Desperate Democrats try re-branding with ‘New Economic Agenda’ for America

/in , , , , , /by

In an article titled “‘A Better Deal’: Democrats Plan to Roll Out New Slogan After Realizing ‘Resistance’ Strategy Is Not Working” Adelle Nazarian writes:

The Democrats have a new slogan and economic agenda: “A Better Deal: Better Skills, Better Jobs, Better Wages.”

Minority leaders Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) have led the charge for this following the absence of a strategy to win back power after realizing that attacking President Donald Trump is not working.

Politico, which first reported on this, suggested the “Better Deal” hearkens back to President Franklin Roosevelt’s “New Deal,” which was created in response to the drought and dust storms of the 1930s that escalated into an environmental disaster.

According to Politico, “The slogan, which is still being polled in battleground House districts, aims to convince voters that Democrats have more to offer than the GOP and the self-proclaimed deal-maker in the White House.”

But be advised we have already experienced their Progressive/Socialist/Marxist (PSM not to be confused with PMS) oppressive attack on our free markets as they slowly tried to take total control of our lives under the blitzkrieg of former President Obama – the years 2008 to 2016 were pure misery indeed.

The Democrat Party working closely with some of their republican friends attempted to decimate the United States free market system starting with our health care system, which is 1/5th of the U.S. economy and place it under federal control much like in Communist Cuba and North Korea.

The Democrats on Monday are going to blame corporations for the demise of our capitalist freedoms when in fact all they want is total control of your and my life from birth to death – cradle to grave.

The Democrats are stating that families in America today feel that the rules of the economy are rigged against them. All propaganda of course – without rich successful capitalists creating jobs these bureaucrats would be unemployed.

So the Democrats will demand that more taxes be collected from big business and the middle class which in turn will put more money in the hands of the government and not Americans.

The PSM power grabs under Obama were soundly rejected by the American people and now the Democrats pay the price – their true colors in the spotlight.

The Democrat Party believes it must control the economy of the United States and the velocity of money – to maintain a close control over the lives of Americans.

Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT)

The Democrat economic polices and ideas put forth by Communists like Bernie Sanders mirror the economic policies of nations like Venezuela.

A country on the brink of civil war as the people are rising up and are about to remove – by force if necessary President Maduro for his oppressive control over the Venezuelan people.

Democrats want one thing – control over you – just like the governments of Cuba, North Korea, Venezuela and the like – REJECT THEM

They hide in the shadows plotting and planning like the slimy worms they are and on Monday they will present their blue print for the take over of the U.S. free market, capitalist system – re written as “helping the poor oppressed Americans” which primarily live in cities controlled by Democrats –

Under the reign of Obama and the weak gutless, spineless GOP Congress we were buried in oppressive legislation from unconstitutional health care to the federal government monitoring how much money you took out of your ATMs under Dodd-Frank.

They want control of your food and water – even the retaining ponds you dig in your back yard on your private property – they want to disarm you 100% and arm the IRS – and other federal agencies like the Social Security Administration to keep their boot on your neck.

They want total control over your children in a federally controlled school system to prepare your children for future allegiance to the Socialist system they pray too.

So on Monday when the Democrats roll out their re-branding of their Party to try and salvage what is left of the swamp they created be advised – it will not be for the good of this nation only for them.

Watch this video exposing rich statists, who are lobbying for higher taxes on the middle class, as complete hypocrites.

The gutless GOP have stood back and allowed the Obama reign of terror to be funded unabated and in 2018 its time to vote in real Americans that will fix this nation and return us back to Constitutional law and order.

As for both the Republican and Democrat parties that have worked for years to dismantle capitalism’s economic freedoms and put us under United Nations New World Order tyranny be advised – this nation is armed to the teeth and any government infringement will be met with total failure.

Let us pray for the success of the Venezuelan people as they fight daily for freedom. The oppression faced in Venezuela is an example of the future government that Democrats represent here.

Its just sad the Venezuelans were disarmed and unable to defend themselves – but they will over come – Salute to their Freedom.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Democrats’ ‘Better Deal’ Proposals Would Make Americans Worse Off

‘A Better Deal’: Democrats Plan to Roll Out New Slogan After Realizing ‘Resistance’ Strategy Is Not Working

Dems to announce ‘A better deal’ economic agenda on Monday: report – The Hill

Not Better: Democrats Hopelessly Adopt New Establishment Slogan: The party persists with marketing campaigns chock-full of empty promises

This Is What Happens When You Ask Pro-Taxers to Pay More

VIDEO: Florida Senator Marco Rubio on what’s really going on in Washington, D.C.

/in , , , , , /by

In an email Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) sent out a video on what is really going on in our nations capitol.

Senator Rubio states:

I just recorded a short video for you to make certain you know the truth about what’s happening in Washington.

Right now we are seeing a large increase in false media reporting – everyone is quick to jump on what they think is happening in our government, and fast to point fingers/accusations.

Our country is on a path towards prosperity and success, but the left has put a target on my back with hopes of defeating OUR conservative voice. They hate how hard we are working and how determined we are to restore our nation and undo the damage done by Barack Obama.

Transgenderism: The Big Absurdity

/in , , , , , /by

Voltaire wrote, “Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.”

When I was growing up it was very clear that a male was a male and a female was a female. Sexual identity was based upon your biological sex at birth. Science defined your sex based upon your chromosomes at the time of conception.

Wikipedia notes sexual differences in humans as follows,

“A baby’s genetic sex is determined at the time of conception. When the baby is conceived, a chromosome from the sperm cell, either X or Y, fuses with the X chromosome in the egg cell, determining whether the baby will be genetically female (XX) or male (XY). To be genetically female, one needs to be (XX), whereas to be a genetic male, (XY) is needed.”

Science prevailed, today science is being ignored to create a new class of protected individuals who define their own “gender.” Gender is not genetic sex. Gender is defined as.

The state of being male or female (typically used with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones).

Transgenderism is the “big absurdity.”

Transgenderism and homosexuality are absurdities that have lead to individuals committing atrocities upon themselves, their families and society.

But don’t tell that to Planned Parenthood. Planned Parenthood is the primary sponsor of the The Teaching Transgender Toolkit (TTT) website. The TTT website states:

The Teaching Transgender Toolkit is a detailed collection of best practices, lesson plans and resources for those who wish to facilitate trainings about transgender people, identities and experiences. The first of its kind, this book translates the authors’ decades of experience leading transgender-related trainings and educational best practices into a guide that can be used by trainers of all levels to provide accurate and effective trainings. Whether you are a novice who has never led a training before, or you are an expert trainer or an expert on transgender identities, the Teaching Transgender Toolkit has something for you!

To become a transgender you need a tool kit.

One has to “train” to become a transgender.

One cannot change their genetic sex, however there are those, like TTT’s sponsors Planned Parenthood, Out for Health a Project of Planned Parenthood and Education, Training and Research (ETR), whose sole purpose is to “teach” boys and girls to believe they are neither a boy or a girl.

In an April 2016 column titled “Transgenderism: Misogyny Writ Large” Judith Reisman, Ph.D, writes:

Adopting “gender uncertainty” policies that permit access to vulnerable women and girls provides predators with greater access to victims. Predators can enter the private spaces of opposite-sex students without detection if they reject their birth sex or dress in opposite-sex clothing. And with the force of law protecting “transgender” students and staff, one is unlikely to report a cross-dressed person for fear of being accused of discrimination. Catch 22. Gotcha!

Read more.

Dr. Reisman warned, “Remember, the U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights’ “PROTECTING CIVIL RIGHTS, ADVANCING EQUITY” reports that elementary and secondary students do mimic what they learn, becoming perpetrators. We must revisit the fallout of the obscene sexual revolution in sex ed and pornography. Was it the road to sexual liberation or the road to sexual slavery?”

Thomas D. Williams, PhD, in an August 2016 column titled “Physicians Decry Pseudo-Science of Transgenderism, ‘Absurd’ to Say Anyone is Born Into ‘Wrong Body’” wrote:

The American College of Pediatricians (ACP) has released a position paper denouncing popular approaches to transgender, declaring that the current protocol is founded upon “unscientific gender ideology,” which lacks any basis in real evidence.

The physicians argue that the assumption that gender dysphoria (GD)—a psychological condition in which people experience a marked incongruence between their experienced gender and their biological sex—is innate contradicts all relevant data and is based on ideology rather than science.

Studies have shown, the authors contend, that the “perspective of an ‘innate gender identity’ arising from prenatally ‘feminized’ or ‘masculinized’ brains trapped in the wrong body is in fact an ideological belief that has no basis in rigorous science.”

“GD is a problem that resides in the mind not in the body. Children with GD do not have a disordered body—even though they feel as if they do,” the doctors note. “Likewise, although many men with GD express the belief that they are a ‘feminine essence’ trapped in a male body, this belief has no scientific basis.”

Transgenderism is a function of nurture not nature.

Whether its a parent, friend, colleague, public school teacher, professor, religion or government that is promoting transgenderism it leads the individual to question their sex when there is no scientific basis for doing so.

Today we are seeing played out what Voltaire wrote, “Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.”

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Camille Paglia: ‘Transgender Propagandists’ Committing ‘Child Abuse’

Rocklin Is Roiling after Trans School Lesson

I Was a Transgender Soldier. Gender Dysphoria Poses Real Problems for Military.

Minnesota Is Pushing Gender Identity Debate on Kindergartners

Pomona College Allegedly Knew of LGBT Director’s Anti-White, Anti-Heterosexual Tweets before Hiring Him

Target paints a bull’s-eye on women – www.washingtontimes.com

Man arrested for placing video camera in Target bathroom

10 Examples of Men Abusing Target’s Dangerous Policy

‘Transgender’ male arrested for taking pictures of woman in Target changing room

“Transgenderism: Misogyny Writ Large” – Judith Reisman, Ph.D

Top Twenty Sexual Crimes Committed at Target Stores – www.breitbart.com

Top Twenty-Five Stories Proving Target’s Pro-Transgender Bathroom Policy
Is Dangerous to Women and Children

Sex Offender Tries to Film Woman in Target, So She Films Him as He Runs Away: Viral Video

RESOURCES:

Help for Those Struggling with Sex-Change Regret – www.sexchangeregret.com

INCIDENTS ON RECORD: 

Compiled List of Predators in Women’s Facilities

The Jewashing of George Soros

/in , , /by

Anti Semite George Soros is the moving force behind  –‘MoveOn.org‘ and J Street that was embraced by the Obama administration and is an ardent Democrat supporter.

Who George Soros is is less important than the question—-why do so many Democrats support him? and why does he support them?

The Jewashing of George Soros

Millions of Jews are anti-Semitic for calling out an anti-Semite.

July 21, 2017

Daniel Greenfield

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical left and Islamic terrorism.

George Soros hates Jews.

He collaborated with the Nazis during the Holocaust and insisted that helping confiscate property from Jews brought him no guilt. “There was no sense that I shouldn’t be there, because that was well, actually, in a funny way, it’s just like in markets that if I weren’t there of course, I wasn’t doing it, but somebody else would.” He described the season of these horrors as “the most exciting time of my life.”

Soros grew up in a “Jewish, anti-Semitic home”. He called his mother a “typical Jewish anti-Semite” who hated his first wife because she was “too Jewish”. After undergoing psychoanalysis, he was able to understand that his shame was rooted in his Jewishness. He had a special contempt for Jewish philanthropies after a failed attempt to defraud a Jewish charity in London.

He was booed when he undermined the presentation of an award to a Holocaust survivor by comparing Israeli Jews to Nazis. Elie Wiesel had declared in disgust, “I heard what happened. If I’d been there—and you can quote me—I would have walked out.”

That same year, Soros blamed the Israeli government for a “resurgence of anti-Semitism in Europe”. He might have been more honest if he took responsibility considering his funding of groups that traffic in anti-Semitic smears. And his own anti-Semitic allegations that “attitudes toward the Jewish community are influenced by the pro-Israel lobby’s success in suppressing divergent views.”

Soros has defended Hamas and Hezbollah who have called for the extermination of the Jews. He championed the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt despite or because of its support for Hitler. Yusuf al-Qaradawi had claimed that Hitler had been sent by Allah to punish the Jews. “Allah willing,” the Brotherhood’s spiritual leader said, “the next time will be at the hands of the believers (Muslims).”

There’s no denying that George Soros is a warped and twisted man. Especially when it comes to the Jews. But he’s also the money man behind a great deal of leftist activism. Especially anti-Israel activism.

And so he must be defended.

An editorial at New York Times by a figure linked to the +972 anti-Israel hate site decries “Israel’s War Against George Soros”. That’s right up there with Poland’s war on Nazi Germany.

What does this war consist of? Has Israel sent drones to the Soros estate? Did Mossad agents drag George out of his featherbed to face the justice of those injured through his actions?

No.

The “war” consisted of one statement. The Israeli Foreign Ministry condemned Soros for “continuously undermining Israel’s democratically elected governments,” and backing hate groups “that defame the Jewish state and seek to deny it the right to defend itself.” Not only is it true, but it’s underwhelming.

Even by the low fake news standards of today’s extremist media, you expect something more from a headline screaming “Israel’s War Against George Soros” than a single restrained criticism.

Read more.

The Establishment Hugh Hewitt Mindset Destroys Conservatism

/in , , , , /by

I listen to Hugh Hewitt every day, and was a guest on his nationally syndicated radio program a few years ago. He’s smart, well-informed and one of the best interviewers I’ve ever heard — and I’ve conducted literally thousands of interviews over the course of 25 years in journalism. And maybe his greatest feat is managing to be a football optimist despite being a Cleveland Browns fan.

But Hugh Hewitt and the establishment mindset he brings represents exactly what is wrong in Washington, D.C. today.

He is totally missing what is happening in the country, and just as importantly needs to happen in Washington, because, I think, he is too close. He is the establishment in mindset in that, of course, politicians do whatever needs to be done to get a win in the “W” column and look toward the next election.

Along the way of following this path, the Republican Party has indeed won the levers of control in D.C. — the House, the Senate, the White House and perhaps the Supreme Court — and at the same time gone a long way to losing its soul. Does the Republican Party represent conservative, traditional, Constitutional principles, or does it represent the continuation of Republican politicians’ futures and power in D.C.?

The Hugh Hewitt Mindset lists sharply towards the latter.

What is the Hugh Hewitt Mindset?

Essentially this mindset accepts swimming in the moral, ethical and principle-less cesspool that is current-day Washington, rather than living and leading by the morals, ethics and principles that could begin decontaminating the cesspool.

Yes, it is a lofty goal, and only ever partially achievable.

But the Hugh Hewitt Mindset actively works to puncture holes in the decontamination vessels sent to Washington to serve in Congress.

The Hugh Hewitt Mindset excoriates principled conservatives such as Sens. Mike Lee and Rand Paul who have stood by their beliefs even when taking a beating by the mainstream liberal media, to which Hewitt is dangerously cozy. The Hugh Hewitt Mindset castigates Sen. Ted Cruz for the government shutdown in 2013 and warns of the impending doom it would cause the party — and was proven totally wrong when Republicans swept to massive gains in 2014.

The Hugh Hewitt Mindset tears into the House Freedom Caucus, which tried valiantly to stick to the promises its members made to voters — that is, pour in a modicum of decontaminate —  because in Washington it is totally expected to tell voters one thing and then do something else once elected. The Hugh Hewitt Mindset has no problem with Republicans promising strong conservative principles during campaigns, as long as those principles can be jettisoned to get a W for the Rs.

On the flip side, the Hugh Hewitt Mindset has seemingly no problem with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell running quite conservatively at home in Kentucky (also Rand Paul’s state) when McConnell seeks votes, then governing quite establishment-like in D.C. and tossing aside his conservatism whenever that works better. The Hugh Hewitt Mindset knows this is just the way things are, understands “everybody” does it  — Republicans and Democrats in their respective ways — and accepts that. Gracious comfort is given to McConnell’s duplicity because McConnell can sometimes be effective in the cesspool. But in the end, he only adds contamination to the sludge in the system.

How the Mindset works

Hewitt writes a regular column for the Washington Post — and now has a show on MSNBC — because the Mindset makes him solidly establishment and so broadly acceptable in establishment circles in the media.

Indeed, Hewitt has an unwarranted love affair with the mainstream media. I appreciate many of the journalists he has on, but his obeisance to them is unbecoming, unnecessary and telling. He’s a terrific interviewer and asks many of the right questions and followups, but he legitimizes the most bias mainstream journalists (Glenn Thrush jumps to mind) to his audience of listeners on the conservative Salem Radio Network.

In his most recent Washington Post column, the full Hugh Hewitt Mindset was on display.

Hewitt slammed the “Wall Street Journal ideologues” because they think taxpayers in states that levy state income taxes should not get to deduct those from their federal taxes. The Journal writers understand that, fiscally, such deductions result in federal taxpayers living in states without income taxes — mostly red states — subsidizing the others. Why should Texas and Florida taxpayers be subsidizing the massively irresponsible spending in California and Illinois?

The Hugh Hewitt Mindset? “F.A. Hayek doesn’t vote in large numbers. Blue-state voters with Republican congressmen do.” Snarky, D.C. arrogant, and totally missing the principles of the “ideologues.” Another word for ideology might be principles. Instead, need a W for the Rs.

He writes: “The GOP lacks policy victories, thanks to imprudent Freedom Caucus members and scared moderates.” See? The Freedom Caucus with its foundational conservative principles would not throw them all away and go back on promises to voters regarding repealing Obamacare. They’re the problem. What are scared moderates? Those are incumbents who, if they have principles are far removed from the Founders’, and who would be frightened of losing re-election if they voted for the repeal and replace bill. He understands them.

The Hugh Hewitt Mindset prescription? “Odds of success increase if the parties go big at the start by removing the sequester’s limits on defense spending and adding immigration reform to the deal: appropriations for President Trump’s wall paired with legalization of the law-abiding, undocumented population but no path to citizenship. A truly ambitious “go big” option could also include a settlement of the judicial confirmation wars, because the more moving parts, the better the chances of success. McConnell, Ryan and Democratic leaders Charles E. Schumer (N.Y.) and Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) could get together with a half-dozen of the smartest members from both parties to work on an expedited basis and go big.”

So basically, get a few really smart people in a backroom, wheel and deal out of the prying eyes of voters and the rest of Congress, make sure lots of people willing to trade their votes for bridges to nowhere get what they want, and then roll out some mammoth piece of porkified legislation covering a thousand political miles. Great idea. Always goes well. And in the end, we would have moved leftward even as Republicans controlled everything. Not an unusual outcome in the mindset.

G.K. Chesterton understood this problem when he wrote in, What’s Wrong with the World: “Compromise used to mean that half a loaf was better than no bread. Among modern statesmen it really seems to mean that half a loaf is better than a whole loaf.”

So if, say, members of the Freedom Caucus were to vote no on such a leviathan bill because they, on principle, oppose legalizing 12 million people who came here illegally — and they promised their voters they would not — the Hugh Hewitt Mindset gives them a sharp smack upside the head and blames them for not being prudent team players and dumping their promises and beliefs. They’re the problem!

The Mindset vs. principles

This is why Republicans are having such a devastatingly difficult time getting anything done, despite having all the power. They are a party divided between the dominating Hugh Hewitt Mindset and a minority holding to foundational principles.

The Democratic Party mostly wants to do stuff to help people — or buy votes, depending on your level of cynicism. But it has very few actual principles, and none that fall within the tradition of the Founders. It’s why Democrats joyfully celebrated a leader who wanted to “fundamentally transform” America. He was the first black President — fine, but not a principle. And he despised the Constitution as a “charter of negative liberties.” That fairly represents a lot of that Party — but not most Americans by a long shot.

But this absence of founding principles puts the Democratic Party on much more comfortable ground in D.C.

The Republican Party remains the repository of long-standing, bedrock American principles such as individual rights, freedom of religion and speech, limited government and capitalism. That formula of understanding that built this nation into the greatest in history is nested within the Republican Party, but rarely acted on.

But when Republicans stand up for those principles, and in doing so endanger some piece of legislation that the establishment leadership desires, they are pilloried by the Hugh Hewitt Mindset. Compromise is a necessity in legislating, but that does not mean burying principles. If this mindset pushes more politicians into compromising principles and campaign promises, or into elevating those who are ever more willing to, then the Republican Party will lose its soul. And if the Republican Party does, where are the foundational American principles to live? Do they ultimately vanish?

19th century theologian and philosopher Tryon Edwards wrote: “Compromise is but the sacrifice of one right or good in the hope of retaining another — too often ending in the loss of both.”

This is the path of the Hugh Hewitt Mindset.

Yes, I’m using Hewitt as a proxy to represent establishment thinking in D.C. and everywhere else it is to be found.

In Washington, there are no “self-evident truths.” There is winning. There is power and influence. There is re-election. And there is access to power and influence. The Hugh Hewitt Mindset abets the continuation of this sludgy, bad-for-America mindset, which means the continuation of the decline of America.

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

Catholic Bishops & Lutherans lament not enough U.S. taxpayer funded refugees coming in to pay their bills

/in , , , , , /by

No of course they didn’t say it that way, but that is what they mean.  Instead, once again, it is about the poor refugees left in the lurch in some third world hell hole because of that meany Donald J. Trump.

This is a broken record alert, but I plan to continue to pound the issue of payment to contractors being tied to the number of refugees admitted, so there is never a reasonable discussion about any slowdown or reform of the UN/US Refugee Admissions Program.

If they were paying for their Christian ‘charity’ out of the pockets of good and kind-hearted parishioners, I would have nothing to say. But, until the USCCB admits to the media that they receive 97% of their annual migration fund budget (about $83 million in 2014) from taxpayers, I will be a broken record on the issue.

It was only six days ago I did a new accounting report for the nine federal refugee contractors*** quasi-government agencies that monopolize all resettlement in the US.

Both the Bishops and the Lutheran contractor are 96-97% funded by US taxpayers!

You will never know that by reading this news.  Indeed, Charity Navigator, a service that rates charities to help you decide if you want to give, said this about LIRS (they would have said the same about the USCCB except that outfit doesn’t file a Form 990, that we can find).

This organization is not eligible to be rated by Charity Navigator because, as a service for individual givers, we only rate organizations that depend on support from individual contributors and foundations. Organizations such as this, that get most of their revenue from the government or from program services, are therefore not eligible to be rated.

In this story from Crux (a Catholic publication) we learn that Catholics and Lutherans are #1 and #2 in the number of refugees they drop off in American towns and cities.

Here is Crux (lamentations):

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Amid a federal judge ordering the government to broaden the exemptions to the immigration travel ban partially upheld by the Supreme Court, Catholic and Lutheran leaders lamented that the immigration cap had been reached for refugees without such exemptions for the 2017 fiscal year.

The federal government suspended travel July 12 for refugee immigrants without close family connections after confirming that 50,000 refugees – the limit imposed by President Donald Trump in a March 6 executive order – had arrived on U.S. soil.

“We remain deeply troubled by the human consequences of the revised executive order on refugee admissions and the travel ban,” said Bishop Joe S. Vasquez of Austin, Texas, chairman of the U.S. bishops’ Committee on Migration, in a July 13 statement.

“Resettling only 50,000 refugees a year, down from 110,000, does not reflect the need, our compassion, and our capacity as a nation,” Vasquez added. “We have the ability to continue to assist the most vulnerable among us without sacrificing our values as Americans or the safety and security of our nation.” [Be sure to see my post on the ceilings going back 30 years, here.  Note that Obama got no where near 110,000 until he was virtually walking out the door, now that has become the standard measure!—ed]

William Canny, U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ lobbyist in Washington, D.C.

“The pause on resettlement and restrictions on the number of persons who can enter our country as refugees will have an immediate effect on our ability to conduct the lifesaving work of providing safety and protection,” said a July 12 statement by Kay Bellor, vice president for programs of Lutheran Immigrant and Refugee Service, which is second only to the U.S. bishops’ Migration and Refugee Services in the number of refugees it helps resettle in the United States.  [Yes, it will have an immediate effect because your organization raised virtually NO PRIVATE MONEY!—ed]

[….]

“As Bishop Vasquez said, it’s very sad, deeply troubling,” MRS executive director William Canny told Catholic News Service July 14.

Pushing for 75,000 refugees in FY18!

At least they have tempered the demand for 200,000 they made of Obama for his last year. If Trump admits 75,000 he will be about 10,000 above the average admissions for the last ten years (which included their dear leader’s years).

Crux continues….

“What we’re advocating for is 75,000” refugees to come into the United States during fiscal 2018, Canny told CNS. “We understand that the administration has security concerns. The administration made some initiative to reduce the number of refugees coming into the country. We don’t agree with it, so at a minimum, we think we should be bringing in 75,000.”

Bellor agreed with the 75,000 figure, noting the number is “less than the need.” Citing United Nations World Refugee Day figures, “the numbers are definitely not shrinking,” she said. “The number of people on the move is 66 million.”

LOL! 75,000 must be the point where they can keep their budgets plenty full with your money!

There is more at Crux, go here to read it all.

Come on all of you (not just the Lutherans and the Catholics), admit that your ‘charitable’ work with refugees could not happen without a huge infusion of more than a half a billion $ a year in federal funding.

And, come on mainstream media, it is time you told the truth!

***Federal contractors/middlemen/lobbyists/community organizers paid by you to place refugees in your towns and cities.  Because their income is largely dependent on taxpayer dollars based on the number of refugees admitted to the US, the only way for real reform of how the US admits refugees is to remove the contractors from the process.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

The 20 diseases ‘refugees’ bring into the West

Australia “dumb deal” looks dead for now

Hetfield of the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society thinks Hawaiian judge just opened floodgates

New Hampshire: Congolese refugee escapes prosecution in domestic violence case

Hawaiian rogue judge has until Tuesday to respond to Trump SCOTUS motion

Muslims Ban Christian Woman from the Temple Mount!

/in , , , /by

“Jerusalem Jane” Kiel is a Danish Christian who moved to Israel five years ago to support Jews and Israel against the Islamic jihad of lies, death and destruction. She is a very brave woman who is threatened regularly by Muslims but she continues in her amazing work in Israel.

Please visit her Face Book page, Israel One Nation and make a donation to keep her standing for the truth!

Minneapolis police chief resigns — Michele Bachmann says grand jury must be impaneled

/in , , , , , , , /by

Apparently Mohamed Noor still won’t talk to police investigators in the wake of the worst disaster for advocates of ‘diversity hires’ in America—the shooting by a Somali former refugee of an unarmed woman, an immigrant, who had called 911 looking for help.

Noor is not talking (to investigators) but he has reportedly talked to friends in the Somali community. Time for a grand jury! Sure hope they keep him under surveillance. Too many Somalis simply disappear before they can appear in court when in legal trouble.

Former presidential candidate Rep. Michele Bachmann, not silent in her home state: Where is the grand jury? And, could this have been a hate crime?

Presidential candidate and former Congresswoman Michele Bachmann

Not only has the police chief resigned, announced by the mayor at a tempestuous press conference, but the people of Minneapolis are out for the mayor’s head as well.  Here is one report from The Guardian (foreign press isn’t giving up on the story!).

Here is what Leo Hohmann (WND) reported yesterday in an update of the story we reported here, here and here.

A day before submitting her resignation, Minneapolis Police Chief Janeé Harteau, in her first public statement on the killing nearly a week ago of an unarmed woman by a Somali refugee cop, called her death “unnecessary” and said it went against the protocol and training given to her officers.

“Justine [Damond] didn’t have to die,” Harteau, the city’s first openly lesbian police chief, said at a press conference Thursday night. Harteau had been hiking in Colorado all week in the aftermath of the shooting.

Harteau said based on current information about the case, there was no justification for officer Mohamed Noor’s decision to shoot Damond, a 40-year-old bride-to-be and yoga instructor who had moved to the U.S. from Australia to be with her fiancée.

Harteau submitted her resignation Friday in the wake of the fatal shooting at the request of Mayor Betsy Hodges, according to a statement from the city.

[….]

Noor has refused to talk with police investigators since the July 15 incident.

Mohamed Noor

Former Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann said Harteau has to accept a large part of the blame for putting an unqualified officer on the street.

“Finally the female chief of Minneapolis police came out and said Justine Damond should still be alive. She said Mohammad Noor had no reason to shoot Justine,” Bachmann told WND. “He violated police policy and training. Noor refuses to cooperate with investigators. He refuses to give a statement.

“Firing him isn’t enough, the question is whether a grand jury will be impaneled. Manslaughter charges should be considered,” she added.

“Again, will the prosecutor and police department work to determine whether this was in fact a hate crime. Clearly it wasn’t premeditated, but was it a gut reaction of Mohammad Noor resulting from his cultural beliefs? What mosque did he attend? What are his beliefs?”

Another mystery about what happened last Saturday night involves a missing two minutes from the official police log of the incident.

Hohmann continues:

As noted by a media outlet in Damond’s native Australia, the 9-1-1 tape reveals a “critical missing two minutes.”

A timeline pieced together through the bride-to-be’s 911 calls and a newly released police incident report shows Damond was shot two minutes after police officers arrived at the alleyway behind her home.

“What it doesn’t explain is what happened in those two crucial minutes that prompted officer Mohamed Noor to draw his gun, reach over his partner and discharge his weapon through the open window, delivering a fatal shot to Ms Damond’s abdomen,” reports News.com.au, an Australian outlet.

Go here for the rest of the story and the actual time line.

For new readers!

Don’t miss this post from 2011 where we first learned how so many Somalis ‘found their way’ to Minnesota.  Hint! The US State Department hired Catholic, Lutheran and evangelical contractors*** to place them there because the welfare was so generous and as I later learned, some big industries needed cheap labor including a window company in Owatonna and poultry plants scattered around the state including near St. Cloud and Wilmer.

***Federal contractors/middlemen/lobbyists/community organizers paid by you to place refugees in your towns and cities. At this minute they are sending ‘abstracts’ to Washington which are their personal wish lists and plans for who will be ‘welcomed’ to your towns for the upcoming  fiscal year that begins October 1, 2017.

Because their income is largely dependent on taxpayer dollars based on the number of refugees admitted to the US, the only way for real reform of how the US admits refugees is to remove the contractors from the process.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Government Investigates Itself Again After Tragic Death of Justine Damond

The questions that won’t be asked about Minneapolis police shooting of Australian woman

Wishful thinking in West Virginia? New resettlement office to be up and running in October

Don’t get too bogged down in legal wrangling on refugees….

Oh geez, WaPo raises the (obligatory) Islamophobia backlash issue in story on Minneapolis police shooting

Refugee contractors increasingly admitting they can’t survive without your money

Letter to Sec. of State Tillerson is plea to keep Refugee Program at State Department

Judicial Watch Launches New Election Integrity Lawsuit

/in , , , , /by

This week saw the first official meeting of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, which is under attack from leftists who want to preserve the ability to steal elections. Also this week, your Judicial Watch filed a new lawsuit that could serve to get key information about the integrity of election rolls in Maryland (one of the states “resisting” inquiries from the Advisory Commission on Election Integrity).

We filed the lawsuit simply to gain access to voter registration lists in Montgomery County, Maryland. The defendants are Montgomery County and the Maryland State Board of Elections. We filed the lawsuit to enforce our rights under the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (NVRA) in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, Baltimore Division (Judicial Watch vs. Linda H. Lamone, et al. (No. 1:17-cv-02006)).

Back in April, we sent a notice letter to Maryland election officials that explained how there were more registered voters in Montgomery County than there were citizens over the age of 18.  The letter threatened a lawsuit if the problems with Montgomery County’s voter rolls were not fixed. The letter also requested access to Montgomery County voter registration lists to evaluate the efficacy of any “programs and activities conducted for the purpose of ensuring the accuracy and currency of Maryland’s official eligible voter lists during the past 2 years.”  On July 7, Maryland denied us access to the list because Maryland law supposedly restricts the release of voter registration information only to Maryland registered voters.

But Section 8(i) of the NVRA provides that “[e]ach State shall maintain for at least 2 years and shall make available for public inspection and, where available, photocopying at a reasonable cost, all records concerning the implementation of programs and activities conducted for the purpose of ensuring the accuracy and currency of official lists of eligible voter.”

In our lawsuit we noted that the registration list is covered under Section 8(i) of the NVRA:

“Section 8(i) of the NVRA contains no requirement that only an individual person or a registered voter may request the documents that the statute describes. Accordingly, Section 8(i) authorizes and entitles Judicial Watch to inspect and copy the requested voter list.”

In fact, we regularly request and receive records from state and local governments pursuant to Section 8(i) of the NVRA.  (The Director of Judicial Watch’s Election Integrity Project is Senior Attorney Robert Popper, who was formerly deputy chief of the Voting Section of the Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department.)  In April, we sent letters to 11 states with counties in which the number of registered voters exceeds the number of voting-age citizens. The states are: Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina and Tennessee.

Maryland needs to make this voter registration information available as federal law requires. Maryland doesn’t want us to expose its voter roll mess, and we hope the courts move quickly so we can begin the process of cleaning up the rolls. This is a national problem, and Maryland is the scene of one of many legal battles we must be prepared to fight for clean elections.

IRS Records Missing

The Obama IRS scandal continues.

You won’t read about in the liberal media but on July 13 the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration issued a devastating report finding that the Internal Revenue Service’s (IRS) records management practice resulted in lost records and incomplete IRS responses to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests and congressional inquiries.  Here is the key finding:

IRS policies do not comply with certain Federal requirements that agencies must ensure that all records are retrievable and usable for as long as needed. For example, IRS e-mail retention policies are not adequate because e-mails are not automatically archived for all IRS employees. Instead, the IRS’s current policy instructs employees to take manual actions to archive e-mails by saving them permanently on computer hard drives or network shared drives. This policy has resulted in lost records when computer hard drives are destroyed or damaged. In addition, a recently instituted executive e-mail retention policy, which should have resulted in the archiving of e-mails from specific executives, was not implemented effectively because some executives did not turn on the automatic archiving feature.

For certain cases that TIGTA reviewed, IRS policies were not implemented consistently to ensure that all relevant documents were searched and produced when responding to external requests for records. TIGTA’s review of 30 completed Freedom of Information Act requests found that in more than half of the responses, the IRS did not follow its own policies that require it to document what records were searched. TIGTA also found that IRS policies for preserving records from separated employees were not adequate.

In short, records of IRS employees including top officials may have gone missing.  And the IRS never told anyone about it.

We’ve been on top of this issue for years. In fact, just this past April we filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the IRS to obtain records relating to the agency’s “preservation and/or retention” of the email records of officials who have left the agency since January 2010 (Judicial Watch v. Internal Revenue Service (No.1:17-cv-00596)).

We filed the suit as part of our continuing efforts to gain information about the IRS’ targeting of conservative groups and citizens during the Obama administration.

Our litigation forced the IRS first to say that emails belonging to Lois Lerner, former director of the Exempt Organizations Unit, were supposedly missing and later declare to the court that the emails were on IRS back-up systems. Lerner was one of the top officials responsible for the IRS’ targeting of President Obama’s political opponents. We exposed various IRS’ record keeping problems:

  • In June 2014, the IRS claimed to have “lost” responsive emails belonging to Lerner and other IRS officials.
  • In July 2014 Judge Emmett Sullivan ordered the IRS to submit to the court a written declaration under oath about what happened to Lerner’s “lost” emails. The sworn declarations proved to be less than forthcoming.
  • In August 2014, Department of Justice attorneys for the IRS finally admitted to Judicial Watch that Lerner’s emails, indeed all government computer records, are backed up by the federal government in case of a government-wide catastrophe. The IRS’ attorneys also disclosed that Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration (TIGTA) was looking at several of these backup tapes.
  • In November 2014, the IRS told the court it had failed to search any of the IRS standard computer systems for the “missing” emails of Lerner and other IRS officials.
  • On February 26, 2015, TIGTA officials testified to the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee that it had received 744 backup tapes containing emails sent and received by Lerner. This testimony showed that the IRS had falsely represented to both Congress, Judge Sullivan, and Judicial Watch that Lerner’s emails were irretrievably lost. The testimony also revealed that IRS officials responsible for responding to the document requests never asked for the backup tapes and that 424 backup tapes containing Lerner’s emails had been destroyed during the pendency of Judicial Watch’s lawsuit and Congressional investigations.
  • In June 2015, Judicial Watch forced the IRS to admit in a court filing that it was in possession of 6,400 “newly discovered” Lerner emails. Judge Emmet Sullivan ordered the IRS to provide answers on the status of the Lerner emails the IRS had previously declared lost. Judicial Watch raised questions about the IRS’ handling of the missing emails issue in a court filing, demanding answers about Lerner’s emails that had been recovered from the backup tapes.
  • In July 2015, U.S District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan threatened to hold John Koskinen, the commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, and Justice Department attorneys in contempt of court after the IRS failed to produce status reports and recovered Lerner emails, as he had ordered on July 1, 2015.

Obama IRS Commissioner Koskinen was nearly impeached in September 2016 for misleading Congress on Lerner’s emails.

So this new report is shocking but not surprising.  We have long battled the IRS in court over its obstruction in responding to FOIA requests about Obama era IRS abuses. It is a scandal that the Obama IRS did not tell Judicial Watch, the courts, or Congress about the loss of government records. Our attorneys will review this report to assess whether we should seek relief and accountability from the courts.  In the meantime, President Trump should finally fire IRS Commissioner John Koskinen and direct the Justice Department to reopen its criminal inquiry into the Obama IRS abuses and cover-ups.

Court Update: Weiner Laptop Documents Uncovered

Judicial Watch’s team of attorneys was in federal court yesterday morning for a hearing in a major lawsuit seeking Hillary Clinton emails.

Specifically, The hearing comes in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit seeking former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s emails that were sent or received during her tenure from February 2009 to January 31, 2013 (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:15-cv-00687)). The case is before Judge James E. Boasberg.

The hearing focused on the State Department’s progress on processing the emails that Hillary Clinton deleted or otherwise failed disclose when she served as Secretary of State, some of which were emails sent by Clinton aide Huma Abedin that were found on the laptop of her estranged husband Anthony Weiner. Clinton attempted to delete 33,000 emails from her non-government server.

The State Department was ordered to produce documents to Judicial Watch, and has been processing only 500 pages per month of emails uncovered by the FBI in its investigation into Clinton’s non-government email system. The State Department has produced 17 batches of documents so far. At the current pace, the Clinton emails and other records won’t be fully available for possible release until at least 2020.

On June 15, the FBI provided a new disc of records to the State Department.  It turns out this disc contains 7,000 records recovered from Weiner’s laptop which now must be reviewed for potential public release.

Our legal team pushed for all these records to be released more quickly but the Justice Department’s attorney said that her State Department agency client shouldn’t have to push more records out because of supposed diminished interest in Clinton emails “since November”!  The Justice attorney also blamed President Trump’s hiring freeze as another reason the records are dribbling out.  I suspect President Trump will blow a gasket when he finds out his agencies are actually slow-rolling the release of the emails that Hillary Clinton tried to delete.

Either way, we’ll keep pushing against this Deep State approach to transparency that protects Hillary Clinton and the corrupt Obama administration.

In the meantime, you can view my brief video report on the hearing here.  And there’s also coverage from Fox News and Circa News.

In the meantime, we’ll keep you apprised of major developments – and will push the Trump administration to stop this stonewalling.

The Humanitarian Hoax of Climate Change: Killing America With Kindness

/in , , , , /by

The Humanitarian Hoax is a deliberate and deceitful tactic of presenting a destructive policy as altruistic. The humanitarian huckster presents himself as a compassionate advocate when in fact he is the disguised enemy.

Obama, the humanitarian huckster-in-chief, weakened and politicized the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for eight years by presenting his crippling policies as altruistic when in fact they were designed for destruction. His legacy, the Leftist Democratic Party with its “resistance” movement, is the party of the Humanitarian Hoax attempting to destroy American democracy and replace it with socialism.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was established by executive order under President Richard Nixon in 1970 and then ratified in the House and Senate. The primary mission of the EPA was the protection of human health and the environment through writing and enforcing regulations based on laws passed by the US Congress. At that time in history the growing public awareness of environmental issues stimulated the creation of non-governmental environmental protection agencies as well. The most famous was Greenpeace which was created by environmental activists from Canada and the US.

Founding Greenpeace member Patrick Moore is now a vociferous critic of Greenpeace and its support for the unscientific politically motivated insistence upon man-made climate change. The extraordinary 6-minute video below is Dr. Moore’s testimony in front of the US Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, Subcommittee on Oversight on February 25, 2014.

The video chronicles Moore’s environmental activism as a young man and member of Greenpeace 1971-1986 to his current unequivocal rejection of the pseudo-science being used to support the unsupportable claims of man-made global warming and climate change. Transcript of Moore’s testimony may be read by clicking here.

To understand why huckster-in-chief Obama insisted and continues to insist that climate change is man-made and the greatest threat to America it is necessary to understand the huckster and the hoax.

The huckster:
Obama was groomed by the globalist elite to bring “hope and change” to America but it was not the hope or change that most Americans understood those words to mean. Barack Obama is a globalist and ideologically a radical socialist tutored in Saul Alinsky’s 1971 “Rules for Radicals.” Alinsky’s “Rules” is the guidebook for social revolution and transforming a democratic America into a socialist state. Socialism with its cradle-to-grave government control is the necessary political structure before imposition of the globalist elite’s end-game of one-world government. Barack Obama is a malignant narcissist whose self-aggrandizing personality made him the perfect puppet and most lawless president in US history. His stunning executive overreach was rivaled only by his greater crime of corrupting the impartiality of the US government by politicizing its agencies and using them to advance his personal political goals to weaken and destroy America. Barack Obama is a pawn of the globalist elites – the perfect con man.

The hoax:
The Humanitarian Hoax of climate change is the whopper of the 21st century. It is a deliberate political scheme to transfer the wealth of industrialized nations (particularly the US) to non-industrialized nations. It is globalized socialism where the assets of productive nations are transferred to non-productive nations. WHY?

The answer is found in understanding the nature of the hoax which has two parts. First, it is necessary to focus attention on the fabricated specter of catastrophic climate occurrences that will devastate the planet to deflect attention away from the actual threats to America from a nuclear Iran, the spread of Islamic terrorism, and the economic instability of a an unsustainable trade deficit.

Second, Obama’s long term plan of an internationalized globalized world requires the de-industrialization of America. His crippling energy restrictions were designed to weaken America’s defenses by destroying America’s energy industry, making us more dependent on foreign energy, and increasing our trade deficit to unsustainable levels. Obama actively supported the punitive anti-American Paris Climate Agreement deceitfully presented as the premier humanitarian effort to save the planet from catastrophic climate change. Obama disguised his crippling rules and regulations to destroy US energy as altruism and a humanitarian concern for the planet.

In a laughable outburst Big Footprint former Vice President Al Gore attacked President Donald Trump accusing him of “tearing down America’s standing in the world” by withdrawing from the Paris climate accord. Only in the eyes of a deceitful globalist can withdrawing from an anti-American agreement be considered destructive. Gore actually said with a straight face on NBC’s Today Show, “The climate crisis is by far the most serious challenge we face.” Al Gore’s “Inconvenient Truth” is in fact a very “Convenient Lie.”

Socialism with its complete government control is the prerequisite social structure for the globalist elite to internationalize the socialist countries, internationalize the police force, and impose enforced one-world government. One-world government is the new world order that the globalist elite intend to rule themselves. It is unapologetically described in chilling detail in Lord Bertrand Russell’s 1952 book “The Impact of Science on Society.” One-world government is a binary socio-political system of masters and slaves. There is no social justice in one-world government, there is no income equality in one-world government, there are no Leftists, environmentalists, humanitarian hucksters, or political agitators of any kind in one-world government – only a docile, compliant population of slaves ruled by the globalist elite.

One-world government is the goal and the underlying motive of the campaign to destroy America from within. American democracy is the single greatest existential threat to one-world government and President Donald Trump is America’s leader. The globalist elite are desperate to stop Trump because if Obama is exposed as a con man it leaves them without their primetime huckster to continue marching America toward anarchy and social chaos with his “resistance” movement. The globalist elites who fund the leftist humanitarian hucksters are using them as useful idiots to facilitate the great Humanitarian Hoax of climate change worldwide that will create the overwhelming social chaos necessary to internationalize the police force and impose their own special brand of a new world order.

Obama and his left-wing liberal lemmings are too arrogant to understand that they are being used as puppets by the globalist elite who have an end game of their own. If the globalist elite are successful in their efforts to weaken America and collapse the economy through an unsustainable trade deficit, overthrow the US government of President Donald Trump, and transform America into socialism the next step is globalist conquest and the imposition of one-world government.

After 241 years of American freedom the world will be returned to the dystopian existence of masters and slaves because a willfully blind American public was seduced by the Humanitarian Hoax of climate change – the “Inconvenient Truth” told by leftist humanitarian hucksters promising to save the planet.

The Humanitarian Hoax will have succeeded in killing America with kindness and a “Convenient Lie.”

Obamacare Is Dying. Let It. by John Tamny

/in , , , , , , /by

The alleged failure of Republicans to repeal the misnamed Affordable Care Act (ACA) predictably has the conservative punditry up in arms. “Why Can’t Republicans Get Anything Done?” was one of many frustrated headlines lamenting the GOP’s lack of legislative success.The politics of repeal would have been worse than doing nothing.

One editorial asserted that Republican failure to ‘do something’ about the ACA “is one of the great political failures in recent U.S. history, and the damage will echo for years.” Really?

Implicit in all the conservative ranting about the need to repeal, or worse, fix the ACA, is that health care was a wholly unfettered, dynamic source of free-market driven innovation before President Obama was elected. Let’s try to be serious for a moment.

Letting Obamacare Fail

Repeal of the ACA would have been an impressive headline, but the short and long-term politics of repeal for Republicans would have been worse than doing nothing. That is so because expectations about a looming nirvana would have been created, only for health care to, at best, return to its less-than-stellar-self that existed before passage of the ACA in 2010.

Importantly, none of what’s been written so far should be construed as support for the ACA. It was foolish legislation, and evidence supporting the previous contention is that the ACA was already dying before our eyes. No surprise there. Legislation meant to give some Americans a lot for a little, with a lot taken from others in return for very little, was bound to fail.

The ACA was plainly imploding as the constant rush of insurance companies out of ACA exchanges revealed in bright colors. Why abolish what the laws of economics were already abolishing?The half-measures offered by Republicans were plainly worse than simply doing nothing.

And that’s why the half-measures offered by Republican compromisers were plainly worse than simply doing nothing. Why legislate away one central plan in return for an allegedly improved central plan; essentially exchanging bad legislation for bad legislation on top of what already wasn’t working before 2010? The politics of repeal or partial repeal spoke to the horror of Washington doing anything to legislate a right to what was and is a market good like any other.

Not discussed enough by either side is that it’s impossible to invent a right to a good or service of any kind to begin with. This is certainly true with regard to health care when we remember that it didn’t realistically exist until the 20th century. Lest we forget, in the 19th it was a death sentence if you were shot in the abdomen. If you broke your femur, you had 1 in 3 odds of dying. Broken hip? Dead. Cancer? Forget about it. You were going to die.

Legislation didn’t reverse the previously mentioned odds as much as trial and error in the area of healing led to healing advances such that a market eventually formed. The shame here is that politicians discovered health care in the first place. Imagine how much more advanced we’d be had they left what was advancing alone.

We Don’t Have a Crystal Ball

All of the above has seemingly been ignored by Republicans ever eager to prove they’re as compassionate as their reliably hysterical opponents on the other side of the aisle. And there lies the problem.

Much as health care didn’t broadly exist when the 20th century dawned, so were automobiles the microscopic exception to the horse rule. Imagine if politicians, sensing what few did about the car’s potential, had legislated broad access to what very few people owned. If so, it’s safe to say that the American automobile industry would never have taken shape, mainly because politicians can’t possibly divine what we want, let alone need. The car evolved into a common good thanks to relentless experimentation that occurred alongside a 99% percent failure rate for American car companies.

Thinking about the computer, while few could get by without one today, as late as 1943, IBM Chairman Tom Watson confidently asserted that the market for computers wouldn’t expand beyond five total computers. Decades later, and billions of dollars worth of failed companies later, the computer is the can’t-live-without rule, including the supercomputers that increasingly line the pockets of rich and poor alike.

At present, politicians in both major political parties are thinking about ways to spend trillions in tax dollars on enhanced roads, just as entrepreneurs like Jeff Bezos are aggressively thinking of ways to deliver us goods and services by air, care of drones. Yet conservatives are comfortable allowing Republicans to add more laws to an already over-controlled health care market?

Despite the historical truth that the present rarely predicts the future of goods and services, politicians in both parties pretend that they know what the market for health care should look like. But how could they?

For Republicans and Democrats to legislate a right to medical services in the present is every bit as lame-brained as it would have been had they legislated access to specific kinds of cars, computers, and smartphones in 1900, 1950 and 2000. Whatever they would have dreamed up for all three would have been a fraction of what intrepid entrepreneurs divined through feverish trial and error.

What Is and What Will Be

Seemingly forgotten by Republicans is that legislation is the absolute worst way to solve any problem, real or imagined, particularly one involving goods and services created in the marketplace.

Lawmaking by definition deals with what is while thriving markets are all about sleuthing out what will be. We’ll only arrive at what will be in the health care space insofar as individuals and businesses are free to experiment without limits, yet Republicans and Democrats in their infinite confusion are trying to create rights for people with what already is.

Ok, but that’s cruel. It’s the hypothetical equivalent of politicians legislating access to the cars, computers, and smartphones of today at a time when all three were likely on the verge of rapid evolution. Health care is no different. If the goal is that everyone should have access to it, the only response from Congress should be that it will cease legislating access to what it can’t give, and more important, what it doesn’t understand. If so, watch health care markets evolve in amazing ways that redound to us all.

Reprinted from Real Clear Markets.

John Tamny

John Tamny

John Tamny is a Forbes contributor, editor of RealClearMarkets, a senior fellow in economics at Reason, and a senior economic adviser to Toreador Research & Trading. He’s the author of the 2016 book Who Needs the Fed? (Encounter), along with Popular Economics (Regnery Publishing, 2015).

RELATED ARTICLES:

3 Republicans Join Democrats to Defeat Obamacare Repeal

The Obamacare Facts That Liberals Don’t Want You to Know

Victims of Obamacare Have a Warning for Senate Republicans

We Hear You: The Failure of Republicans to Repeal or Replace Obamacare

One Mom’s Fight for Her Special Needs Son in the Age of Obamacare

Black, Millennial, Female and… Conservative

/in , , , , , /by

Antonia Okafor, a young, single, black woman, recently discovered that’s she’s a racist, sexist, misogynist. How in the world did this happen? None other than Antonia Okafor explains.

This video is part of an exciting partnership between PragerU and Turning Point USA that will include videos with other young conservatives like Ben Shapiro, Charlie Kirk, and more!  Visit FreetoThink.org to learn more.

RELATED ARTICLE: AIA Author’s Night: Born Again Republican

TRANSCRIPT

I recently discovered something startling about myself. It turns out that I’m a racist, sexist, misogynist. This came as quite a shock to me. How did this happen? As a person of color, a single woman with a graduate degree who grew up poor in a home without a father, I had a clear political path to follow.

And I followed it.

I voted for Barack Obama…twice. After all, we share the same skin color. His father was from Africa. Mine was, too! What other reasons did I need?

I was inspired to see a black man rise to the highest office in the land. I believed his ascent would herald a new beginning, a new era of racial healing and harmony. We would finally have that frank discussion about race that everyone always talks about.

I was also inspired by his wife. I was thrilled to see such a strong, opinionated black woman take the national stage. But then something happened… actually, several somethings.

I realized there was a big contradiction in my own life. I considered myself a free-thinker, but I was thinking exactly what I was supposed to. I decided to start asking questions. I belonged to several campus feminist groups. I was even teaching feminism to inner-city girls. Part of that teaching involved making the case for abortion. These girls needed to know that they had the right to make decisions about their own bodies. Surely, I thought, that’s empowerment. But one day I asked myself: Isn’t it men who benefit most from consequence-free sex? Doesn’t that give them even more power over women? And, of course, abortion certainly doesn’t empower the women it prevents from ever being born.

When I began to ask my other feminist friends how they reconciled these issues, they just got angry. I was called anti-woman. Even by progressive men! “But I’m not anti-woman,” I thought. “I am a woman!” I just don’t want to be a weak one. I want to be strong – like Michelle.

At about the same time, while I was a student at the University of Texas at Dallas, the UT Austin Department of African Diaspora Studies released a statement in which they said, and I quote, “African Americans are disproportionately affected by the saturation of our society by firearms … We demand that firearms be banned in all spaces occupied by black people on our campus.”

Wait a second, I thought. Why would you want to ban firearms only in black areas? Doesn’t that mean that you either think black people are more dangerous than other people, or less worthy of protection? These questions did not endear me to my progressive friends. I was called a race traitor…even by white people. But I’m not anti-black. I am black. I just want to be safe – like Barack.

I realized I didn’t have a good answer; I only had more questions – like, why were blacks doing so poorly in cities that had been run by Democrats for decades? Was it racism and sexism that was holding people back, or was it something else?

The more questions I asked, the less popular I became. But here’s the funny thing: I started to feel better about myself. I decided that the very definition of empowerment required me to take responsibility for my own life. I wasn’t going to be anyone’s victim. Which meant I had to protect myself. So, I bought a gun. I started to advocate for gun rights. That cost me more friends. I joined the pro-life movement and walked in The March for Life. More friends…gone.

Then, I crossed the line. I voted Republican – the party that views me as an empowered individual, able to shape my own destiny; not as a member of a victim group.

And that’s how I became a racist, sexist, misogynist.

I’m Antonia Okafor for Prager University.

VIDEO: Taxes Are Killing Small Businesses

/in , , , , /by

Did you know that the livelihood of 85 million Americans depends on the success of small businesses? So you’d think that the government would encourage the creation and preservation of small businesses. Instead, the federal government taxes small business owners at about 40% — not including additional state or local taxes. Watch this week’s video to find out the effect of that tax rate on small business owners, on job creation, and on the economy as a whole.

Our business and economics series is a collaborative project with Job Creators Network. To learn more about JCN, visit www.jobcreatorsnetwork.com.

TRANSCRIPT

No matter where you come from, what your job is, or where you stand politically, you have to pay taxes. Uncle Sam needs taxpayer dollars to pay for things like schools, fire fighters, and the military.

There are all sorts of different taxes: income taxes, payroll taxes and sales taxes just to name a few. But individuals aren’t the only ones who pay taxes—businesses pay income taxes too.

Businesses that are set up as corporations pay taxes on their income at the US corporate tax rate of around 35 percent—one of the highest in the developed world. Countries like Ireland and Switzerland have corporate tax rates well under 25 percent, which can give companies based there a competitive advantage.

But there’s another taxed group that we’re forgetting…small businesses. There are 29 million of them in the US and they employ nearly 56 million people. That’s a total of 85 million people dependent on the success of small businesses!

Small businesses are most often set up as sole proprietorships, partnerships or another designation called an S-corp. But the money they make isn’t taxed at the corporate rate. The profits earned by these small businesses are “passed through” to the owner and counted as individual income on their personal tax return. That’s why you might hear small businesses referred to as “Pass-throughs.”

These entrepreneurs can pay tax rates as high as 40 percent not including additional state and local taxes, that means many American small businesses are being taxed at a higher rate than businesses anywhere in the world.

Why should you care? Because high taxes hurt small businesses ability to grow and expand, causing them to raise prices or even trim jobs to stay within their budget constraints.

Lowering taxes for small businesses or “pass-throughs” results in the growth of small businesses—allowing them to provide more jobs and boost the economy for everyone. After all two thirds of all new jobs come from small businesses and lowering taxes can have a big effect on the entire economy for all Americans.

So the next time you hear someone supporting an increase in tax rates on businesses, remember that very important group of small business owners and the 85 million people dependent on their success.

VIDEO: Health Care Is a Mess… But Why? by Seamus Coughlin and Sean Malone

/in , , , , , , /by

You probably know a couple who both work full time to support their children, but even with their dual incomes, they’re finding it more and more difficult to afford health insurance.

Everyday incidents like sports injuries, asthma, and blood pressure, combined with their anxiety over rising premiums, are turning their American dream into sleepless nights.

Why can’t people catch a break? It wasn’t always this way!

Everyone wants health care, but there’s only so much to go around.

According to the Consumer Price Index and Medical-care price index from 1935 to 2009, the health care spending crisis didn’t start until the mid 1960s, around the same time when Medicare and Medicaid were signed into law, and at the same time that we began requiring doctors to go through all sorts of expensive licensing procedures beyond medical school.

Since then, health care spending has doubled, even adjusted for inflation. Why? Well, there are a few reasons.

Everyone wants health care, but there’s only so much to go around. And short supply leads to high prices. Normally what happens in a marketplace is that when prices are high, entrepreneurs try to profit by finding more affordable ways to provide goods and services.

The more people become involved in providing these services, the less scarce they become and the lower the prices drop, so that over time, more and more people can afford them.

This is what happened to televisions, microwaves, computers, cell phones, internet service, delivery services, food, shipping, transportation/air-travel, entertainment, home security, fitness, yoga, massages, and even all the medical technology, like LASIK, that isn’t as heavily regulated or controlled by government.

Can’t government drive down the price of goods and services like the free market?

Let’s look at what happened with Medicare and Medicaid as an example. In 1965, these two single payer health insurance programs were instituted in the US. These programs made the unfortunate less dependant on impartial private charities and more dependant on political institutions and pharmaceutical companies.

On top of that, these programs constantly require tax increases, and because they function more to satisfy the health care industry than the worker, they continually lead to more expensive and wasteful ways of treating patients.

As a result, prices shot up, making it even more difficult for people to afford health insurance. Not only that, but in 1965, government took over the training of new doctors, and in 1997 they limited the number of new doctors they would train at 110,000 per year – and the number hasn’t changed since!

Even worse, our government won’t let migrant doctors from developed western countries practice in the US without undergoing this training. So, not only do experienced doctors from other countries not want to practice medicine here, but the ones who do are taking up 15% of those few 110,000 slots, limiting the supply of doctors even more.

Won’t Obamacare solve these problems?

Unfortunately, Obamacare suffers from similar problems. It eliminated the pricing structure by seriously restricting competition because all providers have to offer the same kinds of plans at the same price. And because that price isn’t really determined by the market, providers can charge the taxpayer way more than they could otherwise. It’s basically just a handout to big insurance companies.

But it doesn’t have to be this way! If we get the government out of health care, more people like those you know will be able to get the care they need.

Seamus Coughlin

Seamus Coughlin

Seamus Coughlin is a comedy writer and animator with a deep interest in politics and morality. A good deal of his work can be found on the FreedomToons YouTube channel.

Sean Malone

Sean Malone

Sean Malone is the Director of Media at FEE. His films have been featured in the mainstream media and throughout the free-market educational community.

Iraq’s Blunder vs. Erdogan’s Turkey Today

/in , , , /by

By Wallace Bruschweiler & William Palumbo.

Is history going to repeat itself in the worst possible way?

It took the election of Donald Trump to the Presidency to finally begin the process of systematically dismantling the stranglehold that the Islamic State (aka ISIS, aka ISIL) had on ancient region around Mesopotamia.  After murdering and torturing tens of thousands of innocents, razing countless world heritage sites, and destroying innumerable priceless artifacts, their reign of Islamic terror is finally coming to an end.  At least we hope so.

Given the developments in a certain Middle Eastern neighbor of Europe, which we will detail shortly, it will be helpful to recall what birthed ISIS/ISIL and other groups in the first place.

The American Blunder in Iraq

In 2003, following the successful invasion of Iraq, the American government under guidance from Ambassador Paul Bremmer made the fateful decision to institute “de-Ba’athification,” i.e. the purging of Iraqis who were previously part of Saddam Hussein’s Ba’ath Party from positions of power.  This included, critically, dissolving the Iraqi Army.   At the time of the invasion in 2003 the Iraqi Army consisted of 375,000 troops.

The dissolution of the Iraqi Army was the single greatest error of the war and subsequent occupation, for it deprived 375,000 men and their families of their livelihood.  Let us undertake some basic multiplication (the exact figures here are not crucial to the basic argument).   Assume that that each soldier, on average, was married with two children.*

  • 375,000 x 4 (soldier, wife, 2 kids) = 1,500,000 people without an income (and food on the table)

The natural inclination being for fathers to provide for their families, these struggling and desperate ranks began to engage in criminal activities – robbery, kidnap for ransom, racketeering, etc. – to replace their lost income.  Desperate people, after all, are fodder for unscrupulous behavior.  As time passed, such activities became increasingly sophisticated and organized.  For an apropos historical reference, a similar pattern emerged in Interwar Germany, as armed gangs, e.g. S.A. (aka “Brown Shirts”) formed following the dissolution of the German Army.

Inevitably, because of financial incentives and logistical means, terrorists in Iraq eventually merged with organized crime.   (The nexus between terrorism and organized crime is well-established in countries as diverse as the United States, Mexico, Ireland, Italy, Russia, and throughout the Middle East, South America, Africa, etc.)  The lines blurred between organized, for-profit criminality and terrorism.

Hence, it is no surprise that by the time it matured into a Caliphate, ISIS had as its commanders some of the Iraqi Army’s “best and brightest.”  The rest, as they say, is history – and we are still paying the price.

The Turkish Redux?

A similar situation may very well emerge in Turkey, as “President” (aka Caliph) Recep Erdogan’s post-coup purges (July 2016-present) leave tens of thousands without a means to provide for their families.  Since coming to power, Erdogan has slowly but surely been turning the clock back in Turkey.  Without getting into the nuances of Turkish politics, suffice to say that Erdogan, who is a devout Islamist, is purging a mix of Gulenists, who are a different flavor of Islamist than Erdogan, and secular Kemalists, both whom he perceives as threats to his power.  The politics, however, are far less important to this argument than practical individual and familial economic considerations.

At latest count, Erdogan’s purge has reached a total of 160,000 people, including members of the following societal groups:

  • Military
  • Judiciary
  • Trade unions
  • Universities and private schools
  • Media
  • Politicians

Assuming similar math as Iraq, these figures render approximately 640,000 (160,000 x 4) people at minimum vulnerable to the sway of organized crime and, potentially by extension, joining terrorists.

ISIS and already has a presence in Turkey; indeed, it was ISIS that claimed credit for the June 2016 bombing of Istanbul’s airport.  As Turkey shares borders with both Iraq and Syria, ISIS has a natural opportunity to project influence and propaganda across the frontier and throughout the Anatolian peninsula.

Aside from the obvious dangers of the Islamic State growing within Turkey and threatening its institutions, there are important considerations that amplify the threat posed to the West when compared to ISIS in Iraq and Syria.  Consider:

  • Iraq is squarely in the center of the Middle East region. Turkey is practically an extension of Europe, separated from the Continent only by the Bosphorus and Dardanelles.
  • Turkey is unfortunately still a member of NATO and it has one of the largest armies in the world. Likewise, it is still integrated into the international security apparatus of the West.
  • Since the end of World War II (when they were neutral), Turkey has served as a buffer between Western and Soviet (now Russian) interests, from Southern Europe to the Caucuses.
  • There are substantial Turkish populations in Europe, particularly in Germany. These links could be potentially exploited by terrorists.

The means (proximity to Iraq and Syria), motive (spreading the Caliphate and terrorism), and opportunity (more than 160,000 purged state and civic employees) are all uniquely in place to enable an expansion of ISIS into Turkey.  A further burgeoning of their presence in Turkey would dramatically destabilize the entire Middle East and parts of Europe.

Will the United States and our coalition partners defeat ISIS in Iraq and Syria only to chase the marauding menace into Turkey, which is ripening for radicalization?

What will the United States and our NATO allies do to prevent history from repeating itself in the worst possible way?

Should Turkey remain a NATO member?

Ataturk must be turning in his grave.

* According to the CIA Factbook, the average number of children per Iraqi woman is 4.06.