims)

Burma: 4,774 (1,135 are Muslims)  Yikes! We must be making a big push to get those Rohingya Muslims in to the US before Obama leaves office. I had no idea the number of Burmese Muslims would be this high!

Be sure to see our whole category on the Rohingya of Burma/Bangladesh.  Scary!

If you missed it, see the New York Times on terror threat posed by refugee program, here.

Florida: Muslim Deputy Sheriff Guilty of ‘Conduct Unbecoming’?

It was just a quiet, ordinary Friday night in Orlando, Florida at an obscure Islamic Mosque where certainly a moral failure if not a legal civil rights violation was knowingly committed by the newly appointed Deputy Sheriff Nezare Hamze.

Deputy Hamze was the featured subject matter expert at a workshop designed to teach Muslims about the civil rights given them in the United States and Florida Constitutions, particularly as they relate to acts of Islamic terrorism.

In this day and age, that in itself is mundane, but the event brought out some very significant leaders of the Florida Islamic community and Deputy Hamze just happens to maintain an active, high-level paid position in his former job with the Council on Islamic-American Relations (CAIR).

CAIR, by the way, is a Muslim civil rights group that is currently viewed by the U.S. Department of Justice as an organization with significant ties to supporting Islamic terrorism worldwide. House Bill 3892, which is calling to designate the Muslim Brotherhood a Foreign Terrorist Organization, passed the House Judiciary Committee and will come to the floor for a vote soon in the House of Representatives.

Let me clarify, The Broward County Deputy Sheriff Hamze was teaching a course on civil rights at the same time he is a paid policeman in the third largest Sheriff’s Department in Florida and at the same time the FBI has an open investigation on the Muslim organization that he professionally represents.

Sheriff Scott Israel

Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel

Though this series of internal “law enforcement” contradictions may boggle your logical approach to life, they represent no problem whatsoever to Hamze’s boss, Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel, whom appointed the Muslim Brotherhood connected Hamze last year.

Apparently Hamze wasn’t bothered at all when he observed a clear-cut, unequivocal violation of civil rights of a small group of concerned non-Muslims who peacefully and legally were in attendance at the workshop. This event, by the way was advertised as open to the public and those in the community.

Alan Kornman along with several of his friends tried to attend Deputy Hamze’s public safety training at the American Muslim Community Center in Longwood, Florida. The group had no idea the meeting was closed to non-Muslims, as the invitational flyer did not specify that.

While the group waited for the training to start the Mosque’s president, Atif Fareed, abruptly told them to leave before the program began. Fareed told the group the meeting was only for the “community”, and led Kornman and his friends out into cold weather without even the shoes on their feet.

Hamze apparently stood by and watched as this small, peaceful group of non-Muslims were forced to leave the public meeting. So it seems the Deputy is showing his allegiance to CAIR over the civil rights of the very citizens he is sworn to protect. Incidentally, the material on the tables in the Mosque displayed cards, flyers, and brochures of the Council of American Islamic Relations.

According to LEGAL TIPS CARDS, which is a privately owned and operated U.S. company whose mission is to preserve and protect the constitutional laws and liberties of our country through education, states this about police officers’ conduct,

“Police officers shall perform their duties and apply the law impartially and without prejudice or discrimination…Diverse communities must have faith in the fairness and impartiality of their police. Police officers must refrain from fostering disharmony in their communities based upon diversity, and perform their duties without regard to race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, status with regard to public assistance, disability, sexual orientation or age.”

It goes further,

“3.2 Police officers shall not express, whether by act, omission or statement, prejudice concerning race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, status with regard to public assistance, disability, sexual orientation or age.

3.3 Police officers shall not allow their law enforcement decisions to be influenced by race, color, creed, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, status with regard to public assistance, disability, sexual orientation or age.”

The fact that Deputy Hamze stood by as Kornman and his friends were told to leave a public meeting, displays his inability to treat non-Muslims with the same fairness he would give a Muslim. Perhaps his deep ties with CAIR may be influencing his decision to dismiss the civil rights of non-Muslims.

Interestingly enough if House Bill 3892 passes, Hamze would more than likely be investigated because of his involvement with CAIR which has been proven to have connections with the Muslim Brotherhood/HAMAS. It is puzzling to imagine that we have powerful law enforcement officials who are supposedly working to protect the lives of all citizens in their jurisdictions that also retain professional ties with terrorist affiliated groups.

Of course I guess this makes sense when you understand that many in our national security agencies are following the same Islamic narratives of the Muslim Brotherhood, in which CAIR is deeply involved.

The Broward Country Sheriff’s Department was sent formal complaints about the incident involving Hamze at the American Muslim Community Center, and these complaints have been forwarded on to the Department of Homeland Security Unit Command for further consideration.

So, was this just a quiet, ordinary Friday night in Orlando at an obscure Islamic Mosque or was indeed a civil rights violation committed by a Deputy Sheriff who also works for a Muslim Brotherhood organization? Stay tuned…

EDITORS NOTE: Nezar Hamze the former Regional Operations Director and Chief Executive Officer (CEO) for the Florida chapter of CAIR. Previously, he served as CAIR-Florida’s Executive Director. Currently, the Executive Director of CAIR-Florida is Hassan Shibly, an individual who has referred to Hezbollah as “basically a resistance movement” and “absolutely not a terrorist organization” and who, in August 2014, tweeted, “Israel and its supporters are enemies of God.

A Citizen’s Guide to Fixing The Federal Government

The majority of Americans have lost faith in and distrust the federal government. Currently, just 19% of Americans say they can trust the government always or most of the time, among the lowest levels in the past half-century.

What can citizens do to fix the federal government?

fixing federal government guide book coverJohn H. Ramsey has published “A Citizen’s Common Sense Guide For Fixing The Federal Government.” Ramsey presents the problems but more importantly offers common sense solutions to fix what is broken in Washington, D.C. Ramsey lists the most important problems facing the American people as:

  • 70,000 pages of tax code
  • Rampant Deficit Spending
  • 175,000 pages of regulations, many which are not authorized by law
  • Mismanaged Social Security and Medicare Funds
  • Improper Accounting that masks America’s true liabilities

Ramsey offers the following solutions implemented by “We The People”:

  • Tax Only to fund Government with no social engineering
  • Deficit Spending only in national emergencies
  • Tie regulations to law with fair Administrative Courts
  • Repay Social Security and Medicare. Manage as trust funds.
  • Use generally accepted accounting for government

Ramsey proposes a Constitutional Amendment to reign in the federal government.

Most Americans will agree with Ramsey’s analysis and his solutions for fixing the federal government. Some may not agree with his solutions. Creating a new amendment to the Constitution is fraught with dangers. Ramsey’s Constitutional amendment verbiage would be subject to the whims of Congress, those who are the root cause of the problem.

To the naysayers Ramsey responds:

I think there is enough impetus that a Constitutional Convention is probably going to happen. Our task therefore is to influence the outcome. Clearly, Congress may meddle but they cannot stop it.

My goal is to help to adopt an Omnibus Amendment to The U.S. Constitution requiring that our Federal Government:

Tax only to fund Government, with no social engineering. This could be accomplished either with a flat tax based on income or a Fair Tax on consumption. The key is to eliminate 73,000 pages of exceptions, deductions, and attempted social influences that have nothing to do with funding the government.

Deficit spend only in national emergencies; pay down existing debt. You didn’t comment on this but it is crucial that we enact an amendment that stops runaway deficit spending.

Tie regulations tightly to law with fair and impartial Administrative Courts. This provision would tie regulations more closely to the underlying laws which authorize them and would enable the courts to throw out regulations that exceed the specific authorization in law. Furthermore, currently Administrative Courts are the only recourse for citizens wishing to challenge particular regulations, but such Administrative Courts are staffed entirely by government employees who almost always rule in favor of the government. They are not independent and impartial which my Constitutional Amendment would require.

Repay money misappropriated from Social Security and Medicare and manage them independently as trust funds. Repayment of amounts “borrowed” from these funds would reduce the federal deficit by about $2.8 trillion, almost 15% of the total.

Use generally accepted accounting for the federal government. This requirement is simple but not easy, but it is essential because we simply do not know the extent of federal liabilities because they are accounted for improperly and inconsistently, and so much of the exposure is “off the balance sheet”.

There are other efforts being proposed to fix the broken federal government from eliminating the Sixteenth Amendment as proposed under the Fair Tax (H.R.25), to an Article V Convention and a Constitutional convention to impose term limits on the U.S. Congress recently approved by the Florida legislature.

All of these efforts are dramatic bottom up efforts and each has as its goal to fix an increasingly out of control federal government (legislative, administrative and judicial).

The American people have had enough of top down solutions, they hunger for a bottom up approach.

In that light, Mr. Ramsey’s is one of those solutions worthy of a closer look.

RELATED ARTICLE: Pitfalls to Abbott’s Call for Convention of States

Latino opinion polling initiative launched by Florida Atlantic University

MIAMI, Florida /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — With the number of Hispanic voters in the U.S. topping 27 million this year – and immigration playing a pivotal role in the national debate – the impact of this rapidly growing demographic on the 2016 election is expected to be decisive.

To better gauge public opinion of the Latino population – and its impact on the U.S. political process – FIU’s Steven J. Green School of International and Public Affairs has launched the Latino Public Opinion Forum – the first university initiative in Florida to systematically study the growth and impact of the Latino population.

On Thursday, the forum will unveil its first national poll results – focusing on Latino opinions about Republican frontrunner Donald Trump – in a special media webcast scheduled for 2 p.m. The webcast will feature Eduardo Gamarra, a professor in FIU’s Department of Politics and International Relations and a founder of the initiative, Brian Fonseca, director of the Jack D. Gordon Institute for Public Policyand Andres Arias, senior vice president of product and operations for Adsmovil, a mobile advertising company that specializes in reaching the U.S. Hispanic population.

To view the webcast, please click webcast.fiu.edu. For live coverage of the event follow us on Twitter@FIUNews and @FIU_SIPA. Submit questions using the hashtag:  #LatinoTrumpPoll.

Using first-party data and the latest digital marketing techniques, the first poll reached more than 9,000 U.S. Hispanics through their mobile phones.

“Latino voters will be critical to the outcome of this U.S. presidential election, as well as many other races,” Gamarra said. “Disproportionately high rates of smartphone adoption and usage among Hispanics mean that mobile polling is necessary to achieve a fuller understanding of this demographic.”

“Mobile holds the key to reaching U.S. Hispanics at scale,” said Arias of Adsmovil. “Compared to other ethnic groups, Hispanics over-index in smartphone ownership as well as mobile web and app usage, which leads to unusually high levels of poll participation on mobile devices.”

FIU pioneered this area of study two decades ago with its Cuba Poll, the longest running research project tracking the opinions of Cuban-Americans in South Florida, creating the most complete picture of Cuban-American political attitudes over time.

The Latino Public Opinion Forum will build upon this work by broadening the scope of inquiry to other rapidly growing Latino populations, including Central Americans, Mexicans and Puerto Ricans.

“Over the past two decades, the size of these other Latino populations in Florida has grown significantly,” Gamarra said. “The Latino Public Opinion Forum is aimed at building on the strength of our research in public opinions of Cuban-Americans and closing the knowledge gap about other Latinos.”

FIU’s Kimberly Green Latin American and Caribbean Center, Cuban Research Institute, Metropolitan Center, Department of Politics and International Relations and Department of Global and Socio-Cultural Studies are also partners in the project.

Why socialists need capitalism: Best explanation so far

Have you heard of the shocking and terrifying diaper gap that is now dividing this nation? It is said to be so dire that the White House is urging immediate government assistance to buy baby diapers. Philosophically, this puts disposable plastic consumer products in the category of inalienable rights guaranteed by the government: among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Diapers.

When I lived in the USSR, our Soviet Constitution also guaranteed that our basic needs be provided to us by the caring socialist government. As a result, most basic items were in shortage, let alone such luxury items as coffee or toilet paper. Needless to say, we never even heard of disposable diapers. For our three children, we used pieces of cloth which we washed regularly. We didn’t complain or feel disadvantaged because — I repeat — we had no idea there was such a thing as disposable diapers. Those only existed in the decadent West, where greedy corporations created such a product to boost their capitalist profits. But we were blocked from this information by the Iron Curtain, and what we didn’t know couldn’t hurt us.

Now I live in America, where the decadent capitalist diapers are about to become a basic “human right” guaranteed by the federal government.

About twenty years ago no one used cell phones because they hadn’t yet been created by greedy capitalist corporations, who have since covered the planet with a network of cellular towers. Now free cell phones — known as Obamaphones — have become a “human right” guaranteed by the government.

Internet service didn’t exist either, until greedy capitalist corporations surrounded the world with cables and satellites. Now Internet service has become a “human right” provided by the U.S. government to the needy.

Condoms, birth control pills, and other modern contraceptives also didn’t exist until they were invented, researched, and mass-produced by greedy capitalist corporations. Now they have become a basic “human right” guaranteed and provided by the government.

Vaccines for Ebola and other exotic diseases didn’t exist until they were developed by greedy capitalist corporations and almost immediately declared a “human right” for anyone in the Third World.

Healthcare with all its modern diagnostic equipment, appliances, treatments, and a vast array of pharmaceuticals, from Tylenol to Viagra, also didn’t exist until greedy capitalist corporations…

And so on and so forth.

Capitalism just keeps churning out all these new products, which our increasingly socialist government then declares “human rights” and taxes these very producers in order to provide their products to the people for free.

Some call it harmonious coexistence, but there’s a catch. The more the socialist government expands its functions by guaranteeing an ever expanding number of “human rights,” the more it needs to tax capitalist producers, which undercuts their ability to develop, manufacture, and market new products. Once they reach a tipping point when capitalism is no longer viable, this will also end the propagation of “human rights” in the form of new goods and services.

Socialism conserves the stage in which the society existed at the time it was overtaken. Cubans still drive American cars from the 1950s, North Koreans still dress in the fashions of the same bygone era, and in the USSR I grew up in a government-owned house that was taken from the rich and given to the needy in 1920s and remained without indoor plumbing or running water and with ancient electrical wiring until it was condemned and demolished in 1986.

A planned economy is mostly focused оn providing the basic needs that have already been declared “human rights,” and even then it struggles to keep up with the demand. The USSR had smart inventors and brilliant scientists, but the first personal computer was built in a Californian garage and not in a Siberian one — because America had free enterprise and the USSR didn’t. In the absence of free markets and competition, innovation becomes an almost insurmountable task. There is no time nor money for new products and services; that way it’s also easier for the government to run the economy. And when the people don’t know what they are missing, there’s no reason to be unhappy.

That, however, works best when the rest of the world no longer has competing capitalist economies and no nation lives better than the rest. For example, if it weren’t for capitalist America and Western Europe with their never ending innovation and higher living standards, it would have been a lot easier for Soviet citizens to remain content with their socialist government and thus the USSR would probably still exist.

But wouldn’t it be great if the entire world lived like one socialist village — even if it conserved some ancient technology — and people wouldn’t be missing any consumer products they knew nothing about anyway? Absolutely not — and for a reason that is allegedly dear to every socialist in the West: environmental protection. Centrally planned economies of the Eastern Bloc, China, and other socialist states inevitably became some of the world’s worst polluters.

On the one hand they were stuck with outdated technologies, and on the other they had no budgets for cleanup. Their grimy and polluting state-run factories had to meet their production quotas at any cost, for the glory of the Motherland — even if it meant the destruction of the Motherland’s environment and endangering the health of workers and local residents. Complaining to the state about the actions of the state would be pointless and often more dangerous than breathing bad air and drinking polluted water.

Having the entire world adhering to this model would have resulted in an environmental apocalypse and there would be no Greenpeace to bemoan it because that would mean economic sabotage and the activists would by default become enemies of the state.

Whatever innovations the Soviet planned economy introduced came from the West. The Soviet planners also learned from the West about the real cost of things in the modern world, since their own pricing mechanisms had been removed decades ago with the elimination of free markets.

Thus, socialists are better off with capitalism to invent new products that will be later declared “human rights,” allowing expansion of government functions to new areas, as well as to generate wealth that pays for socialist programs. Likewise, socialists are better off having the rich to subsidize the creation and mass production of new goods and services, and later to pay taxes so that the government can provide these goods and services to others for free.

This leads us to the following conclusions, which socialists can’t refute because it correlates with their own logic:

  1. The longer socialists wait to take over the power, the more technologically advanced society they will get to conserve.
  2. It is more beneficial for the people of all classes, including socialists, to delay the socialist revolution indefinitely.
  3. To delay the socialist takeover is also better for the environment because only capitalism has the power of innovation and the resources to create less polluting technologies, materials, and alternative energy sources. To impose socialism right away would mean to put the planet at risk of never resolving the environmental problems we face today.
  4. Since capitalism generates goods and services that socialists later designate as “human rights,” it is also in the interest of human rights to keep capitalism around indefinitely.

Socialists often describe the world as if it has always been as it exists today, leaving out the dimension of time. But time is a major factor because the world has never been static — and that includes nations, cultures, ethnicities, technologies, sciences, and popular perceptions, such as human rights. The main question that needs to be answered, therefore, is not as much who, where, and how — but “when?”

For example, switching to socialism directly from feudalism would have conserved the society at an early stage, without the host of various “human rights” that were unheard of at the time. According to Marx, humanity needed to go through the stage of capitalism in order to develop the necessary wealth, technologies, and educated populations before the socialists could take over.

But how do we know when the time is right for such a takeover? According to Marx and Lenin, a revolutionary situation exists when the upper classes no longer can, and the lower classes no longer want, to preserve the system, plus there exists a strong revolutionary party that can organize the masses.

Such a party, or rather a conglomerate of radical leftist movements, already exists — and it has been flexing its muscles in Ferguson, Baltimore, and most recently in Chicago, disrupting capitalist Donald Trump’s voter rally. But the first two preconditions for a socialist revolution in America simply do not exist because this country has never had natural static classes, such as the capitalist oppressors ruling over the oppressed workers and peasants. American society has always been dynamic, with unprecedented rates of upward mobility.

Socialists have been trying to update the Marxist formula by redefining “capitalist oppressors” as “hetero-normative patriarchy” and “oppressed workers and peasants” as “sexual, racial, ethnic, linguistic, and religious minorities,” but all their efforts to artificially polarize and destabilize the system have failed to create a revolutionary situation, despite all the tangible damage they have done to the country and to the minds of the growing generation.

Showing the lack of delayed gratification, socialists chant, “When do we want it? Now!” But if they had taken over, for instance, in the 1960s, Americans would have never been able to enjoy such “human rights” as free Internet, free cell phones, or free disposable diapers. Americans would be living today the way we lived in the USSR around the 1980s. There would be no affordable personal computers, tablets, eBooks, iTunes, Google, YouTube, Facebook, or Twitter.

Now that all these capitalist wonders exist, is it finally time? What if we miss the next life-changing technological development that will happen in a year or two? What if it will be a new cheap and clean energy source that will make fossil fuels obsolete? What if it will become a new “human right” that will make all the previous “human rights” pale in comparison?

Speaking of which, how do we know when is a good time to declare the next consumer product a “human right”? If we are serious about it, there has to be a mathematical formula that allows us to calculate with precision the exact time when any given product is no longer a novelty but a “human right.”

This is how the process happens today, time-wise.

  1. When capitalist entrepreneurs create a new product or service, it is usually expensive and is only available to the rich.
  2. Once rich customers have parted with enough money to buy the new product, the entrepreneurs have accumulated enough capital to send it to mass production, making it affordable to the middle class.
  3. Once the market is saturated, the government steps in, declares the product a “human right,” and provides it to the needy for free. All the costs are covered by the taxes extracted from the entrepreneurs who invented the product and from the rich who already paid for its mass production.

Therefore, THR (Time for Human Rights) = ?

I’m not a mathematician, so I will rely on the readers to help me create a sensible equation that includes timing, cost, saturation, taxation, etc. From this equation our politicians can derive time (T) when someone’s consumer product (CP) becomes everyone’s human right (HR).

Bernie Sanders recently declared categorically that healthcare is a “human right.” He didn’t mention when exactly it became a human right: at the dawn of civilization (when no one lived over thirty), during feudalism (when the village blacksmith was also the tooth surgeon), during the industrial revolution (when everything was treated with leeches), or just recently, when capital investments in R&D produced lasers and the MRI?

Is Bernie in possession of the above THR formula, which he won’t share with the toiling masses? If not, we can only conclude that he simply throws around words without knowing what they really mean, whenever he feels like it.

Without a foolproof THR formula to calculate the exact time when a consumer product becomes a “human right,” one can easily embarrass himself. Imagine if in the past the White House had expanded “human rights” to include the ownership of top hats, horse buggies, eight-track players, or VCRs. The only ones benefitting from it today would be standup comedians.

But judging by my Soviet experience, socialists are also in possession of a formula telling them when government-created “human rights” are due to expire — which always happens as soon as they gain total control of any country.

Any government powerful enough to give the people all that they want (e.g., free phones, Internet, or disposable diapers) is also powerful enough to take from the people all that they have.

And that is no laughing matter.

RELATED ARTICLE: Self-Sufficiency, Not Government Spending, Should Be the Measure of Antipoverty Progress

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the American ThinkerThe proposed equation of THR (Time for Human Rights) is now being discussed at the People’s Cube and there already are some excellent suggestions. Follow this link.

Are Ted Cruz and Hillary Clinton now co-chairs of the #DumpTrump campaign?

On Tuesday, March 15th, Donald Trump won Florida, Missouri, Illinois and North Carolina. He lost to Governor Kasich in Ohio. Ted Cruz won no states outright.

florda primary votes by countyNo candidate for the GOP presidential nomination has ever failed to win the sunshine state. The same holds true in the general election.

The GOP must win Florida early in order to put a Republican in the White House on November 8th.

Click here for the 2016 Delegate Count & Primary Results

I received an email titled “One-on-one race” from the Ted Cruz campaign stating:

Tonight, there is no ambiguity.

I’m the only candidate that has defeated Trump outside my home state, that can unify all conservatives, and who has a pathway to win the delegates necessary to earn the nomination.

It appears that Ted Cruz has, along with Hillary Clinton, joined with those behind the #DumpTrump campaign. Among those groups that have made it their mission to dump Trump are Moveon.org, Black Lives Matter, La Raza, George Soros, the Republican establishment, the main stream media and the elite politicians inside the Washington D.C. beltway.

But can they dump Trump?

Neil Munro, from Breitbart in his column Three-Quarters of GOP Voters Back Donald Trump Nomination, if He Gets Most Delegates”  writes:

Three out of four Republicans believe the party establishment should support Donald Trump if he gets the nomination, whose voter support also has broken through the 50 percent mark, up from 44 percent in late February, according to a new poll from YouGov.

Only 13 percent of the party supporters — or just one in eight voters — say the establishment should oppose Trump if he is nominated, says the March 10 to 12 survey.

“If Trump should win … Republican voters, including those supporting other candidates, want the establishment to support him,” YouGov reported.

I have written in my column “Donald Trump is a ‘Christian Nationalist'”:

Donald Trump went from running a campaign, to heading a movement and is now leading an insurgency. Until today I could not define what was driving this insurgency. I may now have the answer.

Karl Marx wrote: “Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people“.

Donald Trump is viewed by his followers as the heart of a heartless world, the soul fighting a soulless government and he understands that it is morals that drives him and the American dream. It is religion that is inextricably linked to politics in America. It is something citizens have not seen since the American Revolution.

Senator Ted Cruz does not have the momentum of Donald Trump. If Senator Cruz’s goal is to have just enough delegates to force a brokered convention then he may do more harm to the Republican Party, than good.

Hillary Clinton, the Democrat establishment candidate, has effectively stopped the Bernie insurgency. Should Senator Cruz continue to try to stop the growing Trump insurgency? By doing so will he alienate those who have voted in large numbers for Trump and cause the GOP to split?

It appears the GOP establishment, Hillary Clinton and Senator Cruz want a Republican house divided. Is that a winning political strategy for Republicans November? It certainly is for Democrats.

Time will tell if Donald Trump achieves the needed delegates to win the nomination outright. He is over half way there. As some have said, nothing can seem to stop the Trump Train.

RELATED VIDEOS:

Donald Trump Super Tuesday Press Conference After Winning FL, IL, NC (3-15-16)

Curly Haugland, an unbound GOP delegate from North Dakota, on CNBC’s “Squawk Box” questioned why primaries and caucuses are even held. Haugland states, “We choose the nominee, not the voters“:

RELATED ARTICLES:

We choose the nominee, not the voters: Senior GOP official

The GOP Sellout Continues

Why Washington’s Political Class Is Losing Control

ICE: 124 illegal immigrants released from jail later charged in 138 murder cases

BEYOND DISTRUST: How Americans View Their Government – PEW Research

The ‘Compassionate’ Bullying of the Left

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump © Mike Stone / Reuters.

Profiles of Arizona and Utah Holding March 22nd Primaries and Caucuses

WASHINGTON, D.C. /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — The following tip sheet was released today by the U.S. Census Bureau:

In advance of the March 22 primaries and caucuses, the U.S. Census Bureau presents a variety of statistics that give an overall profile of each participating state’s voting-age population and industries. Statistics include:

  • Voting-age population and estimate of eligible voters (i.e., citizens age 18 and older).
  • Breakdown of voting-age population by race and Hispanic origin.
  • Selected economic characteristics, including median household income and poverty.
  • Selected social characteristics, including educational attainment.
  • County Business Patterns (providing information on employment by specific industries).
  • Statistics on voting and registration.

Profiles are provided for the following states:

Arizona
Utah

cb16-tps45_graphic_voting_arizona

cb16-tps46_graphic_voting_utah

Is Florida’s Congressional Delegation supporting American Workers or illegals?

Florida’s Congressional Delegation is faced with a choice, one that serves their constituents and one that does not. Which ones are serving their constituents?

Are you aware it costs Floridians over $5 Billion annually to educate, medicate and incarcerate nearly one million illegal aliens in our state that has been so for many years?

Isn’t it time for Florida to be for Floridians?

Are you aware it costs $1,600.00 more a year to teach each non-English speaking student than an American student? Are you aware there are a reported 600,000 illegal aliens occupying jobs that should be done by legal Florida workers?

Two important bills in Congress dramatically reduce the illegal population, reduce the expired visa holders population, reduce school overcrowding and save Floridians billions of dollars a year. They are:

  1. H.R. 1147 “The Civilian Workforce Act” written so that only legal workers are employed in Florida
  2. and H.R. 140  “The Birthright Citizenship Act” which requires one parent to be a citizen for a child born in the country to become a citizen to eliminate. Thereby ending anchor babies.

Who opposes this common sense legislation?

Sadly, only one Florida Representative Vern Buchanan has signed on to co-sponsor H.R. 1147 and three have signed on to co-sponsor H.R. 140 – Rep. Nugent, Rep. Posey and  Rep.Miller.

Surely the rest of you can sign up for legislation that will dramatically and positively open up Floridian jobs for citizen workers, reduce costs and school overcrowding.

The only reason not to support these bills is if your interests are different than your constituents. If you wish to contact your member of Congress here are the Wikipedia links to their biographies and maps of their districts:

RELATED ARTICLE: How a Suspected Murderer and Criminally Convicted Illegal Immigrant Avoided Deportation