Never-Ever-Trumper Unknowingly Explains Impeachment Is Over Weak Democrat Field

/in , , , , , , /by

It makes so much more sense now. When Never-Ever-Ever Trumper, gay liberal Andrew Sullivan, thinks no one in the current Democrat field can beat President Trump in 2020, it’s easier to understand the impeachment furor over a phone call and the raw, unmasked media partisanship.

Sullivan’s New York Magazine take, which I largely agree with in the analysis, summarized:

  • Biden has real strength in the Democratic Party, but his candidacy in a general election is “crippled.” Biden’s crowd size and enthusiasm levels are “anemic” and he looks “confused, addled, over-briefed, and clearly past his expiration date.” Agree. Plus he would have a corruption factor that would mitigate the made-up stuff on Trump.
  • Elizabeth Warren is “unelectable” in November 2020. “She’s a supercilious, smug, know-it-all Massachusetts liberal who reveals contempt for the deplorables the way Clinton did last time. The ‘first woman of color’ to get hired as a professor at Harvard Law School is the stuff that GOP dreams are made of.” Further, Warren said on CNN townhall, that in her administration, her Secretary of Education essentially “would have to be approved by a transgender 9-year-old boy, she’s placing herself firmly inside a cultural revolution most Americans are deeply uncomfortable with.” Agree. She is way outside the mainstream, plus she’s not genuine — a sharp contrast to Trump.
  • Bernie Sanders had a heart attack at 78. Democrats will not trust that he won’t again on the campaign trail. Plus, and this is no small thing in the general election, “he’s also an actual socialist, and he hasn’t entertained — let alone engaged with — a new idea in decades. That’s appealing to millennial Marxists who have no memory of the 1970s, but Jeremy Corbyn was also a superstar with the youngsters a while back.” Agree. He’ll fade.
  • Kamala Harris is just unlikable for most Americans. “Harris has revealed herself as a feckless, authoritarian, lying opportunist who treats the Constitution as cavalierly as Trump, but without his excuse of total ignorance.” I continually fail to see where Trump has trampled on the Constitution, or even pushed it in any ways that previous presidents have not also — without a peep. It’s just said all the time. But on the analysis, agree.
  • Corey Booker is laughable. He has no connection with even Democrat voters, let alone the rest of America. “…he comes off as an earnest cyborg from outer space.” Agree. Like Warren and Harris, he’s a “what do you want me to say” candidate trolling for votes.
  • Beto is despicable. Sullivan agrees. “O’Rourke is a woke, moronic bigot, who believes we live in a white-supremacist country, and would happily remove tax exemptions from most traditional churches, synagogues, and mosques, because they still believe in the literal teachings of the Bible or the Koran. Of all the candidates, he’s the only one I actively loathe.” Well what can be added to that? Agree.
  • Andrew Yang and Pete Buttigieg are fresh, coherent, thoughtful — according to Sullivan — but Yang has zero chance and Buttigieg not much more. Neither would appear to have broad support in the country. Agree on the second part. The first, regarding Buttigieg, not at all.

And just because Sullivan’s writing is just so superb, and his analysis is spot-on from the TDS swamps, I’ll include his ending:

“Don’t get me wrong. I’ll vote for anyone, including Warren or Sanders or even the vacuous Beto to defeat Trump. We proud human scum will not be distracted from the central task at hand. But let’s be honest: This is a field that has largely wilted upon inspection. For what it’s worth, I suspect Warren will win the nomination and dutifully lose the election just like Mondale, Dukakis, Gore, Kerry, and the second Clinton. She has that quintessential perfume of smug, well-meaning, mediocre doom that Democrats simply cannot resist.”

Of course, he lays out a lot more problems with Warren than that conclusion. But when someone as insightful and desperate to defeat Trump is this gloomy on the Democrat options, you can bet that Democrat strategists are also, along with members of Congress.

Hence, they can’t wait 12 months for the American people to weigh in with actual democracy — which they laughably claim is under assault. Impeachment must happen, and it must be now. And the goal of impeachment is to either remove Trump or try to damage him to the degree that one of these bums could win. The authoritarian impulse Sullivan rightly identifies in Warren and Beto is endemic to the Democratic Party.

RELATED ARTICLE: Trump’s Unfairness Advantage — Pelosi realizes Democrats’ trampling of impeachment norms helps Trump. – Wall Street Journal

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

The Revolutionary and anti-Constitutional 1941 Lend Lease Act

/in , , , , , /by

“It’s not a choice between war and peace. It’s a choice between war and endless war. It’s not appeasement. I think it’s better even to call it American self-interest.” – Former CIA agent, Michael Scheuer

“When we look at how, constitutionally, only Congress can declare war, and that is routinely ignored. Not NATO or the UN, but Congress has to authorize these endless wars, and it isn’t.” –  Edward Snowden

“If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy. No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.” – President James Madison

Few people have heard of the “Lend-Lease Act” and its revolutionary change to our Constitution. In his 1961 Farewell to the Nation Speech President Dwight D. Eisenhower stated, “In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex.”  But it’s not just the military industrial complex, it’s the Soviet agents who long ago infiltrated the upper echelons of our government and gave us this unconstitutional legislation.

The Lend Lease Act

The Lend Lease Act was proposed in 1940, and President Franklin Roosevelt signed it into law on March 11, 1941.  It was the principal means for providing military aid to foreign nations during WWII.  The act authorized the president to transfer arms or any other defense materials for which Congress appropriated money to “the government of any country whose defense the President deems vital to the defense of the United States.”  Despite strong protests from isolationists, the Act passed by wide margins in the House and Senate.

FDR signs the Land-Lease Act in 1941 to give aid to Britain and China. President Roosevelt (FDR) sold the Act to the American public as aid to Great Britain, but in reality Lend Lease aid to the Soviet Union was a priority that superseded all other allies’ military needs, including our own.

American aid to the Soviet Union included weapons, ammunition, tanks, oil, fighter aircraft, trucks and jeeps, and materials for the making of the atomic bomb including uranium. (Sound familiar?) In addition, lavish personal items and great quantities of food, including 200 million pounds of butter, were sent while at the same time America had strict rationing of goods.  Our patents, including military blueprints also reached the Soviets in the hundreds of thousands.  It was indiscriminate aid to the Soviet Union.  (American Betrayal chapter 2, Diana West)

Executive Power

The Act allowed the president alone to make the decision regarding transferring materials to beleaguered nations without payment as required by the Neutrality Act of 1939.  It also skirted the thorny problems of war debts that had followed World War I; Britain had defaulted on $3.5 billion. The Neutrality Act of 1937 did contain one important concession to Roosevelt: nations were allowed, at the discretion of the President, to acquire any items except arms from the United States, so long as they immediately paid for such items and carried them on non-American ships—the so-called “cash-and-carry” provision. The revised 1939 Act allowed arms to be sold, but once America entered WWII, the Act became irrelevant.

The Johnson Act of 1934 also prohibited the extension of credit to countries that had not repaid U.S. loans made to them during World War I—which included Great Britain who desperately needed funds to fight Hitler. But it was Russia’s Stalin who wrote to FDR asking him to help the Britain.  If Britain fell to the Nazis, the Soviet Union would be next.  In securing aid to the UK, Stalin had more time to ready his red army for war.

Over the course of the war, the United States contracted Lend-Lease agreements with more than 30 countries, dispensing some $50 billion in assistance.  The agreements signed by the United States and the recipient nations laid the foundation for the creation of a new international economic order in the postwar world and it has continued until now.

Isolationists, such as Republican senator Robert Taft, opposed it. Taft correctly noted that the bill would “give the President power to carry on a kind of undeclared war all over the world, in which America would do everything except actually put soldiers in the front-line trenches where the fighting is.”  Now, however, without action by Congress, the President is allowed to send military support of any kind, including our troops, to any country deemed “vital to the defense of America.”

Soviet Agents

In Diana West’s books, American Betrayal and The Red Thread she exposes the revolutionary and anti-constitutional Lend Lease Act.  The three Soviet agents behind the Act were Armand Hammer, Harry Hopkins and Harry Dexter White.

In The Red Thread, West states, “We may now regard Lend Lease as the founding document of the ‘new world order’ that arose in the aftermath of WWII, its heaviest cornerstones laid by covert Soviet agents Alger Hiss at the United Nations and Harry Dexter White at the International Monetary Fund.  The sea change (with Lend Lease) came in making ‘any country’s defense’ vital to our own.”

Hiss was also president of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and was involved in the establishment of the United Nations both as a U.S. State Department official and as a UN official.

What no one but a few intelligence professionals knew was that in the early 1940s our government had recorded thousands of coded messages from Soviet agents in Washington and New York to their Moscow superiors.  In later years they decoded those messages proving Hiss and White were indeed Soviet spies as charged. Under their code name, the “Venona Papers” are now available to everyone through the Library of Congress.

President Truman knew in 1950 about the Soviet agents as did Eisenhower who was elected after him, along with a select group of Washington elites, but no one seemed to care.  There was a conspiracy of silence that continues to this day.

Armand Hammer

In his book, Dossier: the Secret History of Armand Hammer, Edward Jay Epstein calls Hammer a traitor.  By 1940, British intelligence had developed a lengthy dossier on Hammer.  It identified him and his associates as part of the Soviet “secret regime” in the West.  Earlier that year, it had even monitored the movements of his brother Victor in Egypt (then a British protectorate) on the suspicion that the Hammer Galleries were a front for the Soviet intelligence service.  Yet American history still refers to Hammer as an industrialist (CEO of Occidental Petroleum) and philanthropic.

Nineteen years earlier, Hammer had a meeting with Lenin, who sought to break the isolation of the Soviet Union by making him his “path” to American business.

At the time, Hammer was acting to influence America knowing that if Britain fell to the Nazis, the Soviet Union would be next.  He went directly to President Roosevelt through his wife Eleanor.  Hammer had contributed substantial funds to FDR’s reelection campaign, but had also personally financed an extraordinary radio dramatization which promoted the achievements of FDR’s New Deal.  He sent Eleanor a copy of the recording and that opened the door for him to promote the Lend Lease to FDR regarding aid to the UK, and ultimately to Russia.

Hammer came armed with a large volume of editorials from U.S. newspapers from October 1940, the fruits of a survey he had commissioned to show that newspapers favored financial aid to Great Britain.  He convinced FDR that he would gain popular support by effecting Hammer’s plan.  FDR put him together with his personal advisor and secretary of commerce, Harry Hopkins.

FDR sent Harry Hopkins who was to be the czar of Lend Lease to New York to meet with Hammer on the plan.  Hopkins later flew to London to discuss the plan with Churchill and a few months later Hopkins negotiated the destroyers-for-bases swap with the British. This laid the precedent for waiving restrictions on military aid for those nations fighting Hitler.  When Hitler invaded Russia in June 1941, this opened the door to Lend-Lease for the Soviets.

Harry Hopkins

Harry Hopkins was referred to as the co-president with FDR.  He was unelected and unconfirmed and according to Life Magazine, a one-man cabinet.  He was also the architect of FDR’s New Deal.  He slept in the White House in the Lincoln bedroom and worked at Lincoln’s desk.  He was FDR’s constant traveling companion, was with him for breakfast and before he nodded off to sleep at night.  And Soviet agent Harry Hopkins was the boss of the Lend Lease program.  It was the lifeline to the Soviet war with Hitler and it was run via the Kremlin from inside the Roosevelt White House and bypassed the State Department.

As a devotee of Marx, in 1941 Hopkins wrote, “When a democratic victory is won, then the great wealth of the world must be shared with all people.”  Sounds like our democratic presidential candidates of today.

In a message dated May 29, 1943, Iskhak Akhmerov, the chief Soviet “illegal” agent in the United States at the time, referred to an Agent 19 who had reported on discussions between Roosevelt and Winston Churchill in Washington at which the agent had been present. Only Harry Hopkins meets the requirements for this agent’s identity. Akhmerov, in a lecture in Moscow in the early 1960s, identified Hopkins by name as “the most important of all Soviet wartime agents in the United States.”

Victor Kravchenko

Victor Kravchenko was a Soviet official who defected to America.  Hopkins wanted him sent back to Russia, but FDR was afraid Kravchenko would be murdered by the Soviets.  Kravchenko wrote two books on the horrors of life in the USSR prior to Solzhenitsyn’s defection.

He had been at the Soviet headquarters of Lend Lease in Washington.  After the war, he testified before Congress that the Soviet Lend Lease operation he defected from and that was located only three blocks from the White House, was the Soviet spying, thieving and ransacking Commission.  They succeeded in stealing as many industrial and military secrets as possible.  (American Betrayal, Chapter 5, Diana West)

Harry Dexter White

Harry Dexter White was an American economist and senior U.S. Department of Treasury official. He was the first head of the International Monetary Fund and played an important role in formation of the World Bank. He was also a Soviet secret agent—”the most highly–placed asset the Soviets possessed in the American government.”

White was the assistant secretary of the treasury in the administration of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and caused incalculable harm to the United States. In “Operation Snow,” White did everything within his power to scuttle the peace efforts of the forces within the Japanese government that were striving to avoid war with the United States. He authored an ultimatum adopted as official policy by FDR that upped the ante of belligerent acts Roosevelt was directing at Japan.

Through the infamous Lend-Lease program, White helped facilitate the transfer of billions of dollars in aid to Stalin.

In Albert Weeks’ book, Russia Life-Saver, Lend-Lease Aid to the U.S.S.R. in World War II, a book drawing on Russian revisionism, he tells us that White was “one of the main drafters of the administration’s side of the Lend-Lease particulars, especially as Lend Lease was to be extended to the Russians.

But Weeks also tried to destroy patriot Major George Racey Jordan who was the supervisory expediter of Soviet Lend Lease aid and was stationed at Great Falls, Montana, the hub of the Soviet pipeline.  Jordan saw that atomic secrets were being sent to the Soviets.  Weeks, in his book, claimed it was unverifiable myth, but Jordan wrote a book on what he kept and saw in his diaries.

While providing the Soviets with every possible assistance, White was doing everything to cut off aid that had been appropriated by Congress to assist our ally Chiang Kai-shek’s anti-communist government in China. White was a key operative in treachery that pushed China into Communist hands.  Today, we see Hong Kong’s demonstrations for freedom from Communist China where the demonstrators fly and carry the American flag and sing our national anthem.

Conclusion

Our President brought home the soldiers at the Syrian border and quietly reduced our forces in Afghanistan by 2,000.  Andrew Bostom and Cliff Kincaid tell us not to romanticize the Kurds, that our President is doing exactly what he promised his supporters he would do.

Trump was raised on Norman Vincent Peale’s positive, pro-freedom, pro-capitalist, anti-totalitarian ideology. His family attended Peale’s church.  Andrew Bostom writes, “President Trump’s own muscular anti-totalitarianism stands in stark contrast to the hard left—even overtly Communist—sympathies of the cabal of anti-Trump putschists aligned against him.”

FDR’s ideology of building a democratic world via Lend Lease is coming to an end through Donald Trump.  For nearly 80 years, America has sent taxpayer dollars and our soldiers to foreign lands. Trump promised to get us out of this nation-building business and he’s doing it.  The globalist elite of both parties are enraged.

© All rights reserved.

VIDEO: ISIS Caliph, devout follower of Mohammed, and ‘savage monster’ Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi died like ‘a dog and coward’ killing his own children

/in , , , , , /by

Not since the massive slaughter carried out by the former Ottoman Empire have we seen anything like the brutality and butchering of Muslims, Christians and non-believers under the ISIS Caliphate lead by Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.

Here is President Trump’s announcement and question and answer session on the killing of the world’s former leading terrorist:

Stephen Sorace from Fox News reported:

The Washington Post  published a gasp-inducing headline for the ages Sunday, describing ISIS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi as an “austere religious scholar.”

The obituary, written by The [Washington] Post’s National Security reporter Joby Warrick, followed confirmation of al-Baghdadi’s death in a U.S. military operation in Syria on Saturday night. It detailed al-Baghdadi’s rise to the terrorist group’s shadow leader from what the paper described as his origins as a “religious scholar with wireframe glasses.”

In my column President Trump rejects the principal tenant of Islam — Martyrdom I wrote:

President Trump’s first major speech overseas was in the heart of Islam, Saudi Arabia. The speech was eloquent and presidential. While many will analyse the speech from various angles, I believe the most important sentence in the speech made by the President was:

If you choose the path of terror, your life will be empty, your life will be brief, and your soul will be condemned.

I truly believe what we saw in President Trump’s remarks verify that al-Baghdadi’s life was empty, brief and that his soul is condemned.

President Trump undermined that basic tenant of Islam before fifty leaders of the Arab world. This is the equivalent of going to Rome and denying that the death of Jesus on the cross gives mankind life everlasting.

What President Trump said was blasphemy in many Muslim majority countries.

President Trump’s words are more powerful than using the phrase “radical Islamic terrorism.” For you see terrorists are a culture of death, as the President pointed out, and he single handily denied them paradise and their purpose for following Allah.

All I can say is that this operation was brilliant! President Trump called it correctly, al Baghdadi was a whimpering, crying coward who blew himself up, with three of his own children, in a desperate act of self-inflicted terrorism. A fitting end to a monster.

RELATED ARTICLES:

With Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi’s Death, the Media Seem Determined to Have Their Reputation Join Him

The Future of ISIS After the Death of Baghdadi

Here’s How The CIA Learned About al-Baghdadi’s Whereabouts

Parents of Killed ISIS Hostage Praise Trump, Slam Obama

Ilhan Omar Slow to Acknowledge Killing of ISIS Leader, Posts Photo in CAIR T-Shirt

Lindsey Graham Credits Trump For Destroying the Caliphate, Killing ISIS Leader

Instead of Celebrating ISIS Leader’s Death, Pelosi Uses The Opportunity to Chide Trump

Will Senate Republicans Swallow Democrats’ Abortion, LGBT ‘Poison Pills’?

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

The Trump administration has made good on its promise to implement pro-life policies throughout the federal government, including in America’s foreign policy and in humanitarian aid.

But those advances could be dealt a crippling blow as a result of a compromise by Senate Republicans, who are cooperating with an underhanded attempt to stymie the administration’s efforts through controversial additions to must-pass appropriations bills.

The Trump administration’s Protecting Life in Global Health Assistance policy reinstated and expanded the Reagan administration’s “Mexico City policy,” which barred taxpayer funds from organizations that perform or promote abortions overseas.

In addition, the administration has expanded the availability of funding to pro-life and faith-based aid organizations that the Obama administration excluded from participation in programs at the U.S. Agency for International Development because of their views on abortion, marriage, and gender identity.

Over the summer, the White House and congressional leadership from both parties reached an agreement regarding the budget and appropriations process, including an agreement that neither side would include so-called poison pill policy riders that did not have bipartisan support.

Abortion-related amendments historically have been understood to clearly violate such agreements, and the inclusion of controversial language on sexual orientation and gender identity should also fall into this category.

But prior to the Senate Appropriations Committee’s Sept. 26 vote on the funding bill for the State Department and foreign operations, Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., threatened to offer an amendment reversing the Trump administration’s Protecting Life in Global Health Assistance policy.

In order to avoid a vote on this amendment, which could have passed the committee, Republicans on the panel agreed to add new language proposed by Shaheen to the bill.

That language, released just minutes before the scheduled committee markup, represents an attempt to work around the administration’s prohibition on international abortion funding by providing $665 million for “family planning and reproductive health care”—which would go to groups that promote abortion.

The new amendment, ultimately adopted as part of the final bill, also enshrines problematic language on sexual orientation and gender identity and hinders the administration’s efforts to expand USAID funding to pro-life and faith-based groups.

One provision requires the agency to inform Congress if any group that receives funding has been found to violate an Obama-era regulation interpreting sex discrimination as including sexual orientation and gender identity.

The Supreme Court is considering whether Title VII of the Civil Rights Act’s prohibition on sex discrimination includes sexual orientation and gender identity. This new language, if passed into law, could undermine the Justice Department’s argument in Harris Funeral Homes v. EEOC that Congress has not previously affirmed that reading of the law.

The Shaheen amendment also requires creation of a “shame list” by requiring reporting to Congress that would expose pro-life and faith-based recipients of USAID funding to complaints that they refuse to comply with Obama administration regulations requiring them to make referrals for abortion and endorse radical sexual orientation and gender identity ideology.

The Shaheen amendment is only one aspect of this troubling compromise by Senate appropriators, however.

The committee report attached to the bill, which contains instructions on how funds are to be used, recommends an increase in funding for the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and intersex portfolio in USAID’s Human Rights Division.

Countries found to engage in “official government discrimination” against LGBT individuals could lose access to USAID funding. It’s unclear whether that includes countries that define marriage as between one man and one woman or whose laws define sex as binary and biological.

Finally, the report requires creation of a pilot program to align women’s economic empowerment programs with global health programs that include family planning and reproductive health.

That appears to be an attempt to tie funding for programs such as the Women’s Global Development and Prosperity Initiative, which focuses on enabling women around the world to support themselves and their families, to promotion of and funding for abortion.

The Senate should uphold its end of the bargain made with the White House last summer. That stipulates no funding for abortion-promoting groups, no radical redefinition of marriage and gender, and no shady attempts to implement such policies through a process that’s meant to exclude them.

COMMENTARY BY

Andrea Jones

Andrea Jones is a research assistant in the Richard and Helen DeVos Center for Religion & Civil Society.

RELATED ARTICLES:

The False Hope of the Transgender Language Police

Bernie Sanders Promotes Abortion on Veterans Day, Wants to Turn VA Hospitals Into Abortion Clinics

A Note for our Readers:

With the demand for socialism at an all-time high among our young people—our future leaders and decisionmakers—the experts at Heritage stopped and asked a question that not many have asked:

Is socialism really morally sound?

The researchers at The Heritage Foundation have put together a guide to help you and our fellow Americans better understand the 9 Ways That Socialism Will Morally Bankrupt America.

They’re making this guide available to all readers of The Daily Signal for free today!

GET YOUR FREE COPY NOW! >>

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

PODCAST: This Student Stood Up for Mike Pence Amid Leftist Protests

/in , , , /by

“I Like Mike” was the campaign that Taylor University freshman David Muselman created when a few progressive students tried to keep Vice President Mike Pence from visiting campus.

The vice president had been invited to deliver the 2019 commencement address at the Christian college in Upland, Indiana. When the leftist students tried to block his visit, Muselman rallied the student body in support of Pence with the I Like Mike campaign, which spread like wildfire across campus.

In this episode of The Daily Signal Podcast, Muselman sits down to discuss how the campaign was created and why he chose to stand up for the vice president. Read the lightly edited transcript, posted below, or listen on the podcast.

Virginia Allen: I am joined by David Muselman, a student and proud conservative voice on his college campus at Taylor University in Indiana. David, thanks so much for joining me.

David Muselman: Thanks for having me, Virginia.

Allen: Earlier this year, Taylor University announced that Vice President Mike Pence would be their graduation speaker in May of 2019, and there was such a backlash from the students that it made national headlines.

The demand for socialism is on the rise from young Americans today. But is socialism even morally sound? Find out more now >>

Now, in response to this, you launched the “I Like Mike” campaign. This was a very bold move on your part as you were willing to stand up on campus and express your support for the vice president. Why did you decide to launch the I Like Mike campaign?

Muselman: Absolutely, and thanks for that question. That’s a great question.

But first and foremost, the day our president of the university announced Vice President Pence would be speaking at commencement, everybody was thrilled. I got text messages, I got phone calls, and everybody could not believe that the vice president would be coming to speak at our university in the middle of corn fields. It’s in Upland, Indiana, it’s in the middle of nowhere, and it’s an honor to have the vice president. So that was first and foremost, everybody was thrilled.

A day or two later, the very loud, outspoken minority on the campus freaked out a little bit. There was a girl who said she was actually shaking in fear, and there was another girl who said she was terrified at the fact that Mike Pence was coming to speak on our campus.

Then after those two instances, the, what I like to call, fake media took ahold of the story and really put articles out and put other stuff out in the media saying how much Taylor doesn’t want the vice president to come speak, does not appreciate what he does, and not value his commitment and service to our country.

So that’s from the outside looking in, that’s what everybody thought. Everybody thought Taylor was a place that did not want the vice president to come. From the inside looking out, that wasn’t the case at all. It was a loud, loud, loud minority of students who were not in favor, and in fact, a ton of people on campus really, really were excited for it.

So then that launched me into the idea of making these T-shirts. I made these T-shirts, they’re called “I Like Mike T-shirts.”

They had the vice president’s face in the middle of them, and it was so cool because … I went door to door and sold these T-shirts and a lot of people didn’t buy them at first. Then once our initial group of the people who bought them wore them around campus and got a picture, everybody wanted them.

From maintenance man, from technicians, from faculty to alumni … my phone was blowing up because … it was a FOMO, in a way, it was a fear of missing out. They all wanted to be a part of this I Like Mike campaign, so it was a great opportunity. The vice president actually met with us at commencement then.

Allen: Yeah, and I wanted to ask you about that. What was that like sitting down with the vice president, having really played an integral part of standing up on your campus and saying, “No, we want the vice president to come.”

Muselman: It was an unbelievable experience. Just having the vice president on campus is one thing, but then him being willing to meet with us and my team and the group of people that we worked with, it was humbling. You know, it was humbling.

I learned the week before that the vice president, it was not in the schedule to shake every person’s hand at commencement. He saw that and he said, “Hey, I’m shaking every person’s hand.” He didn’t have to meet with us, and he saw our article on Fox News and he said, “Hey, find those guys. I want to meet with them.” That’s just the man he is, and … I’m so thankful for that type of vice president in our country.

Allen: So what did you all talk about?

Muselman: It was awesome. He came in the room and there was probably 20, maybe a little more students. It was hard to get people back because the seniors couldn’t contribute because they were walking on the stage and a lot of seniors bought shirts. A lot of people left and so it was more the local crowd. But we were all starstruck when he came in. I mean, the vice president walking into the room was pretty humbling.

We talked a lot, we talked about a lot of stuff. He mainly talked about how thankful he was for the support and for us backing him, and we just told him how thankful we were because, really, a lot of us listening to the show even, we believe in those basic, biblically sound conservative values. But sometimes we’re not willing to stand up for those values, and Vice President Pence is an unbelievable example for standing up for those values. But then as well, is not just standing up, being willing to take the heat. Obviously, he’s taken a lot of heat in the past few years, but that’s just the man he is. He’s an unbelievable man.

Allen: Did you receive any backlash on your campus from launching the I Like Mike campaign?

Muselman: I wouldn’t say backlash, no. I did get a couple of dirty looks, and some professors don’t talk to me as much as they did because they don’t agree with what I agree with. But at the end of the day, who cares? That’s my opinion. I mean, who cares?

We got to stand firm for what we believe in, and at the end of the day, if they’re not willing to talk to us, or hang out with us, or even have a friendly conversation with us, what’s the point, you know?

Allen: Did you have a group of friends that you were all kind of launching this together, or did you really come up with this idea and spearheaded it on your own?

Muselman: It was actually my good friend named [Jerice Broyer] from Indiana. He came into my room and he said, “Hey, I have an idea. We got to make T-shirts.” I said, “No way. All right, I’m in.” And so his girlfriend’s dad designs T-shirts and stuff, and so I helped them. I edited all the T-shirts and stuff, and then I sold them all.

It was Jerice’s idea, so I mean, without Jerice, none of this would’ve happened. But it was awesome, going door to door to sell them.

Allen: Yeah, sounds like you all were … quite the team. That’s great. So what did you learn from this experience that you would like to share with other young adults?

Muselman: Yeah, other young adults, I would say don’t be scared of the other side, always remember that half the country voted for Trump, half the country voted for Vice President Pence. Over half the country shares the beliefs that we have. It doesn’t feel like that watching the news, it doesn’t feel like that watching the media. A Bible verse, I think it was Galatians 1:10, and it says, let me read it, is that all right?

Allen: Yes, that’s fine.

Muselman: It’s Galatians 1:10 and it says, “Am I now trying to win the approval of human beings or of God? Or am I trying to please people? If I were still trying to please people, I would not be a servant of Christ.”

So just bottom line, if the spirit is telling you to do something, or you feel that sense, or if you just have that gut feeling to do it, just do it. You know? Don’t think about the backlash.

We have it so easy in America and we are so blessed to live in the greatest country in the world, where in China and North Korea and other countries, it’s pretty hard. So we have it really easy and we got to remember that, and no matter what, you just got to do it.

Allen: Yeah, yeah. So David, you’re a finance major at Taylor and you have a few more years of school left, but has this experience led you to think that you might want to be more involved in policy or politics moving forward?

Muselman: I’ve got that question a lot in the last year, and as of now, I am going to stick with the business route. I’m trying to build a business, I want to do real estate with my brother. We’re best friends, we want to be real estate partners.

Allen: That’s awesome.

Muselman: But down the road, I mean, I would be interested if the situation would present itself. I’m not forcing anything, I’m going with the flow. But I’m going to start a business first and then we’ll see where the Lord takes me.

Allen: Yeah. Well, we certainly appreciate you standing up for freedom and for the vice president at Taylor, and we really appreciate your time here at The Daily Signal.

Muselman: Thank you so much, Virginia.

PODCAST BY

Virginia Allen

Virginia Allen is a contributor to The Daily Signal. Send an email to Virginia. Twitter: @Virginia_Allen5.

A Note for our Readers:

With the demand for socialism at an all-time high among our young people—our future leaders and decisionmakers—the experts at Heritage stopped and asked a question that not many have asked:

Is socialism really morally sound?

The researchers at The Heritage Foundation have put together a guide to help you and our fellow Americans better understand the 9 Ways That Socialism Will Morally Bankrupt America.

They’re making this guide available to all readers of The Daily Signal for free today!

GET YOUR FREE COPY NOW! >>

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

They Butchered ‘Star Wars,’ and I’m Not Hopeful for ‘The Rise of Skywalker’

/in , , , /by

Who knows? Maybe “The Rise of Skywalker” will bind all the tedious storylines of the first two “Star Wars” sequels into a cohesive and rewarding coda.

Then again, if the new trailer offers any clues—and as I understand it, this is the point of trailers—the movie looks like it will ratchet up the fan service in hopes of saving an incomprehensible mess.

If someone asked you to cogently explain the narrative of the sequel trilogy, could you honestly do it?

“The Last Jedi” has been on Netflix for months, and this lifelong fan—a fan who paid to see “The Revenge of the Sith” in theaters at least three times—hasn’t even been able to rewatch it once for free.

To put that in perspective, I would rather binge entire seasons of an English baking show than sit through a $300 million sequel to my favorite childhood movie.

It’s not only that I don’t care one whit about the plot, it’s that I don’t care one whit about the characters either.

Instead of the emperor, we have Snoke. Instead of Vader, we have Kylo. Instead of Luke, we have Rey. Instead of Han, we get both Finn and Poe. Instead of Yoda, we get Luke. Instead of R2-D2, we get BB-8. So on and so on.

Not one of the stand-ins, many of them portrayed by talented actors, are nearly as compelling as the originals, many of whom were portrayed by terrible actors.

These failures might be forgivable if the space opera made any sense. Instead, we are left to watch characters spin their hyperdrives while J.J. Abrams performs a mercy killing of one original character per movie.

May they rest in peace.

It’s just incomprehensible that they could mess this up so badly.

When I was 8 years old, I first sat in a movie theater and watched “Star Wars” (not yet “The New Hope”). It was probably the most exhilarating cultural experience of my youth.

The story, the effects, the sound were all light years ahead of anything a kid could imagine. Much of my time from then on was spent convincing relatives to buy me “Star Wars” figures.

I helped make George Lucas, who had famously kept the merchandising rights for his film, a zillionaire. And I guarded these toys with my life.

Until I was around 12, my dream was to own one of those expensive Kenner Millennium Falcons. (If I could get away with it, I’d buy one today.)

Learning that Vader was Luke’s father had real emotional impact on this 10-year-old. I’ve wasted more time reading “Star Wars” “novels” than I care to admit. (Why didn’t they just use the “Thrawn” trilogy as a basis for the sequels?)

Even in my 20s, I was still legitimately excited by the prospect of prequels. I remember waiting forever for the “Phantom Menace” trailer to load on my dial-up connection and watching those Lucas creations emerging from the fog.

It was a short-lived thrill, of course. Though the opening scene of “The Phantom Menace,” displaying the power and prestige of Jedi cult, held some promise, my heart soon began to sink as the story submerged into trade negotiations (possibly the most boring topic in the entire galaxy) and a discursive on midichlorians.

Why was Lucas wasting precious time explaining the genetics behind the Force? Why was he killing off the best characters (Qui-Gon Jinn and Darth Maul)?

All of this happened a long time ago and somewhere far away, and much of it should be left to the imagination.

But Lucas, freed of any oversight, had somehow managed to create prequels that were simultaneously excessively convoluted and insultingly unsophisticated.

So some of us blamed Lucas, whose wooden dialogue and problems with pacing were well known. Some of us had high hopes for Abrams, who had deftly rebooted the “Star Trek” franchise while preserving the sensibilities of the original show.

Some of us are constantly being disappointed. In the end, the most notable accomplishment of the sequels was making the prequels seem bearable.

I’m not completely bitter about the sale of Lucasfilm to Disney. “Rogue One” is one of the better films in the franchise. The animated shows are fun. And though many people will disagree, I find “Solo” preferable to either of the sequels or any of the prequels.

My expectations for “The Mandalorian” are far higher than they are for “The Rise of Skywalker.”

Maybe the big reveal of “The Rise of Skywalker” will make it all worthwhile, but I doubt it. The thing is, I can’t get myself to really care who Rey’s parents are because I don’t care about Rey or anyone else.

After a string of disappointments, I’m mostly just thankful the madness is coming to an end.

COMMENTARY BY

David Harsanyi

David Harsanyi is a senior editor at The Federalist and the author of “First Freedom: A Ride through America’s Enduring History With the Gun, From the Revolution to Today.” Twitter: .

A Note for our Readers:

With the demand for socialism at an all-time high among our young people—our future leaders and decisionmakers—the experts at Heritage stopped and asked a question that not many have asked:

Is socialism really morally sound?

The researchers at The Heritage Foundation have put together a guide to help you and our fellow Americans better understand the 9 Ways That Socialism Will Morally Bankrupt America.

They’re making this guide available to all readers of The Daily Signal for free today!

GET YOUR FREE COPY NOW! >>

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

Gaza 2040: If not incentivized emigration, what?

/in , , , /by

The current situation in Gaza—and the accompanying misery—are the direct result of the misguided attempt to foist statehood on the Palestinian-Arabs.

“…Arafat was sober, businesslike, almost in awe of the scale of the problems that he faces in turning this impoverished strip of land into the paradise that many of his people expect will come from self-rule.”  – Los Angeles Times, July 2, 1994 – On Yasser Arafat’s return to Gaza following the signing of the Oslo Accords.

“We predicted some years ago that Gaza would fast become unlivable on a host of indicators and that deadline is actually approaching even faster than we predicted — from health access, to energy to water.”  – Robert Piper, Assistant Secretary General of the United Nations Development Coordination, The Times of Israel, July 11, 2017.

“We cannot solve our problems with the same level of thinking that created them” — An aphorism attributed to Albert Einstein.

Over a quarter-century has passed since Israel first permitted the arch-terrorist, Yasser Arafat, access to the Gaza Strip in July 1994. He entered the coastal enclave in jubilant triumph to the cheers of thousands, who lined the streets and squares to welcome him. The mood of euphoria reflected the naïve optimism of the time, which, as some more sober souls warned, soon proved tragically unfounded.

Gaza: The ultimate indictment of the two-state prescription

Of course, it was a euphoria (read “myopia”) that was not confined to the Gazan side of the border. Thus, for example the Israeli foreign minister, Shimon Peres, widely considered the driving force behind the Oslo Process, was quoted at the time as expressing satisfaction with Arafat’s performance as a peace partner. According to Peres:

“The test is in the doing and as things have been done until now, things are going beautifully…Until now it must be said that of all the Palestinian leaders, Arafat … delivered the goods.”

Sadly, but not entirely unexpectedly—at least for those who opposed the Oslo process—life for the average Gazan has been in a steep downward spiral—particularly after the 2005 unilateral evacuation of the Strip by Israel.

In many ways, Gaza has become the ultimate indictment of the two-state, land-for-peace prescription. After all, after over two and half decades, despite almost unanimous international support and massive financial aid, the attempt to foist self-governance on Gaza has failed dismally. When it became clear that there was little chance of a bilateral, negotiated settlement, Israel embarked on a rash, ill-considered unilateral evacuation, razing all trace of Jewish presence—except for the synagogues, which the Gazan mobs swiftly desecrated and destroyed.

Diversion of resources from civilian sector to military

But rather than turn their energies towards developing their society and economy, the Gazans focused on devoting their resources and efforts to enhancing their abilities for aggression against Israel—with missiles and rockets, terror tunnels and fortifications.

This massive diversion of resources from civilian development to mustering military might h as had a severe effect on the Gazan man-in-the-street. I have written in some detail elsewhere on the grim conditions prevailing in Gaza—see for example here, here, here & here.  Accordingly, it will suffice here to point out that the gross misgovernment of Gaza has left the general population awash in untreated sewage flows, with well over 90% of the water supply unfit for drinking, electrical power available for only a few hours a day (despite Qatari dollars, now rumored to be drastically cut back), and unemployment rates soaring to anything between 40-60%–depending on the source cited or the sector involved.

The magnitude of this failure can be gauged from a detailed report by the Congressional Research Service entitled, “U.S. Foreign Aid to the Palestinians:”:

“Since the establishment of limited Palestinian self-rule in the West Bank and Gaza Strip in the mid-1990s, the U.S. government has committed more than $5 billion in bilateral economic and non-lethal security assistance to the Palestinians, who are among the world’s largest per capita recipients of international foreign aid.”

The futility of international aid

The report goes on to stipulate the intended objectives of this generous aid: “Successive Administrations have requested aid for the Palestinians in apparent support of at least three major U.S. policy priorities of interest to Congress: 

  • Promoting the prevention or mitigation of terrorism against Israel from…Hamas and other militant organizations;
  • Fostering stability, prosperity, and self-governance…that may incline Palestinians toward peaceful coexistence with Israel and a “two-state solution.”
  • Meeting humanitarian needs….”

Seen against the grim realities that prevail—and have prevailed unabated for decades, this aid has failed miserably in achieving any, and all, of its declared goals!

The motivation for terror attacks against Israel by Hamas and other Palestinian-Arab terror organizations has been neither prevented nor mitigated. Indeed, with Hamas still actively engaged in enhancing its offensive capacities and inciting violence on the frontier fence, there are few illusions in Israel that a further round of fighting is merely a question of “when”, not “if”.

Neither stability, nor prosperity, nor effective self-government have been in any way significantly fostered. Moreover, humanitarian needs have not been met in any meaningful manner. If anything, the opposite seems true. With the power shortages crippling the delivery of water supplies and sewage treatment, and undermining the regular operation of sanitation services, the entire civilian infrastructure system seems teetering on the cusp of collapse.

As the living conditions in Gaza deteriorate for all, except a privileged few, an increasing number of reports warn that the entire Strip will become unfit for human habitation in the foreseeable future—see, for example, here, here, and here.

Indeed, it should be pointed out that this dismal situation has been reached despite the fact that Israel is providing the hostile Gazans, whose leaders called on them to rip out the hearts of the Israelis and to eat their livers, with significant amounts of power and water—with the latter being constrained more by Gaza’s poorly maintained infrastructure rather than by any limits on Israeli largesse.

What fate Gaza?

This, of course, should concentrate minds on what fate awaits Gaza and Gazans in 15-20 years’ time.

Without getting embroiled in the polemics of what the precise population of Gaza is, in terms of broad approximations, most official estimates put the current population at around 1.85 million. With an estimated rate of growth just under 3% , the projected population will soon top 2 million. Whatever the real accuracy of these figures, the picture they paint is a dire one—the dwindling of already insufficient life sustaining resources and a rapid growth of the population consuming them.

So the question that must be addressed is: What can be done to avert the human catastrophe that almost inevitably will befall the hapless entity and its people?

This is no trivial matter, since the bilateral Oslowian negations have failed; the unilateral Disengagement has only exacerbated the situation; generous financial aid has not helped avert the impending disaster and the attempt to “manage the conflict”, rather than resolve it, has seen the enmity in Gaza evolve from being a terrorist nuisance to a strategic threat of dimensions unimagined when Israel abandoned it in 2005.

The Quarantine: Consequence, not cause

Of course, many of Israel’s detractors will attempt to lay the blame for this bleak situation on the “Occupation” and the “Siege”. But, this is merely a flimsy pretext, that is sounding increasingly hollow and must be rejected for at least three reasons.

Firstly, much of the hardship is created by intra-Palestinian in-fighting between Ramallah- based Fatah and Gaza-based Hamas.

Secondly, in large part, the crisis is a result of intra-Palestinian decisions regarding resource allocation and taxation. Several reports indicate that Hamas has deprived Gaza’s water production and sewage plants of electricity, opting to use the available power for other purposes—such as Gaza’s luxury hotels, which cater for the enclave’s wafer thin affluent class. Moreover, two years after “Operation Protective Edge”, high level Israeli sources revealed that Hamas was seizing up to 95% of the imported cement supplies entering Gaza for its own purposes, such as construction of terror tunnels.

Thirdly, the quarantine of Gaza is the consequence, not the cause, of Arab violence against the Jewish state. Accordingly, demands to remove it are inherently anti-Semitic since they imply Jews should die meekly and give their Judeocidal enemies unfettered access to their compliant victims.

Wide-spread desire to emigrate

This brings us back to the thorny question of Gaza’s future.

After all, in light of the repeated failure of all that has been tried, there seems little point in persisting with similar measures—unless of course one believes that, at some unspecified time, the Palestinian-Arabs of Gaza will, for some unspecified reason, and by some unspecified process, morph into something they have not been for over 100 years—and show no signs of morphing into in the foreseeable future.

But, what if such an unlikely metamorphosis fails to materialize? What then?

In light of the evermore harrowing living conditions and inclement prospects for the future, it is hardly surprising to learn that there is accumulating evidence that more and more Gazans desire to leave the Strip and seek their future elsewhere. It is this emerging propensity that holds the clue to arriving at the only conceivable policy that can allow the Gazan public to extricate itself from its increasingly daunting predicament.

In this regard, I have been repeatedly excoriated for suggesting that the only durable non-kinetic solution for Gaza that is consistent with Israel’s survival as the nation-state of the Jewish people, and that does not entail forcible expulsion of the Gazan population, is that of incentivized emigration to third party countries.

Such opposition is puzzling, since my proposal would appear to be consistent with the desire of a large section of the Gazan population. After all, polls conducted by a leading Palestinian institute consistently show that almost half (and occasionally more) of the Gazans wish to emigrate—even without there being any tangible economic incentives offered.

Gaza: What would Albert Einstein say?

The current situation in Gaza—and the accompanying misery—are the direct result of the misguided attempt to foist statehood on the Palestinian-Arabs.

It was Albert Einstein who reportedly remarked that one can not solve a problem with the level of thinking that created it.The problem of Gaza was, irrefutably, created by the belief that land could be transferred to the Palestinian-Arabs to provide them a viable opportunity for self-governance. Accordingly, the problem of Gaza cannot be solved by persisting with ideas that created it – i.e. persisting with a plan to provide the Palestinian-Arabs with land for self-governance. This concept must, therefore, be abandoned for any lasting solution to be possible.

Clearly then, persisting with humanitarian aid, as in the past, will yield essentially similar results to those of the past. Any improvements in the humanitarian conditions will be at best marginal, probably imperceptible.

The only real way to alleviate the humanitarian crisis in Gaza is to offer the Gazans what they really want – a better life elsewhere, out of harm’s way, free from the clutches of the cruel, corrupt cliques, who have lead them from disaster to disaster for decades.

Thus, rather than pouring millions into inoperative desalination plants and rusting sewage treatment works, the aid should be in the form of generous individual relocation grants to allow non-belligerent Gazans to seek a safer, more secure future elsewhere, outside the “circle of violence” that inevitably awaits them if they stay.

Indeed, if there is any other way—that has not been tried before and failed—to address the predicament in Gaza—i.e. an increasing population reliant on decreasing resources—I would be more than intrigued to learn of it.

© All rights reserved.

In Trump We Trust [+Video]

/in , , , /by

Now before you get your panties in a bunch, of course the supreme being rules over all. Having said that I shall carry on. It’s an amazing time to be alive. It’s great and proud to be an American once again. In Trump we Trust.  Support this man with everything you have or you will have nothing at all.

I Told You So

For those of you who follow my work, over 400 articles, several books, hundreds of speeches, dozens of media interviews and so on. You’ve heard me say it before. So here goes again. You have little faith. Stay the course. Trust the plan. There is one and it is unfolding exactly as it should. Timing and optics. Know this, we are winning. This is an intelligence battle. There will be no impeachment. They are all going down. Hearings, probes, investigations, indictments, prosecutions, sentencing. Prison, GITMO, executions and military tribunals. Marines activated. Q-QANON and other intel sources. Pedophilia the Achilles Heel of the deep state. Epstein. Global Financial Reset. Soon, IRS and Federal Reserve overhauled, controlled, restoring sound money and power back to the people.

Remember? It’s either us or them. Failure is not an option as this is the resurrection of America. The survival of our nation. A course correction for humanity. This one’s for all the marbles. Over 100,000 sealed indictments. FISA brings down the house. They are all going down. Comey, Strzok, Page, McCabe, Brennan, Clapper, Schiff, Pelosi and many many others. Corporate people. Political people. Media mouthpieces. Hollywood idiots. Royalty. Many abroad. All going down. Oh and yes as I have stated before and shall state again now, the Clinton’s, and Obama’s go down big time. This is Trump and the age of transparency. The Bushes for the most part are already under control. We get Trump for at least four more years. Oh, can you say Don Jr?

Donald J. Trump, the most loved man alive. Global support coming soon for Trump. Ending all wars. Repositioning the global Geo-Politcal landscape. Fake news. New media emerging. China, Tech giants, Banksters, Big Pharma have all met their match. Trump a most formidable challenge. Hit Trump? Attack Trump? Go after Trump? And the wrath of God will be your consequence.

A paradigm shift of gargantuan proportions is now underway. Some say “Trump you can’t handle the storm”. Nonsense. Trump is the storm and the storm is now upon us. Stay safe. Surround yourself with like minded people who truly understand the times and expand this circle of influence. Be strong. Seek truth. Speak truth. False Flags will escalate in frequency and in destruction. Be safe. Be prepared. Be vigilant. Trump. Never under estimate what one man can do. This is Trump and the resurrection of America. Rule of law President. Trump restoring power to the people. WWG1WGA.

Divine Intervention

Yes we have been given a chance in this brief breath in eternity to resurrect America. Do not squander this miraculous moment in our history.

As George Washington was divinely inspired and protected to form America, it is my belief that Donald J. Trump is divinely inspired and protected to resurrect America. Trump’s whole life has led him to this precise moment in time. There are no accidents. No coincidences. There are three things that cannot long be hidden, the sun, the moon and the truth. Get with the program. Be on the right side of history. It’s an amazing time to be alive. It’s great and proud to be an American once again. Thank you President Trump Thank you sir. We the patriots are with you. In Trump we Trust. Support this man with everything you have or you will have nothing at all.

Clarion Call

This battle will rage on for the rest of our lives. Pray for our President and his family. No Trump-no hope. What we do right here, right now is for posterity. So when your children and grandchildren ask you “What were you doing when the global governance was being thrust down the throat of America and the world, what will your answer be? Freedom, it’s up to U.S.

© All rights reserved.

VIDEO: What is going on with the various investigations in Washington?

/in , , , , , , /by

Posted by Eeyore

A little birdie told me we can consider the information in this video to be accurate.

GOP Enthusiasm Is Breaking Records

/in , , , , /by

Something happened last night that never happened before. The Sarasota Republican Club on Florida’s politically red coast sold-out a dinner with Republican Congressman Vern Buchanan, who is a regular speaker who has never sold out before. In fact, no Club event had ever sold out. The venue maxxed out at 120 guests — the most it could hold — and another 20-30 or more were turned away.

Sarasota is in the heart of Florida’s red Gulf Coast, but the overflowing dinner was anecdotal evidence of what is likely happening in much of the country. Impeachment is driving GOP enthusiasm to new levels.

GOP enthusiasm for the reelection of President Trump is sky-high. Part of it is Trump’s performance on conservative policies and willingness to punch back — something Republicans have been longing for since Reagan. But a substantial part is the utter insanity and blatant corruption being displayed not just by Democrats but by the entire left establishment from the media to the permanent bureaucracy. The swamp could not be revealed to be more swampier and people are seeing it who did not before.

This can be revealed in some numbers.

In Florida, the biggest battleground state, GOP voter registration has narrowed the Democratic lead to its smallest amount since 1972 — the first year such solid numbers were kept. Most likely, it is the closest since Reconstruction. The latest numbers from the Florida Division of Elections shows that there are 4.986 million registered Democrats in Florida, and 4.741 million registered Republicans, which is an ever narrowing gap. Democrats admit that the closing gap is of great concern because Republicans turn out at the polls in higher percentages than Democrats or independents.

Other states where Republicans are gaining on Democrats in voter registration include the large normally Democratic state of Pennsylvania, along with Kentucky and Louisiana, according to Governing.com. Nationwide, both major parties are seeing declines as independents continue to increase. But the Democratic decline is much sharper at 0.8 of a percentage point compared to Republicans’ 0.2 percent decline.

In fact, in Ohio, the next largest swing state, The Wall Street Journal reports that Democrat strategists are expecting to write the state off as no longer competitive. Democrats will be looking to flip back Michigan and Wisconsin.

Steve Schale, a Democratic strategist who led Obama’s 2008 Florida campaign, told the Miami Herald that party registration has become one of the best indicators of which candidate will win, particularly as the country becomes more polarized. Schale told the newspaper that if Democrats want to win, they need to significantly outnumber Republicans. And that is not happening.

“If more of them vote than us, and we have less of us, then we’re always going to be threading a needle,” he said.

Independents muddy this water some as that particular voting block, known as No Party Affiliation in Florida, now stands at 3.638 million — more than twice what it was in 2000. But independents broke for Florida Republicans at high rates in the 2018 election, which was a blue wave election nationally. Polls suggest that the antics of Democrats from AOC to impeachment to Sen. Elizabeth Warren are turning off more independents than Trump’s antics.

So what appears to be happening in these numbers is a mix of increasing Republican enthusiasm coupled with increasing numbers of people leaving the Democratic Party — for reasons that are probably obvious to our readers.

But it’s about a lot more than numbers. Enthusiasm is huge. Republicans had it in 2016 and Democrats had it in 2018. And it feels like Republicans have a lot more right now.

In the microcosm, that showed at the dinner speech last night for local Congressman Buchanan, who is targeted every year by Democrats and is again this year. There were a lot of first-time attendees, which goes straight to the enthusiasm metric.

This has been a trend at the Club which, in full disclosure, I am president of. Just this year, though, the dinners are showing a sharp uptick in attendance — and this is not even an election year yet. Seeing so many new faces suggests a broadening of GOP interest and support.

One last metric for the enthusiasm scale: Money. Trump and the GOP are raking in record amounts.

Politico reported that Trump and the Republican National Coalition have raised more than $300 million towards 2020. The Trump 2020 alone has $158 million cash on hand — more than any other sitting president at this point in the campaign cycle. Further, in just the past quarter, the Trump campaign has identified more than 300,000 new donors.

As long as the relentless attacks continue on President Trump by the Democrat Media establishment, clearly working in tandem with Democrat leaders in Congress — and it’s almost inconceivable to think they will not with impeachment as just the latest example — Republicans and Trump will continue getting stronger heading into 2020.

RELATED ARTICLE: Dear Glenn Beck: Stop Lying About Republicans And Obamacare

RELATED VIDEOS:

Democrats are LEAVING the Party in Droves!!!

Trump Fires Back at ABC Reporter for ‘Deceptive’ Question.

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

Omar: Dems Fight For Things ‘Most People Can’t Understand’

/in , , , , , /by

In an interview with The Intercept published Thursday, Rep. Ilhan Omar complained that Democrat lawmakers are so smart they’re burdened with “fighting about a lot of things” most voters “can’t understand.”

“I mean it’s the one thing that everybody accuses us of. We think we’re the smartest in the room,” she boasted. “We are very policy-oriented. We care about the details. Just today we were, you know, fighting about a lot of things that most people can’t understand, and there is that aspect of a [2020 Dem candidate Elizabeth] Warren that is exciting. She has a plan for everything.”

Her praise for Warren notwithstanding, Omar backs socialist Bernie Sanders for president, because “Sometimes you have to be reminded about the vision you truly believe in, and where your core values lie.”

Based on her short history in office, Omar’s core values appear to be socialism, sharia law, jihad, and anti-Semitism, not to mention (alleged) bigamy and immigration fraud.

Ilhan Omar

29 Known Connections

In a 2013 interview on the Twin Cities PBS show Belahdan, Omar mocked Americans for the anxiety they felt about Islamic terrorists: “When I was in college, I took a terrorism class…. The thing that was interesting in the class was every time the professor said ‘Al Qaeda’ his shoulders went up.” She then chuckled as she imitated the professor saying “Al Qaeda” and “Hezbollah.” “But you know,” added Omar, “it is that you don’t say ‘America’ with an intensity, you don’t say ‘England’ with an intensity. You don’t say ‘the army’ with an intensity. But you say these names [Al Qaeda and Hezbollah] because you want that word to carry weight. You want it to leave something…. It’s said with a deeper voice.” (See video)

During her tenure with the Minneapolis City Council from 2013-15, Omar acknowledged that she was a friend of several young men who had joined al-Shabab, a Somali jihadist terror group allied with al-Qaeda, several years earlier. “They were happy young men,” said Omar. “And then at some point, something happened. And that is what needs to be researched and studied. What is happening to make them feel disconnected from a community that has birthed them, that has nurtured them?”

To learn more about Omar, click on the profile link here.

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

Elizabeth Warren and the destruction of the West’s moral compass

/in , , , , /by

Elizabeth Warren has joined the likes of the antisemitic and anti Israel “Squad” and other members of the far left Socialist Democrats. Warren would cut or eliminate military aid to Israel the only U.S.ally in the middle-East if elected to the detriment of U.S. and Israel security.

This is the new Democrat party.

Elizabeth Warren and the destruction of the West’s moral compass

By Melanie Phillips

The Democratic presidential hopeful, Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, has suggested that she would consider cutting military aid to Israel to force it to halt construction of settlements in the disputed territories.

“It is the official policy of the United States of America to support a two-state solution, and if Israel is moving in the opposite direction then everything is on the table,” she said. To ensure that no one failed to understand her threat, she repeated her final phrase.

Her comment furnished more evidence that Warren resembles British Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn in her far-left and Israel-bashing views. This threatens to harm not only the sole democratic U.S. ally in the Middle East, but also the interests and security of America itself.

Read more.

 

Hillary Clinton — The Human Spittoon

/in , , , /by

Writer’s note: I wrote the following article last year, but it now appears that Hillary’s mental condition and pathological desperation have devolved. Just this week, she accused the leftist presidential candidate, Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI)––a combat veteran and Major in the Hawaii Army National Guard––of being a “Russian asset” groomed to ensure President Trump’s reelection.

Rep. Gabbard—also, according to Christopher W. Holton, is a “dangerous shill for the Ayatollahs––fired back with a scathing tweet: “Great! Thank you @HillaryClinton. You, the queen of warmongers, embodiment of corruption, and personification of the rot that has sickened the Democratic Party for so long, have finally come out from behind the curtain.”

Indeed, the twice-failed presidential candidate is the woman who as Secretary of State received $150 million from Russia after giving Putin 2O percent of U.S. Uranium––a key material of nuclear bombs. And let’s not forget that Bubba got $500,000 dollars for a 30-minute speech in Moscow amid the Uranium One deal and The Clinton Foundation got $145 million!

All of which dovetails beautifully into my thesis that Hillary is putty in the hands of powerful men who have used her for decades to enhance their own power, essentially spitting in her face when they’re through with her “services.”

ARTICLE FROM LAST YEAR

In Hillary’s cringe-producing appearances over the past year and a half––since she lost the U.S. presidency in 2016 to Donald J. Trump––she has offered upward of 38 excuses to rationalize her loss, which Amanda Prestigiacomo has documented here exquisitely.

Among those excuses were sexism, the mainstream media, the electoral system, the Democratic National Committee, the Democrat Party, suburban women, stupid Americans, technology, deplorables, and, laughably, that she was “too honest.”

You get the picture––a classic, clinical case of paranoia and delusional thinking.

Oops…did I say 38 excuses? Make that 39! At a Shared Value Leadership Summit in New York City this past April, Hillary told the audience that she lost because she was a capitalist!

Right…and Donald Trump won because he’s a Communist!

Oops…did I say 39 excuses? Here, lawyer and Fox News commentator Gregg Jarrett lists 56 of Hillary’s excuses…and counting!

Among that Mt. Kilimanjaro of Hillary’s excuses, Jarrett lists: racism, misogyny, James Comey, the FBI, Russians, Vladimir Putin, WikiLeaks, Barack Obama, Joe Biden, Twitter, Netflix, Chief Justice John Roberts, and The Drudge Report.

You get the picture––a classic case of Hillary’s pathological inability to look in the mirror!

Actually, the genuinely pitiful and self-deluding Hillary is so blind to her own behavior and so clueless about even the concept of accountability that she has spent her entire adult life not seeing what is obvious to literally everyone in the world!

Specifically, people don’t like when someone speaks one way and acts another. It is all well and good for this or that self-described feminist to talk about equality in the workplace, shared responsibility for raising children, and “woman power.” But everyone knows the following:

That Hillary’s “workplace” experience was a direct result of her husband’s position as, first, Governor of Arkansas, and second as President of the United States.

That their shared responsibility for raising their only child Chelsea fell largely to nannies.

That the woman power thing meant nothing in the face of the decades she spent tolerating her husband’s multiple affairs and humiliating abuse––and vilifying his victims!

Excuse No. 57 seems be that she was bullied in school…at least that’s the tale of woe she chose to tell a class of eighth graders when she gave the commencement speech at a tony San Francisco private school just a week ago.

Can excuse No. 58 be that Eleanor Roosevelt told her during one of Hillary’s famous séances that the election was rigged?

A SORDID HISTORY

Hill and Bill graduated from Yale Law School in 1973, married in 1975, and moved to Arkansas, where in pretty short order Bill won election as the Attorney General (from 1977-1979) and Governor of Arkansas (from 1979-1981 and 1983 to 1992).

During those years, Bill had a 12-year affair with singer and model Gennifer Flowers. Every day and every night of that affair, Bill was hurling saliva in the face of his wife Hillary, the human spittoon.

A spittoon, by the way, is a receptacle for spit, largely obsolete today, except for the human spittoon known as Hillary––the arch poster girl for literally more than four decades of non-stop spit abuse.

This is not an article about Bill Clinton’s testosterone levels or irresistible compulsion to seduce women other than his wife, but rather why any woman––particularly his wife––would withstand almost half a century of wiping saliva off her face and pretending that it’s raindrops.

My personal observation is that Hillary somehow realized––probably as a young girl––that there was something about her, both her personality and her character, that was strangely unlikable, even repellent and alienating. And that realization led her to conclude––accurately––that she could never actualize her far-left goals on her own without significant help from powerful men.

In 1973, fresh out of law school, she depended on a powerful man, Jerome Zeifman, a lifelong Democrat, to appoint her to the prestigious position of investigator on the Watergate Committee to impeach or fire President Richard Nixon.

According to Zeifman, however, he had to fire Hillary for a lack of ethics! “She was a liar, she was an unethical, dishonest lawyer [and] she conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality.”

THE SALIVA TSUNAMI

Zeifman spat in Hillary’s face… big time! But the very next year, she married Bill, ushering in a virtual lifetime of saliva!

Whatever Hillary claimed she was doing in Arkansas for women and children, it pales in comparison to the uncountable affairs her husband was having in plain sight––and the buckets of saliva she was wiping off her face every day and every night!

CNN, of all leftist and Clinton-supporting TV outlets, cataloged these “alleged” affairs and “non-consensual encounters” in elaborate detail. The very short list of those affairs, both in the “Natural State” and in Washington, D.C., were:

  • Gennifer Flowers: a 12-year affair.
  • Dolly Kyle Browning: Clinton’s high school friend reported off-and-on sexual encounters from the mid-1970s through January 1992.
  • Elizabeth Ward Gracen: Miss America of 1982.
  • Sally Perdue: Miss Arkansas of 1958.
  • Juanita Broaddrick, R.N.: Arkansas nursing home administrator who accused Clinton of rape in 1978.
  • Paula Jones, who said Clinton propositioned and exposed himself to her in 1991…he settled her lawsuit for $850,000.
  • Kathleen Willey (Democrat activist and White House volunteer who said that in 1993, Clinton grabbed and kissed her in the Oval Office’s private study.
  • Monica Lewinsky: White House intern whose affair with Clinton led to his impeachment.

In each and every instance of these extra-marital encounters––which occupied many many hours of his days and nights––Bill Clinton was hawking large globs of saliva in Hillary’s face. As if that were not enough humiliation, a 1995 biography “contained irrefutable evidence from one of their most trusted friends, Betsey Wright, who had been his chief of staff for seven years when he was the governor of Arkansas,” that Arkansas state troopers helped to solicit women for Bill. Of course, the White House put pressure on Wright to deny her account and she issued a statement saying she had been “misinterpreted.” But the author of the book insisted that he had cleared all the quotes with her in advance.

More telling is that in every single instance of Bill’s purported affairs, what did Hillary do? She sided with her abuser!

Was this dumb of Hillary? Pathetic? Cravenly political? Or, perversely, were Bill’s infidelities a turn-on for Hillary?

Indeed, one can speculate about motives, but some motives are crystal clear, as Kathy Shelton can tell you. In 1975, when she was 12 years old, according to journalist Bre Payton, Kathy was brutally raped by 41-year-old Thomas Alfred Taylor. Unfortunately for Kathy, Hillary represented Taylor and told the jury that young Kathy essentially asked to be raped.

According to reporter Alana Goodman, Hillary knew––and laughed about the fact––that Taylor was guilty at the time, but “used a legal technicality to plead her client, who faced 30 years to life in prison, down to a lesser charge.” She also laughed at the crime lab’s accidental destruction of DNA evidence that tied Taylor to the crime.

Some advocate for women and children! Even before Bill’s serial pattern of spitting in Hillary’s face, she was spitting in the face of a preteen rape victim!

NEW NAME FOR AN OLD PATHOLOGY

Women who spend their lives taking abuse from men––as Hillary has––is not a new phenomenon. All over the world, there are women in relationships with or married to men who spank them, beat them up, chain them, walk them around like dogs on leashes, and yes, spit on them.

Given Hillary’s lifetime of passively tolerating her husband’s non-stop, in-her-face spit-a-thon and her habit of blaming the women, I think it’s high time that The American Psychiatric Association considered including a new category in their bible of psychiatric disorders, the DSM––The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders––much like NPD (narcissistic personality disorder) or BPD (borderline personality disorder or ASPD (anti-social personality disorder).

The new category might be called HSTD––Hillary’s Spit-Tolerating Disorder.

Then again, the DSM already includes Sexual Masochism Disorder, which is a condition in which women actually get aroused “in response to enduring moderate or extreme pain, suffering, or humiliation.”

I could rest my case right here, but there might be another reason Hillary put up with an abusive husband.

THE ULTIMATE APHRODISIAC

Some women melt at the sight of an athlete. Others swoon at a guy who has M.D. or C.E.O. after his name. Yet others get stars in their eyes when they see a guy toting a big wad of cash.

But for other women, the biggest aphrodisiac of all is a guy they perceive as having power. Power in business, on Wall St., in philanthropy, in politics, in the mob. Guys who call the shots, who others genuflect before, who know what power is and how to use it.

I suspect that Hillary has always been a power junkie, and that she hoped her proximity to power would rub off on her.

But just like her cluelessness about losing the presidency to Donald J. Trump because of the 58- and-counting excuses she’s been spouting to anyone who will listen, she was equally clueless about winning the New York Senate seat because of the immense and genuine power and influence of Bill Clinton and about becoming Secretary of State under Barack Obama because of the immense and genuine power and influence of Bill Clinton.

What Hillary never “got” is that power is not heritable, not transferable, not something you get by osmosis just because it happens to be your particular fetish.

Perhaps the most pitiable thing about Hillary––other than the criminal indictment that is just down the road––is her almost childlike belief that if she weathered all the saliva that her husband and other powerful men hawked in her face, she would somehow inherit their power.

Can you imagine the massive vats of saliva Hillary would be receiving from dictators like Vladimir Putin (Russia) and Kim Jong-un (North Korea) and Recep Tayyip Erdogan (Turkey) and Bashar al-Assad (Syria) and Nicolás Maduro (Venezuela) and Mahmoud Abbas (the PLO) if she were the leader of the free world?

This is a woman who will go down in history as the very embodiment of a spit receptacle––a human spittoon. This is the woman who God, in his infinite wisdom and mercy, spared us from seeing as president!

END

Watch: THANK YOU for rebuilding our country! [+Video]

/in , , , , , /by

President Donald J. Trump traveled to Pittsburgh yesterday, where he spoke to workers in America’s booming energy sector at the Shale Insight Conference.

The last time President Trump spoke at the conference was on the campaign trail in 2016. Back then, American energy was under relentless assault—not from some foreign enemy, but from our own Federal Government. The previous Administration made it its mission to stifle growth with crippling regulations aimed at energy producers. These policies did nothing to advance “green energy,” but they did cost many workers their jobs.

American energy dominance is a powerful symbol of President Trump’s larger mission for our nation: “Instead of relying on foreign oil and foreign energy, we are now relying on American energy and American workers like never before,” he says.

“I’m here with the incredible people who fuel our factories, light up our homes, power our industries, and fill our hearts with true American pride,” he added. “With unmatched skill, grit, and devotion, you are making America the greatest energy superpower in the history of the world.”

Energy superpower is no exaggeration. Here are some of the facts and numbers behind America’s energy boom under the Trump Administration:

  • The United States is now the world leader in oil and natural gas production.
  • Crude oil reached a record high in production last year—and is projected to set another record this year.
  • Ditto for natural gas: Production is on pace to set a record high in 2019, the third straight year of such a record.
  • In 2018, coal exports reached their highest level in 5 years.

It wasn’t a mystery figuring out how to get America back on top globally—it just took a President willing to abolish the counterproductive war on American energy workers. The Trump Administration ended job-killing policies put in place under President Obama, like the Clean Power Plan and “stream protection rule.” It pulled America out of the fraudulent, ineffective, and one-sided Paris Climate Accord. And it has opened up federally owned land and offshore areas for exploration and production.

President Trump also believes in building world-class infrastructure that puts more Americans back to work—no matter what the far left tries to block. His Administration has approved permits for the crucial Dakota Access and Keystone XL pipelines, for instance.

Back in 2008, Democrats actually offered a startling preview of what was to come. “If somebody wants to build a coal-fired power plant, they can. It’s just that it will bankrupt them,” then-Sen. Barack Obama explained. He was telling the truth: By the time President Trump took office, more than a third of all coal mining jobs had vanished.

The left is at it again, but this time there’s even less pretending about their true motives. If implemented, the “Green New Deal” would be the most radical takeover of America’s economy ever contemplated. The ultimate goal is to eradicate all production of oil, coal, and natural gas in the United States—and millions of jobs along with it.

President Trump made clear yesterday that he will never let that happen. That’s because he knows who built this great country—and it wasn’t wanna-be socialists in Congress.

“I will never stop fighting for you, because I know that you are the ones who are rebuilding our nation. You are the ones who are restoring our strength. You are the ones renewing our spirit. And you are the ones who are making America greater than it has ever been before.”

Thanks to President Trump, the war on American energy is over.

Read: The President’s full remarks to energy workers in Pennsylvania.

On ‘Transphobia’ and the Sovietization of the West

/in , , , , , , /by

Posted by Eeyore

A recent event around Oxford is today’s stark yet lucid example of the Sovietization of the West. In this case, England, and more tragically, in the area with one of the brightest beacons of Greek civilization and the search for truth in World history, Oxford University.

Some people found stickers questioning the reality of the impossibility of men becoming women or women becoming men in any way beyond cosmetic. And the police got called.

The dictionary definition of man or woman today based on both ‘by definition’ standards as well as biological science, is perhaps not technically illegal. But as Stephen Coughlin explains in his paper, Neo-Marxist cultural changes drill down to politics and then to enforcement. Eventually to jurisprudence as normalization of the new culture sets in.

By definition standards in this case means we define humans as bipeds because nearly all of us walk on two legs and all of us by design walk on two legs despite any tragedy or malformation which may result in another means of locomotion. The same goes for being a man or a woman.

From The Telegraph:

A police force has been accused of “incredible irresponsibility” for treating the display of transphobic stickers around Oxford as a “serious crime”.

Some of the stickers, which have been dotted around the city centre, state: “Woman: noun. Adult human female” and “Women don’t have penises”.

Thames Valley Police has announced that those responsible could be charged with a public order offence and has appealed for witnesses.

It said: “Officers are investigating a large number of offensive stickers that have been placed across Oxford city centre containing transphobic comments.

“It is believed they started appearing in March within the High Street, Catte Street and Parks Road area.”

PC Rebecca Nightingale, the investigating officer, added: “Behaviour like this is not acceptable and we take incidents of this nature very seriously.”

Michael Biggs, Associate Professor in Sociology at the University of Oxford, suggested that the police had overreacted.

“This is literally the Oxford English definition of what a woman is,” he said.

“I can’t believe that needs any stance at all. To say that a dictionary definition is a terrible hate crime is extraordinary. The police is being incredibly irresponsible.”

To get back to reality for a stark second, ANY reaction is an over reaction. With the possible exception of littering or something but given the amount of Marxist or semi-Marxist propaganda one sees on every light standard or telephone pole, there should be no excuse for any reaction at all to a dictionary term.

Returning to this replacement for reality where truth is punishable and destructive fictions are rewarded, Michael Briggs has done an act of bravery beyond perhaps what he is aware of. Of it he is aware, he deserves all of our support. I could list all the professors we are aware of who have lost their jobs and/or been de-platformed for holding a factual position that runs against what is in fact, a full on assault against Western taxonomic systems, but Ill settle for just the one that was sent in today alone:

Did Mount Royal University cancel a geography field school taught by Mark Hecht because of an op-ed Hecht wrote about ethnic diversity?

[…]

Perhaps the cancelling of the Sustainable Europe school trip had more to do with the fact that the lead instructor was Mark Hecht.

Hecht, an instructor in the Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences at MRU, penned an op-ed in the Vancouver Sun on September 6th, 2019 entitled “Ethnic diversity harms a country’s social trust, economic well-being, argues instructor.” 

The article was met with immediate criticism on social media, with activists and journalists accusing Hecht, the Vancouver Sun and Postmedia (the Sun’s parent company) of bigotry, hate, and white supremacy. 

BC Human Rights Commissioner Kasari Govender declared Hecht’s article a “call to hatred”,  and NDP MLA Ravi Kahlon wrote a response op-ed, saying that Hecht’s piece was “racism and white supremacy wearing a thin disguise of academic bluster.”

I have not read Mark Hecht’s paper, but if this case is anything at all like the other profs who have been cancelled because they spoke a truth that was undeniable as factually correct and consistent with reality or a non-Marxist opinion,, (much like men are men and women are women and the twain meet every time a baby is required) he will be de-platformed for this little defence of free speech and reality. In Canada this is out of proportion to even the US in terms of profs who are fired or discriminated against for their opinions.

The case of Ricardo Ducherne is another perfect example of Sovietization of Western universities in Canada today. Prof. Ducherne is in fact Latin-American. So one tends to be skeptical of the White Supremacist label attached to him.

However he did commit the cardinal sin based on a Marxist model of what is allowed. He stated the fact that Western or European Civilization is the best system for humanity the world has ever seen.

That can be easily quantified in any number of ways of course. But the simplest one is that everyone tries to move into a Classical civilized country, while very very few move out of one to an African tribal one or an Islamic sharia one unless they have pretty extreme reasons. And as we saw with the Islamic State, most of them try and come back.

Perhaps its time someone placed some stickers around town that said:

Women = XX

Men = XY

That, would make for an interesting court case.

Eeyore for Vlad

Thank you Cathy F. and PePo.

RELATED ARTICLE: Elizabeth Warren and the destruction of the West’s moral compass.

EDITORS NOTE: This Vlad Tepes Blog column with video is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.