Clyburn: There’s ‘No Way to Pay’ for Biden’s ‘Zero Cost’ Spending Plan

Friday on MSNBC’s Craig Melvin Reports, House Majority Whip Jim Clyburn confessed that “there’s no way to pay” for President Joe Biden’s $3.5 trillion “Build Back Better” spending package, which the Biden administration ludicrously claims will come with “zero cost” to the American people.

“I don’t think that anyone ever thought that after doing the rescue plan of over a trillion dollars, that we would come back with a $6 trillion program,” Clyburn stated. “The question is, how do you pay for that? Because we’re committed, Democrats are committed to paying for what we do. We saw the Republicans do a nearly $2 trillion tax cut and pass it onto our children and grandchildren to pay for it sometime in the future. That’s not our philosophy. Our philosophy is, let’s do what we need to do, but let’s pay for it. And so, there’s no way to pay for a $6 trillion program.”

He continued, “And you may recall, I questioned as to whether or not $3.5 trillion could be paid for. In fact, I said at the time that I thought that somewhere between $1.5 and $3.5, we’ll be able to find a sweet spot. And that, it seems to be what’s taking place now. We are close to finding the sweet spot. And it will be between those two numbers.”

Regardless of the final number, the Democrat spending agenda will be disastrous for the country, because it will be oriented toward a far-left, social justice agenda, including the environmentalist boondoggle, the “Great Reset.”


James Clyburn

39 Known Connections

Contempt for President Trump

In an August 16, 2017 interview on CNN, Clyburn said that the United States was becoming more like Nazi Germany with a Hitler-like Donald Trump as president. “We are approaching a place that we’ve been before,” he stated. “We remember from our studies what happened in the 1930s in Germany. I told a business group down at Hilton Head several weeks before the election, that what I saw coming was a replay of what happened in Nazi Germany.” Clyburn then asserted that both Trump and Hitler were elected by the people: “The fact of the matter is Hitler was elected as chancellor of Germany. He did not become a dictator until later when people began to be influenced by his foolishness. We just elected a president and he’s got a lot of foolishness going on, and I’m afraid that too many people are being influenced by that foolishness.”

To learn more about James Clyburn, click here.

EDITORS NOTE: This Discover the Networks column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

New Study Finds Electric Cars Cost More To Refuel Than Gasoline Powered Cars

Anderson Economic Group EV Transition Series: Report Comparison: Real World Cost of Fueling EVs and ICE Vehicles compared the actual costs of fueling normally asperated cars and trucks versus all electric vehicles. Read the full study here.

The Anderson study noted that Electronic Vehicles (EVs) are, “often presumed to be less expensive to fuel than their ICE counterparts. There is a rationale in physics for this: due to greater thermal efficiency, electric motors convert energy more efficiently than combustion engines. However, this cost is only one of five.”

For a complete picture, Anderson notes that we consumers must consider:

  1. Commercial and residential electric power/fuel costs.
  2. Registration taxes.
  3. Equipment (e.g., chargers) and installation costs.
  4. Deadhead miles incurred driving to a charger or fueling station.
  5. The cost of time spent refueling

The study found:

  • There are four additional costs to powering EVs beyond electricity: cost of a home charger, commercial charging, the EV tax and “deadhead” miles.
  • For now, EVs cost more to power than gasoline costs to fuel an internal combustion car that gets reasonable gas mileage.
  • Charging costs vary more widely than gasoline prices.
  • There are significant time costs to finding reliable public chargers – even then a charger could take 30 minutes to go from 20% to an 80% charge.

In the Anderson Economic Group’s October 21, 2021 column “Real-World Electric Vehicle Fueling Costs May Surprise New EV Drivers” they wrote:

6 months of independent research finds fueling costs for electric vehicles (EV) are often higher than for internal combustion engines (ICE)

East Lansing, MI–October 21, 2021: Anderson Economic Group released today the first in a series of analyses examining the transition from ICE vehicles to EVs.

This initial 36-page study is the culmination of comprehensive research comparing the “apples-to-apples” costs involved in fueling both EVs and ICE vehicles. AEG undertook this study after noting that many commonly cited figures did not account for the true costs associated with EV charging.

AEG calculated the cost of chargers, additional road taxes, commercial charging fees, and “deadhead” miles for three different EV driving scenarios and compared these with 3 analogous ICE vehicle scenarios. The research found that fueling an EV is often more expensive than fueling an ICE vehicle. It further found that fueling costs are far more variable for EVs. The authors go on to note the significant time costs imposed on EV drivers as a result of both inadequate infrastructure and wait times associated with fueling, which can be five to ten times the cost for ICE drivers.

According to study author Patrick Anderson, “These numbers may be surprising to those who haven’t relied upon an electric vehicle, but it’s important we safeguard the public from ‘charger shock.’ Before consumers can feel comfortable buying EVs in large numbers, they need to understand the true costs involved.”

Read the full article.

About the Authors

Mr. Patrick Anderson is Anderson Economic Group’s principal and CEO. His company is one of the most recognized boutique consulting firms in the United States, with years of expertise in the US automotive industry. The company has consulted for manufacturers that include General Motors, Ford, DaimlerChrysler, Honda, and others, along with nearly 200 automobile dealerships representing virtually every brand in the market.

Mr. Alston D’Souza works in Anderson Economic Group’s strategy and business valuation practice area, where he serves as senior analyst and data scientist. While at AEG, Mr. D’Souza’s work has focused on damages and market analysis. He holds a master’s degree in econometrics and quantitative economics from the University of Wisconsin-Madison, and a Bachelor of Technology degree from the National Institute of Technology Karnataka (India).

ABOUT THE ANDERSON ECONOMIC GROUP

Founded in 1996, Anderson Economic Group (AEG) is one of the most recognized boutique consulting firms in the United States. The company has offices in East Lansing, Michigan and Chicago, Illinois. The automobile industry is a primary area of specialization for the experts at AEG, who approach this critical automotive transition from a perspective that recognizes the role everyday consumer choices will play in driving EV market trends.

AEG’s automotive clients include manufacturers, suppliers, trade associations, and dealers and dealership groups.

©All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: The biggest mistakes buyers make when shopping for an electric car.

Biden’s ‘Jabs Not Jobs’ Policies.

“If getting vaccinated is simply a matter of individual health, there is little reason for planners to exercise control over the public.” – Jon Miltimore


QUESTION: Are Personal Heath Decisions Yours or the Biden Administrations?

Biden and his administration are all in to force you to get jabbed, even our military. If you don’t then, well, you can lose your job. In the military you could be court marshalled and/or dishonorably discharged. Watch Tucker Carlson’s exposé of a propaganda PowerPoint used by U.S. Army to justify mandatory vaccines.

There is growing evidence that clearly shows deaths are increasing worldwide after COVID-19 shots. Fox News’ Tucker Carlson reported, through June 11, 2021, the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS), a US Health and Human Services Department division, recorded 358,379 adverse events after vaccinations, including 5,993 deaths and 29,871 serious illnesses.

Dr. Robert Wachter, chairman of the department of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco, stated in a New York Times column, “Remember when the early vaccine studies came out, it was like nobody gets hospitalized, nobody dies. That clearly is not true.”

Some Governors are having none of these vaccine mandates. Governor Ron DeSantis has called for a special session of the Florida legislature to address this issue of personal health decisions. Watch:

Business Insider reported the following about the side effects of getting jabbed:

Dose 2 usually comes with more severe side effects

The most common side effect for all three authorized US vaccines is pain or swelling at the injection site: Nearly 92% of participants in Moderna’s clinical trial developed this side effect. in Pfizer’s trial, 84% of participants reported that, as did 49% in Johnson & Johnson’s.

Other common side effects include fatigue, headache, and body or muscle aches. About 65% of vaccine recipients in Pfizer’s and Moderna’s trials, and 38% in Johnson & Johnson’s, developed fatigue.

For those who haven’t had COVID-19 before, side effects tend to be more numerous and severe after the second dose.

How many Americans have lost their jobs due to Biden’s jabs mandate?

The GOP Times reported:

  • According to the Associated Press, “Advocate Aurora Health has fired about 440 employees for not abiding by the company’s COVID-19 vaccine mandate.”
  • A total of 1,887 Washington state employees have either quit their jobs or been fired for failing to comply with Gov. Jay Inslee’s (D) coronavirus vaccine mandate amounting to approximately 3% of the workforce of the state as reported by The Hill.
  • GOP Newsfeed reported that 117 nurses of the Houston Methodist Hospital system filed a wrongful termination suit against the hospital due to their vaccine mandate, however, a total of 153 employees were terminated.
  • According to Reuters, “New York State’s largest healthcare provider, Northwell Health, has fired 1,400 employees who refused to get COVID-19 vaccinations, according to a spokesman, Joe Kemp.”
  • The Intelligencer reported that the impact is being felt keenly in New York City where about 10% of approximately 5,000 of the city’s public hospital workforce “remained unvaccinated and were not allowed to work.”’

Matthew Holloway in his article This is How Many Americans Have Been Forced Out of Work Because of Jab Mandates notes:

Conservatively speaking 8,880 Americans are without work today as a direct result of the Biden-Harris vaccine mandate. However, many thousands still are conducting work actions such as Boeing employees such as in Everett, Washington where hundreds of employees walked off the job in protest of the mandate. And in New York City and Chicago where anywhere up to 31% of New York’s Police officers and up to 40% of FDNY employees could find themselves unemployed. Or similarly in Chicago where so far 21 officers have been suspended without pay, a number that could grow to almost 2,000 officers

Read the full article.

These numbers will only increase as more government entities enforce Biden’s jab mandates. We are beginning to see more and more Americans not going to work in protest against being forced against their wills to get jabbed. The most recent example was when Southwest Airlines pilots stayed home after their CEO announced a policy that they get jabbed or get fired.

Civil disobedience is on the rise and Biden’s approval ratings are falling like a rock.

As Bill Clinton said, “It’s the economy stupid.”

To Get Jabbed or Not To Get Jabbed

A new paper in the European Journal of Epidemiology that analyzed 168 countries and 2,947 US counties found that higher vaccination rates were not associated with fewer COVID-19 cases.

I have been through four pandemics. The most recent were SARS and H1N1 under the Obama administration. This is the first time that anyone has “mandated” that individuals be jabbed, i.e. take the Covid vaccines.

Here’s an October 19, 2021 video from The Olympian showing how jabbed tyranny is being implemented by the governor of Wisconson:

Conclusion

Watch Tucker Carlson discuss the ramifications of vaccine mandates.

Healthcare is strictly a doctor and patient issue. Government intervention “literally hurts” and does not help patients, healthcare workers and employers. You and your doctor know best what is good for you and your long term health.

Once  you government can mandate that you must get jabbed or else, then what other powers will they take from you?

Many American’s are asking what’s next?

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

1 Horrifying Discovery Forced the Swedes to Bar Their Young People from Taking Moderna’s Vaccine

Kerry Promises to Create Auto Jobs IN MEXICO as Part of Biden’s Green New Deal

COVID-19: The Weaponization Of Fear

NIH Confirms It Funded Wuhan Gain-of-Function Research, Now Fauci Could Spend 5 Years in Jail

Afghan refugees: Do we know what we’re getting into?

Today at the Young America’s Foundation conference at the Reagan Ranch Center.

RELATED VIDEO: The Afghan Refugee Crisis

RELATED ARTICLES:

Immigration provision in reconciliation bill will ‘set back’ American workers 

Ilhan Omar Wants State Department to Fight ‘Islamophobia’

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch video is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

VIDEO: Florida Man Who Became a Congressman Signs Off House Speech With ‘Let’s Go, Brandon!’

My latest in PJ Media:

On the House floor Thursday, a Florida man named Bill Posey, a Republican who has represented the Sunshine State’s 8th Congressional District since 2009, had a great deal to say about the dumpster fire that is Joe Biden’s handlers’ presidency, but his speech is much more likely to be remembered for how he ended it than for what he actually said: Posey concluded his remarks by saying, “Let’s go, Brandon!”

By now the whole world knows that “Let’s go, Brandon!” really means “F*** Joe Biden,” a secret code that everybody is in on, born when an NBC reporter tried vainly to cover for a NASCAR crowd that was chanting “F*** Joe Biden” while she interviewed driver Brandon Brown by claiming that it was chanting “Let’s go, Brandon.” Now “Let’s go, Brandon” has become a chart-topping rap hit and a wry expression of Americans’ dissatisfaction with the corrupt gang of socialists, internationalists, open-borders advocates, and worse that is running things, fronted by a man who, it is increasingly obvious, is barely even there.

Posey surveyed the way things are going as Biden’s handlers’ Build Back Better slogan has become Destroy More Things More Quickly, and said the regime’s program could not “pass a straight-face test.” Posey added: “Based on the false promise that he would unify America, President Biden got into the Oval Office. And my friends on the other side of the aisle gained a razor-thin majority in the House and Senate. But you know, we know, we all know, everybody knows the unification promise was a lie, and your majority is going to be short-lived. So you must feel compelled to rush through a radical agenda before the midterms.”

As a result, Posey said, Americans are “understandably frustrated” and “actually very angry,” and cannot be counted on to “sit back and take it much longer.” He said that Americans want Democrats “to help put America back where you found it and leave it the hell alone.” And then: “Let’s go, Brandon!”

Posey explained to Fox News: “Listen to my speech – like many Americans, I’m frustrated seeing the country quickly decline and the erosion of our civil liberties due to Washington’s policies designed to turn America upside down like the vaccine mandates, silencing parents at school board meetings, rampant crime, broken borders, rising gas and food prices, the weaponizing of the IRS, and a $5 trillion Green New Deal to restructure our lives.”

Indeed. Biden’s handlers have made a mess of things with remarkable speed, and the Florida Congressman didn’t even come close to mentioning all of them. He didn’t say anything about the Afghan refugees who are coming into the country by the tens of thousands despite the fact that no one knows who many of them are, and coming as they are from a jihadi hotspot, it is only reasonable to conclude that at least some of them could be jihad terrorists.

There is more. Read the rest here.

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

TAKE ACTION To Impeach Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin – Sign The Petition

Instead of fighting the enemy, he was fighting Americans.


Sign the Freedom Center’s petition to Remove Secretary Austin NOW! –  CLICK HERE.


Americans are dead and our credibility is in ruins. Meanwhile the man at the top of the military chain of command is blaming everyone else while using the dead for political cover.

When Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III appeared before the Senate Armed Services Committee, he suggested that any criticism of his disaster in Afghanistan would impugn the heroism of American soldiers who fought and died in the war. It was a shameless performance in which Austin blamed everyone else while using the soldiers he sacrificed as human shields.

Indian intelligence sources revealed that the ISIS-K suicide bomber who murdered 13 American military personnel at the Kabul airport had been released from Bagram Air Base by the Taliban.

The decision to pull out of Bagram had been reached at a secret meeting in the Pentagon’s “extreme basement” attended by Austin, Gen. Milley, and Secretary of State Blinken.

Any final decision would have had to be signed off by Biden and by Austin.

It’s understandable that Austin keeps coming up with excuses for the disaster that led to the death of more American personnel in one day than in the last two years of war in Afghanistan.

Austin is at the top of the military chain of command and answers only to the man in the Oval Office. No one is more responsible for the military disaster in Afghanistan than Austin except for the man who gave him his orders. But it was Austin who promised Senate members that if he were confirmed, he would speak his mind and stand up to Joe Biden.

“I certainly wouldn’t be here if I believed the last four years of my life left me too familiar with current operations to change course when needed, too close to scrutinize people with whom I once served, or too afraid to speak my mind to you or to the President,” Austin had assured the Senate Armed Service Committee during his confirmation hearing.

It was one of the many broken promises that Austin left in his wake during his brief tenure. The Secretary of Defense had promised to end the war in Afghanistan “on terms favorable to the United States”, had assured that, “Afghan security forces have the capability and capacity to project security and stability in Afghanistan in 2021 and beyond”, and that he would work to “ensure that the U.S. military and our Afghan partners have the capacity and capability necessary to protect U.S. personnel, our allies and partners, and our interests.”

Austin vowed to represent national interests, to be independent and flexible, and to keep American soldiers and civilians in Afghanistan and in the United States safe.

As the Afghanistan disaster unfolded, Austin showed off all of his abandoned promises.

He explained that he could not rescue the Americans trapped behind enemy lines. “I don’t have the capability to go out and extend operations currently into Kabul.” Austin acknowledged that Americans were being assaulted by the Taliban. “We’re also aware that some people, including Americans, have been harassed and even beaten by the Taliban.” he admitted, but all he had to offer was a protest that he had registered with “the designated Taliban leader.”

In eight months under Austin’s leadership, U.S. military forces had gone from a dominant force to being unable to stop the Taliban from beating Americans in the streets of Kabul.

This disgraceful betrayal was implemented by Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin.

No single military figure had done as much to radicalize the military, undermine military readiness, shatter international alliances, and destroy America’s credibility abroad.

Austin’s opening statement at his confirmation hearing made no mention of Afghanistan or the Taliban, or even Al Qaeda, ISIS, and terrorism. Instead he vowed to fight the “enemies” that “lie within our own ranks” and “rid our ranks of racists and extremists” by which he meant anyone who wasn’t on board with critical race theory and the rest of his radical leftist agenda.

In February, Austin held his first press conference at which he discussed the Biden administration’s illegal military occupation of Washington D.C. He also mentioned that, “I told our allies that no matter what the outcome of our review, the United States will not undertake a hasty or disorderly withdrawal from Afghanistan.”

NATO allies were promised that, “There will be no surprises. We will consult each other, consult together and decide together and act together.” As the British and other NATO allies have made clear, there was no consultation and there were no joint decisions. Instead Biden and Austin made disastrous unilateral moves while leaving the nations that had aided us holding the bag.

But Austin was spending far more time fighting conservatives in the military than fighting the enemy. While white personnel were being told that they were oppressors, and minority personnel were encouraged to believe that they were victims of white racism, the planning for a full evacuation from Afghanistan was being pushed off as it was an unimportant matter.

Defense Secretary Austin kept sloganeering about “a responsible and sustainable end to this war” and promised, “we want to do this methodically and deliberately”. Instead, he abandoned Bagram Air Base, cutting off the only safe evacuation route, and pulled all but 600 military personnel out, only to rush troops back at the last minute for a “hasty” and “disorderly withdrawal”.

Austin had also promised that U.S. military weapons wouldn’t fall into the hands of the Taliban.

“We’re going to responsibly retrograde all of our capabilities,” Austin had falsely promised.  “We’re going to account for all the people and resources that are working with us.”

Instead, Austin left the Taliban as the best armed Sunni Jihadist group on the planet.

While Austin was vowing to fight all the “racists and extremists” in the military, he was ignoring a report to the Pentagon’s Inspector General which warned that “Al Qaeda is gaining strength in Afghanistan while continuing to operate with the Taliban under the Taliban’s protection” and that “Al Qaeda capitalizes on its relationship with the Taliban through its network of mentors and advisers who are embedded with the Taliban, providing advice, guidance, and financial support.”

Al Qaeda functioned in relation to the Taliban the way that America did to the Afghan government as an embedded supportive force providing money and strategic insights. The Taliban had not only failed to turn on Al Qaeda, but the terrorist group that had attacked America on September 11 was playing the role of the wizards behind the Taliban curtain.

In response to Senate questions, Austin wrote that the “Taliban have agreed to take concrete steps to ensure that al Qaeda never again is able to use Afghanistan’s soil to threaten the security of the United States or our allies. If confirmed, I will review the Taliban’s progress toward implementing their commitments with regard to al Qaeda.”

The Taliban implemented their commitments to Al Qaeda, not to Austin. The Haqqani Network, longtime Al Qaeda allies, control Kabul and the terrorist group freely operates in Afghanistan.

“We are committed to a responsible and sustainable end to this war while preventing Afghanistan from becoming a safe haven for terrorist groups that threaten the interest of the United States and our allies,” Austin had said. But the report to the Pentagon IG had already made it clear that Taliban control over Afghanistan would mean the return of Al Qaeda.

What happened wasn’t a surprise, it was inevitable.

“The whole community is kind of watching to see what happens and whether or not al Qaeda has the ability to regenerate in Afghanistan,” Austin told reporters during his post-defeat tour.

As usual, he was late to the party.

“We put the Taliban on notice that we expect them to not allow that to happen,” he said, referring to Al Qaeda using Afghanistan to launch attacks against the United States. The “notice” will be as effective as the one about the Taliban beating Americans at checkpoints.

But Austin had made it his priority to use the military against fellow Americans, whether in Washington D.C. or within the ranks of the military, while betraying Americans to the Taliban.

“This all occurred in a span of about 11 days. Nobody predicted that, you know, the government would fall in 11 days,” Austin whined during an ABC News interview.

Every Biden administration official had latched on the same dishonest talking point.

As the Washington Post noted, “On Sept. 27, 1996, Taliban forces captured Kabul overnight, flooding in from all directions after a 15-day sweep of the country.” There were plenty of intelligence estimates warning of a rapid Taliban takeover. But Austin didn’t have to wait until there were only 11 days left. What was he doing since Kamala Harris swore him in on Jan 25?

Where were all those “responsible” and “methodical” plans he had been promising all along?

Instead of planning how to keep Americans safe, Austin spent those months waging war on Americans with a militarization of Washington D.C. and with a purge of the military. And when 13 American military personnel died because of his actions at the Kabul airport, the dead heroes proved to be men and women, white and Latino, who represented the spectrum that Austin was trying to divide with the big lies of critical race theory and a hunt for “extremists”.

The real extremists were Austin, Milley, and Biden.

Like most leftists, Secretary of Defense Austin could not take the idea of an external enemy seriously. Radicals striving to take power focus all their efforts on fighting internal enemies. And while Austin fought other Americans, Al Qaeda and the Taliban claimed Afghanistan.

Along with untold billions in military equipment, including Black Hawk helicopters, drones, armored vehicles, and a treasure trove of assault rifles and heavy weaponry.

On his post-defeat tour, Austin has claimed that the disaster, “will be studied in the days and months ahead”, and admitted that, “No operation is ever perfect, there are lessons to be learned.” What those lessons are, he hasn’t bothered sharing with the rest of the country.

Austin may not be especially bright, but he is a career military man who reached the pinnacle of his profession. He knew that the Afghanistan withdrawal would be a disaster and that is why he reportedly advised Biden to conduct it in stages, instead of in one fell swoop. Biden ignored his advice and Austin shrugged because he didn’t care about Afghanistan, he cared about “racism”.

The real lesson here is on the dangers of putting radicals with racial grudges in charge of the United States military. The Afghanistan rout was not an unexpected surprise, it was the cumulative effect of radicalism, incompetence, and apathy by a politicized and disloyal brass.

While Austin was fighting enemies at home, he enabled enemies abroad. He made fellow American military personnel into his enemies and they died at the hands of true enemies.

The betrayal in Afghanistan began with a betrayal at home.

COLUMN BY

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

RELATED ARTICLES:

Ilhan Omar Wants State Department to Fight ‘Islamophobia’

UC Berkeley study claims that ‘Islamophobia undermines and weakens women’s rights’

UK: Three children from jailed Islamic State families handed to families in Britain to start new life

India: 3200 Islamic State sleeper cells with 32000 jihadis active in Kerala, with Pakistani support

Afghanistan: Shia community fearful amid deadly mosque attacks and ongoing persecution from Sunnis

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

The Troubling Ramifications of the Aborted Baby Parts Scandal.

Today I am publishing a post on a matter close to my heart. The evil of the multi billion dollar abortion industry and their sale of aborted baby parts. You need to all become very aware of this filthy satanic industry and understand their statement – my body, my choice – is about as stupid and hypocritical as they are evil. As you know that saying doesn’t apply to the vaccine mandate!! Just to the wholesale slaughter and genocide of millions. Pictures I have posted in this blog appear below and are graphic. They show you exactly what is acceptable to the evil left in this country. It surely separates them from us.

Political leaders, Media, Educators and the General public need to wake up to the shocking reality of the abortion issue. The heroine of the left and their friends, Mary Sanger, a true evil Nazi, created Planned Parenthood to remove the scourge of black peoples from the face of America and the world. She was a racist in the uttermost extreme way. Yet the Dems love her, black women who flock to their clinics using abortion as birth control, love her. Ignorance is bliss. Selfishness rules. Uneducated people who are destroying morals, ethics and sensibilities and destroying life as if these aborted, murdered innocents, are trash like wrappers on a chocolate bar. Sad.


The Democrats: Killing the American Family, One Baby at a Time : By ERIC MARTIN.

Margaret Sanger, who founded the Birth Control League, opened the first abortion clinic in America in 1916. She was a disciple of Eugenics, which advocated the racial superiority of the white European peoples over all others, especially over the Blacks, Orientals, and of course, the Jews. Hitler’s racial policies were rooted in the Eugenics Movement, and he was a great admirer of Margaret Sanger.

He came to power in 1933 and fulfilled many of her diabolical aspirations—he exterminated six-million Jews, millions of Gypsies, the physically handicapped, and “mental degenerates.” He also hated Africans, whom he often referred to as mere animals. Margaret Sanger referred to Afro-Americans as “…human weeds, reckless breeders, spawning human beings who should never have been born.”

Margaret Sanger’s Birth Control League became Planned Parenthood in 1942. Since then, the Democratic Party has been the main force behind the killing of over 61,628,584 unborn babies in America. The toll of Black babies has been a holocaust—over 20 million. That was the number of the entire Black population of America in 1960! The Black pastor, Reverend Johnny Hunter, stated on June 20, 2020,

The weapon of mass destruction is the suction machine in Planned Parenthood.”

He went on to raise the alarm amongst the Afro-American community:

If we look the other way while our smallest brothers and sisters are being lynched in the womb, we lose the right to be outraged that we were once lynched by the Klan.”

Hilary Clinton was given the Margaret Sanger Award by Planned Parenthood in 2008. In her speech to thousands of pro-abortion supporters, she said of Margaret Sanger, “I am really in awe of her.”

The Democratic Party is the party of infanticide. They have extended the tongs, the forceps, and the suction machines to babies who are about to be born, babies who are born alive, only to be exterminated by having their heads bashed in and their brains sucked out. Their murderers are now protected by laws enacted by Democratic law makers in Congress. The right to life of the innocent, to the full protection of the Constitution and laws of the United States, has been callously trampled by the Party of Death.

Planned Parenthood is the creation of a twisted Nazi—a depraved racist who hated Judeo-Christian civilization and who worked all her sordid life to destroy respect for human life. She was the enemy of the weak and the infirm, of the poor and deprived.

And yet, Margaret Sanger is the undisputed Queen of the panoply of satanic gods who are worshipped by the Democratic Party and its leaders. These moral perverts claim to be champions of the middle class and of the American family. But as Jesus Christ said, “By their deeds you shall know them.”

They are killing the American family, one baby at a time.

About this author:

Eric Martin

Contributor at America’s Civil War Rising. Eric Martin is a British-born American patriot, who at 75 years of age continues his fight against the enemies of democracy and Judeo-Christian civilization. He was an officer in the Biafran diplomatic corps during the Biafra War of 1967 to 1970 and had close escapes from the Islamic regime of Nigeria and their allies, the KGB. He is a friend of Israel, having volunteered in the Six-Day War, and has also worked with The Friends of Israel for her security. His first allegiance is to the God of Israel and His People, both Jewish and Christian. In 2007, he was chosen by Israel National Radio to announce the station to the world. He believes that it is the duty of all freedom-loving Americans to fight the Marxist barbarians who are now trying to destroy America—with all means possible.

©Fred Brownbill. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES ON: Margaret Sanger.

Putin Warns Wokeness Is Destroying The West: It Happened In Russia, It’s Evil, It Destroys Values

Russia schooling America on freedom and democracy. You can’t make this stuff up. WATCH:

Putin Warns Wokeness Is Destroying The West: It Happened In Russia, It’s Evil, It Destroys Values

By Ryan Saavedra • Oct 22, 2021 DailyWire.com •

Russian President Vladimir Putin slammed during a speech on Thursday the far-left woke ideology that he said is causing societal ills throughout the Western world, saying that it is no different than what happened in Russia during the 1917 revolution.

Putin made the remarks during a plenary session of the 18th annual meeting of the Valdai International Discussion Club in Sochi where the topic was “Global Shake-up in the 21st Century.” Putin’s remarks were translated by an interpreter and that video was uploaded to the Russian government’s website.

“We see with bemusement the paralysis unfolding in countries that have grown accustomed to viewing themselves as the flagships of progress,” Putin said during an event where he spoke for a few hours. “Of course, it’s none of our business or what is happening, the social and cultural shocks that are happening in some countries in the Western countries, some believe that aggressive blotting out of whole pages of your own history, the affirmative action in the interest of minorities, and the requirement to renounce the traditional interpretation of such basic values as mother, father, family, and the distinction between sexes are a milestone … a renewal of society.”

Putin said that Western nations had a right to do whatever they wanted to do but that “the overwhelming majority of Russian society” rejected these new ways of thinking.

“The preparedness of the so called social progress believe that the bringing a new conscience, a new consciousness to humanity, something that is more correct,” Putin said. “But there is one thing I would like to say: The recipes they come up with are nothing new. Paradoxical as it may seem, but this is something we saw in Russia. It happened in our country before after the 1917 revolution, the Bolsheviks followed the dogmas of Marx and Engels. And they also declared that they would go into change the traditional lifestyle, the political, the economic lifestyle, as well as the very notion of morality, the basic principles for a healthy society. They were trying to destroy age and century long values, revisiting the relationship between the people, they were encouraging informing on one’s own beloved, and families. It was hailed as the march of progress. And it was very popular across the world and it was supported by many, as we see, it is happening right now.”

“Incidentally, the Bolsheviks were absolutely intolerant of other opinions, different from their own,” Putin continued. “I think this should remind you of something that is happening. And we see what is happening in the Western countries, it is with puzzlement that we see the practices Russia used to have and that we left behind in distant path, the fight for equality and against discrimination turns into an aggressive dogmatism on the brink of absurdity, when great authors of the past such as Shakespeare are no longer taught in schools and universities because they announced as backward classics that did not understand the importance of gender or race.”

“In Hollywood there are leaflets reminding what you should do in the cinema, in the films, how many personalities and actors you’ve got, what kind of color, what sex, and sometimes it’s even even tighter and stricter than what the Department of Propaganda of the Soviet Communist Party Central Committee did,” he said. “And the fight against racism, which is a lofty goal, turns into a new culture, cancel culture, and into reverse discrimination, racism on the obverse. And it brings people apart, whereas the true fighters for civic rights, they were trying to eliminate those differences. I asked my colleagues to find this quote from Martin Luther King, and he said, ‘I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.’ That is a true value.”

“You know, the Bolsheviks were speaking about nationalizing not just the property, but also women,” Putin continued. “The proponents of new approaches go so far as they want to eliminate the whole notions of men and women, and those who dare say that men and women exist and this is a biological fact, they are all but banished. Parent number one, parent number two, or the parent that has given birth, or instead of breast milk, you say human milk. And you say all of that, so the people who are not sure of their sexual agenda are not unhappy.”

“And I would like to say that this is not something new, and the 20s and the 1920s, the Soviet couture Tagore came up with the so called ‘Newspeak’, and they thought that thereby they were building a new consciousness and coming up with new values, and they went so far that we feel the consequences up until now,” he concluded on the matter. “There are some monstrous things when from a very young age, you teach to children that the boy can easily become a girl and you impose on them this selection, this choice. You push the parents aside and make the child take this decisions that can destroy their lives. And if we call the spade a spade, this is nigh to crime against humanity and all of that under the banner of progress, while some people just want to do that.”

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

Why the Push Is on to Make Pandemic Life ‘Permanent’

COVID-19 is new. But the reaction to the crisis is starting to look familiar.


One year after Americans were ordered to close down society for “two weeks to flatten the curve,” Bloomberg columnist Andreas Kluth warned, “We Must Start Planning for a Permanent Pandemic.”

Because new variants of SARS-COV-2 are impervious to existing vaccines, says Kluth, and pharmaceutical companies will never be able to develop new vaccines fast enough to keep up, we will never be able to get “back to normal.”

“Get back to normal” means recovering the relative liberty we had in our already overregulated, pre-Covid lives. This is just the latest in a long series of crises that always seem to lead our wise rulers to the same conclusion: we just cannot afford freedom anymore.

Covid-19 certainly wasn’t the beginning. Americans were told “the world changed” after 9/11. Basic pillars of the American system, like the Fourth and Fifth Amendments, were too antiquated to deal with the “new threat of terrorism.” Warrantless surveillance of our phone, e-mail, and financial records and physical searches of our persons without probable cause of a crime became the norm. A few principled civil libertarians dissented, but the public largely complied without protest.

“Keep us safe,” they told the government, no matter the cost in dollars or liberty.

Perhaps seeing how willingly the public rolled over for the political right during the “War on Terror,” authoritarians on the left turbocharged their own war on “climate change.” Previously interested in merely significantly raising taxes and heavily regulating industry, they now wish to ban all sorts of things, including air travelgasoline-powered cars, and even eating meat.

Since Covid-19, however, even the freedom to assemble and see each other’s faces may be permanently banned to help the government “keep us safe.”

Assaulting our liberty isn’t the only characteristic these crisis narratives have in common. They share at least two others: dire predictions that turn out to be false and proposed solutions that turn out to be ineffective.

George W. Bush warned Saddam Hussein had “weapons of mass destruction” capable of hitting New York City within 45 minutes. He created the Department of Homeland Security and the TSA to prevent, among other things, a “mushroom cloud” over a major American city.

Twenty years later, we know there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, the terrorist threat was grossly exaggerated, and the TSA has still never caught a terrorist, not even the two people who tried to set off explosives concealed in their shoes and underwear, respectively.

The only effective deterrent of terrorism so far has been the relatively calmer foreign policy during the four years of the Trump administration, during which regime change operations ceased and major terrorist attacks in the United States virtually disappeared.

Predictions of environmental catastrophe have similarly proven false. Younger people may not remember that in the early 1970s, long before Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez was born, environmentalists were predicting worldwide disasters that subsequently failed to materialize. In 1989, the Associated Press reported, “A senior U.N. environmental official says entire nations could be wiped off the face of the Earth by rising sea levels if the global warming trend is not reversed by the year 2000.” The same official predicted the Earth’s temperature would rise 1 to 7 degrees in the next 30 years.

Ocasio-Cortez is famous for predicting in 2019, “The world is gonna end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change.” But Al Gore had warned in 2006 that “unless drastic measures to reduce greenhouse gases are taken within the next 10 years, the world will reach a point of no return.” So, isn’t it too late anyway?

As with the war on terrorism, the war on climate change asks us to give up our freedom for solutions that don’t work. Assuming climate change proponents have diagnosed the problem correctly and haven’t exaggerated the threat—huge assumptions by themselves— implementing their proposed solution won’t solve the problem, even by their own standards.

Its proponents know this. The U.S. has already led the world in reducing carbon emissions without the draconian provisions of the Green New Deal. If you listen to them carefully, the Green New Deal’s proponents propose the U.S. give up what freedom and prosperity remain to them merely as an example to developing nations, whom they assume will forego the benefits of industrialization already enjoyed by developed countries because of the shining example of an America in chains and brought to its economic knees to “save the earth.”

Fat chance, that.

The latest remake of this horror movie is Covid-19. While undeniably a serious pathogen that has likely killed more people than even the worst flu epidemics of the past several decades (although this is hard to confirm since public health officials changed the methodology for determining a virus-caused death), the government and its minions have still managed to grossly exaggerate this threat.

Gone is any sense of proportion when discussing Covid-19. Yes, it is certainly possible to spread the virus after one has been vaccinated or acquired natural immunity. But how likely is it? Is it any more likely than spreading other pathogens after immunity?

If not, then why are we treating people with immunity differently than we have during more dangerous pandemics in the past? Similarly, it is likely possible for asymptomatic people to spread the virus—a key pillar of the lockdown argument—but again, how likely is it?

The theory Covid-19 could be spread by asymptomatic people was originally based on the case of a single woman who supposedly infected four other people while experiencing no symptoms. Anthony Fauci said this case “lays the question to rest.”

The only problem was no one had asked the woman in question if she had symptoms at the time. When it turned out she did, the study on her was retracted. A subsequent study “did not link any COVID-19 cases to asymptomatic carriers,” and yet another after that concluded transmission of the disease by asymptomatic carriers “is not a major driver of spread.” Yet, policies based on this falsehood, like lockdowns and forcing asymptomatic people to wear masks, remain in place.

Most importantly, none of the government-mandated Covid-19 mitigation policies work. No retrospective review conducted with any semblance of the scientific method has found a relationship between lockdowns, mask mandates, or social distancing and the spread of Covid-19. In fact, the most recent study suggests lockdowns may have increased Covid-19 infections, in addition to all the non-Covid excess deaths they caused.

Over and over, authoritarians overhype crises to scare the living daylights out of the public and propose solutions that have two things in common: they demand more of our freedom and they don’t work. It’s always all pain and no gain. One wonders how many repetitions of this crisis drill it will take before the citizens of the so-called “land of the free” finally think to ask:

Why is freedom always the problem?

This article was republished with permission.

COLUMN BY

Tom Mullen

Tom Mullen is the author of Where Do Conservatives and Liberals Come From? And What Ever Happened to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness? and A Return to Common  Sense: Reawakening Liberty in the Inhabitants of America. For more information and more of Tom’s writing, visit www.tommullen.net.

RELATED VIDEO: Michael Palmer MD, Asst. Prof Biochem U Waterloo: “This is a technology designed to poison people.”

RELATED TWEET:

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Why a Capital Gains Tax Increase Would Be a Massive Jobs [and Wealth] Killer

Although startups comprise less than one percent of all companies, they generate 10 percent of new jobs in any given year.


When discussing the economic growth of a post-COVID landscape, too often the role of angel investors is overlooked. Angel investors, or private investors who are often wealthy, finance small business ventures in exchange for equity. For small businesses, angel investors provide a much needed lifeline in the form of cash infusion that doesn’t have to be repaid, except in shared ownership. Private investment, most often through angel investors, is undoubtedly a driving force in technological advancement and job creation.

Unfortunately, angel investment has recently been threatened by the looming possibility of capital gains tax increases under the new administration. Long-term capital gains taxes are applied to assets, such as equity in business, owned for over a year when sold. As of now, long-term capital gains are taxed at 20 percent for wealthy investors. The White House is now calling for a 39.6% top federal tax rate, nearly double the current amount.

As Chris Edwards, director of tax policy studies at Downsizing Government, explains, “In biotechnology and other leading-edge industries, after-tax investor gains are often reinvested in the next round of risky startups, thus creating a virtuous cycle.”

One of the reasons that nearly all high-income countries keep capital-gains taxes low is to help ensure that investors and entrepreneurs are incentivized to take the risk of committing time and resources to relatively risky start-up ventures, typically reliant on the type of scientific and technical innovation that fuels job growth and progress in the long run.

According to Census Bureau data, although startups comprise less than one percent of all companies, they generate 10 percent of new jobs in any given year. The Kauffman Foundation’s Tim Kane pointed out that “without startups, there would be no net job growth in the U.S. economy.” In the same paper, he lays out the argument that “in terms of the life cycle of job growth, policymakers should appreciate the tremendous effect of job creation in the first year of a firm’s life.”

Wealthy angel investors have been behind many US corporations that have revolutionized their field and led to unprecedented growth and technological progress. Henry Ford, for example, received an infusion of cash from coal dealer Alexander Y. Malcolmson. The first investor in Apple was a millionaire retiree from Intel, Mike Markkula. Jeff Bezos obtained $8 million from Kleiner Perkins to build Amazon.

An increase in capital gains taxes would discourage such high-risk investments that provide much-needed seed money to startups, and induce investors to shift their investments to dividend-paying stocks or bonds. While safer, these avenues of investment do not produce the jobs or innovation that startups do, and would hinder entrepreneurship.

“Such tax increases would be a blow to startup investment and entrepreneurship,” Edwards writes. “People considering launching technology startups would instead stay in salaried jobs because earning a smaller after-tax gain from a startup would not be worth all the extra stress, risk, and hard work.”

This tax increase would also make it harder for startups to attract skilled workers. Three-quarters of Silicon Valley firms offer stock options to employees to lure them away from their salaried positions at large companies. A significantly higher capital gains tax would make that benefit much less appealing.

A capital gains tax increase would come as a huge blow to angel investors who fund the new technologies and ideas that we often take for granted. To ensure future growth and progress, it is imperative that we create and maintain an environment that allows angel investors to operate and thrive.

COLUMN BY

Aadi Golchha

Aadi Golchha is the author of “The Socialist Trap: How the Leftist Utopia Will Destroy America” and an independent political analyst.

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Courage. Now.

Well done. They’ll try to destroy this woman and smear her good name – like they’ve done to my colleagues and me. Protect her – at all costs.

We Got Here Because of Cowardice. We Get Out With Courage

Say no to the Woke Revolution

By 

A lot of people want to convince you that you need a Ph.D. or a law degree or dozens of hours of free time to read dense texts about critical theory to understand the woke movement and its worldview. You do not. You simply need to believe your own eyes and ears.

Let me offer the briefest overview of the core beliefs of the Woke Revolution, which are abundantly clear to anyone willing to look past the hashtags and the jargon.

It begins by stipulating that the forces of justice and progress are in a war against backwardness and tyranny. And in a war, the normal rules of the game must be suspended. Indeed, this ideology would argue that those rules are not just obstacles to justice, but tools of oppression. They are the master’s tools. And the master’s tools cannot dismantle the master’s house.

So the tools themselves are not just replaced but repudiated. And in so doing, persuasion—the purpose of argument—is replaced with public shaming. Moral complexity is replaced with moral certainty. Facts are replaced with feelings.

Ideas are replaced with identity. Forgiveness is replaced with punishment. Debate is replaced with de-platforming. Diversity is replaced with homogeneity of thought. Inclusion, with exclusion.

In this ideology, speech is violence. But violence, when carried out by the right people in pursuit of a just cause, is not violence at all. In this ideology, bullying is wrong, unless you are bullying the right people, in which case it’s very, very good. In this ideology, education is not about teaching people how to think, it’s about reeducating them in what to think. In this ideology, the need to feel safe trumps the need to speak truthfully.

In this ideology, if you do not tweet the right tweet or share the right slogan, your whole life can be ruined. Just ask Tiffany Riley, a Vermont school principal who was fired—fired—because she said she supports black lives but not the organization Black Lives Matter.

In this ideology, the past cannot be understood on its own terms, but must be judged through the morals and mores of the present. It is why statues of Grant and Washington are being torn down. And it is why William Peris, a UCLA lecturer and an Air Force veteran, was investigated for reading Martin Luther King’s “Letter from Birmingham Jail” out loud in class.

In this ideology, intentions don’t matter. That is why Emmanuel Cafferty, a Hispanic utility worker at San Diego Gas and Electric, was fired for making what someone said he thought was a white-supremacist hand gesture—when in fact he was cracking his knuckles out of his car window.

In this ideology, the equality of opportunity is replaced with equality of outcome as a measure of fairness. If everyone doesn’t finish the race at the same time, the course must have been defective. Thus, the argument to get rid of the SAT. Or the admissions tests for public schools like Stuyvesant in New York or Lowell in San Francisco.

In this ideology, you are guilty for the sins of your fathers. In other words: You are not you. You are only a mere avatar of your race or your religion or your class. That is why third-graders in Cupertino, California, were asked to rate themselves in terms of their power and privilege. In third grade.

In this system, we are all placed neatly on a spectrum of “privileged” to “oppressed.” We are ranked somewhere on this spectrum in different categories: race, gender, sexual orientation, and class. Then we are given an overall score, based on the sum of these rankings. Having privilege means that your character and your ideas are tainted. This is why, one high-schooler in New York tells me, students in his school are told, “If you are white and male, you are second in line to speak.” This is considered a normal and necessary redistribution of power.

Racism has been redefined. It is no longer about discrimination based on the color of someone’s skin. Racism is any system that allows for disparate outcomes between racial groups. If disparity is present, as the high priest of this ideology, Ibram X. Kendi, has explained, racism is present. According to this totalizing new view, we are all either racist or anti-racist. To be a Good Person and not a Bad Person, you must be an “anti-racist.” There is no neutrality. There is no such thing as “not racist.”

Most important: In this revolution, skeptics of any part of this radical ideology are recast as heretics. Those who do not abide by every single aspect of its creed are tarnished as bigots, subjected to boycotts and their work to political litmus tests. The Enlightenment, as the critic Edward Rothstein has put it, has been replaced by the exorcism.

What we call “cancel culture” is really the justice system of this revolution. And the goal of the cancellations is not merely to punish the person being cancelled. The goal is to send a message to everyone else: Step out of line and you are next.

It has worked. A recent CATO study found that 62 percent of Americans are afraid to voice their true views. Nearly a quarter of American academics endorse ousting a colleague for having a wrong opinion about hot-button issues such as immigration or gender differences. And nearly 70 percent of students favor reporting professors if the professor says something that students find offensive, according to a Challey Institute for Global Innovation survey.

Why are so many, especially so many young people, drawn to this ideology? It’s not because they are dumb. Or because they are snowflakes, or whatever Fox talking points would have you believe. All of this has taken place against the backdrop of major changes in American life—the tearing apart of our social fabric; the loss of religion and the decline of civic organizations; the opioid crisis; the collapse of American industries; the rise of big tech; successive financial crises; a toxic public discourse; crushing student debt. An epidemic of loneliness. A crisis of meaning. A pandemic of distrust. It has taken place against the backdrop of the American dream’s decline into what feels like a punchline, the inequalities of our supposedly fair, liberal meritocracy clearly rigged in favor of some people and against others. And so on.

“I became converted because I was ripe for it and lived in a disintegrating society thrusting for faith.” That was Arthur Koestler writing in 1949 about his love affair with Communism. The same might be said of this new revolutionary faith. And like other religions at their inception, this one has lit on fire the souls of true believers, eager to burn down anything or anyone that stands in its way.

If you have ever tried to build something, even something small, you know how hard it is. It takes time. It takes tremendous effort. But tearing things down? That’s quick work.

The Woke Revolution has been exceptionally effective. It has successfully captured the most important sense-making institutions of American life: our newspapers. Our magazines. Our Hollywood studios. Our publishing houses. Many of our tech companies. And, increasingly, corporate America.

Just as in China under Chairman Mao, the seeds of our own cultural revolution can be traced to the academy, the first of our institutions to be overtaken by it. And our schools—public, private, parochial—are increasingly the recruiting grounds for this ideological army.

A few stories are worth recounting:

David Peterson is an art professor at Skidmore College in upstate New York. He stood accused in the fevered summer of 2020 of “engaging in hateful conduct that threatens Black Skidmore students.”

What was that hateful conduct? David and his wife, Andrea, went to watch a rally for police officers. “Given the painful events that continue to unfold across this nation, I guess we just felt compelled to see first-hand how all of this was playing out in our own community,” he told the Skidmore student newspaper. David and his wife stayed for 20 minutes on the edge of the event. They held no signs, participated in no chants. They just watched. Then they left for dinner.

For the crime of listening, David Peterson’s class was boycotted. A sign appeared on his classroom door: “STOP. By entering this class you are crossing a campus-wide picket line and breaking the boycott against Professor David Peterson. This is not a safe environment for marginalized students.” Then the university opened an investigation into accusations of bias in the classroom.

Across the country from Skidmore, at the University of Southern California, a man named Greg Patton is a professor of business communication. In 2020, Patton was teaching a class on “filler words”—such as “um” and “like” and so forth for his master’s-level course on communication for management. It turns out that the Chinese word for “like” sounds like the n-word. Students wrote the school’s staff and administration accusing their professor of “negligence and disregard.” They added: “We are burdened to fight with our existence in society, in the workplace, and in America. We should not be made to fight for our sense of peace and mental well-being” at school.

In a normal, reality-based world, there is only one response to such a claim: You misheard. But that was not the response. This was: “It is simply unacceptable for faculty to use words in class that can marginalize, hurt and harm the psychological safety of our students,” the dean, Geoffrey Garrett wrote. “Understandably, this caused great pain and upset among students, and for that I am deeply sorry.”

This rot hasn’t been contained to higher education. At a mandatory training earlier this year in the San Diego Unified School District, Bettina Love, an education professor who believes that children learn better from teachers of the same race, accused white teachers of “spirit murdering black and brown children” and urged them to undergo “antiracist therapy for White educators.”

San Francisco’s public schools didn’t manage to open their schools during the pandemic, but the board decided to rename 44 schools—including those named for George Washington and John Muir—before suspending the plan. Meantime, one of the board members declared merit “racist” and “Trumpian.”

A recent educational program for sixth to eighth grade teachers called “a pathway to equitable math instruction”—funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation—was recently sent to Oregon teachers by the state’s Department of Education. The program’s literature informs teachers that white supremacy shows up in math instruction when “rigor is expressed only in difficulty,” and “contrived word problems are valued over the math in students’ lived experiences.”

Serious education is the antidote to such ignorance. Frederick Douglass said, “Education means emancipation. It means light and liberty. It means the uplifting of the soul of man into the glorious light of truth, the light only by which men can be free.” Soaring words that feel as if they are a report from a distant galaxy. Education is increasingly where debate, dissent, and discovery go to die.

It’s also very bad for kids.For those deemed “privileged,” it creates a hostile environment where kids are too intimidated to participate. For those deemed “oppressed,” it inculcates an extraordinarily pessimistic view of the world, where students are trained to perceive malice and bigotry in everything they see. They are denied the dignity of equal standards and expectations. They are denied the belief in their own agency and ability to succeed. As Zaid Jilani had put it: “You cannot have power without responsibility. Denying minorities responsibility for their own actions, both good and bad, will only deny us the power we rightly deserve.”

How did we get here? There are a lot of factors that are relevant to the answer: institutional decay; the tech revolution and the monopolies it created; the arrogance of our elites; poverty; the death of trust. And all of these must be examined, because without them we would have neither the far right nor the cultural revolutionaries now clamoring at America’s gates.

But there is one word we should linger on, because every moment of radical victory turned on it. The word is cowardice.

The revolution has been met with almost no resistance by those who have the title CEO or leader or president or principal in front of their names. The refusal of the adults in the room to speak the truth, their refusal to say no to efforts to undermine the mission of their institutions, their fear of being called a bad name and that fear trumping their responsibility—that is how we got here.

Allan Bloom had the radicals of the 1960s in mind when he wrote that “a few students discovered that pompous teachers who catechized them about academic freedom could, with a little shove, be made into dancing bears.” Now, a half-century later, those dancing bears hold named chairs at every important elite, sense-making institution in the country.

As Douglas Murray has put it: “The problem is not that the sacrificial victim is selected. The problem is that the people who destroy his reputation are permitted to do so by the complicity, silence and slinking away of everybody else.”

Each surely thought: These protestors have some merit! This institution, this university, this school, hasn’t lived up to all of its principles at all times! We have been racist! We have been sexist! We haven’t always been enlightened! I’ll give a bit and we’ll find a way to compromise. This turned out to be as naive as Robespierre thinking that he could avoid the guillotine.

Think about each of the anecdotes I’ve shared here and all the rest you already know. All that had to change for the entire story to turn out differently was for the person in charge, the person tasked with being a steward for the newspaper or the magazine or the college or the school district or the private high school or the kindergarten, to say: No.

If cowardice is the thing that has allowed for all of this, the force that stops this cultural revolution can also be summed up by one word: courage. And courage often comes from people you would not expect.

Consider Maud Maron. Maron is a lifelong liberal who has always walked the walk. She was an escort for Planned Parenthood; a law-school research assistant to Kathleen Cleaver, the former Black Panther; and a poll watcher for John Kerry in Pennsylvania during the 2004 presidential election. In 2016, she was a regular contributor to Bernie Sanders’s campaign.

Maron dedicated her career to Legal Aid: “For me, being a public defender is more than a job,” she told me. “It’s who I am.”

But things took a turn when, this past year, Maron spoke out passionately and publicly about the illiberalism that has gripped the New York City public schools attended by her four children.

“I am very open about what I stand for,” she told me. “I am pro-integration. I am pro-diversity. And also I reject the narrative that white parents are to blame for the failures of our school system. I object to the mayor’s proposal to get rid of specialized admissions tests to schools like Stuyvesant. And I believe that racial essentialism is racist and should not be taught in school.”

What followed this apparent thought crime was a 21st-century witch hunt. Maron was smeared publicly by her colleagues. They called her “racist, and openly so.” They said, “We’re ashamed that she works for the Legal Aid Society.”

Most people would have walked away and quietly found a new job. Not Maud Maron. This summer, she filed suit against the organization, claiming that she was forced out of Legal Aid because of her political views and her race, a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.

“The reason they went after me is that I have a different point of view,” she said. “These ideologues have tried to ruin my name and my career, and they are going after other good people. Not enough people stand up and say: It is totally wrong to do this to a person. And this is not going to stop unless people stand up to it.”

That’s courage.

Courage also looks like Paul Rossi, the math teacher at Grace Church High School in New York who raised questions about this ideology at a mandatory, whites-only student and faculty Zoom meeting. A few days later, all the school’s advisers were required to read a public reprimand of his conduct out loud to every student in the school. Unwilling to disavow his beliefs, Rossi blew the whistle: “I know that by attaching my name to this I’m risking not only my current job but my career as an educator, since most schools, both public and private, are now captive to this backward ideology. But witnessing the harmful impact it has on children, I can’t stay silent.” That’s courage.

Courage is Xi Van Fleet, a Virginia mom who endured Mao’s Cultural Revolution as a child and spoke up to the Loudoun County School Board at a public meeting in June. “You are training our children to loathe our country and our history,” she said in front of the school board. “Growing up in Mao’s China, all of this feels very familiar…. The only difference is that they used class instead of race.”

Gordon Klein, a professor at UCLA, recently filed suit against his own university. Why? A student asked him to grade black students with “greater leniency.” He refused, given that such a racial preference would violate UCLA’s anti-discrimination policies (and maybe even the law). But the people in charge of UCLA’s Anderson School launched a racial-discrimination complaint into him. They denounced him, banned him from campus, appointed a monitor to look at his emails, and suspended him. He eventually was reinstated—because he had done absolutely nothing wrong—but not before his reputation and career were severely damaged. “I don’t want to see anyone else’s life destroyed as they attempted to do to me,” Klein told me. “Few have the intestinal fortitude to fight cancel culture. I do. This is about sending a message to every petty tyrant out there.”

Courage is Peter Boghossian. He recently resigned his post at Portland State University, writing in a letter to his provost: “The university transformed a bastion of free inquiry into a social justice factory whose only inputs were race, gender and victimhood and whose only output was grievance and division…. I feel morally obligated to make this choice. For ten years, I have taught my students the importance of living by your principles. One of mine is to defend our system of liberal education from those who seek to destroy it. Who would I be if I didn’t?”

Who would I be if I didn’t?

George Orwell said that “the further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it.” In an age of lies, telling the truth is high risk. It comes with a cost. But it is our moral obligation.

It is our duty to resist the crowd in this age of mob thinking. It is our duty to think freely in an age of conformity. It is our duty to speak truth in an age of lies.

This bravery isn’t the last or only step in opposing this revolution—it’s just the first. After that must come honest assessments of why America was vulnerable to start with, and an aggressive commitment to rebuilding the economy and society in ways that once again offer life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness to the greatest number of Americans.

But let’s start with a little courage.

Courage means, first off, the unqualified rejection of lies. Do not speak untruths, either about yourself or anyone else, no matter the comfort offered by the mob. And do not genially accept the lies told to you. If possible, be vocal in rejecting claims you know to be false. Courage can be contagious, and your example may serve as a means of transmission.

When you’re told that traits such as industriousness and punctuality are the legacy of white supremacy, don’t hesitate to reject it. When you’re told that statues of figures such as Abraham Lincoln and Frederick Douglass are offensive, explain that they are national heroes. When you’re told that “nothing has changed” in this country for minorities, don’t dishonor the memory of civil-rights pioneers by agreeing. And when you’re told that America was founded in order to perpetuate slavery, don’t take part in rewriting the country’s history.

America is imperfect. I always knew it, as we all do—and the past few years have rocked my faith like no others in my lifetime. But America and we Americans are far from irredeemable.

The motto of Frederick Douglass’s anti-slavery paper, the North Star—“The Right is of no Sex—Truth is of no Color—God is the Father of us all, and all we are brethren”—must remain all of ours.

We can still feel the pull of that electric cord Lincoln talked about 163 years ago—the one “in that Declaration that links the hearts of patriotic and liberty-loving men together, that will link those patriotic hearts as long as the love of freedom exists in the minds of men throughout the world.”

Every day I hear from people who are living in fear in the freest society humankind has ever known. Dissidents in a democracy, practicing doublespeak. That is what is happening right now. What happens five, 10, 20 years from now if we don’t speak up and defend the ideas that have made all of our lives possible?

Liberty. Equality. Freedom. Dignity. These are ideas worth fighting for.

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Quick note: Tech giants are shutting us down. You know this. Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Adsense, Pinterest permanently banned us. Facebook, Google search et al have shadow-banned, suspended and deleted us from your news feeds. They are disappearing us. But we are here. We will not waver. We will not tire. We will not falter, and we will not fail. Freedom will prevail.

Subscribe to Geller Report newsletter here — it’s free and it’s critical NOW when informed decision making and opinion is essential to America’s survival. Share our posts on your social channels and with your email contacts. Fight the great fight.

Follow me on Gettr. I am there. It’s open and free.

Remember, YOU make the work possible. If you can, please contribute to Geller Report.

VIDEO: Critical Race Theory Collusion Exposed In Virginia!

Loudoun County in Virginia is the center of the storm on Critical Race Theory. School district officials there are obsessed with pushing, often dishonestly, the CRT agenda.

We learned this from 3,597 pages of records we received from the county. They reveal a coordinated effort to advance CRT initiatives despite widespread public opposition.

We received the records after two Virginia Freedom of Information Act (VFOIA) requests to Loudoun County Public Schools. In March and April 2021 requests, we asked for communications between Loudoun County Superintendents Eric Williams and/or Scott Ziegler with school board members, teachers and parents regarding anti-racism initiatives, including a proposed speech code.

Here’s what we learned.

On March 27 at 2:19 a.m., Minority Student Achievement Advisory Committee (MSAAC) Chair Keaira Jennings writes to former Director of Equity Lottie Spurlock and others that she tweeted “we will silence the opposition … without realizing the firestorm my words would cause … My intention was and is to have the voices in support of equity in education be heard and supported, and I was actually thinking ‘hopefully those voice will eventually ring louder and drown out those against equity.’”

On March 29, 2021, Jennings writes about distributing a MSAAC a “call to action” in hopes the Loudoun NAACP will join in taking steps against the “false narratives” of “the opposition:”

As you are aware there is a lot of negativity and false narratives being circulated in the community and news regarding equity within LCPS. I think it best to not engage the opposition but rather counter them and drown out their hateful rhetoric. I am attaching a copy of the call to action that MSAAC put out this morning in hopes that the NAACP will join us in taking these or similar steps. Later this afternoon, I plan to also submit a letter formally to the school board asking that they take specific actions items, recognizing that the censure of [School Board Member] John Beatty is not legal for them currently.

On January 11, 2021, Loudoun County School Board Member Atoosa Reaser writes Ziegler an email about legislation moving in the Virginia legislature under the subject line, “Bill Tracking> HB1904 > 2021 session” (H.B. 1904 passed and was signed into law by Virginia Governor Ralph Northam. The new law requires cultural competency for teacher licenses.):

This is the bill that’s going to encompass one of our program’s asks. It will be carried by someone outside of Loudoun, and is more comprehensive. I believe it encompasses what we were asking for and am OK with that path forward. Please let me know this morning if you have other thoughts.

Ziegler responds:

That looks good. Once the bill is passed, it will be interesting to see how the training and rubrics are built and promulgated around the [cultural competency] requirement. That will be where the real work starts.

On March 18, 2021, the African American Superintendent’s Advisory Council issued “Recommendations on Equity,” which includes among numerous other recommendations:

Establishment [of] a single indicator or composite score related to school climate that includes indicators related to antiracism and culturally responsive and inclusive learning environments
[A] requirement for educator preparation programs to include programs of study and experiences that prepare teachers to be culturally responsive educators.

Karen Dawson, executive assistant to the superintendent’s office asks a several public school officials to distribute the recommendations to their staff members.

Assistant Superintendent for Instruction Ashley F. Ellis responds: “We already have a head start with so many of these things.”

Ziegler responds to Slevin and Director of Communications and Community Engagement Joan Sahgren: “I wonder if and how this information can be included in our communications.”

On December 7, 2020, in an email chain regarding a memorandum of understanding between the school board and the sheriff’s office, Spurlock writes to school and law enforcement officials about an upcoming panel discussion regarding “rules of engagement for the community conversation.”

On December 11, Katrecia Nolen, principal and owner of KAPAX Solutions, a management and IT consulting services company, writes:

Data shows that our children are disproportionately referred to law enforcement in Loudoun County and these factors should inform the MOU [memorandum of understanding] review process.
I understand that there were a number of community comments and questions submitted, when will we have access to this community-derived information?

In a March 19, 2021, message to the public school community Ziegler attempts to address concerns regarding “Rumors Concerning LCPS Equity Work” by attempting to draw a distinction between Critical Race Theory (CRT) and Culturally Responsive Teaching (CRT):

The professional development offered to LCPS employees explores issues that have traditionally been ignored in professional development. It asks employees to examine their own personal biases and how they might affect student instruction and interactions with the community. Concepts such as white supremacy and systemic racism are discussed during professional development. LCPS has not adopted Critical Race Theory as a framework for staff to adhere to.

On March 23, Ellis writes about Ziegler’s distinction between Critical Race Theory and Culturally Responsive Teaching:

As we’ve stated in committee meetings and messages to the community, LCPS is not teaching CRT (Critical Race Theory), nor have our staff been trained in Critical Race Theory …


Information related to countywide training for equity was shared with the LCPS School board on September 22…. Additionally, the Department of Instruction has created a frequently-asked-questions document related to Equity and Culturally Responsive Instruction.
The acronym “CRT” might sometimes be confused with Culturally Responsive Teaching.  As you know from C&I meetings this year, we do have a Culturally Responsive Framework that was developed this past year and is being utilized in our schools. Again, this is not Critical Race Theory.

In a March 2, 2021, email, Ziegler invites senior staff to a Zoom meeting facilitated by Virginia Commonwealth University: “Topic: Equity and Culturally Responsive Leadership: Racial Equity: What’s Race Got to Do With It? Dr. Cole and Dr Stanley.” Drs. Cole and Stanley work in the Office of Strategic Engagement for VCU.

In early April 2021, Public Information Officer Wayde B. Byard engages in a conversation with Loudoun Now editor Norman Styer, whom Byard characterizes in an April 5 email to Zeigler, Ellis and Spurlock as “friendly.” Byard writes, “This editor has been friendly to us in the past. In our phone conversation, he said he wanted to ‘cut through the crazy’ and give an honest account of what LCPS is doing.”

In a January 26, 2020, email, Beth Barts writes to then-Superintendent Williams and other school officials informing them about a closed meeting by the Equity Committee, after it was leaked the Committee was considering a rule that would require parents to take equity training before they would be allowed to access their child’s “parentvue,” a mobile application designed to help parents monitor their child’s academic activity. Barts writes:

I would lie [sic] to draw your attention to the social media rumors that the equity committee is going to require parents to take equity training before they are allowed to access their child’s parentvue. There is some outrage building.
I realize this is not exactly accurate and was just a suggestion, but I wanted to make sure you all were aware.

Loudon County parents are not alone in confronting CRT abuse of their children.

We recently made public a training document it received from a whistleblower in the Westerly School District of Rhode Island, which details how Westerly Public Schools are using teachers to push critical race theory in classrooms. The training course was assembled by the left-leaning Highlander Institute and cites quotes from Bettina Love, from whom the Biden administration distanced itself publicly after her statements equating “whiteness” to oppression.

In May, we obtained heavily redacted records from Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS) including documents related to their “Anti-racist system audit” and critical race theory classes. The documents, obtained under the Maryland Public Information Act, reveal that students of “Maryland’s Largest School District” who attended Thomas Pyle Middle School’s social justice class were taught that the phrase “Make America Great Again” was an example of “covert white supremacy.” The phrase is ranked on a pyramid just below “lynching,” “hate crimes,” “the N-word” and “racial slurs.” They were also taught that “white privilege” means being favored by school authorities and having a positive relationship with the police.

In June, we uncovered records from Wellesley Public Schools in Massachusetts that confirm the use of “affinity spaces” that divided students and staff based on race as a priority and objective of the school district’s “diversity, equity and inclusion” plan. The school district also admitted that between September 1, 2020 and May 17, 2021, it created “five distinct” segregated spaces.

CRT is the true pandemic in our schools and Judicial Watch is doing its best to combat it!

Judicial Watch Sues Asheville Over Racially Discriminatory Scholarship Program

Oxymoronic anti-racist racism is the new agenda for the extremist Left.  As part of our effort to combat this assault on the rule of law, Judicial Watch filed a civil rights lawsuit on behalf of a North Carolina citizens group whose members include high school students ineligible for a City of Asheville-funded scholarship only because they are not black.

The plaintiff, WNC Citizens for Equality, Inc., is suing the City of Asheville, City Manager Debra Campbell, and the Asheville City Schools Foundation (ACSF) and its director regarding the city’s establishment of a racially discriminatory scholarship program.

(The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina (WNC Citizens for Equality, Inc., v. City of Asheville et al. (No. 1:21-cv-00310))).

On May 5, 2021, the City of Asheville entered into an agreement with Asheville City Schools Foundation to establish and administer the City of Asheville Scholarship Fund. According to the agreement, the City of Asheville Scholarship is “awarded in perpetuity to Black high school students within Asheville City Schools, with special consideration given for Black students pursuing a career in education.”

Our lawsuit argues that the scholarship is a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and a violation of the members of WNC Citizens for Equality’s rights to equal protection under the law and freedom from racial discrimination under the North Carolina Constitution.

The funds provided by the City of Asheville for the City of Asheville Scholarship came from the settlement of an unrelated lawsuit. On April 13, 2021, the Asheville City Council directed City Manager Debra Campbell and City Attorney Brad Branham to effectuate a “donation” of $474,592.56 to ACSF. The City Council stated that it expected the funds would be used “in such a way as to provide the public benefit of advancing racial equity within the community.” A later, smaller donation also was made by the City of Asheville to ACSF for the same purpose.

According to ACSF’s website, the first City of Asheville Scholarship was awarded in May 2021. ACSF will begin accepting applications on November 1, 2021, and through January 31, 2022, for the next City of Asheville Scholarship to be awarded.

Our lawsuit asks the court to declare the discriminatory scholarship scheme is in violation of both the U.S. Constitution and the North Carolina Constitution.

It is illegal to discriminate on the basis of race and setting up a ‘blacks only’ scholarship is wildly unconstitutional. This civil rights lawsuit seeks to ensure that no student in Asheville is denied educational scholarship opportunities on account of race.

Federal Agencies Unveil Plans to Combat “Anti-Voter Burdens” of People of Color

The Biden administration has engaged in a thinly-disguised “get out the vote” operation – using your tax dollars. Our Corruption Chronicles blog has the latest details:

In response to President Joe Biden’s government-wide directive to eliminate “anti-voter burdens” and “significant obstacles” that prevent people of color from voting, more than a dozen federal agencies have announced unprecedented initiatives that could conveniently result in more votes for Democrats. The agencies concocted their unconventional voter outreach plan after Biden issued an Executive Order on Promoting Access to Voting in early March. It directs the federal government to leverage its vast resources to increase access to voter registration services and information about voting. Under the mandate all agencies must submit a strategic plan outlining ways to promote voter registration and participation to White House Domestic Policy Advisor Susan Rice, who served as National Security Advisor and U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations under Barack Obama.
“The right to vote is the foundation of American democracy,” Biden’s March executive order states. “Free and fair elections that reflect the will of the American people must be protected and defended. But many Americans, especially people of color, confront significant obstacles to exercising that fundamental right. These obstacles include difficulties with voter registration, lack of election information, and barriers to access at polling places. For generations, Black voters and other voters of color have faced discriminatory policies and other obstacles that disproportionally affect their communities. These voters remain more likely to face long lines at the polls and are disproportionately burdened by voter identification laws and limited opportunities to vote by mail. Limited access to language assistance remains a barrier for many voters.” The order also mentions barriers faced by people with disabilities who are denied legally required accommodations and military personnel serving overseas.
In a preview of what is coming, 14 agencies recently disclosed the steps they are taking in response to the president’s call for “an all-of-government action to promote voting access and to further the ability of all eligible Americans to participate in our democracy.” In a lengthy announcement, the White House claims the “strategic plans” are just the beginning of each agency’s commitment and that the agencies will further build out their capacity to help voters better understand “opportunities for engagement” as well as “facilitate participation in the electoral process” in the months to come. Much of the planning will center on the findings of Vice President Kamala Harris’ months-long engagement with voting populations “that have been historically marginalized” as well as civil and voting rights advocacy groups. The administration has also partnered with civil rights organizations, according to the White House release, and has appointed “strong civil rights leadership at the Department of Justice.”
Here is a preview of the preliminary steps government agencies are taking to combat so-called “anti-voter burdens.” The Department of Justice will provide voting information and facilitate voting for federal inmates and educate ex-cons before reentry about voting rules and rights in their state. The Department of Housing and Urban Development will furnish voter registration information and services to around 1.2 million public housing units nationwide and improve voting registration and voting access to the homeless. The Department of Labor plans to designate thousands of employment training centers in every state as voter registration agencies and require the centers to enroll voters and serve as polling precincts. The Education Department is going to prepare a tool kit of resources and strategies for civic engagement for the nation’s elementary and high schools as well as colleges so more than 67 million students and their families learn about “civic opportunities and responsibilities.” The Treasury Department will include voter registration and participation materials in direct deposit campaigns for Americans who receive federal benefits such as Social Security. The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Rural Housing Service is having its offices, borrowers and guaranteed lenders push voter information. Federal transportation officials want to place voter registration materials in high-transit stations and the Department of Defense (DOD) is going to develop voting materials in “additional languages.” This is just the beginning.

Critical Race Theory Roils Virginia Governor Race

Micah Morrison, our chief investigative reporter, provides a look at CRT battles which are coming to a head in Virginia in our Investigative Bulletin:

Virginia is shaping up as ground zero in the battle over schools and Critical Race Theory. The “theory” is pure poison, a hard-edged identity politics from the radical Left teaching that America is an irredeemably racist country suffused by white supremacy. Students must—must—acknowledge this, or pay the price. Dissent will not be tolerated. Parents are in an uproar, particularly in Virginia, where CRT has become a major issue in the gubernatorial contest between Democrat Terry McAuliffe and Republican Glenn Youngkin. Polls show a tight race.
The CRT fight in Virginia has been brewing all year. “Perhaps nowhere  has the debate over critical race theory grown so heated as in Loudoun County” in Northern Virginia, the Washington Post reported in May. Loudoun put nearly half a million dollars into a consulting firm for teacher training and raising “racial consciousness.” Parents grew alarmed and tensions increased. CRT “is teaching kids to see other kids through a strictly identity group lens as opposed to seeing each other as individuals with their own stories to tell that are not dependent on their skin color or their ethnicity,” a Loudoun County parent told the Post.
In July, in Fairfax County’s Thomas Jefferson High School—rated as one of the top public schools in the nation—newly elected anti-CRT members of the parent-teacher association were threatened with removal of their charter by the state’s governing PTA association. In September, chaos broke out at a Prince William County School Board Meeting when parents started shouting at each other. Cops had to clear the room.
Sparked by parent passions, CRT appears to be gaining traction with Virginia voters. A recent Emerson Poll showed that a big majority of Virginians, 86%, were familiar with the CRT debate. 47% said they would support a state ban on teaching CRT in the schools.
Youngkin, the GOP candidate, says he will ban CRT in the schools “on day one” of his administration. He has made CRT a top issue in the race and hammers McAuliffe on it at “Parents Matter” events around the state. CRT “teaches our children to view everything through a lens of race to divide our children up into buckets and then pit them against one another and steal their dreams,” Youngkin told a Parents Matter rally last week.
McAuliffe has stumbled over CRT and education. “I don’t think parents should be telling schools what they should teach,” McAuliffe said at a September debate—a remark that immediately went viral. He dismisses concerns over CRT as “racist” and a “dog whistle.” On the campaign trail, McAuliffe’s education pitch focuses on a $2 billion proposal to raise teacher pay, improve online access, and expand preschool programs.
Judicial Watch has been a national leader in the CRT fight and we’ll be watching Virginia closely. Read more from us on the background of CRT here; on CRT in Maryland here; on CRT at West Point here; on CRT in Rhode Island here. And if you’re interested in using the Freedom of Information Act and public records requests to explore CRT in your community, this episode of JW TV will tell you everything you need to know.

WATCH: Unions Mostly to Blame for Supply Chain Shortages But Biden Thanks Them

The real cause of supply chain shortages are the Unions which provide Stevedores to unload ships and Warehouse Workers at our major ports.   Their contract exempts them from working on weekends and they already make well over $100,000 a year but have no fear – Beijing Joe Biden will influence them to start working 24 x 7 to clear up the backlog but, of course, with your tax dollars.

Biden Thanks Unions for Promising to Help Solve a Supply Chain Mess They Created

In the East Room of the White House last week, President Joe Biden announced the Executive Branch was taking decisive actions to resolve the supply chain issues plaguing the United States.

As media reports show, supply chain bottlenecks are leaving many people without essential goods, and are threatening to play Grinch with consumers this holiday season.

“I half-jokingly tell people ‘Order your Christmas presents now because otherwise on Christmas day, there may just be a picture of something that’s not coming until February or March,'” Scott Price, the international president for UPS, told the AFP wire service in September.

On Wednesday Biden announced he was addressing the problem of West Coast delays, saying the crucial ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach would soon be shifting to round-the-clock operations.

“After weeks of negotiation and working with my team and with the major union and retailers and freight movers, the Ports of Los Angeles announced today that it’s going to begin operating 24 hours a day, 7 days a week,” Biden said.

The president said that by moving to a 24-7 system, the US would be shifting to “what most of the leading countries in the world already operate on now, except us, until now.”

He then thanked union leaders shortly before his closing remarks.

“I particularly want to thank labor: Willie Adams of the Longshoremen and Warehouses Union, who is here today; the Teamsters; the rail unions from the Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen; and the International Association of Mechan- — of Machinists; to the American Train Dispatchers Association; to Sheet Metal, Air, and Rail, and Transportation Workers Union, known as ‘SMART,’” Biden said.

There is little debate that the supply chain issues are a serious problem, and shifting to a 24-7 operation may indeed help alleviate some of the supply chain issues—though the problem is unlikely to be solved so easily.

The obvious question, however, is this: why weren’t these ports already operating around the clock “like most of the leading countries in the world”?

The answer can be found in the very unions Biden thanked.

As Sean Higgins of the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) recently explained, there appears to be no state or federal regulation preventing around the clock work at these ports. It’s simply a union policy.

“The primary issue appears to be the unions, whose contract effectively dictates when work can be done,” Higgins explains.

It turns out that unions negotiated a sweetheart deal. It’s not just that, as the Los Angeles Times notes, union dock workers make $171,000 (plus free healthcare) a year on average. Or that union clerks do even better ($194,000 on average), and they themselves earn a far cry from foremen and “walking bosses” ($282,000). (Those fat compensation figures result in part from the fact that union bosses were able to negotiate holiday pay not just for federal holidays, but for everything from “Bloody Thursday” to the birthdays of union leaders such as Harry Bridges and Cesar Chavez.)

The wages are noteworthy, but the bigger problem for people depending on smoothly running supply chains are the restrictions on work hours the unions negotiated. Higgens notes the labor contract between the Pacific Maritime Association and the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) creates an inflexible operating schedule:

[The] union contract limits the port to just three shifts in a day: two lasting eight hours and another lasting just five hours. All three go from Monday to Friday. These shifts overlap slightly but even if they didn’t, they would still only total 21 hours. Keeping the ports open for 24 hours would require the port to pay overtime every single day.

On top of that, the contract says that any work done on weekends or holidays is automatically time and a half too. So even if the port could offer shifts with a five-day work week that started on, say, Wednesday, it would have to pay those workers the equivalent of six days.

In other words, the contract makes it all but impossible for the port to remain operational for twenty-four hours a day and on weekends.

Now, the entire US supply chain problem doesn’t come down to the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, and the poorly negotiated union contract. But the importance of these ports is enormous.

Indeed, Biden himself notes that 40 percent of all shipping containers imported into the US come from these two ports—which have been idle some 60 hours every week during the biggest supply chain crisis in generations … because of a union contract.

To make matters worse, for years the union has blocked efforts to improve efficiency through automation.

“We were totally opposed to fully automated terminals and got the guarantees from our employers that they would not construct them during the life of our new package,” ILWU President Harrold Daggett noted two years ago after the union negotiated its contract.

This is known as “featherbedding,” a practice unions have perfected over ages that requires employees to implement time-consuming policies and procedures that increase labor costs and decrease productivity. As economist Henry Hazlitt once observed, these “make-work rules” reduce efficiency but “are tolerated and even approved because of the confusion on this point in the public mind.”

The reason the problem persists, Higgens says, is that people simply don’t want to create a political stir.

“You don’t even talk about that. You know, we don’t even try to influence that. But it’s really the root cause,” an anonymous carrier industry source reportedly told CEI.

There may be something to Higgens’s claim—if you’ve ever watched Martin Scorsese’s movie The Irishman, you know what I mean—but there’s a larger economic lesson to be learned.

As the economist George Reisman has observed, unions decrease productivity almost by their very nature.

[The] most serious consequence of the unions is the holding down or outright reduction of the productivity of labor. With few exceptions, the labor unions openly combat the rise in the productivity of labor. They do so virtually as a matter of principle. They oppose the introduction of labor-saving machinery on the grounds that it causes unemployment. They oppose competition among workers.

Granted, simply persuading ports to operate 24-7 around the clock (and no doubt covering the union costs) may solve some problems. But if Reisman’s observations are correct, Biden is seeking increased productivity and efficiency in the wrong place. Because of the incentive structure they operate under, unions are far better at leveraging power to negotiate sweetheart deals than boosting efficiency and productivity to improve the broader marketplace.

Indeed, just one day after Biden’s speech, union leaders were already making it clear they weren’t yet working around the clock—and had no timeline for doing so.

“It’s not a single lever we can pull today,” Gene Seroka, the Executive Director of the Port of Los Angeles, said in a media briefing. “There’s no timeline when suddenly we will wake up and everything will be 24/7.”

COLUMN BY

Jon Miltimore

Jonathan Miltimore is the Managing Editor of FEE.org. His writing/reporting has been the subject of articles in TIME magazine, The Wall Street Journal, CNN, Forbes, Fox News, and the Star Tribune. Bylines: Newsweek, The Washington Times, MSN.com, The Washington Examiner, The Daily Caller, The Federalist, the Epoch Times.

©FEE. All rights reserved.

Ilhan Omar Introduces Legislation to Create Special Envoy for Monitoring and Combating ‘Islamophobia’

Will the human rights reports make a clear distinction between “Islamophobia” as attacks on innocent Muslims, which are never justified, and “Islamophobia” as honest analysis of the motivating ideology behind jihad violence, which is always necessary?

Of course the answer to both questions is a resounding no. If this “special envoy” is created, he or she will crack down on honest discussion of how Islamic jihadis use the texts and teachings of Islam to justify violence and oppression. The special envoy will be another agent in the Left’s escalating war against the freedom of speech.

Omar wants government to monitor global ‘Islamophobia

by Luke Gentile, Washington Examiner, October 21, 2021:

Democratic Reps. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota and Jan Schakowsky of Illinois introduced legislation Thursday that would create a federal office to monitor “Islamophobia” and anti-Muslim bigotry around the world.

Omar hopes the office will help lawmakers understand the “interconnected, global problem of anti-Muslim bigotry.”

“The bill requires the State Department to create a Special Envoy for monitoring and combating Islamophobia, and include state-sponsored Islamophobic violence and impunity in the Department’s annual human rights reports,” Omar’s office said in a press release .

Although Omar and Schakowsky’s proposal is aimed at international anti-Muslim bigotry, they both said it is a domestic problem, too.

“We are seeing a rise in Islamophobia in nearly every corner of the globe,” Omar said. “In my home state of Minnesota, vandals spray-painted hate messages and a Nazi swastika on and near the Moorhead Fargo Islamic Center.”

In the past year, roughly 500 complaints of anti-Muslim hate and bias have been documented in the U.S., according to the release….

“As part of our commitment to international religious freedom and human rights, we must recognize Islamophobia and do all we can to eradicate it,” Omar said.

RELATED TWEET:

 

RELATED ARTICLES:

Taliban behead junior volleyball player who was part of Afghan women’s national team

Montana: Afghan evacuee charged with rape, governor calls for halt in refugee resettlements

Jammu and Kashmir: Muslim youth ‘rescued’ from ISIS found advancing jihad terror sleepe

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Besides All the Crime in Chicago, There’s Also Jihad Terror Plotting

My latest in PJ Media:

Chicago under the misrule of its woke mayor Lori Lightfoot is already a sinkhole of gang violence, drug abuse, and vaccine tyranny, and it’s even worse than you think. On Monday, the Justice Department announced that “an Illinois man pleaded guilty today to attempting to provide material support to designated foreign terrorist organizations, the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) and Al-Nusra Front (ANF).” On the same day, another Chicago man was convicted of providing support to ISIS. If this sort of thing keeps up, the skyrocketing crime rate in the Windy City may be the least of Lightfoot’s troubles.

Chicago’s Dilshod Khusanov, 36, according to the DOJ, will be deported after he serves a prison term. He “encouraged individuals to travel to Syria to wage violent jihad, or holy war, in 2014 and 2015. For example, on Sept. 28, 2014, Khusanov urged co-conspirator Akmal Zakirov to engage in jihad: ‘I hope that the only [reason] that is preventing you from jihad is some mistakes and flaws that are occurring among the other fighters.’ Khusanov explained that it would be better to help those fighters, rather than criticize them.”

Khusanov was part of a group of jihad plotters inside the United States who raised money to help get ISIS jihadis to the front lines: “Later in 2014, two Brooklyn residents, Abdurasul Juraboev and Akhror Saidakhmetov began planning to travel to Syria to fight for ISIS.” To further this goal, “a group of individuals in a domestic network based in New York and elsewhere, including Khusanov, worked together to raise and contribute money to help fund that trip to Syria.”

This group began discussing ways to finance Saidakhmetov’s trip to Syria; two members of the group “also agreed to solicit money from others to fund Saidakhmetov’s travel.” They were the ones who contacted Khusanov, who then “arranged for money to be deposited in Zakirov’s bank account before Saidakhmetov’s scheduled departure.”

All of this came to naught, however, when Saidakhmetov was “arrested in February 2015 at John F. Kennedy International Airport, as he boarded a plane bound for Istanbul, Turkey, a transit point for foreign fighters bound for Syria.”

Osadzinski, meanwhile, a former student at Chicago’s DePaul University, was also at work aiding ISIS, apparently independently of Khusanov’s cell. According to the Voice of America, he “wrote a computer code to help IS bypass programs designed to block the group’s propaganda.” He exclaimed that he couldn’t just “sit in the chair while Muslims are dying”; he began studying how to make bombs, and spoke about the massacres he would perpetrate “once I get my gun and explosive belt.”

There is more. Read the rest here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

UC Berkeley Students Happily Pledge Money to Help the Taliban Kill Americans Inside the U.S.

Minneapolis: Muslim migrant cop who shot unarmed woman to death gets nearly five years in prison

Greece: Muslim migrants march with flag of pro-Sharia Pakistani group

Ilhan Omar introduces legislation to create Special Envoy for monitoring and combating ‘Islamophobia’

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.