Dr. Sebastian Gorka’s talk at the Daytona Beach Lincoln Day Dinner, ‘Trump is kryptonite to the left’

/in , , /by

Sunday night my wife Glynnda, me and 2 other good friends from the Winter Haven 912 attended a Lincoln Day Dinner in Daytona Beach sponsored by the Volusia County Republican Club with over 500 participants featuring POTUS Trump’s confidant and former National Security Strategy advisor Dr. Sebastian Gorka as the keynote speaker.

Dr. Gorka was very charming, witty and frank in his talk where he wandered around among the audience seated at 70+ Tables. Several thoughts came out that you may find interesting.

  1. He stated with a grin and a laugh that Donald J. Trump is absolute Kryptonite to the left. He is so right about that and one of the reasons they HATE him so much for being elected. We Deplorables know all that he has accomplished and that he has kept his promises to us and more. His many actions have both dismantled Obama’s so called legacy as well as delivered a booming economy and the beginning of the return of prosperity to the middle class.
  2. When asked about AG Jeff Sessions and when and if he was going to do something to hold the Clintons accountable for their many criminal and/or seditious activities his response was “There is a reason there are currently 180 federal inspectors in Little Rock, Arkansas” – he wouldn’t elaborate any further nor would he say anything good or bad about Sessions.
  3. The reason corrupt FBI officials like Peter Strzok have not yet been fired is “there are things that can be done if they’re still on the payroll that can’t be done if they are fired.”
  4. He forthrightly stated that Trump’s election was a “gift from God” but we are a long way from being done. He talked about our failed education system and how our children are being taught to hate our customs, traditions and values upon which this country was founded; to think of America as bad or even evil; that we brought problems like Islamic terrorism on ourselves, etc. and how this must be turned around. He mentioned a recent poll of millennials where 44% stated they preferred “socialism” as their preferred form of government.
  5. He elaborated on how the President thinks and relates to people in a way no other President has done in the last 80 years because he is different – he is a businessman, not a lawyer, and/or former politician or military general. He stated President Trump is not only a shrewd deal maker but a people person with great compassion. He is a huge Patriot who deeply loves America and its people.

For example, he told us a story of how he (Dr. Gorka) recently brought 15 Special Forces officers/NCOs from Ft Bragg who were undergoing training in his class for what was scheduled as a 5 min meeting with the President. After 15 mins. where the President personally asked each one questions like where you’re from etc. he said this isn’t good enough and took them to the Oval Office where he called for his photographer and had a group pic taken with them. But….this too was not enough so he had them join him one at at a time for an individual picture. What was scheduled as a 5 min. meeting turned into a 30+ min. meeting and that this is what he does and it drives his scheduler’s wild. Gorka also said this was a first ever in the history of the Special Forces Qualification Course.

Who can remember any time Obama had any military other than perhaps some of his PC yes men Generals and Admirals in the White House especially the Oval office ? He had plenty of time to talk with IRS officials about targeting conservative Tea Party groups as well as many other leftists but the military was obviously a low priority for him.

Dr. Gorka also addressed the DACA situation stating the President understood that the “Dreamers” (who now are avg age of 26) came to the USA with their illegal parents without any knowledge at their young ages bout being illegals. Therefore, he doesn’t feel they should be deported but that they will most likely never become citizens because they will have to go to the very end of a very long line of people already applying for their green cards and/or citizenship.

It was a real privilege to be in the same room with Dr. Sebastian Gorka, a naturalized American Citizen and a true Patriot.

I will interject here that those idiot NFL Philadelphia Eagles including their leftist coach and owner who joined the Obama led “resistance” movement by refusing the opportunity to meet with and be congratulated by President Trump after their Super Bowl win are the exact opposite of these Special Forces Patriotic Americans and should be ashamed of themselves.

Welfare Spending Did Not Decrease Poverty, Capitalism Did

/in , , , , /by

Last September, I shared some very encouraging data showing how extreme poverty dramatically has declined in the developing world.

And I noted that this progress happened during a time when the “Washington Consensus” was resulting in “neoliberal” policies (meaning “classical liberal“) in those nations (confirmed by data from Economic Freedom of the World).

In other words, pro-market policies were the recipe for poverty reduction, not foreign aid or big government.

Sadly, the Washington Consensus has been supplanted. Bureaucracies such as the International Monetary Fund, the United Nations, and the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development are now pushing a statist agenda based on the bizarre theory that higher taxes and more spending somehow produce prosperity.

To add insult to injury, some people now want to rewrite history and argue that free markets don’t deserve credit for the poverty reduction that already has occurred.

Esteban Ortiz-Ospina, writing for Our World in Data, wants readers to conclude that redistribution programs deserve credit.

…the share of people living in extreme poverty around the world has fallen continuously over the last two centuries. …many often say that globalization in the form of “free-market capitalism” is the main force to be thanked for such remarkable historical achievement. …this focus on “free-market capitalism” alone is misguided. …Governments around the world have dramatically increased their potential to collect revenues in order to redistribute resources through social transfers… The reach of governments has grown substantially over the last century: the share of total output that governments control is much larger today than a century ago.

And for evidence, Mr. Ortiz-Ospina included this chart.

I shared a version of this data back in June, asserting that the explosion of social welfare spending made this “the western world’s most depressing chart.”

So does Ortiz-Ospina have a compelling argument? Does poverty go down as welfare spending goes up?

Nope. Johan Norberg points out that there is a gaping flaw in this argument. An enormous, gigantic hole.

Wow. This isn’t just a flaw. It’s malpractice. It’s absurd to argue that welfare spending in developed nations somehow led to poverty reduction in developing countries.

I hope Mr. Ortiz-Ospina is just an inexperienced intern because if he really understands the data, one might be forced to conclude that he’s dishonest.

But let’s set that issue aside. Johan closes his video by explaining that poverty in rich nations declined before modern welfare states. I want to expand on that point.

Johan cited Martin Ravallion, so I tracked down his work. And here’s the chart he put together, which I’ve modified to show (outlined in red) that extreme poverty basically disappeared between 1820 and 1930.

And guess what?

That was the period when there was no welfare state. Not only is that apparent from Our World in Data, it’s also what we see in Vito Tanzi’s numbers.

Here’s Tanzi’s table, which I first shared five years ago. And I’ve circled in red the 1880-1930 data to underscore that there was virtually no redistribution during the years poverty was declining.

The bottom line is that poverty in the western world fell during the period of small government. Yet some people want to put the cart before the horse. They’re making the absurd argument that post-1950s welfare spending somehow reduced poverty before the 1930s.

That’s as absurd as Paul Krugman blaming a 2008 recession in Estonia on spending cuts that took place in 2009.

P.S. For those who want U.S.-specific data, it’s worth noting that dramatic reductions in American poverty all occurred before Washington launched the so-called “War on Poverty.”

Reprinted 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.

Race-Based Diversity Is Creating More Trump Voters

/in , , , /by

The case of new New York Times editorial writer Sarah Jeong’s openly anti-white bigotry is perhaps the most telling example of how far the American left has sprinted from the legacy of Martin Luther King and towards a form of retro racist tribalism that is perhaps as far from the American middle as it is from the American right.

This will either spell the doom of the Democratic Party — or of the American Experiment. Because such concepts cannot survive in an America that resembles anything like the amazing nation that emerged in the second half of the 20th Century.

That America was not just a military and economic colossus, but also a colossus of individual liberties and great, striding steps toward total equality under the law. It drew tens of millions of immigrants from around the world because it was indeed a beacon of hope and opportunity and freedom from oppression.

That entire concept is rapidly becoming antithetical to the diversity-enthralled American left and by extension the Democratic Party. Equal rights? No. Melting pot? No. Law and order? No. Economic opportunity? No. Liberty? No. Individual pursuit of happiness? Well, if the government says it’s OK.

Jeong herself is inconsequential as an individual in all of this. But it’s both the bigoted stew of the increasingly disconnected American power-center elites that she swims in, stirred in with the media/Democratic/leftist defense of her vitriol, that is quite consequential.

As gay moderate Andrew Sullivan astutely observes in the liberal New York Magazine, responding to the defense of Jeong by The Verge:

“…any assertion of racism in Jeong’s tweets as “dishonest and outrageous,” [is] a function of bad faith and an attack on journalism itself. Scroll through left-Twitter and you find utter incredulity that demonizing white people could in any way be offensive. That’s the extent to which loathing of and contempt for “white people” is now background noise on the left. What many don’t seem to understand is that their view of racism isn’t shared by the public at large, and that the defense of it by institutions like the New York Times will only serve to deepen the kind of resentment that gave us Trump.”

Exactly right. And Democrats, the left and the media are so wed to diversity and so blinkered by their hatred of Trump that they cannot see how they are rushing headlong to the aid of the GOP in 2018 and Trump in 2020. By pushing themselves further and further from the vast American center that swings elections, they are providing hope to Republicans who should historically be in a hopeless situation in November.

The Democrats are kindly serving up so many opportunities for Trump and Republicans, just on the racism front — to say nothing of the 73-gender front or socialism front.

The revelation that Obama policy blocked qualified airport control tower candidates who were white, in order to allow room for black candidates — even when positions were open and safety was threatened — got no play at the time in the Obama-cuddly media. And not much since. After all, diversity is king.

Obama’s decision, one of hundreds during his administration, was driven by the social justice platform of identity politics under the label of diversity. The idea is racial redress of past wrongs, but of course it is against people who have done nothing but have the “wrong” color skin — which the vast majority of Americans oppose. When this air control hiring was recently reported in the Wall Street Journal, it became clear that still no one on the left cared as no one on the left sees anything wrong.

In fact, it is part of the groundwork that has been laid for people like Jeong to be despicable bigots and still land a prestige job at the New York Times and be roundly defended by Democrats and the media.

Melinda Gates, who earned her great fortune by saying “I do” to Bill Gates at the altar, decided to start a venture capital fund with the sole purpose of funding minorities and women. No white guys need apply. Further, she declared the reasoning is to promote diversity, and correct racism and sexism in tech companies because white men — “white guy in a hoodie,” in her words — cannot provide products adequately for minorities. Presumably she did not mean her white guy husband, not that guy.

She was applauded by leftist and tech publications. Which is the point.

As Joy Pullman wrote in the Federalist of Gates’ thinking, which is reflected in the broader left:

“…punishing people for the “sins” of their “class” is, quite frankly, of a piece with the ideology that ultimately led to the slaughters of the Bolshevik and French revolutions…”

There is a veritable bottomless pit of these stories. As Trump was trying to reign in the slow-motion disaster of our open borders policies and government’s unwillingness to define who can come into our country, the Washington Post publishes a story under the headline: “Trump immigration plan could keep whites in U.S. majority for up to five more years.”

This “analysis” had one clear objective: Paint immigration in racial terms and color Trump’s immigration policy changes as a way to keep white people in the majority longer. Most Americans, pretty sure including Trump, would never have even considered that element of immigration limitations. They are thinking economic opportunity for low-income Americans, plus national and personal safety for everyone. But the left automatically goes race. It’s the lens through which they see all American life.

Where does all this leave us politically? In the one place that many in the political middle would rather not gravitate to but must: Donald Trump. The President has shown a steadfast willingness to fight back against identity politics, speech censoring political correctness and race-baiting. He’s done it poorly at times and marvelously at times.

If Americans are presented with the choice between traditional Americanism, constitutional rights, individual liberties and a strong economy or anti-white bigotry, anti-Americanism, collectivist hive culture and a feeble economy, it seems like the choice becomes pretty clear. A call to diversity does not win that day when Jeong’s hardcore bigotry is defended by the left and even celebrated by some.

The truth is that Trump and the GOP are the only things standing in the way of a headlong lurch into the violence and slaughterhouse of the Jacobins. Is it really hard to see Maxine Waters as the precursor to Robespierre? If that becomes the choice, the GOP wins. And if that happens in November, it’s truly impossible to predict how the left will react.

But the country might be saved for a little longer.

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

VIDEO: Another Democrat Candidate Who Has Plans to ‘Fundamentally Transform’ Michigan

/in , , , /by

Remember those words and what that meant to America?  It was NOT good!  And, it will NOT be good for Michigan!

Abdulrahman Mohamed El Sayed has played his hand very well to the constituents of Michigan!  Many have fallen under his spell and many are just part of the plan, working very hard for his final solution.

  • He has core Muslims siding with him only because he is Muslim, no other qualification!
  • He has the millennials jumping up & down on his every word!  Smiling, hoping he will pick them to stand with in front of the camera!
  • He has the Marxist/Socialist liberal left just waiting for every opportunity to show support!
  • He has known unindicted co-conspirators in clearly defined court cases, standing with him in support and in some cases are identified as his “de-facto” campaign manager.
  • His platform and his Sharia compliant beliefs collide, but when pressed for an answer, he has none!
  • His anti-Israel stand and support of Gaza, yet this topic is never asked during the campaign.
  • His hard cored Muslim Brotherhood history and background are NEVER questioned by any of the Michigan media.  Yet, when one opposing candidate does (Patrick Colbeck), Abdul’s reply is: “You may not hate Muslims, but Muslims definitely hate you!”

When will they learn that Abdul’s plan has played out before, in many cities, towns, and countries!   Look through history and it’s clear the end results are NOT pretty!

Michigan will make the decision on Tuesday, August 7th!    We can only hope they choose wisely!   Constitution or Marxist Jihad for Michigan?

RELATED VIDEO: Western Shariah Police coming to Michigan?

The ‘Greatest Generation vs. Pelosi’s ‘Delusional Generation’

/in , , , , /by

When Pearl Harbor was attacked on December 7, 1941, America’s leaders took responsibility for defending the country’s borders and destroying its enemies once they realized – quickly- the existential threat posed by the Axis Powers.  This fearless leadership and commitment  to protecting the American people came to define, in part,  those preserving during that period as  “The Greatest Generation.”

In just 44 months, America and its allies planned,  built, and then rushed into battle,  fleets of new airplanes, fighter aircraft, and bombers.  And in just 44 months, fleets of ships were launched.  Nuclear weapons were, for the first time devised, created, tested and successfully deployed.

But America’s leaders today, with few exceptions, would hardly qualify for any title except, perhaps, the most delusional or most corrupt generation.

Nancy Pelosi and her political cohorts provide ample evidence of just how far our nation has fallen.

On September 11, 2001, nineteen alien terrorists inflicted more casualties on the United States than did the entire Japanese fleet on, the day that as President Roosevelt declared, would “live in infamy.”

Those 19 hijacker-terrorists turned passenger airliners into de facto cruise missiles –  creating horrors and carnage that will be forever etched in the minds and hearts of those who lived through those attacks on our nation.

On July 27, 2018, Nancy Pelosi uttered jaw-dropping description of the terror attacks of 9/11 as the “9/11 incident.”

How could anyone of sound mind and possessing a firm grip on reality, describe the worst terror attack ever committed on U.S. soil as a merely “incident?”

Pelosi then went on to chastise the Republicans for failing to support border security claiming that the Democrats were far more committed to securing our borders and following the recommendations of the 9/11 Commission.

The harsh reality is that the globalist leaders of both the Democratic and Republican parties have repeatedly and steadfastly refused to secure America’s borders and indeed enforce our immigration laws effectively.  There is ample evidence that the leaders of both parties have refused to adequately address the multitude of failures and vulnerabilities of the immigration system.

The leadership of both parties is determined to ram a massive DACA amnesty down our throats even though the 9/11 Commission identified immigration fraud as the critical method of entry and embedding of terrorists.

I addressed this concern in my article, DACA Solution Must Heed 9/11 Commission Findings.

Now the Trump administration is contemplating shutting down the government, to protect America and Americans by finally getting the funds to construct a border wall.

However, first and foremost, let us not forget, that the “leaders” of the Democratic Party have led demonstrations demanding that ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) be disbanded and that interior enforcement of the immigration laws is terminated.

Let us not forget Pelosi herself has outrageously repeatedly accused ICE agents of terrorizing immigrant communities.

Just months ago, on February 28, 2018, Nancy posted the following press release on her official Congressional website. The title of her press release was, Pelosi Statement on Trump Administration ICE Raids Targeting the San Francisco Bay Area:

Washington, D.C. – Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi issued this statement after the Trump Administration conducted sweeping raids across Northern California that resulted in the arrest of more than 150 men and women, at least half of whom did not have a criminal record:

“The Trump Administration’s raids were a shocking abuse of law enforcement power.  Again, the White House has reached into our communities to detain scores of hard-working, law-abiding immigrants indiscriminately.

“Fully half of those swept up in the ICE raids have no criminal record.  This raid was intended solely to terrorize innocent immigrant families and instill fear in the hearts of our communities – not to keep Americans safe.  Parents will now be torn from their children, and spouses ripped away from their loved ones.

“The Administration continues to brazenly target the cities that refuse to bow to its blatantly bigoted anti-immigrant and mass deportation agenda.  The people of the San Francisco Bay Area will continue to oppose these cowardly attacks, and we will remain open to the patriotic immigrants who are the constant reinvigoration of America.”

Worksite investigations are an element of the interior enforcement of our immigration laws, an aspect, I might add, that the 9/11 Commission directly addressed.

In point of fact, the day before a terrorist carries out a terror attack he/she is likely hiding in plain sight at work.

Consider my recent article: Congressional Hearing: Iranian Sleeper Cells Threaten U.S.

Work-site investigations are primarily conducted to liberate jobs stolen by illegal aliens that American and lawful immigrant workers desperately need so they can support themselves and their families.

Sleeper agents are so named because they maintain a shallow profile and seek to avoid calling attention to themselves.  While they may violate our immigration laws, they are fastidiously careful never to get arrested.  They quietly wait for the day they are called to action.

The official report, 9/11 and  Terrorist Travel referenced interior enforcement of our immigration laws repeatedly,  Consider this example:

Thus, abuse of the immigration system and a lack of interior immigration enforcement were unwittingly working together to support terrorist activity. It would remain mostly unknown since no agency of the United States government analyzed terrorist travel patterns until after 9/11. This lack of attention meant that critical opportunities to disrupt terrorist travel and, therefore, deadly terrorist operations were missed.
The aliens arrested during these field investigations that Pelosi railed against, were not taken into custody to “terrorize immigrant communities” but to seek the removal (deportation) of aliens who violate our nation’s borders and violate our laws.  This is also done to deter other aspiring illegal aliens, from around the world, from coming to the United States illegally or with the intention of violating the terms of their lawful admission into the United States.

I can also tell you that when I was an INS agent, I located numerous alien fugitives during routine worksite investigations.  These aliens had committed serious crimes, including murder and rape.

In one particularly memorable case, I encountered a citizen of Belize working in a glass factory in Brooklyn, New York.  He had no ID but claimed that he had become a naturalized citizen.

The owner of the factory swore that the guy was the most trustworthy employee he had ever hired.  He told me that he even trusted him to open the factory in the morning and close it at night if he was away from the factory and he frequently had dinner at the owner’s home with his wife and kids.

Long story short, when no records were found to corroborate his claims about being a naturalized citizen, my colleagues and I took him into custody.

It turned out that he lied about his identity and circumstances.  He was indeed from Belize; however, he had never become a naturalized citizen.

He had, however, been previously deported from the U.S. after he completed his prison sentence following his conviction for manslaughter.

He had re-entered the U.S. illegally, had been located, arrested by INS agents and prosecuted for that unlawful reentry.  He subsequently escaped from a federal correctional facility and ultimately found work in that factory where we saw him.  He was a fugitive.

His boss nearly went into cardiac arrest when he learned of these extraordinary circumstances concerning his “most trusted employee!”

Meanwhile, Pelosi defamed courageous federal agents and used inflammatory language in accusing ICE agents of staging “cowardly attacks” on “law-abiding” and “patriotic immigrants.”

It would appear she was attempting to incite violence against ICE agents.  Should any agent be attacked, perhaps they or their families should consider suing Pelosi personally for inciting hostility by abusing her authority as a leader of the United States House of Representatives.

Law enforcement officers are indeed made accountable, why shouldn’t our elected “representatives” also be made responsible?

Furthermore, contrary to Pelosi’s lies, aliens who violate our immigration laws are, by definition, not law-abiding!

The ICE agents who took the immigration law violators into custody did not do so not out of bigotry or hatred, but because of the oaths, they made when they entered on duty with the federal government to uphold the Constitution and enforce our nation’s laws.

Our immigration laws have nothing to do with race, religion or ethnicity.

Title 8, United States Code, Section 1182 enumerates the categories of aliens excluded.  Among these classes:  aliens with dangerous communicable, diseases, convicted felons, human rights violators, war criminals, terrorists, spies, and other usual suspects.

The term patriotic has been defined, in part as “having or expressing devotion to and vigorous support for one’s country.”

How on earth is an individual who violates the sovereign borders of a country in which he/she is not a citizen demonstrating patriotism?

Perhaps the issue of patriotism should be reviewed in examining the conduct of Ms. Pelosi, whose words and exhortations undermine the dangerous and vital work of America’s immigration law enforcement officers.  We should, therefore, ask if her conduct is a demonstration of patriotism or, more appropriately, of treason.

Motorists who drive erratically are likely to be pulled over by police officers to make sure that they are not operating under the influence of alcohol or drugs and also to make sure that they possess valid driver’s licenses.

Pelosi’s rhetoric and evident detachment from reality cause me to wonder if when she made that statement was suffering the effects of psychedelic drugs or had too much to drink.

Other possibilities include that she is senile or suffers from an abject inability to discern reality from a fantasy world she has created within the realm that lies between her ears.

Or perhaps,  she knows what she must say to get campaign contributions from her globalist campaign contributors.

Drunk drivers are said to be driving under the influence (DUI).  Perhaps Ms. Pelosi is guilty of GUI (Governing Under the Influence).

I provided testimony to the 9/11 Commission.  As an INS agent, I investigated and arrested many international terrorists.  About three years ago I wrote an extensive article, The 9/11 Commission Report, and Immigration: An Assessment, Fourteen Years after the Attacks.

Pelosi and her colleagues should be required to read it along with, the 9/11 Commission Report and 9/11 and Terrorist Travel.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in FrontPage Magazine.

Shhhhh!!! Global temperatures were warmer last summer, and summer before that

/in , , , /by

Summer is the season where temperatures have historically hovered around a comfortable 70 degrees most days while occasionally reaching a slightly warm 80 degrees. Perhaps the Deep South would rarely reach 85 degrees in during a historic heatwave before global warming. But now summers are hot – real hot. And global warming is to blame. At least that is the message conveyed by the establishment media, trying to reprogram impressionable readers and viewers into believing this summer marks the beginning of a global warming apocalypse.

Here are just a few of the recent headlines:

“Our climate plans are in pieces as killer summer shreds records,” screams an Aug. 5 CNN headline.

“Scorching Summer in Europe Signals Long-Term Climate Changes,” claims an Aug. 4 New York Times headline.

“Climate change is supercharging a hot and dangerous summer,” warns a July 26 Washington Post headline.

“Record-breaking heat and fires are worsened by climate change,” lectures a July 28 CBS News headline.

And then there is our personal favorite, “Global heat, fires and floods: How much did climate change fuel that hellish July?” asks the July 31 USA Today. (If you can’t guess what USA Today’s answer is, you need an extreme intervention.)

Science is the enemy of global warming alarmists. And objective scientific data is that enemy on steroids. Let’s take a look at what the scientific data reveal:

Source: drroyspencer.com.

The above chart represents global temperatures as measured by NASA satellite instruments. Global temperatures were warmer last year (including last summer) and the year before that in comparison to 2018 and this summer. Each year there are regional differences that make some areas of the globe warmer than others.

It turns out that temperatures this summer happen to be regionally warmer among the population centers of North America and Europe. As a result, even as global temperatures are lower this year and lower this summer than the past two years and summers, the media can take advantage of regional variances to mislead people in America and Europe into believing summertime temperatures this year illustrate record-breaking, global warming-infused heat. And, of course, the media conveniently fail to mention that 2017 and 2016 summer temperatures in American population centers were relatively cool.

There are a couple more points about the above graph that deserve mentioning. The satellite data start in 1979, which was the end of a 30-year cooling period. As such, global temperatures would be expected to rebound from that cool period and grow warmer from 1979 through 2018. Also, the total warming during the past 40 years has been merely 0.5 degrees Celsius (approximately 1 degree Fahrenheit). That amount of warming is barely noticeable, if noticeable at all, without sensitive and precise scientific instruments taking the measurements.

When it comes to global warming, the establishment media love to hype. Summertime is a perfect time for that hype. But don’t believe the hype; believe the scientific data.

RELATED ARTICLE: California Wildfires Caused By Radical Environmentalists, Not Climate Change

Pennsylvania Grand Jury: Sexually Abused Victims ‘Brushed Aside,’ Predators Protected

/in , , , , /by

HARRISBURG, Pa. (ChurchMilitant.com) – Pennsylvania bishops cared more about avoiding scandal than protecting victims — this according to the Pennsylvania grand jury report, set for release as early as August 8.

A court filing made public Friday reveals Bp. Donald Trautman of Erie was one among two dozen clergy who filed to block release of the report, considered the most sweeping investigation into clerical sex abuse in American history. The 880-page report offers findings from six dioceses: Erie, Pittsburgh, Harrisburg, Scranton, Allentown and Greensburg.

The main thing was not to help children, but to avoid ‘scandal.’ Tweet

In the court document, Trautman admits that continuing to block release of the report “could further injure victims of abuse,” and so withdrew his appeal — but only on condition that certain accusations leveled against bishops in the report did not apply to him, namely:

  • “all of [the victims] were brushed aside, in every part of the state, by church leaders who preferred to protect the abusers and their institution above all”
  • “The main thing was not to help children, but to avoid ‘scandal'”
  • “Priests were raping little boys and girls and the men of God who were responsible for them not only did nothing: they hid it all”
  • “Diocesan administrators, including the Bishops, had knowledge of this conduct and yet priests were regularly placed in ministry after the Diocese was on notice that a complaint of child sexual abuse had been made. This conduct enabled offenders and endangered the welfare of children”
  • “several Diocesan administrators, including the Bishops, often dissuaded victims from reporting abuse to police, pressured law enforcement to terminate or avoid an investigation, or conducted their own deficient, biased investigation without reporting crimes against children to the proper authorities”

The quotes shed light on the nature and scope of the findings, which include at least 300 named priests. So far, it’s known that 64 come from Erie, 71 from Harrisburg and at least 90 are named from Pittsburgh (nearly one third of the total number). Bishops Lawrence Persico of Erie and Ronald Gainer of Harrisburg publicly released the list of names themselves, while an attorney for an accused Pittsburgh priest revealed the number of priests named from that diocese.

Check out our full #CatholicMeToo coverage

Gainer announced last week he was stripping every Church building of the names of all bishops since 1947, all of them complicit in shielding sexual predators. The move only came, however, after media pressure.

In response to Gainer’s announcement, spokesman Joe Grace of the Pennsylvania attorney general’s office said, “It is long past due for the Diocese of Harrisburg to make public the names of predator priests within the Catholic Church. Their proclamations today only come after intense public pressure and in the face of the imminent release of the Grand Jury report exposing decades of child abuse and cover up.”

“To this point, the Diocese of Harrisburg has been adverse to transparency and has not been cooperative,” he added. “A now public opinion by the judge supervising the grand jury last year made it clear they sought to end the investigation entirely.”

The dioceses of Pittsburgh and Greensburg won’t follow the lead of Erie or Harrisburg, however, refusing to release the names of accused priests until publication of the report.

It’s widely expected that the name of Cdl. Donald Wuerl, archbishop of Washington, D.C. and former bishop of Pittsburgh (1988–2006), will make an appearance in the grand jury report, as he was named in multiple lawsuits during his tenure there alleging conspiracy to cover up sex abuse, and had a history of placing accused priests back in active ministry or failing to report them to law enforcement.

Trautman was bishop of Erie from 1990–2011, and championed the cause of progressive liturgy. He opposed the traditional reforms of Pope Benedict, critical of his motu proprio Summorum Pontificum, which gave universal permission for priests to offer Mass in the old rite. As chairman of the U.S. Bishops’ Committee on the Liturgy, he spearheaded the use of more “inclusive” language in liturgical texts. His revised, “inclusive” version of the Roman Missal was ultimately rejected by Rome in 1998.

RELATED ARTICLES:

White Paper: Child Molestation and the Homosexual Movement

New York Public School brings in Drag Queens to Teach Kindergartners About Sexuality

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared on ChurchMilitant.com.

Video Answers to Important Questions that will impact the Mid-Term 2018 Elections

/in , , , , /by

Here are two video clips answering two questions many of you have been asking or pondering.

1. Ben Shapiro takes a clear-eyed look at why American Jews vote for the anti-Israel Left.

2. Ben Shapiro: The Myth of the Tiny Radical Muslim Minority.

3. Bill Finley: Mid-Term Perfect Storm

The below midterm 2018 election map was sent out by the Democratic National Campaign Committee.

Freedom to Develop

/in , , , /by

In this column, we’re going to discuss the freedom to develop.

What is the freedom to develop?

To develop is to change our environment from one form into another form—in particular, a form that the developer regards as more conducive to human life. All energy production requires development, and a lot of it.

Thus, for energy production to occur, we need to be free to develop; to be free to take our ideas—the best place for a power plant, which basin has the most potential for oil and gas, a new kind of refinery—and translate them into value.

What does freedom to develop mean? It means that others cannot forcibly interfere: private individuals should not be able to sabotage development, as sometimes happens with pipelines, and governments shouldn’t be able to sabotage development, which is far more common.

image

Pro-development vs. anti-impact

If we want the best laws to promote human well-being through energy abundance, we need this freedom. However, there are a lot of people in the world, particularly in wealthy countries, who advocate the idea that development is bad. They sometimes call it “being green” or “minimizing impact.”

If you really take that idea seriously it means that we shouldn’t do the things that we need to do to prosper, and that in fact we shouldn’t have done most of what we’ve already done to make ourselves prosperous.

If we’re anti-development, if we want to minimize our impact, then we should have never turned the patch of dirt and trees in the northeast United States into New York City.

If you look at the map of North Korea and South Korea, you’ll see that South Korea is lit up at night while North Korea is almost completely dark: if we really want to minimize impact, North Korea is doing a much, much better job.

I think this anti-development idea is a dangerous idea. We don’t want to be anti-development. We want to be anti-pollution, but pro-development.

The vital importance of private property rights

This doesn’t mean that the government has to develop itself. It just means the government has to allow people to be free to develop.

Historically, the United States has been the world’s energy leader and the world’s energy innovator because we have had the most freedom to develop of any place in the world—including a strong respect for private property rights, which are vital for enabling people to develop energy resources.

But today, the right to private property and the right to develop are both under attack. Much damage has already done by anti-development activists preventing people from using their land as they choose, and instead saying that landowners are obligated to use their land only in the way the activists see fit.

We might ask, “Does freedom to develop mean that anyone can develop anywhere?” There’s room for debate here, but in general, people who own private property can and should preserve the areas that they really want preserved and develop the areas they really want developed. It’s a very dangerous idea that one person’s property rights should be restricted because someone else wants that property to remain pure.

If I buy several acres with some trees, and then I learn that underground there’s an amazing amount of hydrocarbons, I should be free to extract that so I can get a royalty from it. Someone in Washington D.C. or Washington State shouldn’t get to say, “I want your land“ or to tell you how to use your land.

The freedom to develop is crucial, so if we respect the freedom to develop while respecting the freedom from endangerment, we can make a lot of progress.

RELATED ARTICLE: Trump blames California wildfires on ‘bad environmental laws’

War on Boys: The ‘Feminist Jihad’ on Normal Male Behavior

/in , , , , , , /by

James Woods tweeted the following,

James Woods (@RealJamesWoods)
There is a war on boys in America: chemical “castration” (ritalin), the mythology of #ADD, the scourge of pedophilia (#NAMBLA), the feminist jihad against virtually all normal male behavior in pre-teens and teens, etc. It is open war on boys and the prognosis is devastating.

Prager University published the below video titled “War on Boys” narrated by Christina Hoff Sommers, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.

Mr. Woods is correct in his analysis that there is a war on boys being boys.

In an August 2nd, 2018 Washington Examiner op-ed titled “Feminism is the last thing in the world boys need” Suzanne Venker wrote:

The sheer degree of havoc feminists cause never ceases to amaze me, nor does their arrogance and condescension. In a ridiculous piece in the The New York Times titled “What Feminists Can Do for Boys,” feminist author Jessica Valenti claims that those who share her ideology can help boys become men.

I cannot think of a more preposterous argument. Feminism is a major cause of the predicament boys and men now face. In what world could it be the remedy?

What modern feminists want is to rid the world of traditional masculinity, pure and simple. They’re consumed with the unwarranted and bogus notion that men in their natural state are prone to oppress women and that the male drive to provide and protect is evidence of said oppression.

While girls and young women have ample resources to seek “respite” from restrictive cultural mores, writes Valenti, boys do not — and this oversight makes them “susceptible to misogynist hucksters peddling get-manly-quick platitudes and dangerous online extremist communities.”

She then points to none other than Jordan Peterson, the Canadian psychology professor and YouTube philosopher who’s become a bona fide sensation ever since his interview with the U.K. feminist Cathy Newman. But Peterson’s meteoric rise is hardly due to his being a “misogynist huckster.” On the contrary, it is due entirely to his being a shining example of what it means to think for oneself and to be a mature, responsible man who’s committed to his wife and kids.

I can’t think of a single better role model for men.

Read more.

The Honorable Steve Baldwin, author, researcher and speaker on homosexual issues, wrote a white paper published in the Regent’s University Law Review titled “Child Molestation and and Homosexual Movement.” In a January 2014 column Mr. Baldwin wrote:

Lately, the gay movement seems to be making large gains in its war on America’s Judeo-Christian culture. Gay characters have become the norm on sitcoms; it has become fashionable to attack the Boy Scouts; homosexual propaganda inundates many of our public schools; nearly all the mainstream religious denominations have “revised” their understanding of Biblical teaching concerning homosexuality; and the gay “rights” legislative agenda is succeeding beyond the advocates’ wildest imaginations.

[ … ]

It is difficult to convey the dark side of the homosexual culture without appearing harsh. However, it is time to acknowledge that homosexual behavior threatens the foundation of Western civilization ─ the nuclear family. An unmistakable manifestation of the attack on the family unit is the homosexual community’s efforts to target children both for their own sexual pleasure and to enlarge the homosexual movement. The homosexual community and its allies in the media scoff at this argument. They insist it is merely a tactic to demonize the homosexual movement. After all, they argue, heterosexual molestation is a far more serious problem.

The feminists have joined forces with the LGBTQ community and introduced into public schools, colleges and universities an anti-boy/male agenda. Being a “male student” is not an appropriate pronoun on many college campuses.

Mr. Baldwin concludes:

The homosexual community knows that the capture of all major youth groups is absolutely necessary to the expansion of its movement. They know what most social scientists and sex researchers know but refuse to talk about: homosexually-molested children are likely to become homosexual. After all, one of the most common characteristics of homosexual molesters is the fact that they were molested themselves during boyhood. An article published by the American Medical Association reported that, “Abused adolescents, particularly those victimized by males, were up to 7 times more likely to self-identity as gay or bisexual than peers who had not been abused.”

It is high time that America’s elected officials, health authorities, education leaders, and law enforcement officials act to not only tell the harsh truth─the homosexual community has targeted America’s youth─but act now to counter this horrible trend. Failure to do so will have disastrous consequences for both our culture and for the health of our children.

Time for boys to be boys and grow into men, who will be fathers, brothers and real males.

RELATED VIDEO: Make men masculine again. Rape, murder, war – all have one thing in common: Men. The solution seems simple: make men less toxic – make men less masculine. In this video, Allie Stuckey, Host of “Allie” on CRTV & “Relatable” podcast, explains why demonizing masculinity is not the solution, but the problem.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Feminism isn’t helping girls, and certainly not boys

5 Horrific Examples of Cultural Decay in America

Bank of America blames firearms with ‘military characteristics’ for mass shootings, but report on Parkland massacre shows Cruz asked for but was denied help!

/in , , , , , , , , /by

Anne Finucane, Vice Chairman of the Bank of America.

Anne Finucane, Vice Chairman for Bank of America in a letter stated,

We know there is a limited role we [Bank of America] can play as a company to make a direct contribution to reaching a day we all want, when we no longer have to suffer a mass shooting tragedy in our country.

Firearms with military characteristics have been used in many of these tragedies, including at schools in Florida and Connecticut.

We have firearms industry clients who do not manufacture this type of firearm. But we are engaging the limited number of clients who do, to learn their plans to keep this type of firearm from being used in mass shootings. In those discussions, we have indicated it is our intent that we will not finance the manufacture of this type of firearm for non-law enforcement, non-military use. We want to understand what those clients are doing to end mass shootings, and what we can do to help them.

Bank of America and Anne Finucane miss one key factor in mass shootings, the shooters.

If Bank of America truly wants to help prevent mass shootings, then they must take into account the shooter. Issues such as how did the shooter purchase a firearm with military characteristics, was the purchase legal, what was the background of the school shooter, did the shooters family, friends or fellow students know his intent, what did law-enforcement know about the shooter? Lastly, what did the local school district know about the shooter and did the district do its duty to either help or report the shooter to the appropriate authorities.

We now learn that, in the case of Nicholas Cruz, he asked for help and was denied it.

A heavily redacted report  was released on August 3rd, 2018 after Broward Circuit Judge Elizabeth Scherer ordered Broward County Public Schools to release its report on Nicholas Cruz, the shooter who slaughtered 17 people on February 14th, 2018 at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School.

According to The Daily Beast,

In Cruz’s junior year, after he had already begun exhibiting behavior so disturbing it led to guidance counselors wanting to have him committed, the teenager sat down with education specialists to discuss his options for further schooling.

He was told he could transfer to Cross Creek, a school tailored for students with special needs; sue the Broward school district; or stay at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School without any special counseling. According to a review of that meeting featured in the new report, school officials left out one crucial fact: Cruz was still entitled to special assistance at Stoneman Douglas if he chose to stay.

Being unaware of this option, however, Cruz—whose developmental delays were flagged at age 3—was reportedly stripped of counseling services and left to fend for himself as a “regular student.”

Read more.

The Sun-Sentinel noted that the investigation found that the school district “did not follow the requirements of Florida statute or federal laws governing students with disabilities” in two specific instances:

  • School officials misstated [the shooter’s] options when he was faced with being removed from Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School his junior year, leading him to refuse special education services.
  • When [the shooter] asked to return to the therapeutic environment of Cross Creek School for special education students, the district “did not follow through,” the report reveals.

What would have happened if the district had told Nicholas Cruz the truth about his options? What would have happened if the Broward County School District followed through on returning Nicholas Cruz to the therapeutic environment of Cross Creek School?

Perhaps Ms Finucane should meet with school districts across America and ask them what are they doing to stop one of their students from becoming the next mass shooter?

The Media’s Full-Throated Defense Of NYT’s Hiring An Anti-White Bigot

/in , , , , /by

As the story surrounding Sarah Jeong’s anti-white shamefulness unfolds it only gets worse, and it goes directly to the bifurcation of our country that comes from the stew of leftist hierarchy identity politics, anti-Americanism and a now openly dishonest and partisan media.

The progressive defense of the Times’ hiring a bigot, particularly by the media, is an awesome display of the power and terror unleashed through the hierarchy of identity politics, because a different writer hired by the Times in February found to be using gay slurs was fired within hours. But not only is Jeong not being fired, the wagons have tightly circled across the media landscape.

Yes, because in the poisonous identity hierarchy, lesbians are far more aggrieved and therefore have greater rights and power than whites, which are at the bottom of the hierarchy — seriously, this has been taught on college campuses around the country for years — there is a built-in, intended and defended double-standard. Want to know the reason for the rise of the Alt Right and white nationalism? Read on.

As is now well-known, the New York Times this week announced the hiring of Sarah Jeong to sit on their editorial board and write editorials. This board forms the newspaper’s daily opinions. About 30 seconds after the announcement, Twitter exploded with some of Jeong’s breathtakingly hateful and bigoted tweets against whites and white males. She is Korean-born and the Times must have known of these.

We have to have a quick and ugly sampling, from roughly 2014-2015, so hardly ancient writings:

“Dumba** f***ing white people marking up the internet with their opinions like dogs pissing on fire hydrants”

“Are white people genetically predisposed to burn faster in the sun, thus logically being only fit to live underground like groveling goblins”

“oh man it’s kind of sick how much joy I get out of being cruel to old white men”

“White people have stopped breeding. You’ll all go extinct soon. This was my plan all along.”

“White people marking up the internet with their opinions like dogs pissing on fire hydrants”

“#CancelWhitePeople”

There’s more from the Times’ new bigot. For normal Americans, these tweets are a gasp, and surely spelled her doom. When the Times announced the hiring of Quinn Norton in February, it was discovered that she had used the gay slur “fag” and “faggot” repeatedly. She herself is a lesbian and gay rights activist, and was using the term toward other gays on Twitter in the same way that blacks use the N word with other blacks. It’s all quite despicable. The Times high moral code forced it to fire Norton within hours of announcing the hiring.

But a funny thing happened with Jeong’s anti-white bigotry tweets. The Times’ high moral code is not kicking in to fire her, and much of the media, all of the left-wing media, is defending the Times’ keeping Jeong onboard. In fact, publication after publication is attacking the “organized conservative Twitter trolls” and urging the Times to stand firm.

The Washington Post blames conservative media — not Jeong:

“Without evidence that they had any bearing on Jeong’s extensive body of work, which includes a book she wrote about online harassment, these statements could have perhaps been unceremoniously dismissed as insignificant. But after conservative media seized on the story Thursday, they ignited a firestorm of debate…Jeong’s episode has also raised complicated questions about the stubborn nature of harassment that women of color face online.”

I’m waiting for the Post to write about what Michelle Malkin endures daily. She’s Filipino. Or maybe Candace Owens. She’s black. But they’re conservative, so again…meh.

The Huffington Post called on the Times to just ignore the critics:

“The proper way to respond to a bad-faith troll campaign like the one the right-wing internet is waging on Sarah Jeong, the newest member of The New York Times editorial board, is to not respond at all, to not even listen in the first place…But ignore the trolls you must. This includes the gleeful, snickering chuds who strip old tweets of their context and send them back out into the world. And this also includes the establishment figures like Ari Fleischer and publications like the National Review, the folks wailing about an Asian woman’s“anti-white racism,” as if there were such a thing.”

There’s more of the identity politics. Racism isn’t racism. Only whites can be racist. Minorities by this new definition, cannot be. Because whites are at the bottom of the aggrievement scale. This is how the new bigot thinks.

The huge tech site The Verge, encouraged newsrooms everywhere to stand against the hate — not Jeong’s, mind you, but the hate of those who are calling out her tweets and the Times’ hiring of her.

“…as the editors of The Verge, we want to be clear: this abusive backlash is dishonest and outrageous…journalists have been increasingly targeted by people acting in bad faith who do not care about the work they do, the challenges they face, or the actual context of their statements…it’s time other newsrooms learn to spot these hateful campaigns for what they are: attempts to discredit and undo the vital work of journalists who report on the most toxic communities on the internet.”

Jezebel magazine was ticked the Times responded at all, thinking they should have ignored the outcry as other media outlets encouraged:

“The trolls have largely concerned themselves with Jeong’s fairly innocuous tweets about white people.”

Their meaning of “innocuous” is different from mine.

The Cut considered her tweets harmless:

“Many of Jeong’s tweets that the right dug up dated back five years, and were harmless jokes about conservative white people.”

But “fag” used by a gay person toward other gay people was so harmful as to be a firing offense? Yes. Identity politics. She was the wrong kind of bigot — if one at all. Jeong is the right kind of bigot.

The list of defenders goes on and on. Jeong will not only keep her job and take her place in the pantheon of modern progressive regressives on the Times’ editorial board, she will become a hero on the Left. Worse, though, is that more people will be emboldened to think and talk hatefully like her — as long as their bigotry is correctly targeted. That is the lesson between Norton and Jeong.

And I’m sorry to say that “correctly targeted” means at white people.

Hence the rise of the alt right and white nationalism — two small but dangerous movements — is actually just more identity politics driven by the left. Bigotry begets bigotry. A few short decades ago, we were trending away from the day of the bigot.

Again, all of this ends really, really badly if there is not a sea change in the culture.

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

Is CNN “The Enemy of the People”?

/in , , , /by

It began at the Trump Rally this past Tuesday in Tampa. I was covering the rally as part of the press corps for News Talk Florida. A sizable crowd was on hand and, as is customary, the attendees and media had to wait for a couple of hours for President Trump to take the podium. To fill the time, news reporters wrote their columns and the television media made brief on-air reports, including Jim Acosta of CNN, a well known adversary to this administration.

Seeing Mr. Acosta begin to make his live report, the crowd turned around towards the camera, waved their Trump signs and began to chant “CNN sucks” as well as “USA” and “Trump.” As more people began to notice what was going on, they joined in and their voices grew louder and louder. So much so, Mr. Acosta was forced to curtail his report. This happened not just once, but at least two times.

Trump supporter in Tampa, Florida. Photo by John Michael Chambers.

The next day, the White House correspondent was interviewed on CNN and was visibly upset with the heckling in Tampa, whining, “It felt like we weren’t in America anymore,” and portrayed himself as a victim.

Some reports claimed President Trump had instigated the verbal attack on Mr. Acosta. This is simply not true as it happened long before Mr. Trump took the stage.

He also claimed the media worried about their safety. Frankly, the only person singled out by the crowd was Mr. Acosta during his report. Nobody cared about him when the camera was turned off. No other member of the media was addressed, other than a member of the press asking an attendee a question.

This is evidently a common occurrence with Mr. Acosta as it has happened at other events. Bottom-line, the Trump supporters know who Mr. Acosta is and are acutely aware of his adversarial relationship with the president, which they do not appreciate.

Pursuant to this, in Thursday’s press conference, Mr. Acosta persisted in asking the press secretary, Sarah Sanders, if the Trump administration considered the media, “The enemy of the people.” Although she dodged the question, she claimed to be offended by the attacks by the press on her personally.

Ivanka Trump, the president’s daughter issued a statement that, No, she didn’t consider the media as an enemy of the people. This caused President Trump to Tweet on Thursday, “They asked my daughter Ivanka whether or not the media is the enemy of the people. She correctly said no. It is the FAKE NEWS, which is a large percentage of the media, that is the enemy of the people!”

It is no secret the public no longer trusts the media, reaching incredible lows. Republicans and independents generally regard it as an organ of the Democrats.

When there is any push back to a story in the press, particularly by the president, they claim foul. Ever since the beginning of his candidacy, Mr. Trump knew he wasn’t liked by the press, which is typical for most Republican presidents. Unlike his predecessors though who simply took the abuse, Mr. Trump is not afraid to return fire which annoys the press to no end, claiming he is being “unpresidential.” He refutes this comment by saying, “It is a lot easier to act presidential than to do what I do,” a reference to his results orientation.

Sitting there as a member of the press, I was asked my opinions on various subjects. Inevitably, the first question asked was, “Are you with CNN?” After I assured them I was not, they asked some rather interesting questions about the media and politics in general.

Basically, I think CNN’s Jim Acosta is getting a small taste of his own medicine, and certainly doesn’t like it. Somehow he believes he should be exempted from criticism. The heckling he receives at the Trump rallies is a result of his own doing. He has gone out of his way to irritate the administration and certainly doesn’t come across as “fair and balanced.” Supporters of the president recognize this and treats him accordingly.

Somehow I am reminded of the old saying, “If you cannot stand the heat…”

Keep the Faith!

RELATED ARTICLES:

Trump Didn’t Create Distrust of Media, the Media Did

Trump: Driving liberals crazy

RELATED VIDEO: Jim Acosta is a cry baby.

Note: All trademarks both marked and unmarked belong to their respective companies.

VIDEO: Dana Loesch Vaporizes Jim Acosta’s Hypocritical Tears

/in , , , /by

“Acosta is upset that someone yelled CNN sucks. Imagine how he would feel if his network set up a public lynching of him. As they did of me… many in legacy media stopped prioritizing advancing news and truth in favor of advancing themselves and their political agendas.” —Dana Loesch

RELATED ARTICLE: Anti-Trump vandalism sweeps country: Yacht, Hollywood star latest targets

VIDEO: UK MEP Janice Atkinson on the migrant crime statistics the EU doesn’t want you to know about

/in , , , , , /by

I interview UK MEP Janice Atkinson. In this one, she talks about prison populations filled with migrants, 85% of immigrants being economic migrants, and the numbers of people who are waiting to come in. One last video to go, and in it Janice talks about how the Free Tommy rallies won’t change the government’s minds, but they have awoken the people. That should be a ‘best seller’.

EDITORS NOTE: This video originally appeared on Jihad Watch.