Trump’s Rollback of CAFE Mandates Is a Big Win for Car Buyers, Consumer Choice

/in , , , /by

The Trump administration recently proposed the Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule. The proposed rule offers modifications to Obama-era Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards with a “preferred alternative” for model years 2021 through 2026.

Without a doubt, the Trump administration’s proposed revision is a welcome victory for consumers’ wallets and for consumer choice.

The Obama administration implemented fuel-efficiency mandates that would force auto manufacturers to have a fleetwide fuel-economy average of 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025. The new rule’s “preferred” change would maintain the existing fuel-economy mandate through 2020 (increasing to 37 mpg) and keep the level at 37 mpg through 2025.

New fuel-efficiency standards create a number of unintended consequences, including higher prices for new cars and costly retooling of existing auto plants.

A 2016 Heritage Foundation analysis estimates the Obama fuel-economy mandates increased new-car prices $6,800 more than the pre-2009 baseline trend, and that eliminating the more aggressive standards would save 2025 car buyers at least $7,200 per vehicle.

As my colleagues detail, “Economists and engineers accurately predicted that the [model year] 2016 standards would hurt consumers by at least $3,800 per car.”

Consumers—not government bureaucrats—should make decisions about what cars they drive.

If consumers value saving money on gasoline, they will simply choose to purchase more fuel-efficient cars, and automakers will meet that demand without a federal mandate. If consumers value other attributes—vehicle weight, engine power, safety—Washington shouldn’t force automakers to ignore consumers’ preferences.

In fact, a 2011 paper from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology found that if vehicle weight, horsepower, and torque were held constant at 1980 levels, fuel efficiency would have increased 60 percent from 1980 to 2006 instead of the 15 percent increase that did occur.

The reason fuel-efficiency increase occurred at 15 percent instead of 60 percent is because auto manufacturers met buyers’ demands for heavier vehicles with more torque and horsepower. When the federal government comes in and says we need to have a fuel economy of 54.5 miles per gallon, regulators override those preferences.

Congress established fuel-economy mandates in the 1970s as a response to the Arab oil embargo. A fear existed that the world was running out of oil and that America was too dependent on foreign oil.

CAFE standards were sold under the false notion of scarcity. It makes no sense now that we have an abundance of oil.  But even if the world were running out of oil, fuel-economy mandates were not a good policy then and are not a good policy now.

CAFE standards are not just a relic of the past, but a systemic problem of the way policymakers, regulators, lobbyists, and pundits treat energy markets. Policies and regulations are based on alleged expertise and on making bold predictions about the future of energy supply and demand.

Rather than rely on regulations to tell producers and consumers what to do, we have price signals for that. Higher gas prices communicate information to energy producers to drill for more oil. They communicate information to entrepreneurs to invest in new extraction technologies, alternative vehicle technologies, or more fuel-efficient cars.

Prices also communicate information to energy users to buy more fuel-efficient products, to carpool, or to find other modes of transportation.

When Obama-era regulators set CAFE standards and estimated the alleged savings to consumers, they demonstrated the same level of hubris our politicians did in the 1970s.

When crafting these standards, the Environmental Protection Agency and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimated that gas prices would be $3.87 per gallon in 2025, increasing to $4.24 per gallon by 2040. They used these price projections to project how much money consumers would save on fuel costs.

While those price-projection scenarios are certainly plausible, increases in supply could also certainly drive prices down, and consumers would save less money on gas by purchasing a more fuel-efficient car.

Alternatively, gas prices could rise even higher than the government projections, and consumers could save even more money from mandated fuel efficiency.

The reality is, we don’t know. It is difficult to project gas prices 22 weeks ahead, let alone for the next 22 years, and it’s dangerous to base policy on those predictions.

Trump’s course correction on CAFE is a welcome step. Congress should demonstrate similar courage and recognize that we don’t need to mandate energy use for cars, dishwashers, or even clocks on microwaves, and scrap these standards altogether.

COMMENTARY BY

Portrait of Nicolas Loris

Nicolas Loris

Nicolas Loris, an economist, focuses on energy, environmental and regulatory issues as the Herbert and Joyce Morgan fellow at The Heritage Foundation. Read his research. Twitter: .

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

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image of 2015 Jeep Grand Cherokees exhibited at a car dealership in New Jersey July 24, 2015. (Photo: Eduardo Munoz/Reuters /Newscom)

Trusting the Untrustworthy

/in , , , /by

Sir Alexander Fraser Tytler (1747-1813), a Scottish jurist and historian, provides an explanation for why great societies do not survive for more than 200 years:

“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largess from the public treasury. From that time on the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the results that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship (bondage).”

Our forefathers founded the United States of America as a republic and not a democracy to avoid this existential threat. So, what happened?

The Bern happened. Snowflakes and millennials discovered leaders in representative government who would provide the largesse from the treasury that they could not vote for directly. Bernie Sanders promised them the cradle-to-grave government support of socialism and its attendant breakdown of representative government – they trusted the Bern and they were all in. After Hillary and the DNC managed to deny Bernie the candidacy Hillary’s campaign moved further left politically to pick up Bernie’s constituents.

Hillary tailored her message toward Bernie’s followers and in the aftermath of her shocking loss to candidate Donald Trump her followers disavowed the American electoral system entirely. They have withdrawn their trust because they don’t like the outcome. This is unprecedented in American history. For 242 years the American public has accepted election outcomes and moved on. As in any competition there is a winner and a loser and everyone moves on to try again next time.

Trust is the essential component in all human relationships which is why betrayal is so devastating. Marital relationships, parent-child relationships, friendships, business relationships, consumer relations, political relations, moral, ethical, and religious relationships all revolve around trust. Trust is the fulcrum of civil society in personal and public matters and is the foundation of the laws that structure society.

Historically, the United States of America was born from distrust of England and its monarchy. The American Revolution created the greatest experiment in human liberty and freedom and ever known. Individual rights and freedoms of speech, religion, assembly, the press all required consensus and trust in the common denominator of being an American. As America grew and more and more people arrived from different nations and cultures all across the world what bound them together remained consensus and trust in the common denominator of being an American. The American dream of freedom and prosperity bound them together in common cause. America had overcome tribalism and became the freest and most powerful country on earth by accepting election outcomes and the peaceful transfer of power that acceptance provides. What happened?

The educational indoctrination against American individualism toward collectivism that began after WWII started to weaken the common denominator of American citizenry.

The melting pot that was America began to cool and the common denominator of Americanism began fraying. Eventually the divisive leadership of Barack Obama encouraged hyphenated Americans to distrust other hyphenated Americans. African-Americans, Asian-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, white-Americans, Jewish-Americans, Christian-Americans, Muslim-Americans began seeing each other as untrustworthy – the traditional common denominator of Americanism was vanishing and being replaced by identity politics whose common denominator was self-identified victimhood. Society began devolving into the tribalism of victimhood.

Tribalism has a very different dynamic for group cohesion that focuses on the WHO of behavior and not the WHAT. Let me explain.

In tribal societies membership in the tribe is the absolute value. Regardless of your behavior, when you are a member of the tribe the tribe protects you. The tribe focuses on the WHO of behavior which explains the nature and attraction of identity politics. Human beings are social beings and require emotional attachment.

In the Trump era we are witnessing the devolution of American society into political tribes.

In the leftist Democrat tribe it does not matter what you do – as long as you are considered a victim you are welcomed into the tribe and protected. The leaders of the tribe promulgate victim identity politics to galvanize their power. They tolerate any and all differences in race, religion, gender, socio-economic status, etc but will not tolerate anyone who thinks differently. Leftist identity politics requires self-identification as a victim. In a symbiotic relatedness the leftist tribal leaders do not hold their constituency accountable for behavior (what they do) and their constituency ignores the malfeasance of their leadership. This is how it works.

Hillary Clinton, leftist tribal candidate for president in 2016 was elevated to “above the law” status (the who). It did not matter that she colluded with the Russians to sell 20% of American uranium to the Russians or that she made up a fictitious story about a video to absolve herself of responsibility for Benghazi. Remember all human relatedness revolves around trust and those who voted for “HER” ignored any and all evidence about her wrongdoing.

In fact, the left doubled down and in a stunning tactic of political projection accused President Donald Trump of colluding with the Russians.

When it was discovered that Hillary used an illegal basement server containing classified information her followers chose to ignore it because she was the leader of the tribe. Even after it was discovered that Hillary’s basement server was hacked her tribal followers refused to look at WHAT she had done and how she had endangered America.

After Hillary’s devastating loss to President Trump her tribe became hysterical – they continue to refuse to accept the election results (the what) and instead are trying to overthrow duly elected President Trump. This brings us to the Mueller “investigation.”

The infamous Mueller “investigation” has been exposed as part of the soft coup (no military involvement) against President Trump. The “Russian collusion” narrative cooked up by the anti-Trumpers parallels the fiction of the Benghazi video – both wag-the-dog plots to deflect attention away from the actual staggering malfeasance of Hillary and the Obama administration. Again, the anti-Trump leftist tribe concentrates on the WHO and not the WHAT.

Ironically, the Mueller debacle has begun to boomerang onto its own anti-Trump cast of characters including Mueller, Rosenstein, Strzok, Page, McCabe, Wray, Ohr, Brennan, Comey, the partisan Clinton/Obama lawyers Mueller hired, and of course Hillary and Obama himself. The malfeasance of the entire cast is slowly being exposed one FOIA request at a time. The politicizing of the FBI, CIA, IRS, NSA, DOJ, and State Department under Obama was a staggering betrayal of the institutional non-partisan missions to protect and preserve the country. Obama promised to transform America and he did.

Obama’s hope and change brought the greatest erosion of public trust in government since the Vietnam War. We are at a tipping point when Americans no longer trust the politicized government institutions or the mainstream media who have colluded to rewrite the facts in favor of their preferred politicians (the who).

So, “What happens when trusted institutions are no longer trustworthy and the country’s institutions betray their own citizens??” The society devolves into fractious tribalism where only the WHO and not the WHAT of behavior matters. The leftist anti-Trump tribe seeks to overthrow the President and replace our capitalist infrastructure with socialism. The pro-Trump tribe seeks to protect and preserve the unifying Constitution and the non-partisan rule of law.

The crucial question is, “Who do you trust?” Americans who trust the anti-Trumpers to overthrow a duly elected president are inviting anarchy. Historically, anarchy is followed by totalitarian government to stabilize the chaos that anarchy creates. Americans who trust the Constitution and the rule of law can recover from this period in history and defy the prediction that great civilizations necessarily collapse backwards into dependency and bondage.

Sir Alex Fraser Tytler also delineated eight stages in the rise and fall of great civilizations:

  1.  from bondage to spiritual faith;
  2. from spiritual faith to great courage;
  3. from courage to liberty;
  4. from liberty to abundance;
  5. from abundance to complacency;
  6. from complacency to apathy;
  7. from apathy to dependency;
  8. from dependency back again to bondage.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

America is at the tipping point of losing its identity as a representative republic. Anarchy and lawlessness being fomented by the leftist Democrat tribe threatens to collapse our capitalist infrastructure and replace it with the deceitful promise of socialism. Here is the problem. Everywhere the people have elected officials who promise them free stuff and cradle-to-grave government dependency the outcome has been disastrous. We don’t have to look at the calamity of Venezuela – we can look at California, Illinois, and New York – these states are teetering on bankruptcy because free stuff is not free contrary to what the Bern says. In the immortal words of Margaret Thatcher, “Socialism cannot work because eventually you run out of other people’s money.” California, Illinois, and New York are running out of other people’s money and are are currently in Tytler’s 7th stage.

It is imperative that we stand strong with President Trump and trust the trustworthy Constitution and the rule of law. If the nation trusts the untrustworthy promises of social justice and income equality through socialism we will be forced into bondage. We will end up like Venezuela – poor, robbed of our precious liberties, individual freedoms, and begging for a return to our capitalist infrastructure and representative republic.

Untrustworthy snake oil salesmen come in all forms. Many appear extremely “presidential.” What they have in common is they live in the swamp and the product they are selling only benefits themselves. We must be very careful and only trust the trustworthy – we must trust the Constitution, the rule of law, and duly elected President Trump who stands for both.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on the Goudsmit Pundicity.

VIDEO: Jewish Students Speak About Anti-Semitism at George Washington University

/in , , , , /by

Whenever Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) or other anti-Israel activists initiate a Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) campaign, Jewish students become fearful of the accompanying anti-Semitism. This is exactly what happened in April 2018, at George Washington University (GWU).

The ugly face of BDS at  #GWU: Jewish students voice their fears again and again, student government ignores them and votes for a secret ballot to push BDS through with zero accountability.

Please retweet #BDSisAntiSemitic

RELATED ARTICLE: CAIR in the Classroom: Islamist Group Partnering with Public Schools

EXPOSED: Astonishing Fake News Against Rick Scott in Senate Race

/in , , , , /by

I don’t really like the term “fake news” because it has come to mean any story with which the person using the phrase disagrees. That’s not particularly helpful.

But there really is fake news out there, and it is being heavily promulgated by the dinosaur media that is still pretending to be mainstream. It’s not just the big dogs of CNN or the AP or the New York Times. What is going on in Florida media markets is so bad right now as to require equal time if it weren’t newspapers. It’s straightforward Democratic attack ads cast as “news” stories.

The latest came in Sunday newspapers around the state owned by rapidly expanding media conglomerate Gatehouse Media, which publishes 21 newspapers in Florida and has 570 media outlets nationwide. (Gatehouse recently acquired the Tampa Bay Times, Florida’s largest newspaper.)

Gatehouse Media newspapers in Florida.

On Sunday, Gatehouse newspapers generally ran the exact same story with the exact same headline as it came out of their capitol bureau in Tallahassee: Rick Scott turns to those he appointed for campaign cash

They used different dropheads below the headline, depending on their layouts and styles: Well-heeled Floridians appointed to state boards are ponying up funding for governor’s bid to unseat Nelson and ‘It smacks of pay-to-play.’

The reason this epitomizes fake news is not that the same story that ran in all these newspapers is a lie. The thrust of it is accurate enough. It’s fake news because it is not newsworthy. There is no news in this breathless, page 1 Sunday story plastered around the state during a highly competitive U.S. Senate campaign between Scott (worth noting, an early supporter of President Trump) and 40-year D.C. incumbent Sen. Bill Nelson — a race that may determine who controls the Senate.

Here’s the gist. The governor of Florida appoints hundreds and hundreds of people to boards, advisory councils and commissions around the state — university boards, water boards, airport authorities, environmental boards, medical boards, building boards and so on. Naturally enough, he appoints people who agree with him on issues, particularly on issues that relate to those boards. In what is perhaps less shocking than the sun rising in the east, many of those people who agree with the governor also support the governor politically. Some even donate to his election campaign. Oh the scandal of it all!

And yet, there it is. That’s the entire story. Some of the hundreds of appointees who all agree with Gov. Scott politically have donated to his Senate political campaign; exactly as has been the case with every single governor ever.

There’s even less to the story than that. Reporter writes:

“Scott has collected close to $1.4 million from 127 appointees, their spouses and children, who have given either to his Senate campaign or the New Republican PAC supporting his bid…”

So the 127 number covers three categories, not just appointees. Spouses can reasonably be included. Children means adult children, which may be making their own decision on supporting Scott. But they’re still lumped in to inflate the number. How many are just appointees? 50? 80? The story doesn’t say, and one can reasonably infer that is because that number is pretty small compared to what may be a thousand appointees. But to get the real percentage using the reported 127 number as the numerator, we need the total number of appointees, spouses and children as the denominator. That means this is probably a very tiny percentage. Well under 10 percent. That makes it hard to hide the fakeness of the fake story.

This is a picture-perfect definition of non-news. This is the equivalent of reporting on a plane that landed smoothly, taxied to the terminal and all the passengers deboarded safely — and  making that sound shifty and suspicious if it could be reflected badly on a Republican. It’s just that bad.

And maybe a little worse. I wear three hats in relation to this particular fake news story. One, I am one of those appointees by Gov. Scott — to the Board of Trustees of State College of Florida. Neither Scott nor his team has ever asked me for money or brought up political support of any kind in the interviews prior to appointing me to the position. Twice. And, I’ve not donated to Scott’s campaign.

The second hat I wear is as a former long-time journalist in the mainstream media, spending many years covering politics. And the third hat, I now work with select political candidates running for office. So I have seen up close and personal both sides of equation between reporter and political machine. Based on these experiences, I am about 99 percent sure that this story — and the many like it — are actually opposition research by the Nelson campaign, which is then fed to friendly, gullible, allied reporters within Gatehouse Media, in this case, in their Tallahassee bureau.

There is plenty to criticize in the fake story on basic journalistic grounds. But this sentence that the reporter included to show balance reveals just how badly the reporter misunderstands basic reality, to put it in the most kind light.

“Those contributors deny that there’s any link between their appointments and the checks they cut for Scott’s Senate bid. But the campaign data shows a remarkable correlation.”

“Denies” is one of those implied guilty words the media loves to use. And then using the conjunction “but” to start the following sentence implies the denials are suspicious. The real problem is the last word. The correlation actually is long before this reporter “discovered” it (again, being generous) in the campaign finances. The correlation is between the type of principled person Scott appointed and the type of principled person who supports Scott’s campaign for the Senate — which is a blindingly obvious correlation with zero nefarious implications.

This is the latest in an ongoing stream of anti-Scott stories emanating from Gatehouse Media’s Tallahassee bureau. Some others include:

Rick Scott’s donors still mostly a mystery, but what’s revealed belies outsider image (July 6, 2018)

Scott’s use of blind trust challenged as illegal (July 17, 2018) (Even blind trusts aren’t good enough if you’re a Republican.)

Florida Gov. Rick Scott’s investments draw scrutiny (July 21, 2018)

Gov. Rick Scott profits from Hep C drug tied to state prisons, opioid crisis (July 22, 2018)

Low pay casts shadow over Florida’s improving jobs picture (Aug. 4, 2018, as Florida nears an all-time low in unemployment — still negative about Scott.)

These were found quickly in the first couple of pages with a Google search of “Gov. Scott and Gatehouse Media.” A Google search of “Sen. Nelson and Gatehouse Media” does not locate one negative story in the first two pages. But several pieces of puffery.

The point is, this is a glaring pattern with Gatehouse Media; and of course, it is true in the rest of the Florida media, too.

This is why Republicans need to raise so much more money than Democrats to have a level playing field: Gatehouse Media stories such as these, quite possibly planted by the Nelson team, are the equivalent of millions of dollars in free advertising to Nelson. Why spend money on attack ads when you have the media to do it for you?

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

Massachusetts’ Taxpayers sue over anti-Semitic, pro-Islam public school lessons

/in , , , , , , /by

At last, some push back against what is a nationwide problem.

“Massachusetts Taxpayers Sue Over Anti-Semitic, Pro-Islam School Lessons,” by Adam Kredo, Washington Free Beacon, August 17, 2018:

A group of Massachusetts-based taxpayers are suing the school committee in the city of Newton, a wealthy, liberal enclave, over what they claim is the leadership’s ongoing promotion of anti-Semitic school materials and the promotion of Islamic religious beliefs, according to an announcement from the organization handling the lawsuit.

Education Without Indoctrination, a local community group driving the lawsuit, “claims multiple violations of the Massachusetts Open Meeting Law stemming from the school committee’s handling of a burgeoning scandal over anti-Semitic lessons and the promotion of Islamic religious beliefs as objective facts in the public school district’s history classes,” according to a press release from the group.

The lawsuit stems from a controversy of Newton Public Schools use of what the group claims are “unvetted educational materials” produced by the Saudi Arabian oil company ARAMCO and the Qatari government, which has long been cited for its funding of terrorism.

“In teaching world history, Newton Public Schools (NPS) use unvetted educational materials funded by the Saudi oil company ARAMCO and the government of Qatar. As a result, Newton public school students are propagandized with materials that slander Israel and the Jewish people, and that falsify history to promote the Islamic religion in public schools,” the press release states.

“Just this past May, Newton North High School invited an anti-Semitic group to screen Palestinian propaganda films to its students,” it continues. “For this, NPS Superintendent David Fleishman earned a rebuke from the New England branch of the Anti-Defamation League and Boston’s Jewish Community Relations Council.”

Concerned parents have been stonewalled in their attempts to gain information from the school leadership about these activities, the group claims….

VIDEO: No Support from Supporters

/in , , , /by

Marc N. Blattner, President and CEO. Pone: 503-245-6482

Mark Blattner, CEO of the Jewish Federation of Greater Portland (JFC-GP), appears to have swallowed today’s deadly multiculturalism pill, an hallucinogenic that causes its victims to believe that mixing two disparate cultures can bring about an egalitarian Utopian society.  Despite the many books written about the decline of civilizations under Islam, there are still too many misguided people on the left who, whether wittingly or not, act to bring Israel to destruction.  We are already seeing evidence that while differences in race and religions can work very well, the invasion of a theocratic culture, such as Islam, can cause the demise of the host culture.  This explains why there are so many Islamic tyrannical regimes in the east and why Sweden may be taking her last breath in the west.

In a world that often views Israelis and Jews as pariahs, there is only one bona fide homeland for the Jewish people who, after thousands of years of suffering on foreign soil, were finally able to reclaim their ancient homeland in 1948.  They re-built and transformed the neglected desert and malarial swampland into a modern, thriving, innovative state, yet there are still some American Jews who seem to resent their brethren’s freedoms and accomplishment.  These voices from the Diaspora claim to be “a strong supporter of Israel,” but the words ring empty as the ADL (Anti-Defamation League), the AJC (American Jewish Congress) and JFCGP persist in denying Israel’s right to their own complete independence, self-rule, dignity, language, flag, holidays, Jewish customs and laws, and Jewish culture, unapologetically and unbeholden to others, on this one piece of land that 22,145 km compared to the Arab world’s 12,061,226 km, with Israel’s population of 8,585,000 (in 2016) to the Arab world’s 330,000,000 (in 2007). No other country is asked to hyphenate its identity and destiny.

These “strong supporters” have not defined their support; it is an empty statement. 

HAMAS rioters in Gaza.

While they try to appear altruistic, they are speaking out against the Nation-State Law that protects Israel’s interests and her continued existence.  Contrary to the rhetoric, the Law does not affect the individual civil, political or human rights of Israel’s minority groups. They retain their rights to vote, to employment, housing, and transportation.  It does, however, clearly reserve the collective right of national self-determination in the state to the Jewish people, the fundamental principle of Zionism. Ronald Lauder and the AJC abuse Israel’s nationalism, but it is precisely that concept of nationalism plus borders that are helping some countries (Hungary, Poland, Latvia and The Czech Republic) survive the Islamic onslaught being experienced by their less wise neighbors.

Where were the ADL, AJC, and Jewish Federations when Israel fought for her survival against Islam’s multiple wars, Intifada attacks and constant barrage of rockets since before her declaration of statehood?  They were mute then and they remain mute now, through the current fire jihad that has destroyed more than 82,000 acres of forestry and agriculture, livestock, homes, livelihoods, irreplaceable personal belongings, and impaired the pulmonary and emotional health of the residents. The groups are silent when Palestinians destroy precious Hebrew artifacts beneath the Temple Mount, and absurdly absent when President Trump acknowledged and formally declared Jerusalem the Eternal Capital of Israel.  We hear no voices against the anti-Semitic textbooks in American schools and they do not support President Trump’s attempt to keep Americans safe from violent Islamic migrants who cross our own borders.  There is no doubt that the ADL, AJC, and regrettably others are Progressives, globalists, who desire one large chaotic world with one ruler at the top for which the masses will have neither voice nor vote.

The Left seeks parity from disparity and expects Israel to do with her invaders what no other country has been able to do – welcome as equal, for a peaceful coexistence, the Arabs who have imposed hate, death and destruction on Israel even before its sovereignty was established.  The Muslim invaders changed the Middle East and Persia drastically and are now slowly destroying Sweden, Germany, England, the Netherlands, Italy and France and others. The Muslims are marching, terrorizing the host population, and violently wrecking property.  They are wreaking havoc so that women are no longer able to walk the streets in safety, for fear of firebombs, acid attacks or rape for not dressing in full Islamic shroud.  The Jews may no longer wear kippahs or any other Jewish-identifying clothing or attend synagogues in those countries.  They are being forced to leave behind their homes, businesses and friends and, in many instances, go to Israel, where the American do-gooders are willing to have them live through a repeat performance.  Poland, Hungary, Latvia and the Czech Republic are refusing the migrants entry despite intimidation from the European Union. Meanwhile, in the rest of Europe, Muslims are manipulating themselves into positions of authority in order to Islamize the established culture.  Ninety self-identified Muslims are running for office in the U.S.

What the Lauders of our world do not understand is what could happen if the Muslims had equal status, and ultimately equal population, in Israel.  They would establish sharia courts to supersede the laws of the land, and enact Islamic punishments (beheading, stoning, whipping, chopping limbs) for even the simplest of crimes.  They would insist on Female Genital Mutilation on young girls, allow the marriage of adult males to prepubescent girls, allow bigamy (four wives per man), and sanction wife beating as a religious prerogative.  They would establish Islamic holidays as national and mandatory, allowing for the inhumane, barbaric torture of cattle as they’re driven to slaughter, and insist on halal foods in all public venues.  They would declare Jewish holidays, dance, music, and other festivities offensive, beginning with “no-go” zones.  To ensure the wearing of burqas, they would mass-rape women until they complied.  What the adherents of Islam cannot accomplish through law, they would enforce with the same violence seen in Islamic countries and Europe today.

The time would come in Israel for Arab men to apply for social services in support of their numerous wives and children, that would be approved by at least the Arab half of the Israeli government and drain Israel’s coffers. As the number of rage-filled youths proliferates to exceed the Jewish population, perhaps in one generation, they will create enough riots and chaos to reach their stated goal to free Israel of the Jews “from the river to the sea,” the call for genocide.

Within a matter of a few years, we could see Ronald Lauder being lauded in New York for his donation to the new memorial or museum to the State of Israel, but just as he would be ready to speak, there would be the unnerving tremble of an imminent, severe earthquake.  His mother, Estee Lauder, would be turning over and over in her grave.

Ronald Lauder has tried to impose a psychological threat against Israel, saying that he sees American-Jewish youth becoming less attached to their heritage, and that his suggestions are the remedy, but that is not the case.  American youth, in general, are propagandized and Islamized in American schools.  They are being robbed of a good education; deprived of math and reading skills; taught that Islam is superior to Judaism and Christianity; and that America has been a colonialist nation, responsible for slavery.  From K-12 through universities, our youth are being indoctrinated and disenfranchised by the left, and it has extended to such as the ADL, the AJC, and Jewish Federations, groups once counted as friends and honest supporters of Israel.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Palestinians Choose to Fund Terrorists Over Children’s Education

Episcopal Bishop Forced to Apologize After Fabricating Israeli ‘Atrocities’

EDITORS  NOTE: The featured image is of the Israeli flag seen in front of burned barricade in settlement of Katif in Gush Katif bloc of Jewish settlements. REUTERS/Goran Tomasevic – RTRL6W4

Colleges Are Turning Red Students Radically Blue

/in , , , /by

A good friend of mine recently attended his daughter’s high school graduation and was amazed at the high number of students attending prestigious universities around the nation. That includes his daughter, who is traveling across the continent to attend Stanford University.

The high school is located in a very conservative part of Southwest Florida just littered with churches, Republican Clubs and Trump supporters. Most of the transplants are from Midwest states. In other words, this is very red America, and presumably a high number of those graduating students reflect their parents’ values. Certainly my friend’s daughter does.

At this moment. And that’s the rub.

Our university systems are increasingly focused on turning red students radically blue. This is not a stated goal, of course. It’s simply the reality on the ground — taking generally conservative, pro-America Christian students and indoctrinating them over four years into progressive, anti-America non-Christian students. While there are certainly exceptions, the numbers depressingly bear out the effectiveness of this indoctrination.

According to Campus Renewal, more than 70 percent of teens who confess Christianity when they enter college reject Christianity by the time they leave four years later. Previous studies have placed it between 65 and 80 percent. So roughly three out of every four.

Of course some percentage of young people will leave the faith when they leave home anyway. That has always been the case, as William Wilberforce explained more than 200 years ago. But the percentages are significantly lower in that group. So if you have a youth group with 20 kids that go to college, the odds are only five or six will still be Christians four years later. Those are just the facts, and that should be deeply sobering for parents, pastors and priests.

There are virtually no studies on the shift in political views of people before and after college, perhaps because so many are still so young they have not formed firm enough worldviews yet to create a data set. But considering the dominance of liberal professors and the monolithically progressive environment that young, impressionable students are thrown into for four years, it is only reasonably to expect a similar level of influence and “flipping” among them.

This picture is partially painted just from faculty political affiliations. In an article published by the National Association of Scholars, entitled “Homogeneous: The Political Affiliations of Elite Liberal Arts College Faculty,” Brooklyn College professor Mitchell Langbert shows this in pure, dominating numbers. Langbert examined the political affiliations of doctorate-holding faculty members at 51 of the top 66 liberal arts colleges listed by U.S. News & World Report.

His findings are astonishing. Fully 39 percent of the colleges in his sample have no Republican doctorate faculty on staff. Not one.

Langbert also looked at the total Democrat-to-Republican faculty ratios at the most elite colleges. At Williams College, the Democrat-to-Republican ratio is 132-to-1; Amherst College, 34-to-1; Wellesley College, 136-to-1; Davidson College, 10-to-1; Swarthmore College, 120-to-1. Only two colleges of the top 66 are even close to having an even faculty: the U.S. Military Academy (West Point) with a Democrat-to-Republican ratio of 1.3-to-1, and the U.S. Naval Academy, with a ratio 2.3-to-1.

Many on the left and in the media have dismissed such studies by claiming that the GOP has moved far right and so actually it left academia. That doesn’t really pass the smell test, but Sam Abrams, writing at Heterodox Academy, plotted graphs comparing where university faculty stand on the political spectrum and where the American people stand. What he demonstrates is that as liberal as universities were as recently as the 1990s, they are dramatically more so now.

“Professors were more liberal than the country in 1990, but only by about 11 percentage points. By 2013, the gap had tripled; it is now more than 30 points. It seems reasonable to conclude that it is academics who shifted, as there is no equivalent movement among the masses whatsoever.”

This dominance, and the obsequiousness of college administrators, reveals itself in the shift in curriculum.

In 64 of the top 76 universities in the country, students can get a history degree without any American history. Wisconsin is entirely dropping history as a major. So is California. Less than 3 percent of colleges require history or civics to get a degree. This all explains why 75 percent of students support socialism, but can neither define it or give one successful example of it. Ignorance of history is foundational to indoctrination. It’s a form of Orwell’s Memory Hole in “1984.”

This is about as objective as is available right now: Comparing the polling on Christian students, the smothering monolithically Democratic faculty, the leftward lurch compared to the rest of the country and the dramatic shift in curriculum, and the outcome becomes not only obvious, but predictable.

In “What’s So Great About Christianity,” Dinesh D’Souza, makes the broader point about public schools through universities:

“Children spend the majority of their waking hours in school. Parents invest a good portion of their life savings in college education and entrust their offspring to people who are supposed to educate them. Isn’t it wonderful that educators have figured out a way to make parents the instruments of their own undoing? Isn’t it brilliant that they have persuaded Christian moms and dads to finance the destruction of their own beliefs and values? Who said atheists aren’t clever?”

The same holds true about Democrats and political radicalization.

An indicator of the veracity of this truth is that the most liberal of media outlets, such as The New York Times and Vox have been working hard to show that while all these facts may be true, college is not making students more liberal, or professors aren’t doing so, or maybe colleges are just opening students’ eyes — depending on the publication.

In other words, they’re providing cover for the indoctrinators.

The students with the best ability to weather the storm of the politically progressive, theologically anti-Christian college years are those whose parents and churches equip them with strong defenses for their beliefs. Without that they walk into a four-year, sustained assault on everything they believe and the statistics are clear what happens.

There is one silver lining. The small percentage that survive the fires of liberal programming over four years, are some of the most stalwart young conservatives out there and are far more adept at defending their views than their peers on the left who were seldom, if ever, challenged in their worldviews. (See: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.)

Even this small percentage worries the progressive gatekeepers such as the New York Times. And that, at least, is a good thing.

RELATED ARTICLE: Yale honors prof who enraged students by defending free speech

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on The Revolutionary Act. The featured image is by ISTOCK/IZUSEK.

Former Obama Security Clearances Removed — Liberal media in a frantic stir!

/in , , /by

Gosh, all this angst about revoking Brennan’s security clearance!

And now, it’s become the Deep State’s newest symbol de jour of Freedom of Speech.

It’s really too bad these brave Champions of Free Speech and Liberty didn’t speak out, when my own Secret security clearance was revoked.

Incredibly, it happened on June 12, 2015 … exactly three years (to the day!) … after I was commended by DHS CBP for finding 300 terrorists connected to the Tablighi Jamaat Initiative (TJI).

Yes, that would be the same National Security case that the Obama Administration shut down, which also included the now-infamous 67 deleted records, that are directly linked to the San Bernardino shootings.

By rights, these Obama Officials should of had their clearances revoked a long time ago, and, by rights, I ought to still be working as a Counter Terrorism specialist within the Federal Government.

RELATED ARTICLES:

My Slow News Week: Media more worried about other people’s falsehoods and misstatements; just not their own

How Did the ‘Mainstream Media’ Become the ‘Enemy of the People?’

Shadow Government Psychopaths and the Deep State

/in , , , , /by

There is a system in place, a clandestine, sophisticated network that controls the world we live in. It creates the narrative that permeates throughout the world and becomes the false reality we have all come to know as our way of life. Our civilization is entering the beginning stages of a major collision, and a much-needed course correction is in order. President Trump and we the people must meet this challenge. Failure is not an option. This Shadow Govt. Psychopaths and the Deep State, are now being exposed and are on the run. The pendulum has shifted. We are winning.

Psychopaths & Sociopaths

The world is run by insane people with insane objectives. These individuals are living in a chronic state of fear and believe that everyone is a threat to them and to their very survival. They are crazy. They seek to dominate. They seek absolute control over every aspect of our lives. They seek to suppress and to destroy. They are warmongers and dictators. Many of the men are dressed in expensive business suits and the women in expensive pant suits. Unlike most of the human race, they carry out their acts with absolutely no conscience whatsoever as they are deranged and detached from the light of God to such an extent that evil permeates through them. You should know by now who these individuals are, and if you don’t you will be able to identify them soon, once you come to learn about False Flag Operations, Problem-Reaction-Solution, and the Hegelian Dialectic. Explore these categories on my blog site for more information.

These psychopaths and sociopaths are hard to detect, as they are intelligent, clever, artful, and often rise to positions of power. Many of these individuals are sexual deviants, pedophiles, and belong to demonic groups as recently released by Wikileaks. They are very manipulative and have seized power and control over every aspect of our lives, our speech, and even our thoughts. They have infiltrated and corrupted our education system, health-care system, religious institutions, the media, and most all forms of entertainment. They have seized control over and poisoned our food supply and all natural resources. Yes, it is this shadow government that controls the world in which live, making Earth and its inhabitants prisoners on a prison planet. Now please don’t shoot me, I am only the messenger. So how do they do this?

The Big Club

They formed, own, and control the “big club” and like the comedian George Carlin said,  “You and me, we ain’t in it.” We are nothing more than pawns on the chessboard of life being used as they so choose. They think of us and describe us as useless eaters. So who is part of the big club? The big club can be described as an intricate, interconnected web of organizations, corporations, religions, and governments mostly made up of unelected leaders, many of whom are inbred.

But once again we are winning. We are at steps six and seven on the scale of discovery and action. Trust the plan. Learn more about Q.

And remember this: “No matter how paranoid or conspiracy-minded you are, what the government is doing is worse than you imagine.” – William Blum (former U.S. State Dept. employee).

EDITORS NOTE: Mr. Chambers was nominated for the 24th Annual Colorado Independent Publishers Association EVVY Awards – LEARN MORE. Readers may follow Mr. Chambers at John Michael Chambers Author, John Michael Chambers Speaker, John Michael Chambers Blog, Facebook Eye on the World, Facebook Author, Facebook Economic Institute.

Open Letter to ‘Resistance’ Leader Retired Admiral William McRaven

/in , , , , /by

Retired Adm. William McRaven wrote an op-ed for the Washington Post, protesting Trump’s revoking of former CIA Director John Brennan’s security clearance and declaring—as if in an open letter to Trump himself—“I would consider it an honor if you would revoke my security clearance as well, so I can add my name to the list of men and women who have spoken up against your presidency.”

McRaven a former Navy SEAL and commander of U.S. Special Operations Command was a staunch defender of Obama’s failed foreign policy including terrible Rules of Engagement (ROE) in Afghanistan and Iraq – just ask Billie and Karen Vaughn whose NAVY SEAL son Aaron was killed needlessly along with 29 other Americans in Operation Extortion 17 and wrote about McRaven’s defense of Obama and excuses for the ROE in their book “Betrayed.”  McRaven was far from apolitical as claimed by some and is far from honorable in my opinion.  See link.

Ray Starmann writes a great article below on this situation and he is absolutely right that McRaven is a member of the most politically correct Generals and Admirals ever produced supporting the terrible foreign policy of Bill Clinton and Barak Obama, overseeing the demise of our military might, while supporting the leftist ideology. The outcomes of your seditious actions, incompetence and arrogance prove this.

An Open Letter to Admiral William McRaven

August 17, 2018
By Ray Starmann

Dear Admiral McRaven:

Your OPED yesterday, which was picked up by every liberal media outlet in the country, was sadly indicative of the current state of mind of many of our nation’s recently retired and active duty senior military leaders.

You stated that former CIA director John Brennan, “is one of the finest public servants I have ever known. Few Americans have done more to protect this country than John. He is a man of unparalleled integrity, whose honesty and character have never been in question, except by those who don’t know him.”

The man whom you describe as being a cross between George Washington, Abraham Lincoln and Mother Theresa is a deep state hack; who, along with other Obama holdouts, is openly and aggressively pursuing a coup d’etat against the current President of the United States, for one reason and one reason only – his side lost the election.

Frankly, I can’t think of any actions that are more un-American, and against the values that Americans hold dear and that which so many Americans died for in the past.

What you call unparalleled integrity, I call honest to goodness treason.

Former CIA director Brennan, whom you state has honesty and character authorized the CIA to spy on American citizens, tried to rig a Presidential election and then lied to Congress about that spying. A man you claim has unparalleled integrity was caught fabricating stories about attacks on US personnel in Libya and providing weapons to ISIS backed militias in Syria.

Mr. Brennan also voted once for a communist candidate. How Mr. Brennan was hired as DCI after voting for a communist and why you support a man who once did, is a mystery to everyone but you and God.

Former members of the special operations community do not share your adoration for Mr. Brennan. Kris “Tanto” Paronto, a former Army Ranger and private security contractor who was part of the CIA team that fought back during the 2012 Benghazi terror attack, accused Brennan of putting his “politics” before those in the field.

On Twitter, Paronto stated: “My principles are greater than clearances too John Brennan, especially when you and the @CIA kool-aid drinkers punishes us for not going along with the Benghazi cover-up story in order to protect you, @HillaryClinton’s & @BarackObama’s failures. You put your politics before us.” 

Mr. Brennan was recently referred to by retired Army Brigadier General Anthony Tata as a ‘clear and present danger’ to the nation.

No doubt John Brennan’s complete absence of integrity and his erratic behavior are what convinced the President to revoke his clearance. Mr. Brennan stated that “Trump’s … performance in Helsinki, exceeds the threshold of ‘high crimes & misdemeanors.’ It was … treasonous.”

In a recent article, Pat Buchanan stated that had Brennan made the same accusations of treason against former President Andrew Jackson, ‘he would have been challenged to a duel and shot.’

As you know sir, on the security clearance form, Question 29 reads, ‘have you ever supported overthrowing the U.S. Government?’

I think it’s more than apparent, from his nightly rantings on CNN to his Twitter expletives that John Brennan supports over-throwing the President and the current cabinet members of the US government.

You also wrote, sir, in reference to the President, “Through your actions, you have embarrassed us in the eyes of our children, humiliated us on the world stage and, worst of all, divided us as a nation,”

Actually, Admiral, the only person who has humiliated the US on the world stage in the last decade is Barack Hussein Obama. During the eight years of the Obama administrations, the world watched as the US cow-towed to Iranian thugs, let the Chinese run rings around us in the Pacific, while ISIS murdered tens of thousands of innocent people in the Middle East.

Believe me, Admiral, the children of Syria and Iraq are rejoicing in their liberation from ISIS mass murderers. And, the people of the Middle East and across the world are sleeping soundly tonight, knowing that an incompetent, narcissistic maniac like Hillary Clinton isn’t sitting in the Oval Office.

As far as the nation’s current political schism, you need only look at your fellow liberals who are inciting violence and propagating hatred on a daily basis.

You then dared the Commander in Chief to revoke your security clearance.

I’m sure you’re aware of the following regulation in the UCMJ. Retired military officers are subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) under Article 2 of the UCMJ, which extends the jurisdiction of military law to “Retired members of a regular component of the armed forces who are entitled to pay.” “Retirees are subject to the UCMJ and may be tried by court-martial for violations … that occurred … while in a retired status.”

Article 88 of the UCMJ criminalizes “contemptuous words against the President, the Vice President, Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of a military department, the Secretary of Homeland Security, or the Governor or legislature of any State.”

Something to ponder, sir.

No doubt your OPED was designed to whip up some more anti-Trump hysteria and to usher you into the political arena. No doubt you are a serving member of the ‘resistance.’ No doubt, you have your eyes on some office space in the capitol building or in the White House. No doubt, you have your eyes on the prize, all at the expense of the nation you once served.

When I read your OPED, sir, I wondered where and when and why you went wrong. How does someone from a military family, a SEAL, who came of age in the Reagan years; someone who understands what it’s like to be on a team; the camaraderie, the toughness mentally and physically required; someone who grew up reading about people like Patton, MacArthur, Lee, Grant, Teddy Roosevelt and Hal Moore- How does a guy like that end up aligning himself with the party of Pelosi, Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez, and slime like Hillary who was chanting baby killer back at Wellesley, and “too gutless to serve, I hate the military” Bill…?

How does a guy like you still support the destructive policies of Obama, and furthermore, how does a guy like you support Brennan, when you know damned well Brennan was a communist, and that he perjured himself in front of Congress, how does that happen?

You, sir, are representative of what, is in my opinion as a former Army Captain and combat veteran of the 7th Cavalry, the worst generation of senior leaders this nation has ever fielded. Bar None. The majority of you, were and are what the late Colonel David Hackworth so eloquently described as ‘perfumed princes.’

It doesn’t matter how many degrees you have; how many combat tours you did and how much fruit salad you earned. It doesn’t matter that you have the SEAL Trident.

Your generation of senior leaders sold and is selling out the nation’s defense to the highest bidder and that bidder is social engineering and leftist ideology. You and your generation of leftist senior leaders have allowed our military to be destroyed for the greater glory of pensions, Tricare and political power, national security be damned.

Now, that you’ve overseen the decimation of our military, you are determined to overthrow a sitting President because he represents everything anathema to the left – America First and the fact that the USA IS AND ALWAYS WILL BE THE GREATEST COUNTRY ON THE FACE OF THE EARTH.

You are all nothing more than political hacks; Obama leftists fighting some kind of insurgent anti-Trump campaign like a division of crazed left-wing fanatics holed up in the Beltway National Redoubt, waiting for a last op order from der Fuehrer, Barack Hussein Obama.

I believe sir, that you need to examine your conscience and ask yourself one very important question – what in the name of God Almighty would Hillary Clinton have done for anyone in this country?

The answer is nothing.

Ray Starmann
Editor in Chief
US Defense Watch

RELATED ARTICLES:

Army Brigadier General Says John Brennan Is a ‘Clear and Present Danger’ Who Wants to ‘Overthrow’ Trump

John Brennan’s CIA ‘Operated Like A Branch Office Of The Hillary Campaign’

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of President Barack Obama talking with U.S. Navy Vice Admiral William H. McRaven on May 6, 2011, at Campbell Army Airfield in Fort Campbell, Ky. (AP Photo/Charles Dharapak)

Bank of America and Comcast Back Group Demanding Jack Phillips Bake Transgender Celebration Cake

/in , , , , , /by

With the ink barely dry on the Supreme Court’s Masterpiece Cakeshop ruling, the Colorado Civil Rights Commission is continuing its crusade to punish Jack Phillips for running his business in accordance with his faith.

Earlier this summer, the Supreme Court reprimanded the CCRC for the “hostility” towards Jack’s religious liberty and, stung by the defeat, LGBT activists have prepared another assault on the cake baker. Just days after the ruling, the state agency found probable cause with a complaint filed by a transgender attorney against Masterpiece Cakeshop and ordered Jack’s business to undergo compulsory mediation.

The alleged violation? Declining to create a pink cake with blue icing in commemoration of gender transition.

However, Jack and his attorneys at the Alliance Defending Freedom are striking back and have filed a lawsuit against the Governor, Attorney General, and members of the CCRC. According to the lawsuit:

It is now clear that Colorado will not rest until Phillips either closes Masterpiece Cakeshop or agrees to violate his religious beliefs. The state’s continuing efforts to target Phillips do not just violate the Constitution; they cross the line into bad faith. This Court should put a stop to Colorado’s unconstitutional bullying.

Not surprisingly, LGBT activist groups are digging in and joining the assault on religious liberty. What is surprising, is that major corporations are funding these efforts with YOUR dollars.

For example, One Colorado, a member of the left-wing Equality Foundation, is working to push an agenda that threatens 1st Amendment protections for Masterpiece Cakeshop and all business owners like Jack. Our research has found several major corporations are sponsors of One Colorado’s annual fundraising event including Bank of America and Comcast.

You can see all the companies that help fund the anti-religious liberty activists at One Colorado here.

Would you do business with a company that works to undermine your 1st Amendment protections? If Bank of American and Comcast are hostile towards religious liberty, we need to hold them accountable and send our dollars to companies that will not fund these radical groups. At 2ndVote we recommend banking with your local community bank where you know the individuals who run the business and know your dollars will stay close to home.

We encourage you to tell Bank of America and Comcast why you’re taking your business elsewhere. Use the links below to contact leadership directly:

Send Bank of America an Email! Send Comcast an Email!

RELATED ARTICLE: The Transgender Language War / Abigail Shrier – WSJ

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

Fake Blues: The Media’s Worst Enemy Isn’t the President, It’s Themselves

/in , , , , , /by

On Thursday, over 300 media outlets joined in a coordinated effort to push back against President Donald Trump. That will hardly come as a shock to many Americans, as it seems mainstream news organizations have done little else throughout his tenure in the White House. Indeed, the stunt was perhaps the most vivid and explicit demonstration to date of the mass groupthink, negative Trump obsession, and narrative of victimhood that characterize the modern media landscape.

The Boston Globe led the campaign, characterizing it as a response to the White House’s “dirty war against the free press.” A senior editor proclaimed: “We are not the enemy of the people.”

On the latter statement, we can at least agree in principle. The Bill of Rights is explicit that “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people … to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” These rights have been broadly interpreted to prohibit government officials and entities of all types from engaging in censorship or suppression of free expression.

Americans should be grateful for those freedoms and protections.

However, the mainstream media has become its own worst enemy by abusing its considerable freedom and squandering whatever goodwill and trust it had with America at large.

In a recent poll of nearly 4,000 Americans, 72% expressed the belief that “traditional major news sources report news they know to be fake, false, or purposely misleading,” with nearly two-thirds attributing the reporting of fake news to the promotion of an agenda. Democrats polled tended to be significantly more trusting of media, while Republicans or Republican-leaning Independents were significantly less so.

That’s not President Trump’s fault. Americans’ trust in media had been falling long before he took office.

And despite the media’s mass pity party for themselves on Thursday, it’s hard to imagine any administration in history that has been subjected to greater press scrutiny – to say nothing of disrespect and vitriol – than the Trump administration. Any suggestion that Trump’s efforts have somehow cowed or suppressed critical coverage of him would be the ultimate example of “fake news.”

What the media is reacting to is not a “dirty war” against them, but a new landscape in which a few well-established, for-profit corporations who claim the high ground of the First Amendment can no longer co-opt or set the terms of the national debate without expecting their own pushback or scrutiny. Americans have awakened to the fact that the self-proclaimed “guardians of truth” must be viewed with a critical eye, and media watchdogs have more tools than ever before to hold irresponsible journalists accountable and to correct the record.

And, yes, we also have an American president who will use tools of modern communication to bring his messages directly to the people and to aggressively counter the tsunami of negative coverage he faces virtually every minute of every day. For many Americans used to watching their chosen representatives be treated like mute punching bags by a sneering, condescending press loyal to the opposition party, it can be bracing to see one finally standing up for himself.

Gun owners in particular have reason to reject the media’s victimhood narrative. We have seen far too many examples of false and misleading media reporting on firearm and Second Amendment related issues to attribute the phenomenon to mere ignorance or laziness. What follows are just a few of the more egregious examples.

Ironically, the most obvious indictment of the media was their inability to report accurately or insightfully on the biggest political story of the 21st Century to date: the success of Donald J. Trump’s insurgent candidacy for the presidency of the United States. It would be an understatement to say they misjudged the depth of discontent arising from the Obama years, the horror with which many regarded Hillary Clinton, or the desire millions of Americans had for a leader who would unabashedly affirm America’s greatness.

Had gun owners taken reporting on the 2016 election at face value, they might have accepted defeat without even showing up at the polls. Then instead of a pro-gun president, they would have had one who believed the same Supreme Court that declared the right to keep and bear arms a fundamental individual liberty was “wrong on the Second Amendment.” Pro-gun Americans’ ability to trust their own instincts and persevere in the face of what the media suggested were hopeless odds literally changed the course of the nation’s history.

Another monumental falsehood perpetrated by the media is that the Second Amendment has nothing to do with the individual right to possess a firearm for self-defense. They did this before the U.S. Supreme Court squarely and conclusively ruled otherwise in 2008 (thereby confirming the prevailing view of the American public), and they’ve continued to do so since then. And to whatever extent they are willing to admit the high court’s precedent makes their own views largely academic, they respond by calling for the outright repeal of the Second Amendment or, more dishonestly, by suggesting that all the gun control they want is completely compatible with it.

But however the media attempt to couch their arguments, they remain nearly unanimous: Congress can and should ban guns, whether that means merely the most popular ones or all of them. Simply put, American gun owners who believe in a robust and meaningful Second Amendment know the mainstream media is and long has been working in the opposite direction. This is a remarkably hypocritical posture for an industry that likes to claim the First Amendment as its mandate and shield.

The third way the media has shown its bias against gun owners is by characterizing them as bad or uncaring people and attacking the NRA in the public square. They have suggested that Americans love their guns more than their own children. They have cast support for gun control (the efficacy of which remains mostly unproven) as a moral imperative. They have called the NRA – and by extension, its millions of law-abiding members – “a terrorist organization” and have accused them of having “blood on their hands” and being responsible for the deaths of innocents. They have advocated for shunning gun owners and the lawful industries that support the Second Amendment, not just in polite society, but through the means of modern commerce.  At least one article in the Washington Post even suggested that merely owning a gun makes a person “responsible” for firearm-related violence committed by others.

On top of this are nearly daily examples of reporters’ laughable ignorance, fear-mongering, shady factual claims, and transparently biased “fact-checking” regarding firearms and firearm-related violence in the U.S.

The overall picture is of a media apparatus lacking in judgement, professionalism, trustworthiness, and familiarity with the lives and values of millions of ordinary Americans.

To be sure, there are exceptions, and some reporters work diligently and ethically to report accurate information, even when it goes against the conventional wisdom of their colleagues.

But journalists fretting over their public image have more to fear in the practices of their peers than in any characterizations of their profession coming from the White House. If they want to counter the narrative that they are blindly and single-mindedly focused on hounding a president from office at any cost, openly colluding to scold him for rhetoric that merely mirrors their own contempt may not be the best place to start.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

My Slow News Week: Media more worried about other people’s falsehoods and misstatements; just not their own

How Did the ‘Mainstream Media’ Become the ‘Enemy of the People?’

NRA Wins Lawsuit in Washington State, Prevents I-1639 From Appearing on Ballot

Outrage of the Week: Shopify Targets America’s Guns

NoFundMe: NRA Protest March Nets $70 in National Fundraising Effort

King County Unveils “Common Sense” Action Plan: Ban “Semi-automatic, High Velocity Weapons”

Loesch to Cuomo: Be Quiet and Listen to Your Father

/in , , , , /by

“It seems Andrew Cuomo didn’t listen to his own father that much, who took a very, very different view of America’s greatness… So now I’m going to say to you what I say to my own children, Andrew. Be quiet and listen to your father.” —Dana Loesch

Stoneman Douglas at 6 Months

/in , , , /by

It was six months ago but feels like just yesterday. On Feb. 14, a deranged teen attacked students and staff members at Parkland, Florida’s Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, killing 17.

Like millions of parents and grandparents across America, I was transfixed by the news that day, watching the coverage with horror. I grieved for those whose lives were lost and those they left behind. And I feared for my own school-age grandkids.

On Wednesday, Stoneman Douglas opened its doors once again to a new school year. Again, like mothers and grandmothers nationwide, I want to know if anything has changed over the last half year.

The intervening months have certainly been eventful for some of Stoneman Douglas’ students. They marched in Washington, D.C., gave fiery speeches, and took a 20-state “Road to Change” bus tour to register voters and push for gun control. They rubbed shoulders with celebrities, gave hundreds of interviews, and made passionate appeals for gun control.

But as they settle back in at Parkland, will their school be any safer?

Fortunately, the answer appears to be “yes”—and it’s not because of any media-focused bus tour.

Instead, Broward County—like many other communities across America—has been working hard to improve school safety. Security upgrades at Stoneman Douglas include a new 12-foot security fence, improved classroom door locks, additional security guards, and continuous monitoring of the school’s video surveillance system. The school is even piloting the use of portable metal detectors.

None of these measures are as glamorous as a press conference with a movie star. But each will meaningfully improve school safety.

Of course, much more can and should be done. A good place to start is by taking action to prevent future tragedies by identifying and intervening with those who are likely to commit them.

I find it deeply disturbing that the Broward County school district reported no instances of bullying, harassment, battery, or trespassing at Stoneman Douglas for the entire 2016-17 school year. None.

That’s not just a problem—it’s a potential crisis. The Sun Sentinel reports that the school had many reportable incidents that year. But failure to report such incidents, as the paper observed, “mak[es] it impossible to spot a school’s trouble spots and inform parents about safety.”

Why is this so relevant?  Because the Parkland attacker was himself the victim of reportedly vicious bullying. He was also the subject of dozens of tips made to local police and the FBI. But no one acted on that information—and then it was too late.

The “Road to Change” bus tour could have focused the nation’s attention on these issues. It could have called for schools’ safety improvements and proactive intervention for people like the Parkland attacker. Sadly, though, it seems to have had a very different objective.

According to the tour’s website, its objective was “to get young people educated, registered, and motivated to vote.” It was, according to its own words, a political operation.

Political activism is fine, but to focus on politics instead of commonsense solutions for school safety simply isn’t.

Nor is focusing solely on guns. The Columbine attackers brought bombs to school. Last year, a Maryland girl was arrested for planning to blow up her classmates. And just weeks after the Parkland attack, an ISIS-inspired Utah teen brought a homemade bomb to school.

That’s why a holistic approach is needed. More secure schools. Better mental health services. A proactive response to bullying. And “red flag” laws to keep weapons away from those who pose a clear threat to themselves and others.

These are just a few of the commonsense solutions that can make schools safer. None of them have the flash and dazzle of a political bus tour. But that’s all the more reason for us to pursue them.

After all, our children deserve nothing less. It’s been six months since the Parkland tragedy—and they’re heading back to school NOW.

COMMENTARY BY

Portrait of Kay Coles James

Kay Coles James

Kay Coles James is president of The Heritage Foundation. James formerly served as director of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management and as Virginia’s secretary of health and human resources. She is also the founder and president of The Gloucester Institute. Twitter: .

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

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of a student as she waits to cross a street to enter for the first day of classes at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, on Aug. 15. (Photo: Joe Skipper/Reuters/Newscom)

Urban Violence Begins in Broken Homes

/in , , , , /by

The Chicago Tribune reported a big drop in violence in Chicago this past weekend. Forty people were shot.

This down from the weekend before, when 74 were shot.

The Tribune’s Steve Chapman rejects what he calls the “popular myth, cynically promoted by Trump and other outside critics” that Chicago is an “exceptionally dangerous city.”

Yes, 674 people were murdered last year in Chicago, more than in New York City and Los Angeles combined. But that is much better than 1991 when, says Chapman, 920 were murdered, and the 674 killed in 2017 was down 15 percent from 2016.

Whether or not we call this violence “exceptional,” it is certainly unacceptable. It should concern us all, particularly its racial characteristics.

As Chapman notes, “Chicago’s crime problem is concentrated in a small number of poor, blighted, mostly African-American neighborhoods.”

He continues, “Those areas owe their plight largely to a sordid history of systematic, deliberate racial discrimination and violence, endemic poverty, and official neglect over the years.”

For sure, misguided government policies have contributed to this sad state of affairs. But these policies were supposed to help these communities, not destroy them.

Policies, such as excessive taxation and government housing, that have fostered indifferent absentee landlords and crime-ridden neighborhoods.

If there is any “deliberate racial discrimination” that drives violence and crime in black urban areas, it is the racial discrimination of the left. It is the racial discrimination of identity politics, which promote the idea that different ethnicities should live under different rules and receive special treatment.

Let’s recall that the unfairness that blacks had to deal with in America’s history was unequal treatment under the law. This is what needed to be fixed, and this is what was fixed in the Civil Rights Act in 1964.

The problem was that liberals wanted to use their agenda not to fix the law but to change the country. And in the name of racial fairness, the era of big activist government, financed with oceans of taxpayer funds, was born.

But government can’t fix anybody’s life. It can only make sure that the law protecting life, liberty, and property is applied fairly and equally.

The beginning of big activist government fostered the demise of personal responsibility.

The perpetrators, and victims, of violence in Chicago and other urban areas are largely young black men. They mostly come from homes with no father and from communities where this reality is the rule rather than the exception.

Making a child is not hard to do. Raising a child and conveying the values and rules that make for a successful life and responsible adulthood is. Particularly now that popular culture largely dismisses these truths. And in black communities, politics and media are dominated by the left, whose message for them is that life is unfair because of racism and the answer is big government.

According to recent data from the Pew Research Center, 36 percent of black children under 18, compared to 74 percent of white children under 18, live in a household with married parents.

And according to Pew, 30 percent of households headed by a single mother, 17 percent of households headed by a single father, 16 percent of households headed by an unmarried couple, and 8 percent of households headed by a married couple are poor.

Data from the Cook County Department of Health show that, in suburban Cook County and in Cook County under Department of Health jurisdiction, in 2016, 86 percent of babies born to black women between 18-29 were born out of wedlock.

President Donald Trump is doing his job. We have robust economic growth that we haven’t seen in years, with unemployment rates at record lows.

Black leaders need to start doing their job and convey that marriage, work, education, and personal responsibility are the only things that will fix black America.

COMMENTARY BY

Portrait of Star Parker

Star Parker

Star Parker is a columnist for The Daily Signal and president of the Center for Urban Renewal and Education. Twitter: .

COPYRIGHT 2018 STAR PARKER

DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM

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