Tag Archive for: policy

MISINFORMATION WATCH: It’s Rob Reiner, Mia Farrow and Nancy Sinatra Who Hate Women

/in , , , , , , , /by

Misinformation is false or inaccurate information, especially that which is deliberately intended to deceive.

Disinformation is a subset of propaganda and is defined as false information that is spread deliberately to deceive people.

Malinformation or malicious information is having or showing a desire to cause harm to someone; given to, marked by, or arising from malice or malicious gossip.

In this Misinformation Watch article to expose mis, dis and malinformation we look at Rob Reiner, Mia Farrow and Nancy Sinatra. 

As JFK said,

The great enemy of truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest, but the myth – persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.

Rob Reiner and Nancy Sinatra

Rob Reiner in a tweet said that Republicans don’t respect women.

Nancy Sinatra agreed with Reiner and said she does not understand why any women are Republicans: “Yes, I have thought that for decades, and it’s beyond my comprehension why a woman, any woman would be a republican. Ever – unless she can’t read.”

Another woman tweeted this in response to Rob Reiner’s tweet:

This idea of women and respect is classic disinformation. It is a myth that supports the liberal ideal of mothers murdering their babies. Abortion is the bedrock of the Biden administration and those like Rob Reiner, Nancy Sinatra and Melissa Rosenstock who want others to believe that if you do not believe in mothers killing their unborn babies then you “hate” women.

Here’s the reality of abortion on the black community:

  • Abortion is the leading cause of death for African Americans, more than all other causes combined, including HIV, violent crimes, accidents, cancer, and heart disease.
  • Abortions are performed on black women at a rate 3.5 times higher than white women; black women have over 30 percent of abortions though they are only 12.6 percent of the population.
  • Over their lifetimes, black women average 1.6 more pregnancies than White women but are 5 times more likely to have a pregnancy that ends in abortion.
  • Approximately 360,000 pre-born black babies are aborted every year, nearly 1000 per day.
  • More than 16-million black babies have died by abortion since 1973.
  • The percentage of the black population in the U.S. has dropped from 12.6 percent in 2010 to 12.4 percent in 2020. The black population in the U.S. (41 million) has dropped precipitously below the Hispanic population (63 million), numbers that would be radically different had 16 million black lives mattered enough to society to protect them from abortion and raise them to fruitful adulthood.

You see it’s not Republicans who created the baby formula shortage, it is Biden and his administration. If mothers can’t get baby formula their babies’ heath is put at risk. So, ipso facto it is Democrats who hate women, particularly mothers with children.

What those who are against abortion are for mothers having their babies but if they don’t want or can’t support their babies give the baby away to another woman and mother who will take care of them.

Abortion is a zero sum game for the unborn. It is either life or death.

Democrats want death. Republicans want life and more and more babies born healthy, happy and ultimately good and prosperous citizens.

Abortion is a form of genocide particularly of minorities. You see if abortion is done away with then more black and Hispanic babies would be born. Democrats can’t have that happen, can they?

Democracy or Constitutional Republic

The Founding Fathers created via the U.S. Constitution a Republic. Their goal was to remove themselves from the aristocracy of the King of England and become free men by limiting the powers of the central government. The U.S. Constitution limits the role of the federal government and given each state powers over everything else that is not constitutionally allowed. The federal governments powers are limited and the states are empowered. America is the only nation with a Constitutional Republican form of government.

Finally Rob Reiner tweeted the following:

America is not a democracy it is a Constitutional Republic. John Adams, in The Letters of John and Abigail Adams, wrote:

“I do not say that democracy has been more pernicious on the whole, and in the long run, than monarchy or aristocracy. Democracy has never been and never can be so durable as aristocracy or monarchy; but while it lasts, it is more bloody than either. … Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself.”

Rob Reiner and Democrats want to establish an a democracy where the majority rule and the minority obey. Democracy is worse than either an aristocracy or monarchy. Biden and his administration is feverishly working to turn America into a democracy, which is now wasting its people, exhausting itself in debt and murdering future generations via abortion.

Adams warned:

“It is in vain to say that democracy is less vain, less proud, less selfish, less ambitious, or less avaricious than aristocracy or monarchy. It is not true, in fact, and nowhere appears in history. Those passions are the same in all men, under all forms of simple government, and when unchecked, produce the same effects of fraud, violence, and cruelty. When clear prospects are opened before vanity, pride, avarice, or ambition, for their easy gratification, it is hard for the most considerate philosophers and the most conscientious moralists to resist the temptation. Individuals have conquered themselves. Nations and large bodies of men, never.”

Mia Farrow

Sharia Law applies to the followers of Mohammed. Muslims believe that women are necessary but must be controlled. Sura 33:59 of the Qu’ran reads,

“O Prophet! tell thy wives and daughters, and the believing women, that they should draw over themselves some of their outer garments (when in public): that is most convenient, that they should be known (as decent women) and not annoyed.

Wearing a full covering over their bodies is a symbol of obedience to Allah. Muslim groups like the Islamic State and the government of Afghanistan have firmly implemented this Sura.

Responding to Reiner’s tweet Mia Farrow tweeted that Republicans “would be happy to impose Sharia laws [on women].”

They’d be happy to impose Sharia laws

— Mia Farrow?? (@MiaFarrow) May 12, 2022

Here’s a Mia Farrow tweet this in June of 2015

Remember that on March 20th, 1854 in Ripon, Wisconson the Republican Party was founded on the platform to end slavery. Former members of the Whig Party met to establish a new party to oppose the spread of slavery into the Western territories. According to History.com:

The Republicans rapidly gained supporters in the North, and in 1856 their first presidential candidate, John C. Fremont, won 11 of the 16 Northern states. By 1860, the majority of the Southern slave states were publicly threatening secession if the Republicans won the presidency. In November 1860, Republican Abraham Lincoln was elected president over a divided Democratic Party, and six weeks later South Carolina formally seceded from the Union. Within six more weeks, five other Southern states had followed South Carolina’s lead, and in April 1861 the Civil War began when Confederate shore batteries under General P.G.T. Beauregard opened fire on Fort Sumter in South Carolina’s Charleston Harbor.

Here is a recent article about a Muslim family:

Muslim Family convicted of Modern Day Slavery in Virginia

AsAm News:

A federal jury convicted a family in Richmond, VA of holding a Pakistani woman in forced servitude for 12 years, the Department of Justice recently announced.

Zahida Aman, Mohammad Nauman Chaudhri and Mohammad Rehan Chaudhri will face sentencing for conspiracy to commit forced labor. In addition, the jury convicted Aman of forced labor and document servitude, and defendant Rehan Chaudhri of forced labor….

Aman is said to be 80 and her son Mohammad Nauman is 54 and her other son Mohammad Rehan is 48….

One neighbor called news of the conviction disturbing. The Jones family told WRIC it never suspected or witnessed any abuse inside the home.

According to WTVR, the victim was related by marriage. Prosecutors say they kept her as a slave. True Crime reports the mother arranged the marriage between the victim and a third son who also lived in the home. Two years later, that son moved to California, but his wife stayed behind. They had four children together who lived in Virginia.

quotes those passages in the Qur’an that allow for human slaves:

Slavery is acceptable in Islam. The Qur’an has Allah telling Muhammad that he has given him girls as sex slaves: “O prophet, indeed, we have made lawful to you your wives to whom you have paid their dowries, and those whom your right hand possesses of those whom Allah has given you as spoils of war.” (Qur’an 33:50)

Muhammad bought slaves: “Jabir (Allah be pleased with him) reported: There came a slave and pledged allegiance to Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) on migration; he (the Holy Prophet) did not know that he was a slave. Then there came his master and demanded him back, whereupon Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) said: Sell him to me. And he bought him for two black slaves, and he did not afterwards take allegiance from anyone until he had asked him whether he was a slave (or a free man).” (Muslim 3901)

Muhammad took female Infidel captives as slaves: “Narrated Anas: The Prophet offered the Fajr Prayer near Khaibar when it was still dark and then said, ‘Allahu-Akbar! Khaibar is destroyed, for whenever we approach a (hostile) nation (to fight), then evil will be the morning for those who have been warned.’ Then the inhabitants of Khaibar came out running on the roads. The Prophet had their warriors killed, their offspring and woman taken as captives. Safiya was amongst the captives. She first came in the share of Dahya Alkali but later on she belonged to the Prophet. The Prophet made her manumission as her ‘Mahr.’” (Bukhari 5.59.512) Mahr is bride price: Muhammad freed her and married her. But he didn’t do this to all his slaves:

Muhammad owned slaves: “Narrated Anas bin Malik: Allah’s Apostle was on a journey and he had a black slave called Anjasha, and he was driving the camels (very fast, and there were women riding on those camels). Allah’s Apostle said, ‘Waihaka (May Allah be merciful to you), O Anjasha! Drive slowly (the camels) with the glass vessels (women)!’” (Bukhari 8.73.182) There is no mention of Muhammad’s freeing Anjasha.

What is most interesting is that Mia doesn’t tell you is the history of Arabs who are currently holding elected positions in the U.S. House of Representatives and their religious affiliations.

If Mia is worried about Shariah law coming to America she needs to look at the beliefs of Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib, who recently put forward the Palestinian Nakba resolution condemning the Jewish state of Israel.

Here’s the most current list of U.S. Representatives and their religious affiliations from Wikipedia.

House of Representatives

Picture Representative
(lifespan)		 Arab or Middle Eastern ethnicity Party State Term start Term end Notes
Rep. Graves Garret Graves
(born 1972)		 Lebanese Roman Catholic Republican Louisiana January 3, 2015 Incumbent
Rep. LaHood Darin LaHood
(born 1968)		 Lebanese Catholic Republican Illinois September 10, 2015 Incumbent
Rep. Crist Charlie Crist
(born 1956)		 Lebanese Methodist Democratic Florida January 3, 2017 Incumbent
Rep. Kihuen Rubén Kihuen
(born 1980)		 Lebanese Catholic Democratic Nevada January 3, 2017 January 3, 2019 Retired
Rep. Mucarsel-Powell Debbie Mucarsel-Powell
(born 1971)		 Lebanese Catholic Democratic Florida January 3, 2019 January 3, 2021 Lost reelection
Rep. Omar Ilhan Omar
(born 1981)		 Somali Muslim Democratic Minnesota January 3, 2019 Incumbent
Rep. Tlaib Rashida Tlaib
(born 1976)		 Palestinian Muslim Democratic Michigan January 3, 2019 Incumbent
Rep. Bice Stephanie Bice
(born 1973)		 Iranian Christian Catholic Republican Oklahoma January 3, 2021 Incumbent

©Dr. Rich Swier. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: ‘Pools Of Blood’: Authorities Shut Down Abortion Clinic For Endangering Patients

The Truth About Liberal Policies

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

Many thanks to Laser List member Jeff Walyus for this fantastic rhetorical approach.  I have found it enormously helpful on many occasions.

The truth about liberal policies is that they hurt people.  Let’s look at just the latest examples.

The New York Times made an astounding admission in November. Democrats run the show in Illinois, California, and New York, and have for decades, but blue states are doing worse than red states in many key respects: lack of affordable housing, disparities in education funding, rising economic inequality – all things liberals and Democrats profess to care about and for which they claim to have all the answers.  The New York Times was brutal in its assessment of blue state results:

… blue states are the problem.  Blue states are where the housing crisis is located.  Blue states are where the disparities in education funding are the most dramatic.  Blue states are the places where tens of thousands of homeless people are living on the streets.  Blue states are the places where economic inequality is increasing most quickly in this country.  This is not a problem of not doing well enough.  It is a situation where blue states are the problem.

Let’s take a closer look at one of those blue states, Washington, out on the Left Coast.  America’s schools are following in the footsteps of Seattle to indoctrinate students on racial equity. But Seattle’s efforts to teach racial equity and ethnic studies have been marked by animus, lies, and worsening results.  Academic achievement as measured by state test scores went down after instruction on “power and oppression” was emphasized over math in 2018.  Pass rates for whites and blacks both dropped.  The response of the schools?  More ethnic studies and less math.  Despite having equity programs for decades, Seattle schools had one of the worst black-white student achievement gaps in the nation, as of 2017.  Liberal policies did not make things better.  They made them worse.

Another admission comes from a liberal book author who worked on progressive causes in San Francisco.  Like other west coast cities, San Francisco adopted policies that enabled homelessness, drug dealing, and crime.  All the problems he set about to solve got worse, instead.  He pins the blame on the liberal mindset that labels people victims and makes excuses for their destructive behavior.  San Francisco is where Walgreens closed 15 stores because shoplifting there is so bad and the penalties for it have been reduced.  Do you suppose the people who walked to those stores for their prescriptions are better off now?

Liberals have pushed Child Tax Credits, food stamps, and super-sized Obamacare subsidies, but a recent report shows people can make more from these programs than from work.  These programs disincentivize work and allow people to stay home and not return to the work force.  Maybe, if you’re a Democrat politician, you like the idea of making people more dependent on government and, thus, on you.  But any normal person can see this is not a healthy development and it’s unsustainable.

Democrats want to massively increase federal spending on transportation which they view as systemically racist.  But more mass transit and fewer cars will hurt the poor.  A study found that cars provide urban households with better access to jobs and economic opportunities than other forms of transportation.  Cars reduce neighborhood poverty exposure by 3 to 4 percent.

Liberals love the teachers unions, but collective bargaining agreements for teachers produce worse outcomes for students, especially minority students.  Liberals also love rent control, but it’s well-known rent control produces housing shortages because it destroys the incentive to build new housing.

Rising homelessness.  Out-of-control shoplifting.  Worse educational outcomes.  Fewer economic opportunities.  Not only do liberal policies not work, they actually hurt people.  In their impulse to make a perfect world and end all human suffering, liberals end up making things worse.  This is why you should not support them, no matter how good they make things sound.  They might be good at dazzling rhetoric, but they’re terrible at good governance.  Which would you rather have?

Visit The Daily Skirmish

©Christopher Wright. All rights reserved.

DeSantis blasts Biden, calls inflation a ‘huge problem,’ pledges gas tax relief

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

Nobody is fighting harder for the American people than Governor Ron DeSantis. DeSantis is taking on the Biden Administration at every turn, as he prepares for a possible run at the presidency in 2024. If President Trump can’t run for POTUS in 2024, than Governor DeSantis is unquestionably our candidate. And the Democrats should be very concerned about Joe Biden sharing a debate stage with the great governor. #DeSantis2024!

DeSantis calls inflation a ‘huge problem,’ pledges gas tax relief

By Local10.com, November 22, 2021

Gov. Ron DeSantis said Monday that the state legislature will pursue gas tax relief for Florida residents, calling inflation a “huge problem.”

At a news conference Monday morning in Daytona Beach, accompanied by the state’s Department of Transportation Secretary Kevin J. Thibault, DeSantis placed the blame on “inflationary policies out of Washington.”

“The price of a Thanksgiving dinner is up over 20% just over last year,” DeSantis said. “I think what’s most dramatic, because it affects most people in their daily lives, is gas prices going up.”

The average price for a gallon of regular unleaded gasoline in the state jumped 10 cents in the middle of last week to $3.36, according to the American Automobile Association, the highest price at any point since September 2014. It sat at $3.35 on Monday morning, six cents below the national average of $3.41.

https://twitter.com/GovRonDeSantis/status/1462810131624779776?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1462810131624779776%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fgellerreport.com%2F2021%2F11%2Fdesantis-blasts-biden-calls-inflation-a-huge-problem-pledges-gas-tax-relief.html%2F

RELATED TWEET:

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column 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: Is Biden Going Soft on China?

/in , , , , /by

The first few weeks of Biden’s presidency has seen the rollback of several Trump-era policies that put pressure on China. But while Chinese leaders may feel relieved, the United States has received nothing in return for the gradual easing of tensions.

President Biden consistently refers to China as a “competitor.” This language is quite a bit softer than former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s labeling of the Chinese Communist Party as “the central threat of our times.” Gordon Chang notes that it is difficult to compete when we know our competitor is cheating. When President Biden talks about competing with China on technological advancements, “That sounds fine, but China steals somewhere in the neighborhood of $500 billion worth of U.S. IP each year,” Chang said on Washington Watch. China’s persistent theft of intellectual property makes it impossible to compete fairly with.

Several of President Biden’s early executive orders have directly benefitted China, while exposing Americans to risk. Chang cites several concerning examples. “President Trump, with an executive order, barred China from supplying equipment to our electricity grid. In other words, that prevents China from committing sabotage. And that’s not a theoretical concern when it comes to the grid. Yet Biden, in an executive order, repealed that Trump era protection.”

President Biden has also failed to take the spread of Chinese propaganda on America’s college campuses seriously. There are around 60 Confucius Institutes still operating in American colleges, and though they purport to simply teach Chinese language and culture, they are not to be taken lightly. Chang points out that Confucius Institutes are “run by the Communist Party’s United Front Work Department, which is this part of the Communist Party which tries to subvert foreign countries. So really what we’ve got here is propaganda on our campuses.” The U.S. does not develop propaganda programs in Chinese colleges, so why should we let them do so here?

The day before the Trump administration left office, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo took perhaps the administration’s most significance stand against China by officially calling the Chinese’s government abuses of Uyghur Muslims genocide. Secretary of State Antony Blinken initially affirmed Pompeo’s finding that the Chinese government was committing genocide in Xinjiang. However, we have yet to see the administration indicate it has plans to do anything about it. Chang says, “when you talk about genocide, we’ve got to remember that the U.S. is a party to the Genocide Convention of 1948, which requires every country to stop genocide. And I don’t hear any of that language from the Biden team so far.”

Genocides always loom large in history. If the administration does not consider China’s genocide to be a priority now, future history texts books will ask why. In America’s dealings with China, history will remember how the Biden administration reacted to China’s heinous human rights abuses.

Ultimately, the threat that China poses to the free world makes it more than a competitor. As the world’s second most powerful country, China has been flexing its diplomatic and political muscles at the United Nations and the World Health Organization to the detriment of democratic societies. The Chinese government is guilty of an ongoing genocide of a religious and ethnic minority. Not to mention China’s imprisonment of political dissidents, crackdown on churches, and mass surveillance of its people.

As China grows more powerful, it has the capacity to compel others to do what it wants. That is worrying not because China is a competitor, but because the Chinese government has no respect for democracy, rule of law, or basic human rights. Smaller countries with less resources struggle to stand up to China. If the United States does not lead the way in doing so, no one will.

COLUMN BY

Arielle Del Turco

Assistant Director of the Center for Religious Liberty

Arielle Del Turco serves as Assistant Director of the Center for Religious Liberty at Family Research Council, where she is responsible for international religious freedom policy and advocacy efforts. Through research and analysis of international religious freedom matters, she helps craft effective policy solutions along with coordinating FRC’s advocacy on this issue. Arielle’s work has appeared in the USA Today, National Review, Jerusalem Post, Washington Examiner, CBN News, The Federalist, The National Interest, Christian Post, The American Conservative, Daily Signal, and Townhall. She has conducted a number of media interviews on international religious freedom, and has herself interviewed key advocates and victims of persecution. She holds a bachelor’s degree in Politics and History from Regent University, and is currently pursuing a master’s degree in International Relations.

EDITORS NOTE: This FRC-Action column with video is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

President Trump Grows the Fastest Economic Recovery in U.S. History

/in , , , , /by

Despite the Democrat lockdowns, riots, looting, widespread crime and violence — the American people want what’s right, decent and good.

The fastest economic recovery in U.S. history

Under President Trump, America built the strongest economy the world has ever seen. The stock market broke records, the unemployment rate dropped to its lowest level in half a century, and income inequality fell as blue-collar jobs returned to our country.

Then, as a pandemic from China spread across the globe, President Trump made the difficult but necessary decision to shut the economy down to slow the spread of COVID-19.

Now, as we safely reopen, our economy is surging back faster than anyone predicted:

  • America added over 9 million jobs from May through July—beating market expectations three months in a row. President Trump’s historic, bipartisan relief package alone is estimated to have saved over 50 million jobs.
  • Retail spending has fully recovered and is now at an all-time high.
  • Industrial production rose for the third straight month in July, with factory output up 3.4 percent last month after a 5.7 percent surge in June.
  • The NASDAQ and S&P 500 stock indices are trading at or near record highs once again, lifting Americans’ 401(k)s.

That result is no accident. After the financial crisis more than a decade ago, it took America over four years to regain 9 million lost jobs. But following the Coronavirus shutdown, it took the Trump Economy only a few months to do just that.

“We had such a strong foundation that we’re recovering much faster than anybody anticipated,” President Trump said at a news conference on Saturday.

In addition to pro-growth, pro-worker policies long before the crisis—including tax cuts, deregulation, renegotiated trade deals, and more—President Trump responded to the pandemic by using the Defense Production Act to lead the greatest mobilization of American industry since World War II.

The Trump Administration has exercised the DPA and related authorities 78 times so far, dispersing over $3.5 billion to speed the development and manufacture of essential materials here at home. President Trump mobilized the productive power of General Motors, for example, to create thousands of ventilators for Coronavirus patients.

As a result, GM repurposed its Kokomo, Indiana, plant in just 17 days. It has now produced over 21,000 ventilators.

Other companies, including Ford Motor Company, GE, 3M, and Puritan Medical have partnered with the Federal Government to ramp up production of everything from N-95 masks to testing swabs. This nationwide effort is boosting American manufacturing, creating jobs, reshoring supply chains, and replenishing our Strategic National Stockpile.

“New factories, businesses, and laboratories are being built all over America to match our Nation’s demand for personal protective equipment, pharmaceuticals, drugs, testing supplies, therapeutics, and vaccines,” President Trump said.

President Trump’s “Made-in-America” strategy is crucial for defeating this virus, important for restarting our economy—and essential for restoring our country’s promise.

RELATED ARTICLE: We have rebuilt America’s Strategic National Stockpile

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

Will President Biden Give Pro-Constitution Americans Any Assurances?

/in , , , , /by

My latest at PJ Media:

If Joe Biden is sworn in as president on January 20, 2021, and all the polls are telling us he absolutely has it in the bag, he will swear on that day to “preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States,” so help him, you know, the thing. But no matter what mandate the Democratic Party propaganda machine known as the American media, and the farce known as mail-in voting, can give the affable grifter, roughly half the country will still be absolutely unwilling to go down the path of managed decline, internationalism, and socialism that a Biden administration promises to give us.

Can Biden offer the Americans who really do want to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution any assurances?

Take, for example, the Second Amendment, Americans’ final safeguard against tyranny. Will Biden pledge not to appoint Beto O’Rourke, who vowed, “Hell, yes, we’re going to take your AR-15, your AK-47,” to any position in which he actually would be able to disarm Americans and leave them defenseless in an age of ever-escalating antifa and Black Lives Matter violence?

Also in regard to security, Biden has vowed, on his first day in office, to remove what he calls Trump’s “Muslim ban,” which in reality is a travel ban on thirteen countries, eight of which are Muslim, that cannot or will not provide accurate information about prospective immigrants. Biden excoriated this travel ban as “vile” and characterized it as “Donald Trump’s assault on black and brown communities in this country.”

If he does indeed become president and scraps this travel ban on his first day in office, what safeguards will he put into place to ensure that jihad terrorists and others who wish to harm Americans (“black and brown” ones as well as those of other hues) will not take advantage of his hospitality? Migrants, including the Boston Marathon bombers and the San Bernardino shooters, murdered and maimed Americans during the Obama administration. What will Biden do to reassure Americans that this sort of thing won’t happen again?

There is much more. Read the rest here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Palestinian Rutgers Prof Spins Vehicular Jihad Attack as “Car Accident”

Nigeria: Muslims murder wife, mother, all children and other relatives of one Christian, 13 people in all

Syrian Government Enraged That Kurds Intend to Sell Kurdish Oil

UK: Illegal Muslim migrants given VIP treatment and filling hotels on taxpayer dime

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

Is it better for people to mingle and allow them to be infected with COVID-19?

/in , , , , , , /by

There are numerous national, state and local policies that require, and in some cases laws, that require Americans to self-quarantine and for businesses to shut down in order to reduce the spread of the Wuhan Flu also known as COVID-19.

I have now lived thru four pandemics.

According to the U.S. Center for Disease Control they are:

  1. 1957 – 1958 Pandemic (H2N2 virus)
  2. 1968 – Pandemic (H3N2 virus)
  3. 2009 – H1N1 Pandemic (H1N1pdm09 virus)
  4. 2019 – Cronavirus Disease of 2019 (COVID-19 or Wuhan Flu)

This is the first time in my lifetime that Americans have been required to self-quarantine and businesses to shut down.

In my county Sarasota, state of Florida and the United State and World wide as of July 4, 2020:

Cases overview
Sarasota County
Confirmed
1,707
Recovered
–
Deaths
98
Florida
Confirmed
190K
+11,458
Recovered
–
Deaths
3,702
+18
United StatesUnited States
Confirmed
2.89M
+50,445
Recovered
872K
Deaths
132K
+273
WorldwideWorldwide
Confirmed
11.2M
+212K
Recovered
6.03M
Deaths
528K
+5,134
QUESTION: Is it better to allow people to be infected with COVID-19?

There are three categories of COVID-19 infections:

  1. A-symptomatic infections. Those who have the COVID-19 virus but show no symptoms. This group has the antibodies that resist COVID-19.
  2. Symptomatic infections. These are people who are hospitalized and require medical care to recover. Some must be placed in an Intensive Care Unit (ICU) before they recover and are released.
  3. Those who die because of COVID-19. This group of people are most likely suffering from other physical anomalies that weaken their bodies auto immune system.

This CDC chart shows the infection rates in America by age:

Age Group Cumulative Rate per 100,000 Population
Overall

102.5
     0-4 years

8.9
     5-17 years

4.0
     18-49 years

62.6

  18-29 years

34.7

  30-39 years

62.5

  40-49 years

98.6
    50-64 years

155.0
    65+ years

306.7

  65-74 years

222.5

  75-84 years

370.1

  85+ years

573.1

The idea is to allow people to become infected means that those infected will most likely recover and have the necessary antibodies to all them to resist COVID-19 and remain healthy.

Why haven’t we shut down America for previous pandemics?

ANSWER: Bad politics and bad science.

Jon Miltimore in an article titled Modelers Were ‘Astronomically Wrong’ in COVID-19 Predictions, Says Leading Epidemiologist—and the World Is Paying the Price reports:

Dr. John Ioannidis became a world-leading scientist by exposing bad science. But the COVID-19 pandemic could prove to be his biggest challenge yet.

In a wide-ranging interview with Greek Reporter published over the weekend, Ioannidis said emerging data support his prediction that lockdowns would have wide-ranging social consequences and that the mathematical models on which the lockdowns were based were horribly flawed.

Ioannidis also said a comprehensive review of the medical literature suggests that COVID-19 is far more widespread than most people realize.

“There are already more than 50 studies that have presented results on how many people in different countries and locations have developed antibodies to the virus,” Ioannidis, a Greek-American physician, told Greek Reporter. “Of course none of these studies are perfect, but cumulatively they provide useful composite evidence. A very crude estimate might suggest that about 150-300 million or more people have already been infected around the world, far more than the 10 million documented cases.”

So, if COVID-19 is far more widely spread then why don’t we stop the lockdown and allow Americans to get back to work?

Dr. Ioannidis stated:

“Major consequences on the economy, society and mental health” have already occurred. I hope they are reversible, and this depends to a large extent on whether we can avoid prolonging the draconian lockdowns and manage to deal with COVID-19 in a smart, precision-risk targeted approach, rather than blindly shutting down everything. Similarly, we have already started to see the consequences of “financial crisis, unrest, and civil strife.” I hope it is not followed by “war and meltdown of the social fabric.” Globally, the lockdown measures have increased the number of people at risk of starvation to 1.1 billion, and they are putting at risk millions of lives, with the potential resurgence of tuberculosis, childhood diseases like measles where vaccination programs are disrupted, and malaria. I hope that policymakers look at the big picture of all the potential problems and not only on the very important, but relatively thin slice of evidence that is COVID-19.”

Under President Trump our hospitals have the necessary equipment and personnel to deal with COVID-19.

Blue States lead the nation in COVID-19 deaths

Jon Miltimore in an article titled Blue States Have Been Hit Much Harder by COVID-19. Why? reports:

Eleven of the 12 states (including the District of Columbia) with the highest COVID-19 fatality rates are traditional blue states. Leading the way, unsurprisingly, is New York, which posted the highest deaths, total (31,346) and per capita (1,611 per 1M).* New Jersey is not far behind New York, however (1,478/1M). These states are followed by Connecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and the District of Columbia. Just one red state—Louisiana, seventh highest with 680/1M—cracked the top twelve.

[ … ]

The question is, why?

After all, blue states tended to have the most stringent lockdowns. Indeed, eight red states—Arkansas, Iowa, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Oklahoma, Utah and Wyoming—declined to issue stay-at-home orders at all (though some took less severe measures).

None of these states were among the states hardest hit by COVID-19.

CONCLUSION

As more people mingle more will become infected, however more will survive with the antibodies needed. As more people are tested for COVID-19 we will have more positives results for the virus. Most of those tested positive will recover completely from the virus.

So, is it better to allow people to mingle and get infected or not? This is a personal decision on each American. Government should not be mandating. Rather government should get out of  the way.

If you have symptoms of COVID-19 go to the hospital. If you don’t feel well because you have the flu, or any other notable social diseases, stay home.

©All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

The History Of Influenza Pandemics By The Numbers

The History Of Influenza Pandemics By The Numbers

Blue States Have Been Hit Much Harder by COVID-19. Why?

Pavlovian Politics

/in , , , /by

We have all seen people on both sides of the political aisle use catch phrases routinely in response to political topics, but it seems the Democrats have honed this skill to razor sharpness. For example, in her recent “60 Minutes” interview, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) was asked by Anderson Cooper if she thought President Trump was a racist, to which her reflexive response was, 

“Yes, no question. When you look at the words that he uses, which are historic dog whistles of white supremacy, when you look at how he reacted to Charlottesville incident where neo-Nazis murdered a woman, versus how he manufactures crisis, like immigrants seeking legal refuge on our borders, it is night and day.”

Her response seemed almost robotic. I found her use of words like “dog whistles,” “white supremacy” and “manufactures crisis” illuminating as if she had been programmed to use such expressions on command, kind of like Pavlov’s dog. Say a certain word or ask a question, and the person begins to salivate automatically. Frankly, it’s kind of scary.

The expression “dog whistles” is particularly interesting as it is now commonly used by the Left to denote how they believe conservatives respond. Now I will admit I have seen Republicans use catch phrases, such as “Lock her up” and “CNN sucks,” but I have found conservatives more inclined to engage in honest debate as opposed to Democrats trained in Pavlovian responses.

Do you want to stop a left-wing Democrat in his/her tracks? Just tell them you have voted for a Democrat in the past, as you thought the person was the right candidate for the job, and then ask if they ever voted for a Republican. A wild-eyed expression comes over their face and they are at a loss for words.

I had a Democrat friend who recently told me point blank, “I will never go to any meeting where a Republican is speaking.” So much for open-mindedness. I also guess I will not see him in any of my audiences any time soon.

What I am finding with Democrats is there is less courteous debate and more conditioning in terms of talking points. Whenever I get in an argument with them, I feel I am dealing directly with MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow or CNN’s Don Lemon, et al. Interestingly, if you ask them to explain their rehearsed talking points, they are at a loss. This speaks volumes about the power of the main stream media. Further, they tend to turn up the volume as if you cannot hear them. I have found both young and older Democrats becoming excessively passionate and less inclined to hear opposing views, thereby emboldening them to attack their opponents.

Now there is a movement in the media to label Republicans as racist, hate-filled liars. This is all being done as a prelude to the 2020 elections to condition their constituents to believe Republicans are evil and must be eliminated. Through the use of identity politics, the media is creating stereotypes intended for character assassination. I don’t think Hitler could have done it any better.

As to racism, let us never forget not one Republican ever owned a slave. In fact, the Republican Party was created to abolish slavery (anyone remember a guy named Lincoln?). The Left conveniently overlooks the fact that the Ku Klux Klan and Jim Crow laws were all Democrat inventions, and somehow try to blame the Republicans for their creation. Nothing could be further from the truth. Nonetheless, by training people to repetitively chant “Racist, Racist, Racist,” they are hoping people will develop a reflexive action against the Republicans.

By religiously parroting the talking points of the Left, the Democrats have become a party of lemmings controlled by the news media who has plotted them on a course to tear their opponents apart. More likely though, they will end up in the abyss.

Keep the Faith!

RELATED VIDEO: Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) 60 Minutes interview with Anderson Cooper

EDITORS NOTE: This column with images is republished with permission. All trademarks both marked and unmarked belong to their respective companies. The featured photo is by Charles Deluvio 🇵🇭🇨🇦 on Unsplash.

New Republican Party: The Red, Purple and Parchment Troika

/in , , , /by

In my column New Democrat Party: The Red-Green-Rainbow Troika we took a look at the Democratic Party and how President Obama has fundamentally changed it by forming political alliances, creating a Troika. The members of the Red-Green-Rainbow Troika are certainly strange bedfellows but politics makes for strange bedfellows.

Now let’s look at the Republican Party.

Who has fundamentally changed it, why and is it for the better or worse? Who are members of the New Republican Party Troika (NRPT)? These are questions that may help voters understand what happened during the presidential primary of 2016 and what will happen in the lead up to November 8th.

Just like the Democratic Party, the GOP is make up of a Troika. The Republican Troika consists of three major factions:

  1. Conservative Republicans (a.k.a. the reds). These are the Grand Old Party elite (GOPe). They joined the party after the Goldwater years and have gained in power and prestige due to their unwavering party loyalty. They normally vote the Republican ticket.
  2. Republicans In Name Only (a.k.a. the purples or RINOs). These are individuals who joined the Republican party solely to win a political seat or appointment. A perfect example is former Florida Governor, former Republican and now Democrat Charlie Crist. The purples do not hold conservative values, rather they change as does the weather in the Sunshine State. The RINOs will not necessarily vote for the Republican ticket. Some have joined movements to undermine Republican nominees for president dating back to the days of Barry Goldwater.
  3. Constitutional Conservatives (a.k.a. the TEA Party). They embrace the parchment upon which the Constitution and Bill of Rights are written and signed by the Founding Fathers. This group includes Libertarians.

What differentiates these three factions is their commitment to “conservative values”, which are defined differently by each faction.

Arizona Republican Senator Barry Goldwater and presidential candidate in his book “The Conscience of a Conservative” wrote:

I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution, or that have failed their purpose, or that impose on the people an unwarranted financial burden. I will not attempt to discover whether legislation is “needed” before I have first determined whether it is constitutionally permissible. And if I should later be attacked for neglecting my constituents’ “interests,” I shall reply that I was informed that their main interest is liberty and that in that cause I am doing the very best I can.

This statement, to many Republicans, defines Conservative values at every level of government. The idea of limited government as envisioned by the Founders and enshrined in the Constitution. States rights are paramount and trump efforts to impose government laws and regulations upon the population.

But not all members of the Troika embrace Goldwater’s statement. For you see there has been no true Conservative leader of the Republican Party since Ronald Reagan. How do we know? The American Enterprise Institute’s  in a column titled A reality check about Republican presidents measured the growth of government (i.e. regulations) over the past fifty years. Murray writes:

…I think it’s useful to remind everyone of the ways in which having a Republican president hasn’t made all that much difference for the last fifty years, with Ronald Reagan as the one exception.

First, here’s the history of the most commonly used measure of growth in the regulatory state, the number of pages in the Federal Code of Regulations.

murray_05132016

We can fairly blame LBJ’s Democratic administration for the initial spike in regulations, and Jimmy Carter’s years saw another steep rise. But using number of pages as the measure understates what happened during the Nixon years, when we got the creation of the Environmental Protection Agency and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, plus much of the legislation that gave regulators the latitude to define terms such as “clean” or “safe” as they saw fit.

After the Carter years, the slope of the trendline was shallowest in the Reagan and Clinton administrations (with the Clinton result concentrated in his second term, when a Republican House imposed a moratorium on some new regulations). The increase during the Obama years remained on the same slope as the one during George W. Bush’s years. And if you’re thinking about the Democrats’ most egregious regulatory excess, Dodd-Frank in 2010, recall that Sarbanes-Oxley passed in 2002, when Republicans controlled both the House and the Senate.

I should add that presidents don’t bear a lot of blame for failing to reduce regulation — their power to restrain the activities of the regulatory agencies is limited — but neither has electing a Republican president done any good, with Reagan as a partial exception.

Read more.

With the GOP nominee process ending and Donald Trump as the nominee, what has changed? Who is now the leader of the GOP?

Many would say Trump, as the nominee, will be driving the policy and politics of the Republican Party. However, their are those who write and speculate that their remains an internal discord within the party between one of the three factions. The most likely faction to cause this discord are the purples/RINOs. The other two factions have begun uniting behind Trump.

Ayn Rand wrote, “The uncontested absurdities of today are the accepted slogans of tomorrow. They come to be accepted by degrees, by dint of constant pressure on one side and constant retreat on the other – until one day when they are suddenly declared to be the country’s official ideology.”

What are the uncontested absurdities of the Republican Party elite? Here’s a short list:

  1. Fear. Republican elites fear being called out by Democrats, the media and at times by fellow Republicans. The fear is palpable.
  2. Political correctness. Republicans succumb to the pressures of being politically correct (see #1 above).
  3. Compromise. Republicans are prone to compromise their values when it is unnecessary or by dint of constant pressure from the Democrat Troika. Compromise is the art of losing slowly. Something the GOPe is accustomed to.
  4. Elitism. The Republican elite (GOPe) has consistently ignored the voices of primary voters in 2008, 20012 and in 2016.
  5. Old guard career politicians. The old guard is not focused on retaining the core values of the party of Abraham Lincoln, rather it is focused on winning re-election.
  6. Lack of leadership. The GOP has controlled Congress for the past 4 years yet has failed to stop the agenda of the Democrat Troika. The leadership of McConnell/Boehner and now McConnell/Ryan have failed to make headway.
  7. Politics by press release. Republicans have become the party of the press release. They send out press statements that sound good on the surface but seldom become political reality, law or have an impact on public policy or Main Street Americans.
  8. Ignoring the base. The GOPe believe they can win presidential elections with old guard, politically correct, compromising, career politicians.
  9. Going along to get along. The best way to win re-election is to go along with the GOPe and Democrats. Shutting down the government to keep from increasing the national debt or reducing the size of government spending goes against the grain of the GOPe.
  10. The GOPe eats its own. The GOPe in the name of items #1-#9 will attack candidates and elected Republicans. Moderate means purple.

So what’s the solution to all of these Republican absurdities? As Newt Gingrich wrote in an article in The Washington Times on January 8, 2016 titled “Donald Trump”:

You’re sick of politicians, sick of the Democratic Party, Republican Party, and sick of illegal’s. You just want this thing fixed. Trump may not be a saint, but doesn’t have any lobbyist money influencing him, he doesn’t have political correctness restraining him, all you know is that he has been very successful, a good negotiator, he has built a lot of things, and he’s also not a politician, so he’s not a cowardly politician. And he says he’ll fix it. You don’t care if the guy has bad hair. You just want those raccoon’s [rabid, messy, mean politicians] gone. Out of your house!

Donald J. Trump has changed the political paradigm. Will the purples follow or become the thorn in the side of Trump. That is the question.

lincoln quote

RELATED ARTICLES:

House Republicans to Move Forward on Spending Without a Budget Number

An Economist Explains Why America Is Moving Toward Totalitarianism

List of Attendees for Zuckerberg’s Facebook Meeting are all Members of #NeverTrump Movement

How the Democrats Destroyed Detroit, Milwaukee, Newark and St. Louis

/in , , , /by

Discover the Networks has updated its profiles of those cities under long term Democratic leadership. The updated profiles are of the cities of Detroit, Milwaukee, Newark and St. Louis.

Here are excerpts from each updated profile with a link to the full analysis of failed leadership in each city:

Detroit’s Decline Under Democratic Leadership

Detroit, now synonymous with failure and decline, was once the emblem of American progress and prosperity. As the late biographer and scholar Matthew Josephson observed in the 1920s: “Nowhere in the world may the trend of the new industrial cycle be perceived more clearly than in Detroit. In this sense it is the most modern city in the world, the city of tomorrow.” University of Michigan historian Jeffrey Mirel puts it this way: “Throughout the 1920s, Detroit was the shining star of the new era, the very center of the American economic universe, where capitalism and technology combined to produce the greatest goods for the greatest numbers.”

Read the full profile.

Milwaukee’s Decline Under Democratic Leadership

The city of Milwaukee was once a prosperous, thriving metropolis. For years it was the world’s foremost beer-producing city, and home to four of the largest breweries on earth (Schlitz, Blatz, Pabst, and Miller). Almost every major American brewery, in fact, had at least one factory in Milwaukee. These employed thousands of local residents in jobs that formed the foundation of the city’s middle class. Other major corporations in the city during the first half of the twentieth century included the A. F. Gallun & Sons leather tanning company; the machinery manufacturer Allis-Chalmers; the heavy-mining equipment producer Bucyrus Erie Company; the Falk Corporation, producer of industrial power transmission products; the electrical component maker Cutler-Hammer; and the A.O. Smith Corporation, a major manufacturer of automotive frames.

Politically, Milwaukee has not had a Republican mayor since 1908.

Read the full profile.

Newark’s Decline Under Democratic Leadership

The city of Newark, New Jersey has been led exclusively by Democrat mayors for the past 81 years. The entrenched power of the Democratic Party is reflected in the near-unanimous support its candidates receive from Newark voters in political elections on every level. For example, in the 2009 gubernatorial race, Newark voters cast 90.2% of their ballots for Democrat Jon Corzine, vs. just 8.3% for Republican Chris Christie, the ultimate statewide winner. Similarly, in the 2004 presidential election Democrat John Kerry received 85.9% of the vote in Newark, far outpacing Republican George W. Bush’s 12.8%. And in the 2008 presidential election, Democrat Barack Obama captured 90.8% of the Newark vote, vs. 7.0% for Republican John McCain.

Read the full profile.

St. Louis’s Decline Under Democratic Leadership

During World War II, St. Louis, Missouri was a bustling place replete with factories that produced such necessities as ammunition, uniforms and footwear, K-rations, chemicals and medicines, and even aircraft. Soon after the war, in 1949, began an era of Democratic rule that continues in the city to this day. Indeed it has been 65 years since a Republican was elected as mayor of St. Louis. This entrenched Democratic dominance is reflected in the fact that in each of the past three U.S. presidential elections, voters in St. Louis cast between 80 and 84 percent of their ballots for the Democrat candidate.

Between 1940 and 1970, St. Louis was one of the major destinations for the millions of blacks who migrated away from the rural South to take advantage of newly opened job opportunities in Northern cities. During this 30-year period St. Louis’s black population nearly tripled, fromapproximately 108,000 to more than 317,000. By 1970 it was a majority-black city—a fact that, in light of the overwhelming degree to which African Americans identify as Democrats, would have immense political implications for the city and its future.

Read the full profile.

These profiles show the failures of policies embraced by the Democratic Party over time. They are a harbinger of things to come in other cities and towns.

Deceptive Reporting on Donald Trump Exposed

/in , , , /by

AUSTIN, Texas /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Brad O’Leary, publisher of TheOLearyReport.com, former NBC News Radio/Westwood One talk show host, author of the The United States Citizens’ Handbook and former feature writer for USA Today Weekend magazine. Brad is calling out online publication BearingArms.com about contributor Bob Owens’ deceptive post. Find Brad’s response below and on TheOLearyReport.com:

A newspaper in the UK, called The Telegraph, is trying to fool people by claiming expertise on the Second Amendment.

They begin their article as if they are supporters. They do not remind their readers that the Second Amendment came about because the British Government tried to disarm our American colonists in our Revolutionary War, which was the spark that started the Revolution.

They do not tell their readers that the Second Amendment was based on British freedoms guaranteed in the Magna Carta.

Nor do they admit that a few years ago when the British Parliament stripped British citizens of those same rights, that they as a newspaper completely supported that effort.

Nor did they tell their readers that every reporter and researcher working on the story is a committed anti-gunner. You might say that I am guessing at this and I am.

When the American newspaper USA Today did a week of front-page new stories on gun-ownership in America, they began the first story with an apology. They usually try to have reporters who are balanced in their opinion, but they could not find a single reporter on their paper that supports the ownership of guns or had even fired a gun. If that is what happens in America, I consider it to be proof that in England it would be worse.

The Telegraph article ranks four tiers of supporters, with the lowest tier being against the Second Amendment. I do not object to whom they put in that lowest tier, but I object to whom they put in the third tier. They listed four Republicans who they claim hardly support the Second Amendment, Kasich, Trump, Carson and Christie. That would be really wishful thinking on the part of a bunch of gun-banners pontificating on freedoms that they stripped themselves of in the hope influencing Americans, who might follow and strip themselves of the same freedoms.

The most outrageous person that they put in that group who should be ranked in the top tier of Second Amendment supporters is Donald Trump. Before you gasp and tell me that is not what you have heard in the American media coverage, let me tell you some things that they could have told you but they haven’t:

  1. Donald Trump is the first presidential candidate in the history of American politics who said that he would sign concealed-carry reciprocity when Congress passes the Bill. It is true that the other candidates have made clear what they think about concealed-carry based on what they did in their own states or are willing to do in Congress but none have said that I will sign reciprocity Federal Bill into law.

Now I cannot tell you the ins and outs of how far all the other candidates go to support the Second Amendment but Trump has left no doubt that:

  1. He would allow military troops, bases and recruiting centers to be armed.
  2. He would see that the Federal government and FBI create an instant, accurate and fair list of criminals, including mentally defective people to deny them of ownership of guns.
  3. He would not sign into law any gun and magazine bans.
  4. He would enforce all of the Federal gun laws on the books and bring back a NRA supported Federal Law enforcement program called Project Exile, which was opposed by Rahm Emmanuel, Hillary Clinton, President Barack Obama and Eric Holder. They want guns banned. They do not want felons, drug dealers, rapists and murderers who use a gun in the process of a crime to be incarcerated for five years in Federal prison because they think it is a waste of Federal money.
  5. He wants to fix a broken mental health record system. And that effort is opposed by the American Psychiatric Association and by the board members of the legal drug cartel known in America as the pharmaceutical industry, who would prefer that Americans lockup their guns in a safe than lock up the drugs that are in their medicine cabinet.

Why would we (and you) allow gun-banners and extremists like the managers and reporters of The Telegraph spew ignorance and deceive readers by disseminating their deceptive “researched” information sourced from so called Conservative or pro-gun sources who are actually their own insiders pretending to be pro-gun experts?!

RELATED ARTICLE: Why gun laws miss the mark – The Orange County Register

Dear Millennials, the Dems are Screwing You

/in , , , , /by

At what point does the millennial generation wake up and realize that their love affair with the Democratic Party has been one-sided? While the Democrats have benefitted enormously from millennials’ overwhelming support of their brand in national, state and local elections, the affection has gone unrequited. Granted, the Democrats talk a big game about the youth of America, but it’s what they’re actually doing to younger Americans that matters. In nearly every significant policy arena the modern, far-Left Democratic Party is pushing policies that will undoubtedly jeopardize the futures of young Americans working hard to make a better tomorrow.

Conservative activist, former Reagan administration official, and nationally-syndicated radio host Mark Levin’s new book Plunder and Deceit is a thorough examination of the ideological and legislative assault on young Americans. The book uses extensive data points and a second-to-none analysis to make the case that the modern Democratic Party’s allegiance to liberal ideology on the social front, and to tax-and-spend economics on the fiscal front, is selling out young Americans. It is a must-read for young Americans who are looking to escape the Democratic Party’s deceptive, focus group tested talking points and looking to find the truth.  Additionally, the book is a must-read for Americans of all ages who want to understand, and be able to explain to open-minded young Americans, the danger we are in if we fail to correct our course.

What is perhaps most disturbing about this disconnect between what the modern Democratic Party says to young Americans, and what it does to them, is that it’s not simply that the Democrats are failing to help the youth in our society, but that they are deliberately harming them. After reading Levin’s book and being reminded of the grave economic future being created by the Obama administration, their congressional allies, and weak-knee’d Republicans too cowardly to fight back, I wonder where young Americans think the money to pay off the growing national debt, which is equal to the value of everything the country produces, is going to come from? There is no significant difference between annual deficits, accumulated government debt, and taxes coming out of your pocket, absent the time preference. And the modern Democratic Party prefers to burden young Americans with the debt and spending they are accumulating right now, rather than to govern responsibly, due to their continued quest for the consolidation of government economic power. This allegiance to the broken economics of unsustainable government debt, is not just failing to provide young Americans with the promised “hope and change,” but it is unquestionably doing significant damage to the potential prosperity of young Americans hoping for a bright economic future.

Facts matter and the facts are not on the side of the modern Democratic Party. The laws of both arithmetic and economics dictate that all debts both public and private must be paid. Those debts are either paid by the debtor, who fulfills his obligation to pay back the debt, or the creditor, who unwillingly pays the debt himself when he fails to receive the money he loaned back from the debtor. There is no third way, these are the only options. With these hard facts in mind, it’s clear there are only a couple of options for young Americans going forward if we do not begin to control the federal government’s profligate spending. The first option for young Americans is a future of confiscatory tax rates so high that they will choke off any chance that they can live economically prosperous lives in an increasingly shrinking private sector future. Our unsustainable and growing national debt, with its entitlement promises and grim discretionary spending outlook, will strangle private sector opportunity in favor of public sector thievery.

The second option is just as disturbing for young Americans. The federal government can simply ignore its accumulated debt obligations and fail to repay its creditors, both foreign and domestic. This disastrous scenario would destroy the economic credibility of the world’s greatest supporter and dramatically increase the cost of debt in the future. Young Americans need to understand that this means that their car loans, their home loans, their credit card interest rates, and any other attempt to finance their lifestyles, or their futures, with debt will be dramatically more expensive than it was for their parents. You can thank the big spenders in elected positions in our government for this disparity between what your parent’s lifestyle was, and what yours is going to be.

Yes young America, you are being screwed, big time. It’s easy to make the faux “tough choices” to pile on government debt today, when cowardly politicians, and their silent opposition, anchor the costs of those “tough choices” to my children and yours, who will pay for them for decades.

For the sake of the country and its future, I am hoping that Levin’s book becomes the centerpiece of a long overdue national discussion about what our real “priorities” are as a nation. I refuse to accept that the greatest country in the history of mankind, when confronted with the hard facts in Levin’s book, will choose the route of a profligate present, and a bankrupt future for their children, rather than a responsible present and a prosperous future.

RELATED ARTICLE: Nearly Half of Millennials Say the American Dream Is Dead. Here’s Why.

RELATED VIDEO: Why the GOP Sucks at Courting Millennials: ‘The Selfie Vote’ Author Kristen Soltis Anderson

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the Conservative Review.

America Must Rethink Its Immigration Policy

/in , , , , /by

It is high time for the American people to finally wake up and stop spending so much time trying to be politically correct.  Politicians must stop obsessing about winning the next election and begin to focus on what’s best for America, especially in light of what happened last week in Chattanooga, TN.

Last week, a naturalized American citizen from Kuwait killed five members of our armed forces. Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez, a 24 year old Muslim, was brought to the U.S. by his parents when he was six years old.  He also retained Jordanian citizenship by his parents being from Jordan.

Within the intelligence community, Abdulazeez is what is called a sleeper.  There are not only sleeper individuals in the U.S.; but one of law enforcements greatest fears is the “sleeper cells” in the country.  Sleeper cells are terrorists in waiting.  They are awaiting instructions to become active; but until such an order is issued, they are to assimilate into American society and stay below the radar of law enforcement (as Abulazeez seemed to have done).

Because it is unknowable how many sleeper cells or individuals are in the U.S., it is now time to shut down the border and to implement a three year moratorium on all immigration; and this includes foreigners wanting to attend university in the U.S.

We can no longer be the dumping ground for everyone seeking political asylum or a better life.

We must immediately cease from allowing immigrants from Muslim countries, period.  We must immediately cease from allowing immigrants into the country who have no marketable skills to bring to the U.S.  Family reunification should have absolutely no place in our future immigration policy.

Becoming an American citizen is a privilege not a right.  America should not have to apologize for putting stringent conditions on who is eligible for citizenship.  We can no longer allow foreigners to depress wages for Americans and to continue to allow Fortune 500 companies to import cheap labor at the expense of citizens.

If the shooting in Chattanooga didn’t scare the hell out of Americans, maybe these immigration trends will.

According to the Institute of International Education’s “Fields of Study of Students from Selected Places of origin 2013-14, “127,332 student visas were granted to students from 43 predominantly Muslim countries (14% of all student visas issued).”

The top five countries receiving visas were:  Saudi Arabia (53,919), Iran (10,194), Nigeria (7,921), Indonesia (7,920), and Kuwait (7,288).  This total of 87,242 represents almost 70% of all student visas issued from Muslim countries.  This would explain why Arabic is the fastest growing language on college campuses.

According to the Modern Language Association (MLA), “Enrollment in Arabic classes grew 127% nationally.”  The MLA listed Arabic as the 8th most popular language learned in American institutions of higher education in 2013.

What rational person or sane country would allow people from the above countries to enter the U.S.?  We know where the hotbeds of radical Islam are and yet we continue to allow people from those countries to come to the U.S.  The F.B.I. has already admitted to Congress that terrorists from the Middle East have already come into the U.S. through Mexico and they have no idea where they are.

By most accounts, Muslims are least likely to assimilate than other groups of immigrants.  This isolation makes them fertile targets for radicalization.  France and Britain are currently experiencing this dilemma.  America is on the verge of becoming another France or another Britain.

Yes, I am suggesting profiling those who want to enter into the U.S.  To my liberal and politically correct friends, get over it.  This is about national security and our safety.

Some will attempt to argue that this is discrimination; and I would agree with that assertion.  Those who seek to legally enter into the U.S. have no inherent right to be accepted into our country; therefore America has the absolute right to be discriminating in regards to who enters the country.

We need not provide a reason nor give an explanation for changing our immigration policies.  Our national interests and our national security trump all of their aspirations.

We must stop all immigration immediately; clear up the backlog of those in the pipeline, estimated to be just over 4 million people; and remove all those in the country illegally.  This will give us a chance to digest and assimilate those who are already in the que for legal entry into the U.S.

How many more Americans must die because too many politicians want to play politics with our national security?

You Can’t Have One without the Other

/in , /by

A May 5, 2015 article in Scouting Magazine by Bryan Wendell, a senior editor for Boys’ Life, Scouting, and Eagles’ Call magazines, reminded Boy Scout leaders across the country that page 99 of the 2015 Boy Scout Handbook prohibits the use of toys such as water guns and Super Soakers in friendly water games.  According to Wendell’s blog posting, “It’s a good time to remind you that BSA (Boy Scouts of America) policies prohibit pointing simulated firearms at people.  Yes, that includes water guns.”

Wendell also reminded local scout leaders of restrictions contained on page 100 of the Boy Scout Handbook, cautioning that, in order to prevent serious injury during water balloon fights, scouts should use “small, biodegradable balloons,” and that balloons should be filled “no larger than a ping pong ball.”  No larger than a ping-pong ball?

When contacted by reporters, BSA spokesman Deron Smith confirmed that these policies have been on the books for quite some time, and that the Wendell blog posting was simply a reminder of longstanding safety rules.  He said, “Water guns and rubber band guns must only be used to shoot at targets, and eye protection must be worn.”

When asked why the rule was being highlighted, Smith replied that a scout leader had once told him that, “A scout is kind.  What part of pointing a firearm (simulated or otherwise) at someone is kind?”

After interviewing Smith, Todd Starnes, host of Fox News & Commentary, commented, “I’m assuming that also means kids won’t be able to cool off by running through semi-automatic sprinklers.  Don’t be surprised if the BSA bans campfires and replaces them with simulated flames on portable smartphones.  Can’t risk the kids burning their marshmallows.”

All of this was followed by a May 21, 2015 speech by former Defense Secretary Robert Gates at the BSA Annual Convention in Atlanta.  As the recently elected president of the BSA, Gates urged the organization to reverse its longtime ban on homosexual scoutmasters, warning that “court challenges to the ban would be inevitable, costly, and ultimately lead to the collapse of the organization.”

One wonders whether Gates might have left the Pentagon in July 2011 with a copy of Barack Obama’s Iraq and Afghanistan Rules of Engagement in his pocket and simply read the wrong speech to the assembled scouts. The proposal to reverse the ban on homosexual scoutmasters comes on the heels of a historic policy change of May 23, 2013, when the BSA voted to lift the ban on gay scouts.  Fearing unforeseen financial consequences, the BSA voted to reverse its 103 year policy banning homosexuals from the organization, while postponing any decision on the issue of gay scout leaders.

The news that the Boy Scouts may soon reverse their ban on gay scoutmasters caught the eye of conservative talk radio icon, Barry Farber, host of The Barry Farber Show in New York.

In a June 9 column for WorldNetDaily, titled, What if ‘Gay Scoutmaster’ Story is Sick Joke? Farber expressed his outrage.  He said, “There’s only one way to let you know how the likely arrival of gay scoutmasters sits with me.  It may seem over-twisted to you, but don’t forget, I’m the world’s foremost authority on how things sit with me!”

To illustrate his befuddlement, Farber said, “Remember Alan Funt’s laugh-laden TV show Candid Camera?  Elaborate practical jokes were played on unsuspecting people while concealed cameras were rolling.  Innocent people were thrust into preposterous situations, and after their confusion and consternation were milked dry, the mask would come off and the announcer would proclaim, ‘Smile!  You’re on Candid Camera!’

“Now gay scoutmasters are coming!  Part of me semi-seriously suspects that all this talk of gay scoutmasters is fake, a practical joke by major media and major politicians to target me and mess up my head.  I imagine a secret conclave in a back room.  The ringleader calls for order.  ‘Let’s have some fun,’ he begins.  ‘Barry Farber is a conservative talk-host and columnist who believes in virtues and values and stuff.  We’re gonna pretend the Boy Scouts decided to lift the ban on gay scoutmasters.  Boy Scout President Bob Gates has agreed to go along with the gag, and as former head of the CIA and secretary of defense, he knows how to keep a secret and put on a good act.  Gates will put out a statement like, ‘We must live in this world as it is and not as we wish it to be, and, given society’s mounting opposition, we can no longer sustain banning overtly homosexual men from serving as scoutmasters.’

“Farber will bite the bait and get sucked all the way up the exhaust pipe and take it all seriously and stutter and sputter his way through one of his right-wing rages.  We’ll have some good, clean fun when Farber learns it was all an absurd gag and he was tee-totally stupid enough to fall for it!  Learn your roles in the hoax, everybody.  We’ll roll it out in spring of 2015.’ ”

Farber confesses, “I’d volunteer to undergo the most stinging humiliation possible if ‘gay scoutmasters’ really were a gag.  I remember full well how utterly fascinated we Boy Scouts – age 12 to 15 – were about everything having anything to do with sex.  This lifting of the ban against overtly gay men serving as scoutmasters is the one news story most deserving of being a sick joke and not a breathtaking transmogrification of the rulebook…

“Is Bob Gates seriously asking us to believe there are hordes of American parents right now stomping and screaming, ‘We won’t tolerate this mindless bigotry against gay scoutmasters.  Admit them immediately or we’ll withdraw our sons from Scouting!’  I don’t think so.  What strikes me as unsustainable is maintaining sexual distance between boys aflame with experimentation lust and gay scoutmasters challenged beyond comprehension by the temptations brought on by this incredible surrender.”

Farber concludes, “Political correctness has a brother, older, wiser and stronger.  His name is Common Sense.  That brother is now pleading to be heard and heeded.  Historian-philosopher Will Durant gave us an excellent battle cry that goes, ‘When liberty destroys order, the hunger for order will destroy liberty.’   As a suggested corollary, we might also assume, ‘When political correctness destroys common sense, the hunger for common sense will destroy political correctness.’  I hope so.  Too many innocent lives stand to be affected and afflicted.

“In my view this cave-in by the Boy Scouts does not make big trouble possible.  It makes big trouble inevitable.  And I wish the gay-agendacrats could understand that zero animosity toward gays attends this outcry.”

I tend to believe that Barry’s onto something and I’m sure he speaks for the vast majority of parents with sons of scouting age.  The gay scoutmaster thing has got to be a classic “Smile!  You’re on Candid Camera!” gag.  After all, if it is now national policy of the Boy Scouts to allow gay men to be scoutmasters, surely the Girl Scouts would have announced by now that they’re going to allow adult male heterosexuals to be troop leaders… taking our pubescent 12 and 13-year-old daughters and granddaughters off into the woods for weekend camping trips, and all with the blessing of the New York Times, The Washington Post, and every liberal politician within shouting distance of a microphone or a TV camera.

As I read Barry’s heartfelt rant, I couldn’t help but think of the 1955 song, “Love and Marriage” by Sammy Cahn and Jimmy Van Heusen, a song first introduced by Frank Sinatra in the 1955 TV production of Thornton Wilder‘s Our Town.  The first stanza tells us:      

Love and marriage, love and marriage,
Go together like a horse and carriage.
This I tell you brother,
You can’t have one without the other.

In other words, if parents of 12 and 13-year-old boys are going to be faced with the dilemma of whether or not to allow their sons to go off on weekend camping and canoeing trips with openly gay scoutmasters, then how long will it be before we are called upon to wrestle with the same dilemma where our daughters and granddaughters are concerned?  Or are we to assume that, while the sexual abuse laws are written to be gender neutral, parents should be willing to put their sons in harm’s way, but not their daughters?

That’s what convinces me that the gay scoutmaster thing is just another liberal gag.  Will liberal orthodoxy dictate that we discriminate between boys and girls, as we do in nearly all sex-related matters, or, in the interest of “fairness,” will they insist that, just like love and marriage, “You can’t have one without the other?”

In the meantime, Mr. Gates need not worry about the demise of the Boy Scouts of America.  When we’ve become so politically correct that 12-year-old boys are prohibited from squirting each other with water guns and Super Soakers, and when they are prohibited from hitting each other with water balloons larger than ping-pong balls, the end has already arrived and the Boy Scouts of America have become the Boy Wooses of America.

What is needed is for parents to regain control of the Boy Scouts, telling Mr. Gates, Mr. Smith, and Mr. Wendell to do what all good scouts should do: “Take a hike!”

No Strategy. No Clue.

/in , , , /by

The Wednesday, June 10 Wall Street Journal headline at the top of the page was “Obama Set to Expand Troops in Iraq.” We were 589 days into the two terms Barack Hussein Obama has served in the office of President of the United States and he is as clueless now as he was when he arrived on January 20, 2009.

“President Barack Obama is poised to send hundreds more American advisers to a new base in a strategic Iraqi region to help devise a counterattack against marauding Islamic State militants, U.S. officials said Tuesday, a shift that underscores American concern over recent battlefield losses.” It’s 450 “trainers.”

We have had losses because (1) Obama was elected on a promise to end the conflict in Iraq and (2) reelected by pulling out troops to the point that the remaining Iraqi troops—Shiites in the south—decided it wasn’t worth dying for their leaders. Can’t say I blame them, but dying at the hands of ninth century Islamic fanatics is the fate that threatens the entire Middle East, not just Iraq or what’s left of it.

This is how we lost the war in Vietnam. There was a time when Americans utterly destroyed their enemies on the battlefield. In the latter half of the last century, starting in Korea, we forgot how to do that and why that’s how wars are won.

In all candor, like a lot of Americans, I went back and forth about the Mideast conflicts. Looking back, I think George H.W. Bush showed remarkable insight when, after driving Iraq’s Saddam Hussein out of Kuwait, he stopped at the border and came home. George W. had the notion he could somehow introduce democracy to the region. He couldn’t and it will likely never really occur there because Islam is the only law and it has kept the region ignorant, backward, and under the thumb of tyrants for centuries.

The Islamic State troops must be stopped at some point, but Obama is not the President who will do it. Whatever U.S. backed combat occurs will be just enough to present enough television news images to convince the gullible that progress is being made.

Obama arrived in office without any strategy and has spent the last six and a half years “muddling through” as the British say. He and the Democratic Party had only one goal; to win the elections. After that, they wanted to “fundamentally transform” the greatest nation on planet Earth. They have largely made a mess out of everything they touched from ObamaCare to Common Core.

There’s a reason why Obama will send more troops and that’s because every one of our allies has told him that, if the U.S. does not again assert its role of global leadership, they are not going to cooperate with him in a thousand different ways.

Our allies in the Mideast have told him they lack the military strength (and will) to conduct any kind of war with ISIS. The U.S. and much of the rest of the world cannot afford to sit by and let the enormous oil wealth and reserves of the Mideast come under the control of ISIS.

So, once again we read headlines about U.S. troops returning to the Mideast.

What that means is that the 2016 elections are more critical to the future of the nation than all previous ones.

I think Americans, liberals, conservatives and independents alike have had more than enough of President No Strategy. I think there are enough older Americans who remember and take pride in a nation that was unabashedly the world’s leader in the pursuit of peace and democracy. And I think that the thirty percent or so of brain-dead liberals are not sufficient to affect the outcome of a 2016 election devoted to restoring the nation’s economy and leadership.

It can be done. John F. Kennedy was on his way to doing so. Reagan did so. In 590 days from now, we can begin to do so again.

© Alan Caruba, 2015

RELATED ARTICLE: President Obama’s Failed ISIS Strategy in Iraq