Greece, Prostitution, and the Sad Consequences of Democratic Socialism

The moral of the story is that socialism (however defined) has never worked in any form at any time in history.


My left-leaning friends periodically tell me that there’s a big difference between their benign policies of democratic socialism and the wretched track records of Marxist socialism, national socialism, and other forms of totalitarianism.

I agree. Living in a European welfare state, after all, is much better than living in a hellhole like CubaNorth KoreaZimbabwe, or Venezuela.

Not only do you enjoy the rule of law (no Khmer Rouge-style concentration camps!), but you also enjoy considerable prosperity compared to the rest of the world.

But there are two things to understand about that prosperity:

Let’s consider the case of Greece. I’ve written many times about the debilitating impact of high tax rates and wasteful spending in that nation. It has the least economic freedom of all nations in Western Europe, so it’s no surprise that it is falling further behind.

But sometimes a compelling example is the best way of helping people understand the harmful impact of big government. From The New York Times:

We were on Filis Street — a warren of alleyways and dingy two-story houses — which has been home to Athenian brothels for most of the past century. The trade is more desperate now because of Greece’s lost decade since the 2008 financial crisis, which has left no profession unscathed. The collapsed economy and the arrival of tens of thousands of migrants have pushed even more women into prostitution — even as prices have fallen through the floor…“I had a flower shop for 18 years — and now I’m here out of necessity, not out of joy,” said Dimitra, a middle-aged woman who lost her shop in the crisis and now works as a madam…the number of prostitutes in the city had increased by 7 percent since 2012, yet prices have dropped drastically, both for women working on the streets and in brothels. “In 2012, it would require an average of 39 euros” for a client to hire a prostitute in a brothel, Mr. Lazos said, “while in 2017 just €17 — a 56 percent decrease.”

The saddest part of the story is the commentary of the prostitutes:

“I hate sex,” Elena said. “I like the money, not the job.” Anastasia…has worked as a prostitute since she was 14. She’s now 33, and says the work is harder than ever. “People don’t have money anymore,” she said… Monica, a 30-year-old Albanian prostitute…spends six to eight hours a day trying to entice clients, but most do not stay. “They don’t have money,” she said. “They haven’t had money for the past seven years.”… Many Greek men are simply too poor to pay anymore.

support legal prostitution, in part because the alternative of pushing these unfortunate women even further into the underground economy would be worse.

But that doesn’t change the fact that these women don’t have good lives. And the misery of democratic socialism in Greece is making their lives even sadder.

The bottom line is that I now have three awful anecdotes from Greece to help illustrate the wretched impact of big government. In addition to the price-cutting prostitutes we discussed today, let’s not forget that Greece subsidizes pedophiles and requires stool samples to set up online companies.

Needless to say, I hope we never go that far in the wrong direction.

The moral of the story is that socialism (however defined) has never worked in any form at any time in history.

This article was reprinted with permission from International Liberty.

Daniel J. Mitchell

Daniel J. Mitchell

Daniel J. Mitchell is a Washington-based economist who specializes in fiscal policy, particularly tax reform, international tax competition, and the economic burden of government spending. He also serves on the editorial board of the Cayman Financial Review.

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images is republished with permission.

PART TWO: Trevor Loudon Releases Mini-Doc on Florida’s Andrew Gillum #EnemiesWithin [Video]

Originally published on trevorloudon.com:

This week, Trevor Loudon presents Part Two (See Part One) of a series exposing the radical ties of Florida Gubernatorial candidate Andrew Gillum. Gillum, the current mayor of Tallahassee, Florida, has a long history with hard-core socialist activists.

Andrew Gillum is a threat to national security.

WATCH THE VIDEO BELOW!!

In 2016, New Zealand author and film-maker Trevor Loudon released his full-length documentary The Enemies Within, which exposed a shocking number of United States Senators and members of Congress who pose a security risk to America. These elected officials were all tied to hostile foreign powers, anti-American Marxist groups or fronts for the pro-terrorist Muslim Brotherhood.

The radical group “Dream Defenders” endorses Andrew Gillum (Screenshot of tweet)

Please embed these videos on your blog, tweet them to your followers, post them to Facebook, or personally email them to friends, relatives and colleagues. Every American voter needs to see these videos. If more Americans understand how badly they are being betrayed by their own elected representatives, they can help “drain the swamp” themselves, directly through the ballot box.

Part Two:

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images and videos is republished with permission.

10 Reasons Why The Democrat Will Lose Big on November 6th, 2018

There has been much speculation and polling done since the midterm elections of 2018 began. The legacy media has pushed two narratives: 1. Trump is evil and 2. There will be a blue wave on November 6th, 2018.

Here are 10 reasons why both narratives are hurting Democrats and the issues that truly count with the majority of voters:

  1. “It’s the economy stupid!” as James Carville pointed out to former President Bill Clinton during the 1992 election. Clinton won. The economy is booming under President Trump. People vote in their self interests. There are more working class Americans who are benefiting from the Trump administration policies than not. Win Republicans.
  2. The illegal alien invasion. Immigration remains a hot button issue with Americans, especially those who immigrated to the United States legally. Americans do not want to see their jobs taken by illegals nor do they want to pay welfare to those coming in the “caravan.” Win Republicans.
  3. #JobsNotMobs is a winning slogan. The attacks on individuals have soured the American people on the lawlessness exhibited by individuals and groups. For women a key factor is security. A safe home and community are key issues. Fear is not a winning strategy. Accosting people in public places hurts Democrats. Win Republicans.
  4. Saying what you mean and then doing what you say. President Donald J. Trump is the gold standard for making and keeping promises made during his campaign. A series of videos by Project Veritas has shown key Democrats running for election are saying anything to get elected. Lying is bad policy and worse politics. Win Republicans.
  5. The radicalization of the Democratic Party. Two movements are making an impact on bringing key Democrat constituencies to the Republicans. The first is the #WalkAway campaign. The second is the #BLEXIT movement. Both ask Democrats and Independents to think for themselves. These two campaigns, that are just getting started, will have an impact on the minority vote in 2018 and bigger impact in 2020. Win Republicans.
  6. The legacy media and fake news. The media did not learn from the 2016 presidential election. Rather than taking the win of Donald J. Trump in stride and reporting on his policies and positions in a rational and fair way, they went in the opposite direction. The legacy media now makes up news in the hopes that people will just trust them. Trust in the media is at an all time low. Fake news did not work in the presidential election of 2016 and will not work for them in the 2018 midterm election. Bias is obvious, lying is obvious and the hate for those who voted for President Trump is obvious. Win Republicans.
  7. The blame game doesn’t win hearts and minds. The Democrats and the media have since November 2016 blamed President Trump for everything from causing Hurricane Michael to the slaughter in a Pittsburgh synagogue. President Trump is a man of action. The Democrats are running on blame the other guy at all cost. Win Republicans.
  8. The Democratic Party’s growing list of socialist candidates. The Democratic Party, in order to appease the most radical part of its base, has chosen to run socialists in key races. Perhaps the most note worthy of this neo-Socialist Democrat movement are Andrew Gillum, running for governor in Florida, Julia Salazar, running for New York state senator and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, running for the U.S. Congress in New York District 4. Socialism sucks (see 1 above). Win Republicans.
  9. The Kavanaugh hearings. The lingering effect of the animus shown during the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on now Associate Justice Kavanaugh still hangs like a cloud over the Democrat Party. Win Republicans.
  10. Finally, the lack of ideas. The Democratic Party is running against President Trump. That is their entire message. As Tip O’Neil said, “All elections are local.” Republicans are running on the booming economy, lower taxes, secure borders, law and order, support for ICE, support for minorities by improving their lives, legal immigration, fair trade and less government control. The Democrats aren’t saying what they really stand for but they are the opposite of what the Republicans stand for. Win Republicans.

In a article titled “Trump Campaign Blitz Will End With The GOP Winning Big” Michael Busler writes:

President Trump, who constantly reminds us of his zest for winning, is about to embark on a campaign blitz.  He will visit eight states and his campaign will spend millions on advertising.  This will begin on Wednesday and last until election day.

The result of the Trump campaign blitz will be big wins for the Republicans on election day.  The GOP will maintain a majority in the House of Representatives and increase their majority in the Senate to 56 or 57, but perhaps as high as 60. [Emphasis added]

We agree. Winning is the new mantra of the Republican Party. The proof will be in the primary pudding served up on November 6, 2018.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Black Voters Will Save America With The #WalkAwayCampaign And BLEXIT

Oregon Could Elect Its First Republican Governor In Nearly Four Decades

179 Death Threats Against President Trump Are Live On Twitter…Real Time Updated List

Accusing Trump of fostering violence is incitement

The Political Miscalculations of the Democrats

Billionaire Democrat Tom Steyer Runs Facebook Ad Comparing President Trump To Saddam Hussein

GQ Writer Julia Ioffe: Trump Has Radicalized Many More People Than ISIS

RELATED VIDEO: Loesch: Democrats lack substantive policy proposals

New Brazil President to close ‘Palestinian’ embassy: “You do not negotiate with terrorists”

A refreshing dose of reality from a country that has supported the “Palestinian” jihad for a considerable period.

“Brazilians elect first ardently pro-Israel president,” by 

RIO DE JANEIRO (JTA) — Brazilians elected a president who is a far-right, ardently pro-Israel veteran pol who once declared “My heart is green, yellow, blue and white,” in a reference to the colors of the Israeli and Brazilian flags.

“Far-right”: i.e., hated by the political and media establishment.

Jair Bolsonaro, a 63-year-old seven-term congressman who built his campaign around pledges to crush corruption and crime, secured over 55 percent of the vote, an 11 percent lead over his far-left rival Fernando Haddad.

“We cannot continue flirting with socialism, communism, populism and leftist extremism … We are going to change the destiny of Brazil,” said Bolsonaro in his late Sunday night acceptance speech broadcast from his home in Rio, which showed a Jewish menorah in the background of the video.

Highly divisive among Jewish voters, the Conservative lawmaker — whose middle name, Messias, literally means “messiah” — won the ballot after a drama-filled election that looks set to radically reforge the future of the world’s fourth biggest democracy, leaving nearly 15 years of far-left governments behind….

For many Jewish voters, Bolsonaro has always been a dream president. He has declared he will move the Brazilian embassy to Jerusalem from Tel Aviv. His first international trip as president, he said, will be to Israel, with which he will seek to broaden the dialogue. And he promised to close the Palestinian embassy in Brasilia.

“Is Palestine a country? Palestine is not a country, so there should be no embassy here,” Bolsonaro said weeks ago. “You do not negotiate with terrorists.”…

“Bolsonaro stood out among the many candidates for including the State of Israel in the major speeches he made during the campaign,” Israel’s honorary consul in Rio, Osias Wurman, told JTA last week. “He is a lover of the people and the State of Israel.”…

RELATED ARTICLE: Como o Poder das Ideias Está Libertando Mentes no Brasil by Rafael Ribeiro

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on Jihad Watch. It is republished with images with permission. The featured photo is by sergio souza on Unsplash.

The Left Goes Full Open Borders

It wasn’t long ago that both sides of the aisle believed America’s border laws should be enforced.

As President Donald Trump pointed out on Twitter, even former President Barack Obama, at least rhetorically, said that illegal immigrants couldn’t be let into the country en masse and without restrictions. (He said that as a senator.)

“We simply cannot allow people to pour into the United States undetected, undocumented, unchecked and circumventing the line of people who are waiting patiently, diligently, and lawfully to become immigrants into this country,” Obama said.

This dynamic has dramatically shifted, as the American left now increasingly sees any level of border enforcement as beyond the pale.

The migrant caravans originating in Honduras and heading north to the U.S. border are testing just how far the left will go in embracing this new narrative.

The position Obama held just over a decade ago is now considered offensive in some circles. Some are even demanding that the U.S. let the caravan into the United States.

“Every one of these people are coming from a real fear. These are refugees,” Cambridge, Massachusetts Mayor Marc McGovern said, according to the Boston Herald. “These are people who really are facing real problems and we have to let them through.”

The left is sending a message that concern over unchecked immigration is illegitimate.

Yet this is out of step with the American people in general.

Americans are clearly divided when it comes to the issue of immigration. Some want more high-skilled immigrants, others don’t. Some think a wall is necessary for border security, others don’t.

But one thing that Americans tend to agree on, strongly, is the idea that we have a right to control our border and determine who comes into the country. This belief flows from the concept that we are a sovereign nation that must maintain law and order for the safety of everyone.

The idea that thousands of people can just arrive at the border, demand entrance to the United States, and possibly force their way in by overwhelming U.S. authorities offends our idea that America is a nation of laws, and it undermines the idea that the American people have the right to set their own immigration policies.

America has very specific laws regarding legal immigration and asylum—which generally only applies in cases of state-based repression. Allowing a gaggle of thousands of people into this country with little oversight and little legal standing would only encourage more of this sort of tactic.

This worry is fueled by an increasingly aggressive left-wing stance that any level of border enforcement is tantamount to racism and nativism. This view is no longer held by just a few radicals. It is increasingly the stance of more mainstream progressives and Democrats.

Earlier this year, the call to abolish U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, morphed into a mainstream movement embraced by prominent Democrats like Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y.

One can see how this public position actually encourages more illegal immigration, including the massive caravans.

As The Heritage Foundation’s senior policy analyst for Latin America, Ana Quintana, noted, many of these migrants have been manipulated by South American left-wing parties into believing this is their path to the United States.

It’s a political tactic used to sow chaos, and unfortunately puts lives at risk—including the migrants who travel thousands of miles through dangerous locations to get to the U.S. border.

“This caravan antic is right out of the left’s disorder and chaos playbook,” Quintana wrote. “The timing before the U.S.’s midterm elections and the change of presidency in Mexico is not coincidental. It is also clear the caravan organizers are more interested in creating turmoil than the well-being of the migrants.”

We are paying the price of the world believing we won’t enforce our border laws.

The issue now at stake with the caravan is not merely immigration, but whether the United States is in fact a sovereign country—whether the American people have the power to decide their immigration laws, and whether our government will enforce those decisions.

All of this shows just how far progressives have moved away from the mainstream when it comes to immigration.

COMMENTARY BY

Portrait of Jarrett Stepman

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

RELATED ARTICLE: Military to Deploy 5,000 Troops to Border


BREAKING NEW VIDEO: Arizona Senate Race: “We can’t be talking about” that

UPDATE

Arizona U.S. Senate candidate, Kyrsten Sinema, has almost immediately responded to our undercover investigation exposing her staff saying she is a fake moderate.

Sinema was shown the undercover tapes LIVE on KTAR 92.3 radio in Arizona and fumbled when she was asked if she was really a progressive trying to trick moderate voters.

Here’s the transcript of Sinema being questioned on Arizona radio:

HOST: Now there’s something that just came out yesterday. Project Veritas which is known for using hidden cameras.

SINEMA: And those guys are convicted criminals.

HOST: Well, they do go and they capture people saying things that sometimes they wouldn’t say in public, they say in private instead. The video they put out yesterday this is not great, it’s Lauren Fromm which Project Veritas says is a field organizer for your campaign, here’s a little bit of that video…

[PLAYS VIDEO FOR SINEMA]

HOST: Okay so first off, is Lauren Fromm part of your team and second, is she telling the truth? Are you a progressive and are you just acting moderate to get elected?

SINEMA: Well I don’t know who Lauren is, so I can’t answer that question.

HOST: They say she’s a field organizer for your campaign.

SINEMA: Well let’s take everything they say with a grain of salt.

The Senate candidate is asking us to take it with a grain of salt that Lauren Fromm, the field organizer, works for her. Sinema can say whatever she wants, but when I walked into Sinema’s field office, Lauren Fromm was standing right there!

And when Sinema says that she doesn’t know Lauren, just take a look at this picture of the two of them together:

Fromm and Sinema

This all comes on the heels of the video being shown on primetime cable news, on Sean Hannity’s program! And it’s being covered by Arizona media as well.

The largest newspaper in Arizona has already covered this story, quoting the field organizer Madison Snarr facetiously stating, “She’s going to stand up and protect Arizona values, whatever the f*** that means.”

I was in Arizona yesterday to get comment from Snarr and received the following response:

James: Could you explain —

Madison: I believe what I said. I believe she’s going to stand up and protect Arizona’s values.

James: You said whatever the ‘f’ that means.

Madison: I mean that – that um… changes. As time goes on… Arizonans have evolved throughout the years. Sinema has as well. I think she’s a great candidate.

James: Whatever the “F” that means though. Isn’t that mocking the idea that a senator would represent the state she is from?

Madison: That was a glib statement . . .


Arizona: Project Veritas Action Fund has released undercover video from current Congresswoman and US Senate candidate Kyrsten Sinema’s campaign.

This new video exposes the campaign’s belief that in order to win Arizona, Sinema must appear more moderate than she really is and must hide her progressive views from voters in the process. This is the sixth undercover video report Project Veritas has released in a series revealing secrets and lies from political campaigns in 2018.

  • Campaign Staff mocks Sinema platform: “She’s going to stand up and protect Arizonans values. Whatever the f**k that means.”
  • Sinema’s immigration proposal: a “path to citizenship” for all non-criminals.
  • Sinema Campaign Manager: “We can’t be talking about an assault weapons ban.” Describes an incremental approach to gun control.
  • Top donor says gun control “couldn’t be a platform issue…” But Sinema would still vote for it.
  • Campaign staff explains: “… she is pro-choice. She is very liberal, she’s progressive.”

Judge Bans Enforcement of California Law Requiring Pro-Life Groups to Promote Abortion

A federal judge in San Diego has permanently barred enforcement of California’s Reproductive FACT Act, which requires pro-life crisis pregnancy centers to disseminate information about abortion.

The Friday order follows a June 26 Supreme Court decision that found that the FACT Act likely violates the First Amendment.

“The government has no business forcing anyone to express a message that violates their convictions, especially on deeply divisive subjects such as abortion,” said the Alliance Defending Freedom’s Michael Farris, who represented a coalition of pro-life groups challenging the law.

“California disregarded that truth when it passed its law forcing pro-life centers to advertise for the abortion industry. The district court’s order puts a permanent end to that law in light of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in June, which rightly found that ‘the people lose when the government is the one deciding which ideas should prevail.’”

“The outcome of this case affirms the freedom that all Americans have to speak—or not to speak—in accordance with their conscience,” Farris added.

There are some 200 pro-life pregnancy clinics in California, many of which have a religious orientation. The FACT Act required clinics licensed by the state to post a bulletin relaying information about abortion access in a “conspicuous place” within the facility. Unlicensed clinics—which provide various support services but do not offer advanced medical care—must disclose that they are not credentialed to practice medicine on site and in all advertisements.

The National Institute of Family and Life Advocates (NIFLA) challenged the law on constitutional grounds, arguing it violated the First Amendment because it forces a private speaker to spread a message with which they disagree.

California countered that it has a legitimate interest in ensuring its citizens are well-informed about the range of reproductive health options available to them. The state also feared many pro-life clinics conceal their anti-abortion mission from unwitting patients.

On appeal to the Supreme Court, a five-justice majority led by Justice Clarence Thomas found the law likely violates the First Amendment. The case then returned to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, which entered final judgment against the FACT Act. The plaintiffs may also ask to recoup the cost of the litigation.

In one of his last opinions on the court, Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote a concurrence “to underscore that the apparent viewpoint discrimination here is a matter of serious constitutional concern.”

“Governments must not be allowed to force persons to express a message contrary to their deepest convictions,” Kennedy wrote. “Freedom of speech secures freedom of thought and belief. This law imperils those liberties.”

COLUMN BY

Inside The SPLC/Media Matters/MSM Machine Smearing Republicans

There is a new, well-financed, well-oiled smear machine that is spinning up mud and using the media to spread it as though it is legitimate news.

It goes like this: The Southern Poverty Law Center uses its anti-conservative, anti-Christian, pro-Muslim, pro-illegal immigration, pro-LGBTQ metrics to identify “hate groups.”

The result: It has managed to label as hate groups such organizations as the Family Research Council, the Alliance Defending Freedom, the Center for Family and Human Rights, social scientist and researcher Charles Murray, Muslim analyst Frank Gaffney, the non-profit Center for Immigration Studies and its leader Mark Krikorian and Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a Somali-born critic of Islamic extremism.

A biblical stance on homosexuality or marriage (or even theology!) can be enough to get one on their hate list. The SPLC then lumps these Christian groups and non-PC people in with the KKK and neo-Nazis and the New Black Panthers, true hate groups, making the lists look legitimate.

It’s not. The SPLC is closer to a hate group than many of the organizations on its list. Evidence for this is that the FBI, the U.S. Army and the charity clearinghouse Guidestar used to partner with the SPLC to identify hate groups. But all of them and more have severed their partnerships with the SPLC as it has become more obviously a scammy partisan group.

The SPLC has huge financing from leftist organizations and has become a mammothly wealthy organization.  According to the Washington Free Beacon, the “organization reported $477 million in total assets and $132 million in contributions on its most recent tax forms, which cover Nov. 1, 2016 to Oct. 31, 2017. That represents an increase of $140 million in its total assets from the previous year.” It fundraises directly on emotional appeal from discriminations past, and then uses it on partisan political causes.

Unfortunately, the media still has not seen the light. The SPLC is fully trusted and used as an objective source by the mainstream media, which is a fellow traveler along the same general path of biases. So this is step one in the smear: the SPLC labels someone or some group as haters and the media trusts that designation, citing it as a source.

Step two enters with Media Matters, a hyper leftist organization funded by George Soros, among many others. Media Matters list of founding funders is like a Who’s Who in funding American progressives. The leftist, activist Tides Foundation put in $4.4 million, George Soros’ Open Society Institutes kicked in more than $1 million the Schumann Fund for Media and Democracy, run by longtime PBS host Bill Moyers chipped in $600,000.

Media Matters makes extensive use of the SPLC’s terrible list by seeking connections between Republican officeholders and anyone or any organization on the list, then attempts to vilify that Republican by association.

Since Media Matters is an obvious leftist slander machine even to many in the media, the smears are pushed out with the imprimatur of the SPLC undergirding them for “credibility,” and like the sun rising in the east, many in the media then use it as a basis to run their own stories and thereby mainstream the smear as legitimate news.

This machine was already in place, but in this election cycle it was clicked up a level by Democrat operatives who apparently discovered they could target the slime attacks against specific candidates, and inserted themselves into the machine (which was already attacking conservatives and Republicans in general.) The Democratic operative, or perhaps at times candidates themselves, sought connections between GOP candidates and the SPLC list — no matter how tenuous — and then fed that information to Media Matters to maintain a public distance from such obvious dirty tactics.

Media Matters would then run the hit pieces and those operatives/candidates would alert local media to the smear jobs, using the supposed legitimacy of the SPLC, and most of the media bit and ran stories smearing GOP candidates in what appear to be targeted races.

It’s basically Democratic story plants, which the media happily ran.

The Revolutionary Act refuses to repeat the smears, so here’s an example of one we are intimately familiar with, but with the names of the innocent removed.

A Christian Republican who had been involved in national political presidential campaigns offered to hold a fundraiser for a Republican running for a state legislative seat. The candidate naturally accepted this common offer, as virtually every candidate in either party does.

But the man who held the fundraiser is on the SPLC’s list because he was part of a group some 20 years ago that later became a white nationalist group (after he left it) and because alt right groups have re-published some of his writings, which he has no control over and which were not racist, and because an errant media report one time identified him as an officer of a racist group, which he never was. He wrote extensively explaining each of these passing connections and mistakes, and that he was never part of anything that was racist when he was part of the organization.

The SPLC didn’t care and refused to remove him from the hate list. That smear was bad enough, but the truly atrocious one was that Media Matters then ran its typical hit piece — almost assuredly planted by the candidate’s Democratic opponent. (The Republican candidate was running in his first race for a state legislative seat. Media Matters would never have been researching or even come across such a unknown person on its own.)

Remember, the candidate had only met the unfairly tainted fundraiser once before attending the event at his home. Of course, he knew nothing of the 20-year-old character assassination by the SPLC. He is a retired military JAG and his wife is Dominican! Hardly the material of white nationalist or white supremacist.

Nonetheless, not only did Media Matters defame him — which is to be expected — so did the local newspaper, whose political reporter did a huge story on the fundraiser and his relationship with the candidate in the most horrible way.

And this, after all the explanations were given regarding the fundraiser’s innocence, and the fact that the fundraiser held another event for a female Hispanic candidate in the same election cycle. Not at all what a white supremacist does.

Didn’t matter, the smear was on and the media was complicit with the SPLC, Democrat operatives and Media Matters.

This pattern with different details has been repeated in the Florida governor’s race, in two state legislative races and in a Florida congressional race, along with other races around the country.

This is the problem with a media that ranges from compliant to co-conspirator with Democrats, starting with treating the far leftist hate group SPLC as an objective arbiter of hate groups.

RELATED ARTICLE: NBC Journalist: Stop With the False Equivalencies. It’s ‘Plain as Day’ That Republicans Are Just Worse.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in The Revolutionary Act.

EXCLUSIVE REPORT: 96.1 percent of University of Texas administrators, 93.5 percent of faculty donated to Dems

  • A Campus Reform analysis has found that an overwhelming majority of faculty and administrators at University of Texas schools contributed financially to Democrat candidates and causes from 2017-2018.
  • System employees donated a grand total of $642,693.43 during this time frame, 94.7 percent of which went to Democrat candidates and causes.

Campus Reform analyzed the 2017-2018 political donation records of employees at the University of Texas (UT), using publicly available records from the Federal Election Commission, in order to determine the political leanings of faculty and administrators at the college.

According to the Campus Reform analysis, 96.1 percent of all UT system administrators who donated to political candidates or causes gave a total of $36,852.20 to Democrat politicians or Democrat organizations, such as Texas Senate candidate Beto O’Rourke and New York congressional candidate Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

“In total, UT employees donated $642,693.43 from 2017-2018. Of that amount, 94.7 percent went to Democrat politicians or Democrat organizations…”    

In total, UT employees donated $642,693.43 from 2017-2018. Of that amount, 94.7 percent went to Democrat politicians or Democrat organizations, while just 5.3 percent of the donations were made to Republican politicians or Republican organizations.

In total, 917 faculty members, specifically, donated a total of $481,853.56 to politicians or political organizations. They contributed 93.5 percent of the money to Democrat politicians or organizations, such as the Texas Democrat Party and End Citizens United. Just 6.5 percent of donations went to Republican politicians or Republican causes.

Of 140 UT administrators, 137 donated $36,852.20 to Democrat political candidates and politicians. Three UT administrators gave a total of $1,500 in donations to Republican politicians or organizations from 2017-2018.

Act Blue and It Starts Today received the highest amount in donations in the Democrat and Democrat category while Donald J. Trump for President, Inc. and Ted Cruz for Senate received the highest amount in donations in the Republican category.

For the purposes of this data, Campus Reform defined “faculty” as employees of the college that have direct instructional contact with students, such as professors, teachers, and instructors. “Administrators” were defined as employees who manage programming or are responsible for students and faculty, such as department chairs, deans, presidents, and provosts.

Campus Reform sorted individual donors using their self-stated position at the college. For example, if the individual donor noted that they were a “professor of literary theory,” they were designated as a faculty member. If an individual noted that they were employed as an “executive director,” they were designated as an administrator.

In the event that an employee’s title was ambiguous and could not be confirmed, they were marked as a general employee, but not sorted into faculty or administration categories. Campus Reform did not account for retired UT System employees who made political donations. Campus Reform used 180 variations of keyword searches to cull data specific to UT employees at all 14 institutions listed on the University of Texas System’s website.

Campus Reform used the most recent FEC donor records from Jan. 1, 2017 to Oct. 22, 2018.

COLUMN BY

Grace Gottschling

GRACE GOTTSCHLING

Investigative Reporter

Grace Gottschling is the Investigative Reporter for Campus Reform. She is a recent graduate of The College of New Jersey and has experience traveling across the country to engage and train others in pro-life apologetics. Grace manages research and Freedom of Information Act records requests for Campus Reform.

RELATED ARTICLES:

100 percent of Univ. of Oregon admin, 99.95 percent of faculty donate to Dems

EXCLUSIVE REPORT: 100 percent of SMU administrators, 98.8 percent of faculty donate to Dems

VIDEO: Beto O’Rourke supporters can’t name any of his accomplishments

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images is republished with permission.

NYU student senate plans Israel BDS vote … in private

  • New York University’s student senate will vote on an Israel Boycott, Divest, and Sanction resolution in private.
  • The scheduled vote comes amid rising tensions between Jewish and Palestinian groups on campus.

NYU student Senator-at-Large Rose Asaf tweeted that student senators would propose a Boycott, Divest, and Sanction resolution (BDS) against the state of Israel at the university senate meeting on Nov. 1.

“Whilst we understand that the heated nature of the discussion around the issue has led to threats of violence in the past, it does not change the fact that if the vote is held in private, it is impossible for students to know what their supposed representatives are voting for.”    

This proposal comes on the heels of a resolution, passed last semester, which urged the university to “review its nondiscrimination policies for Palestinian, Middle Eastern, and other affected students traveling to the State of Israel and attending NYU Tel Aviv,” according to NYU Local.

The final vote on the resolution is scheduled for Dec. 6 and votes will be cast anonymously, with only NYU students permitted to attend. During this time, those opposing the resolution will only be given two minutes to speak.

This resolution comes at a time when conflicts between Israel and Palestine continue to rise with student groups often clashing on campuses throughout the country.

“This resolution is explicitly posed as part of the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions movement,” Asaf and fellow Senator-at-Large Bayan Abubakr told Washington Square News, NYU’s student-led newspaper. “A lot of the times at other universities, they’ll try to separate it from the BDS movement and say this is just divestment. We are explicitly saying that this is a result of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement.”

BDS “is a Palestinian-led movement for freedom, justice, and equality” that “upholds the simple principle that Palestinians are entitled to the same rights as the rest of humanity,” according to the movement’s website.

“This resolution is not about divesting from Israel,” Asaf told Campus Reform. “It is about divesting from corporations that aid Israel in its abuse of Palestinian human rights,” although the specific contents of the resolution have yet to be released to the public.

The proposal of this resolution has alarmed students across the NYU campus, particularly within the Jewish community. Adela Cojab, who currently serves as president of NYU Realize Israel, indicated that she sees a problem with representation in student government. Cojab, a past senator, alleged that when students found out she was part of Realize Israel, she was then discriminated against on campus.

“It’s very alarming that an entire demographic [of pro-Israel students] is excluded from representation on student government, and the resolution is being presented that affects that group directly,” Cojab told Washington Square News.

“The total absence of action on states such as Iran, Saudi Arabia, and China, where human rights abuses are common, shows an undue bias against Israel,” NYU College Republicans Secretary Nicholas Suri Campus Reform, saying that he does not believe the resolution itself to be anti-Semitic.

“The singling out of Israel for this action likely makes some Jewish students feel unwelcome on campus,” Suri acknowledged.

The College Republicans secretary cited the fact that NYU recently received a #9 ranking among worst schools for Jewish students.

“I do not believe a boycott/divestment would be beneficial for improving the climate in the NYU community,” he told Campus Reform. “I personally believe that this goes against NYU’s commitment to have members of all communities feel safe and welcome on campus, and will disenfranchise some students.”

“The private nature of the vote is an act of cowardice and totally prevents students from holding their senators accountable,” Suri continued. “Whilst we understand that the heated nature of the discussion around the issue has led to threats of violence in the past, it does not change the fact that if the vote is held in private, it is impossible for students to know what their supposed representatives are voting for. This makes a mockery of any supposed democracy that gives these people legitimacy.”

But Asaf defended the Student Government Association’s decision to hold a private vote.

“The vote will happen by way of the secret ballot because of McCarthyist websites like Canary Mission that try to inhibit our ability to speak freely and try to scare us into self-censorship. Student safety is my first priority,” the Student Senator-At-Large told Campus Reform

NYU did not respond to a request for comment in time for press.

COLUMN BY

Andrew Logan Lawrence

ANDREW LOGAN LAWRENCE

Campus Correspondent

Andrew Lawrence is a Georgia Campus Correspondent, and reports on liberal bias and abuse for Campus Reform. He studies Political & Social Sciences at University of Georgia, and is currently working on the Brian Kemp for Governor campaign.

RELATED ARTICLES:

More than 50 NYU groups pledge to boycott Israel

College: Prof’s refusal to write Israel letter ‘disappointing’

UMich punishes prof who denied Israel recommendation

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images is republished with permission.

Dead Jews––What Else is New?

This past Saturday morning, 11 Jews were shot to death in a Pittsburgh synagogue by one of the millions of Jew haters who contaminate our world.

To Jews like me, who know and appreciate Jewish history as I do, this is no surprise. Tragic, yes; shocking, no.

We are a tiny, indeed microscopic, people, only 15 million in a world of nearly eight billion. That ratio equals the proverbial grain of sand on the vast beaches of life, only one drop in the immense oceans that cover most of our globe.

But Jew hatred is very powerful, written about in thousands of books and articles by erudite scholars who posit theories ranging from resentment that God selected Jews as his “chosen people” to the myth that the Jews killed Jesus to the accusation that Jews are either greedy capitalists or cruel communists to the grievance that Jews run the world.

My own take is that when you peel back every layer of the onion of anti-Semitism, the root cause is that the anti-Semites among us are obsessively jealous. How can it be, they wonder, that this tiny people, dispersed in a diaspora for the last 5,000 years to far-flung communities all over the world where they landed with no language skills, no money, no resources, no nothing––and in the process survived the Jew-targeting Inquisition, Crusades, pogroms. Concentration camps and pandemic outbreaks of anti-Semitism––managed to flourish and rise to prominence wherever they went?

Here in America, we have living proof that the green-eyed monster is alive and well, Exhibit No. One being the execrable “Reverend” Louis Farrakhan––one of Barack Obama’s buds––who little more than a week ago spoke before a smiling, nodding, applauding audience as he called Jews “termites” and “stupid.”

Did I mention his glowing admiration for Hitler? “The Jews don’t like Farrakhan,” he said some years ago, “so they call me Hitler. Well, that’s a good name. Hitler was a very great man.” Last May, this Nation of Islam leader––who has been manically obsessed with Jews his entire life––spoke of “Satanic Jews who have infected the whole world with poison and deceit.”

YOO HOO MEDIA BLATHERERS

No need to continue to question what could possibly have provoked the Pittsburgh mass murderer, Robert Bowers, to go on his Jew-hating rampage. Is there any doubt that it was Mr. Farrakhan, as well as the violence-promoting rhetoric of leftist Democrats such as:

  • Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA): “”If you see anybody from that cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd. You push back on them. Tell them they’re not welcome anymore, anywhere!” And under the Obama regime, she also “guaranteed” that “the U.S. would not support Israel militarily should fighting break out with Iran.”
  • Former Democrat Attorney General Eric Holder: “When they go low, we kick them. That’s what this new Democrat Party is about.”
  • Actor Robert DeNiro: “I want to punch Trump in the face….he’s a punk, a dog, a pig, a mutt…”, and at the Tony Awards, ““First, I wanna say, ‘f–k Trump,’”
  • The violent behavior of the fascistic Antifa thugs who with absurd inaccuracy describe themselves as anti-fascist?
  • The violent behavior of professional victim organizations like Black Lives Matter (BLM) which insist, according to Philip Carl Salzman, that the group “has been guided to anti-Semitism by the [flawed] concept of ‘intersectionality,’” and that “supporters of [this bogus concept] cheer terrorists when they murder Jews. To them, that is just ‘social justice’ at work.”

This is the short list and the media know all this but steadfastly fail to cover it because of their rosy-eyed infatuation with all things diverse and multicultural, their hard-left bias––and, of course, all things anti-Trump. The idea of actually broadcasting Mr. Farrakhan’s racist rants and Jew hatred going back decades, as well as the provocative and inflammatory outbursts of the other Democrats I mentioned, is unimaginable to the hard leftists of the American media because their bosses are so heavily invested in the global economy. It is always about following the money!

THE NEW JEW HATRED

In the saga of contemporary anti-Semitism, Mr. Farrakhan is not alone. In fact, I believe the fulminating resurgence of anti-Semitism in the United States is a direct result of Barack Obama’s influence, which persisted for the entire eight years––2009-2016––he occupied the Oval Office.

As we now know, President Trump has not yet purged the government of all the seditious and even treasonous operatives left over from the Obama regime.

According to journalist Mona Charen, Mr. Obama had a “genocidal hostility toward Israel.” Here is the very short list of those he surrounded himself with (you can look up each person’s decades-long antagonism, in words and deeds, to Israel––meaning Jews).

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice, National Security Advisor; Lee Hamilton, former Congressman, advisor and “fixer”;  Zbigniew Brzezinski (the man behind Obama’s foreign policy);  John Brennan, Deputy National Security Advisor for Homeland Security; Samantha Power, U.N. Ambassador and before that on the National Security Council; Iranian-born Valerie Jarrett, Obama’s Senior Advisor; Dalia Mogahed, the “most influential Muslim” in the White House, and close colleague of John Esposito, a staunch defender of the Muslim Brotherhood.

And that is not to omit Mr. Obama’s “court Jews,” who like past lackeys financed, supported, licked the boots of and sold out the Jewish people in order to gain the personal influence, privileges, wealth, and protection that the “nobles” afforded them. They helped Roman emperors kill Jews. They helped Hitler kill Jews. But after their groveling and traitorous service, they were blamed for economic downturns and used as scapegoats to explain away the failures of the evil regimes and leaders they abetted. Fools and dupes, to a person! They included:

Rahm Emanuel, White House Chief of Staff; David Axelrod, chief strategist and media advisor for Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign and White House insider; Robert Malley, a fan of Hamas and Hezbollah and son Simon Malley, an Egyptian-born Jewish journalist, and Barbara Silverstein, a New Yorker who worked for the U.N. delegation of the Algerian National Liberation Front, both of whom loathed Israel and apparently passed their toxic DNA onto their son; Dennis Ross, Mr. Obama’s special adviser for the Persian Gulf and Southwest Asia, which included Iran, who participated in 12 years of failed Israeli-Palestinian “peace” efforts; George Soros, the Budapest-born multibillionaire and Nazi collaborator who is also devoted to vilifying Israel and funding numerous groups that work unstintingly to bring about its destruction. Soros also has ties to numerous news outlets—including The New York Times, Washington Post, Associated Press, NBC, ABC, et al.

FRUIT OF THE POISONOUS DEMOCRAT TREE

These Jew-and-Israel haters and many others have spawned a new generation of Jew-and-Israel haters who continue to contaminate our body politic. They include:

  • Self-described “Palestinian”-American Linda Sarsour, principal organizer of the “pussy hat” Women’s March on Washington, avid supporter of BDS, supporter of the incarcerated Palestinian Islamic Jihad member Muhammad Allan, a known recruiter of suicide bombers, supporter of Sharia law, and firmly opposed to Israel as a Jewish state….you get the picture.
  • Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, (D-NY) who won a stunning primary victory over 10-term NY Congressman Joseph Crowley, and who Democratic National Committee Chairman Tom Perez called “the future of our party,” called Israel’s killing of 60 terrorist “protesters” in May a “massacre.”
  • Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ), according to Daniel Greenfield, is an ardent admirer of former Black Panther and Hitler admirer Stokely Carmichael (better known as Kwame Ture), and quotes him often on the flaws in the U.S. Constitution. “When Sen. Booker casually quotes a violent anti-Semitic racist, there’s a serious racism problem,” Greenfield says. “As the senator brings his hatred for the Jewish State to the Senate, he should be asked whether he agrees with his hero, “The only good Zionist is a dead Zionist…we must take a lesson from Hitler.” Oh, and Mr. Booker also voted against the Taylor Force Act that cut off funding for the Palestinians while they subsidize terrorists and their families.
  • According to pro-America, pro-Israel warrior Pamela Geller (www.pamelageller.com), the Democrat Congressional Committee Chair Rep. Ben Ray refuses to withdraw support for these anti-Semitic candidates, as well as for the following candidates:
  • Democrat Ilhan Omar who is running for Congress in Minnesota. She recently claimed that she hoped Allah would awaken people to “the evil doings of Israel,” and vilified “the apartheid Israeli regime.” And she also defended nine men who sought to join ISIS.
  • Munich Olympic terrorist scion “Palestinian-Mexican” Ammar Campa-Najjar, (D-CA) running for Congress.
  • Andre Carson (D-IN), running for his second term as Congressman, has been a speaker at numerous pro-jihad conferences and terror-tied Muslims have given him generous donations. CAIR proudly lists Carson on their website, along with Keith Ellison and many other Democrats.
  • Democrat Rashida Tlaib (MI) wants to be the first Muslim woman in Congress and supports Rasmea Odeh, convicted of murdering two American students in a Jerusalem bomb attack. Tlaib has also supported Islamic Relief, a group linked to the Muslim Brotherhood and designated as a terrorist organization by the United Arab Emirates.
  • Democrat candidate for Congress Scott Wallace (PA) was criticized after it was found that his charitable foundation had given hundreds of thousands of dollars to groups that promote the BDS campaign. And in a recent debate––in a synagogue, no less––he told his Republican opponent, Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick, to “f—k off.”
  • Leslie Cockburn (D-VA) was accused by the Virginia GOP of being a “virulent anti-Semite,” based on her-co-authorship of “Dangerous Liaison: The Inside Story of the U.S.-Israeli Covert Relationship,” a book that “advocated for the inherently anti-Semitic belief that Israel controls America’s foreign policy.”
  • Perhaps the worst is Senator Kristen Gillibrand (D-NY), appointed for her first term and now running for her second six-year term in a state that boasts the second largest Jewish population in the world. But the formerly pro-gun, pro-life political conservative from upstate New York now supports the virulently anti-Semitic, Sharia-law-defending Linda Sarsour, who has stated publicly that Gillibrand “works for us on the inside.” Gillibrand also supports the “Israel Anti-Boycott Act,” which opposes the anti-Semitic Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions movement targeting Israel. And she voted for the nuclear deal with Iran––a state of fanatical anti-Semitism which vows every day to wipe Israel off the map and kill every Jew who walks the earth.

How any Jew can vote for this anti-Israel senator is incomprehensible to me.

And here is what the lovely Missouri State Senate Democrat, Maria Chappelle Nadal, had said: “I hope Trump is assassinated,” and “Police are pigs.”

A SIMPLE LESSON

If you don’t want rabid racists, anti-Semites, tax-raisers, and open-border fanatics to run our country, DON’T VOTE FOR ANY DEMOCRAT! They all hate the fact that President Trump has helped our economy soar into the stratosphere, boosted employment for blacks, Hispanics, youth, and women to all-time highs, strengthened our military ten times over, the list of wins goes on and on.

Or, vote for the party of Jew hatred, high taxes, a weak military, and the kind of toxic racism that belonged more in the Jim Crow era than in 2018 and beyond. Holy Mackerel….what a simple choice!

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images is republished with permission.

A Black Book on Jihad

Matthew Hanley reviews scholar Robert Spencer’s historical survey of jihad in which the last chapter is aptly titled “The West Loses the Will to Live”. 


Anyone genuinely curious about the history of the 20th century has probably heard about the Black Book of Communism, an exhaustive account of the damage Marxist ideology inflicted around the globe. Its authors estimated that Communism claimed the lives of about 100 million people.  That sobering, round figure tends to stick in the mind, even if some seek to explain it away.

Robert Spencer’s new book The History of Jihad: From Muhammad to ISIS – along with Raymond Ibrahim’s Sword and Scimitar – gives us something akin to the Black Book of Communism. It’s a powerful account of the domineering brutality that Jihad has inflicted near and far, from its bloody 7th century origins to the present day. As Spencer makes abundantly clear to anyone willing to take seriously the facts he summons up, “Islamic piety always underlay the jihad.”  For this reason, he is only too likely to be belittled or scorned.

There is no firm number of total deaths by way of jihad over the centuries. Might it exceed the 100 million mark?  It likely approaches that figure in India alone; the Pulitzer Prize-winning historian Will Durant argued in 1935 that the “Mohammedan conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history.” This is hardly on anyone’s radar, and Spencer fills a major gap in our understanding by detailing what occurred in the subcontinent in all its vivid, revolting detail.

In the Muslim mind, infidels are to be given three options: convert, pay, or die.  But the payment option is offered only to “people of the book”: Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians. Hindus and Buddhists aren’t on that list, so only two options remained: submission or death. Allah the most merciful?

In the first (8th century) foray, the instructions were as clear as day: kill all the combatants, arrest and imprison their children, and grant protection only to those who submit.  Massacres ensued in rapid succession, but killing so many can get exhausting. When the general on the ground, faced with the practical difficulty of mass extermination, started encouraging surrender and granting protection without conversion, his superior back in Iraq was incensed – and sent word: “God said: ‘Give no quarter to infidels but cut their throats. Then you shall know that this is the command of the great God.’”

When another leader, centuries later, displayed sympathetic inclinations towards non-Muslims, his younger brother (Aurangzeb) had him beheaded and reportedly wept for joy upon receiving his head. This was the guy who gave the capitol of modern day Pakistan its name.  In 1670, he not only destroyed the temple at Mathura but renamed it Islamabad. Looting temples, often stocked with precious metals, was a prime source of enrichment and a precursor to razing them to the ground, which jihadists did systematically.

Another little known but highly consequential event was the battle of Manzikert (near Armenia) in 1071 in which the supposedly still stout Byzantines were routed. This paved the way for the Greek peoples inhabiting Asia Minor to be overrun by the Turks (which subsequently gave rise to the Ottoman Empire and modern day Turkey).

Procession of Crusaders Around Jerusalem, July 14, 1099 by Jean-Victor Schnetz,1841 [Palace of Versailles, France]

Spencer documents the whole history of jihad in a chronological manner. This, surprisingly, had never been done before. He proceeds century by century, which means that different geographical regions are treated side by side. Like a spectator at a tennis match, the reader’s eyes go from west to east and back again, over and over, following sanctioned episodes of execution, plunder, rape, torture, enslavement, destruction, humiliation, and oppression. It is an utterly devastating approach.

He relies heavily on contemporary sources that exhume long buried accounts of great human agonies inflicted upon infidels. They also reveal a mindset that regards killing as a “good action” for which jihadists hope to “receive future reward.” Spencer also includes a telling aside about the jihadist origin of the word Assassins.

The jihad actually reached Rome in 846; invaders looted the basilicas of St. Peter and St. Paul – both of which were outside its walls, which they were unable to breach. Thereafter, necessary precautions were implemented because:

It had not yet become customary for the Roman Pontiff to proclaim the peacefulness of Islam and benign character of the Qur’an, and to decry the building of walls.

Robert Spencer

Suffice it to say Spencer has made it his life’s work to follow the counsel of previous popes, such as Sixtus IV (15th century), who warned us “not to remain plunged in. . . inertia” while Islam advances.

Spencer recently left Catholicism for Orthodoxy. It might be more accurate to say Church leaders left him, or prodded him out. This is a man who has been banned from entering the United Kingdom, while radical imams there freely proclaim that Islam will dominate the world. But he has been hardly more welcome to share his erudition in dioceses here or regarded more positively by the U.S. Bishops Conference. Whether it emanates from Church or State, it is utter madness that drives such contempt for the man and his message.

Astute observers such as William Kilpatrick have been warning that the Church’s inadequate and inaccurate stance vis-a-vis Islam today could well lead to a large scale loss of confidence. Spencer apparently decided enough was enough.

This book does us a favor by shining a light on a supremacist creed that stands in opposition not only to the West, but to every other form of governance and law.

Yet Islam is the religion that the Left, which supposedly detests hegemony, most seems to esteem.

We don’t believe jihadists’ plainly stated motivations in part because we have lost much of our own faith – along with a sense of faith altogether. The last chapter – aptly titled “The West Loses the Will to Live” – is dispiriting precisely because our feeble posture today foolishly dismisses the peril obviously evident from the litany of atrocities Spencer chronicles throughout the book. It substantiates what we are ultimately immersed in: a great spiritual crisis

Matthew Hanley

Matthew Hanley

Matthew Hanley is senior fellow with the National Catholic Bioethics Center. With Jokin de Irala, M.D., he is the author of Affirming Love, Avoiding AIDS: What Africa Can Teach the West, which recently won a best-book award from the Catholic Press Association. The opinions expressed here are Mr. Hanley’s and not those of the NCBC.

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images is republished with permission. © 2018 The Catholic Thing. All rights reserved. For reprint rights, write to: info@frinstitute.orgThe Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own.

‘Gosnell’ Hangs On at Box Office Despite Obstacles

The movie about Kermit Gosnell, the late-term abortionist in Philadelphia who went to prison after being convicted of the murder of three babies, briefly cracked the Top 10  at the U.S. box office but also continues to face what its producers call censorship.

“We have been banned, blocked, and attacked,” Phelim McAleer, who co-produced “Gosnell: The Trial of America’s Biggest Serial Killer” with his wife, Ann McElhinney, said in a statement Friday to The Daily Signal.

“The mainstream media refused to review the film despite a national release of a movie about a subject [abortion] that is a major political issue,” McAleer said. “NPR refused our advertising, Facebook has blocked our ads, and theaters yanked our film, even though it was a success.”

“Gosnell” has taken in an estimated $3.2 million and was on 467 screens as of Sunday, according to Box Office Mojo, which placed it unofficially at No. 18 among all movies in theaters.

The movie opened Oct. 12 and was the No. 12 film that weekend, after hitting No. 10 for one day.

The movie tells the true story of Gosnell and how his 30-plus years as an abortion doctor ended in a case alleging multiple murders at his clinic, dubbed the “house of horrors.” Directed by Nick Searcy, the film stars Dean Cain, Earl Billings, and Michael Beach.

Life Site News reported Tuesday that “movie theaters across the country are dropping and blocking ticket sales” for the movie “despite–or perhaps because of–the film’s success.”

Despite the challenges, McAleer said, the film has a profound impact on those who see it. He cites a report in LifeZette that a screening in California “led to its viewers helping one young local woman in changing her mind about getting an abortion.”

“Our movie has saved a life,” McAleer told The Daily Signal. “We are stunned and moved.”

The co-producer said the movie did not quickly wane in popularity.

“The film is also going from strength to strength–most movies see a massive drop-off in box office [of] 50-60 percent every week,” McAleer said Friday. “On Monday, for example, we had declined just 20 percent. Interest is growing not declining.”

COLUMN BY

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


RELATED ARTICLE: I Watched ‘Gosnell.’ Here Are My 5 Takeaways

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images is republished with permission. The featured photo is of Actor Dean Cain, who stars in “Gosnell” as a police officer and is known for playing Superman in the TV series “Lois and Clark,” attending a conference Saturday organized in his honor at Comic Con Paris 2018. (Photo: Mireille Ampilhac/Abaca/Sipa USA/Newscom)

VIDEO: A Mob of Thousands Descends on U.S. Border Demanding Entry

Art Del Cueto, VP of Border Patrol Counsel and ICE Agent, joins Grant Stinchfield to discuss why this caravan of immigrants moving towards our southern border is just one of the many examples that proves the need for stricter border policies.

RELATED ARTICLES:

The Left Goes Full Open Borders

San Francisco Taxpayers Spent $6,122.44 Each to Register “Undocumented People” to Vote

EDITORS NOTE: This video with images is republished with permission.

If You Earn $32,400 Annually You Are In the Top 1% In The World

There are those who envy the top 1%. In an interview aired on ABC News on October 18, 2011, former President Obama expressed his commitment to the Occupy Wall Street protesters. “I understand the frustrations being expressed in those protests,” Obama told ABC News’ Jake Tapper.

The top 1% are the sworn enemies of the leaders of the Democratic Party and Democrat Socialists. But who really is in the 1% globally?

In an Investopedia article titled “Are You in the Top One Percent of the World?” Daniel Kurt reports:

The growth of income inequality has long been a hot topic around the globe, but it wasn’t until the “Occupy” movement that the amount of wealth concentrated in the top 1% of society received so much attention.

[ … ]

This raises an interesting question: who exactly are the 1%? The surprising answer: if you’re an American, you don’t have to even be close to being uber-rich to make the list.

Daniel Kurt notes:

Ranking by Income

According to the Global Rich List, a website that brings awareness to worldwide income disparities, an income of $32,400 a year will allow you to make the cut. $32,400 amounts to roughly:

  • 30,250 Euros
  • 2 million Indian rupees, or
  • 223,000 Chinese yuan

So if you’re an accountant, a registered nurse or even an elementary school teacher, congratulations. The average wage for any of these careers falls well within the top 1% worldwide.

Figure 1. The percentage of global wealth owned by the top 1% surpassed 50% as of 2016.

Source: Oxfam

Kurt concludes, “The term ‘top 1%’ of global income may sound like an exclusive club, but it’s one to which millions of Americans belong. It’s a reminder of just how prosperous developed countries are compared to the vast majority of other people who share our planet.”

EDITORS NOTE: The featured photo is by Sharon McCutcheon on Unsplash

Copyright © 2024 DrRichSwier.com LLC. A Florida Cooperation. All rights reserved. The DrRichSwier.com is a not-for-profit news forum for intelligent Conservative commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own. Republishing of columns on this website requires the permission of both the author and editor. For more information contact: drswier@gmail.com.