Posts

Advertising agencies ‘confidence high heading into 2017’ — Digital Video gains over TV

CHICAGO, IL /PRNewswire/ — According to a fourth quarter survey of advertising agencies conducted by STRATA, a Comcast company, confidence among agencies heading into 2017 is high. Forty-three percent of agencies report that their business will increase in the first quarter of 2017, while only 11% expect a decrease. Forty-two percent of respondents anticipate the need for additional staff next year, and not a single agency reports plans to reduce staff sizes. This comes in contrast to Q2 this year, which found that the rate of hires was decreasing, and concerns over needing to reduce staff sizes were increasing rapidly.

When asked what the biggest challenges ahead were, 51% stated that their biggest concern was expanding their client roster, followed by determining the right media mix (22%). Only 13% of agencies felt that client retention was their chief concern, reflecting confidence in existing relationships.

The fourth quarter survey found video advertising remains the dominant focus, with 34% of agencies noting their clients’ primary focus was local TV & cable. For the first time the survey’s history, digital video claimed the second spot, with 27% of agencies responding that it was their primary focus, a 79% increase over the previous year. Display advertising, previously in the second spot, fell to third with 15% reporting it as their clients’ main focus.

“At the end of a year that could be defined as turbulent, if nothing else, one of the upsides we’re seeing is the swift reversal in agency outlook and confidence. Earlier this year, we found that agencies had major concerns about budgets and revenue, but we’re now seeing much more optimism heading into 2017,” said Judd Rubin, vice president at Strata. “We’re excited to see how this new confidence impacts advertising strategies next year. Local and cable video continue to be the top focus, but digital video is increasingly coming to the forefront. With mobile advertising and rapidly growing social players like Snapchat also making strides, 2017 could prove to be a very exciting year.”

Though only 6% of agencies report plans to allocate between 26-50% of their budgets to paid social, that’s an increase of 321% compared to the first quarter this year. A majority of agencies report that paid social media accounts for the smallest portion of their budget (0-5%), and 18% percent of agencies noted that it accounted for 11-25% of their budget, an 80% increase over last year.

In terms of which platforms agencies are using in social campaigns, Facebook remains dominant, with 94% planning to use the social network. YouTube, Instagram, and Twitter reclaim their second, third, and fourth spots, respectively. Though Snapchat remains sixth, more than 20% of agencies now plan to use the messaging app, a 58% increase from the second quarter in 2016.

Heading into 2017, responses also indicate increased appetite for programmatic buying options. Thirty-six percent of agencies report that they will be allocating 10-20% of their budgets to programmatic purchasing, a 33% increase over Q2. Another 27% plan to dedicate 20-40% of their budgets to programmatic, up 43% compared to Q2. The percentage of agencies refraining from programmatic buying decreased as 24% of agencies report that they will not devote any of their budget to programmatic, a 39% decrease from Q2.

About STRATA

The solutions that STRATA provides empowers clients to buy and sell all media types including cable, broadcast, newspaper, radio, outdoor and digital advertising mediums. On average, over $50 Billion in advertising dollars flow through STRATA systems per year. As the system of choice for over 1,000 agencies in the United States, STRATA provides media technology that enables organizations to lead rather than react to industry developments.  By transforming the way advertisements are placed and tracked, STRATA adds a new level of transparency to campaigns that is necessary in the ever-evolving media world. STRATA is a Comcast Platform Services company. For more information, visit www.gotostrata.com.

RELATED ARTICLE: Trump Wins Again – Lockheed CEO Gives “Personal Commitment” To Cut F-35 Costs “Aggressively”

Illegal Alien Children eating up Health and Human Service’s agency budgets

You’ve probably all seen this news about the Department of Health and Services scrambling to re-direct money from other areas of the agency budget to take care of the largest number of ‘children’ (ever!) entering the U.S. illegally.

train-map

Where the wall needs to be…

I’m posting this so that as we move ahead in the coming days with news on the budget for FY17 and the Continuing Resolution, you have some background understanding of the dilemma the refugee program is in during the waning days of the Obama Administration.  The ‘kids’ (who are NOT refugees) are gobbling up limited funds putting their needs in direct competition with the refugees entering the US from all over the world. (In addition to depriving US citizens of other needed programs.)

For new readers, the Office of Refugee Resettlement is an agency at HHS which has been given the duty of taking care of the illegal alien kids.

Here is Jessica Vaughan at the Center for Immigration Studies:

An average of 255 illegal alien youths were taken into the custody of the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) every day this month, according to the latest figures the agency provided to Congress. This is the largest number of illegal alien children ever in the care of the federal government. To pay for it, the agency says it will need an additional one or two billion dollars for the next year – above and beyond the $1.2 billion spent in 2016 and proposed for 2017 – depending on how many more arrive. For now, the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), where ORR resides, is diverting $167 million from other programs to cover the cost of services for these new illegal arrivals through December 9, when the current continuing resolution expires.

An email to congressional staff from Barbara Clark of the HHS legislative liaison office, dated November 28, 2016, stated:

Daily referrals of unaccompanied children averaged 247 over the last seven days, and 255 so far in November. For comparison, referrals averaged 185 per day in November of FY 2016 and 64 per day in November of FY 2015. As of November 27, 2016, the number of children in ORR care is approximately 11,200.

A separate email informed congressional offices of HHS Secretary Burwell’s intent to transfer money from other programs to ORR to pay for shelters, health care, schooling, recreation, and other services for the new illegal arrivals, who typically were brought to the border by smugglers paid by their parents, who often are living in the United States illegally.

Continue reading here and see which programs are being robbed to pay for the ‘kids.’

About the map: I was searching for a graph to show how many ‘kids’ (mostly Central American teenage boys, see here) had come in to the U.S. in the most recent years, but every graph I found only went to 2014. So what is up with that!  I figured the map would be a nice addition to the post instead.

By the way, this post is tagged ‘Unaccompanied minors’ because many years ago they were called that and that is how I first tagged the topic.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Democrats Express Solidarity with Islamic Extremists in Wake of Election by John Rossomando – IPT News

America’s Success Story: From Hamilton to Trump

First two months of FY2017, 98% of Syrians entering the U.S. are Muslims

Refugee Industry lobbyists want to talk to Trump transition team

UK: 96% of Muslims do not believe al Qaeda was behind 9/11 jihad attacks

Video: Christine Williams on the ignoring of the genocide of Christians in the Middle East

If Continuing Budget Resolution (as is) extends to late March, ORR will run out of money

Fun to watch the Left eat its own: ACLU sues Catholic Charities

How many more Ohio States before House Republicans move Rep. Babin’s bill?

The Immorality of Changing the Rules After an Election

Some bad ideas just won’t die. Most recently, the continuing effort by those who lost the Presidential election to retrospectively change the rules continues to plow on — naturally enough courtesy of the friendly mainstream media megaphone.

Electors should not vote for the candidate who won their state, as the rules call for, but for the candidate who won the national vote, argues Harvard Law professor Lawrence Lessig in the Washington Post. “The framers left the electors free to choose. They should exercise that choice by leaving the election as the people decided it: in Clinton’s favor” Lessig wrote.

Essentially, he argues that there is nothing in the Constitution that overtly requires electors to vote for the candidate who won their state. Therefore they are free to, and ought to, vote for the candidate who won the popular vote. Of course, he does not mention electors are required to follow the rules of the various states in which they are elected.

But aside from an attempt to re-write our long-term understanding of elections, this is a deeply disingenuous article.

First on the general merits, he is promulgating a pure democracy — something the Founders cringed at. Pure democracy is often and aptly compared to two wolves and one sheep deciding on what’s for dinner. The Electoral College as a representative balance between the people’s popular vote and states’ rights was brilliant and on purpose by the Founders and is critical to keep. On the other hand, pure democracy has a long and ignoble history, which is precisely why ours is not that.

In the Federalist Papers #10, James Madison wrote: “…Hence it is that such democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security and the rights of property, and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.”

But the professor, and many Democrats today, want pure democracy…now.

It’s the cheating of scoundrels

But the most disingenuous element in this line of thought is to change the rules retrospectively.

Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton both ran their campaigns based on the known rules: Who wins the most electors wins the White House. They created their strategies around winning key states. If it was a popular vote, both campaigns would have been run differently and we do not know what those results would have been. Changing the rules after the outcome to change the outcome is just abhorrent thinking.

If the good professor was not too blinkered by ideology, he would know that.

Let’s drive this home with some strong analogies.

Let’s say a football game finished where one team wins 24-10 — a solid win. But the losing team argues afterwards that the game should be decided by total yards gained, because the losing team had 400 yards compared to 250 yards for the other team — a solid advantage. But those were not the rules by which both teams were playing. Strategies would have changed. That sounds absurd, but insert the Electoral College for the game score, and the popular vote for yards gained, and the analogy is sound. But we rightly would never consider that.

Or again, consider if the loser of a seven-game World Series argues afterwards that the champion should be decided by total runs instead of the number of games won, because the loser scored more total runs — which has happened several times. But those weren’t the rules. Again, strategies would have changed.

Or again, consider if you are driving 45 mph in a 45 mph speed limit zone, but the next day the speed limit is changed to 30 mph and you are retroactively ticketed for speeding. That’s absurd! That’s not fair! You would have driven slower! Exactly. It is absurd.

This is the precise principle that applies to those who want to change the elections rules now, for this past election. If you want to change them going forward, that is a discussion to have (and which I would oppose doing) but changing the rules retrospectively is simply wrong.

RELATED ARTICLES:

On Castro: Turning a Monster into a Martyr

The “Mandates” That Never Were

Thanksgiving to God is Our American Heritage

Replace Obamacare with Free Market Principles

Will the Outcome of the Election Matter as Much as We Think?

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

VIDEO: Nigel Farage speech in the United States about Brexit and Trump

Nigel Farage on 2016, the year of political revolution, stating, “Often there are decades where very little happens and occasionally there’s a year where decades happen.”

Watch this analysis of what happened in 2016.

Here’s Donald Trump’s statement regarding British referendum on E.U. membership posted June 24, 2016 on Facebook:

The people of the United Kingdom have exercised the sacred right of all free peoples. They have declared their independence from the European Union, and have voted to reassert control over their own politics, borders and economy. A Trump Administration pledges to strengthen our ties with a free and independent Britain, deepening our bonds in commerce, culture and mutual defense. The whole world is more peaceful and stable when our two countries – and our two peoples – are united together, as they will be under a Trump Administration.

Come November, the American people will have the chance to re-declare their independence. Americans will have a chance to vote for trade, immigration and foreign policies that put our citizens first. They will have the chance to reject today’s rule by the global elite, and to embrace real change that delivers a government of, by and for the people. I hope America is watching, it will soon be time to believe in America again.

Prophetic.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Nigel Farage: “I Fear For My Life”

FARAGE: If Le Pen Wins, The EU Is Over

Media falsely spins Trump’s NYT climate comments

The media spin on President Elect Donald J. Trump’s sit down with the New York Times on November 22, can only be described as dishonest. Trump appears to soften stance on climate change & Donald Trump backflips on climate change  & Trump on climate change in major U-turn

The ‘fake news’ that Trump had somehow moderated or changed his “global warming” views was not supported by the full transcript of the meeting.

Heartland Institute President Joe Bast had this to say about the full transcript of Trump’s meeting: “This is reassuring. The Left wants to drive wedges between Trump and his base by spinning anything he says as “retreating from campaign promises.” But expressing nuance and avoiding confrontation with determined foes who buy ink by the barrel is not retreating.” The Heartland Institute released their skeptical 2015 climate report featuring 4,000 peer-reviewed articles debunking the UN IPCC claims.

Trump’s climate science view that there is “some connectivity” between humans and climate is squarely a skeptical climate view. Trump explained, “There is some, something. It depends on how much.”

Trump’s views are shared by prominent skeptical scientists. University of London professor emeritus Philip Stott has said: “The fundamental point has always been this. Climate change is governed by hundreds of factors, or variables, and the very idea that we can manage climate change predictably by understanding and manipulating at the margins one politically selected factor (CO2) is as misguided as it gets.” “It’s scientific nonsense,” Stott added. Stott is featured in new skeptical climate change documentary Climate Hustle.

Scientists at the UN climate summit in Marrakech commended Trump’s climate views. See: Skeptical scientists crash UN climate summit, praise Trump for ‘bringing science back again’

Trump also told resident NYT warmist Tom Friedman: ‘A lot of smart people disagree with you’ on climate change. (Note: Friedman has some wacky views: Flashback 2009: NYT’s Tom Friedman lauds China’s eco-policies: ‘One party can just impose politically difficult but critically important policies needed to move a society forward’)

Once again, Trump was 100% accurate as very prominent scientists are bailing out of the so-called climate “consensus.”

Renowned Princeton Physicist Freeman Dyson: ‘I’m 100% Democrat and I like Obama. But he took the wrong side on climate issue, and the Republicans took the right side’

Nobel Prize-Winning Scientist Dr. Ivar Giaever, Who Endorsed Obama Now Says Prez. is ‘Ridiculous’ & ‘Dead Wrong’ on ‘Global Warming’

Green Guru James Lovelock reverses belief in ‘global warming’: Now says ‘I’m not sure the whole thing isn’t crazy’ – Condemns green movement: ‘It’s a religion really, It’s totally unscientific’

Politically Left Scientist Dissents – Calls President Obama ‘delusional’ on global warming

Trump correctly cited the  Climategate scandal: “They say they have science on one side but then they also have those horrible emails that were sent between scientists…Terrible. Where they got caught, you know, so you see that and you say, what’s this all about.” See: Watch & Read: 7th anniversary of Climategate – The UN Top Scientists Exposed

Trump cited his uncle, a skeptical MIT scientist: “My uncle was for 35 years a professor at M.I.T. He was a great engineer, scientist. He was a great guy. And he was … a long time ago, he had feelings — this was a long time ago — he had feelings on this subject.” (Yes, other MIT scientists are very skeptical as well. See: MIT Climate Scientist Dr. Richard Lindzen Mocks 97% Consensus: ‘It is propaganda’

It is also worth noting that Trump’s often cited 2012 tweet about climate change stating “The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive,” was clearly a joke and he has said it was a joke. It is further worth noting that climate skeptics do not believe the conecpt of “climate change” was “created” by China.

The media have created a cartoon-version view of Trump’s climate views.  If he says anything short of global warming is a hoax created by the Chinese, then the media claims Trump flip-flopped.

Trump countered: ‘We’ve had storms always, Arthur.’

Trump is accurately citing the latest climate science by noting that extreme weather is not getting worse. See: 2016 ‘State of the Climate Report’

  • The U.S. has had no Category 3 or larger hurricane make landfall since 2005 – the longest spell since the Civil War.
  • Strong F3 or larger tornadoes have been in decline since the 1970s.
  • Sea level rise rates have been steady for over a century, with recent deceleration.
  • Droughts and floods are neither historically unusual nor caused by mankind, and there is no evidence we are currently having any unusual weather.

Trump’s claim to have an “open mind” on U.S. climate policy and his comment that “I’m going to take a look at” withdrawing from the UN Paris agreement are more nuanced than his previous blunt statements that the U.S. will cancel the UN agreement. But those comments in the context of the interview are hardly a flip-flop or major signal of changing views on the issue.

(Climate Depot Note: UN Paris climate deal ‘is likely to be history’s most expensive treaty’ – ‘Cost of between $1 trillion and $2 trillion annually’

http://www.thegwpf.com/donald-trump-on-climategate-the-paris-agrement/

Donald Trump’s New York Times Interview

President-elect Donald J. Trump during a meeting at The New York Times’s offices in Manhattan on Tuesday.

[….] THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN, opinion columnist: Mr. President-elect, can I ask a question? One of the issues that you actually were very careful not to speak about during the campaign, and haven’t spoken about yet, is one very near and dear to my heart, the whole issue of climate change, the Paris agreement, how you’ll approach it. You own some of the most beautiful links golf courses in the world …

[laughter, cross talk]

TRUMP: [laughing] I read your article. Some will be even better because actually like Doral is a little bit off … so it’ll be perfect. [inaudible] He doesn’t say that. He just says that the ones that are near the water will be gone, but Doral will be in great shape. (Note: Trump’s Seawall Is About His Business, Not Global Warming – ‘Only shows Trump uses climate alarmism to benefit his business’)

[laughter]

FRIEDMAN: But it’s really important to me, and I think to a lot of our readers, to know where you’re going to go with this. I don’t think anyone objects to, you know, doing all forms of energy. But are you going to take America out of the world’s lead of confronting climate change?

TRUMP: I’m looking at it very closely, Tom. I’ll tell you what. I have an open mind to it. We’re going to look very carefully. It’s one issue that’s interesting because there are few things where there’s more division than climate change. You don’t tend to hear this, but there are people on the other side of that issue who are, think, don’t even …

SULZBERGER: We do hear it.

FRIEDMAN: I was on ‘Squawk Box’ with Joe Kernen this morning, so I got an earful of it.

[laughter]

TRUMP: Joe is one of them. But a lot of smart people disagree with you. I have a very open mind. And I’m going to study a lot of the things that happened on it and we’re going to look at it very carefully. But I have an open mind.

SULZBERGER: Well, since we’re living on an island, sir, I want to thank you for having an open mind. We saw what these storms are now doing, right? We’ve seen it personally. Straight up.

FRIEDMAN: But you have an open mind on this?

TRUMP: I do have an open mind. And we’ve had storms always, Arthur.

SULZBERGER: Not like this (sic!).

TRUMP: You know the hottest day ever was in 1890-something, 98. You know, you can make lots of cases for different views. I have a totally open mind. (Note: EPA Says That The Worst Heat Waves Occurred in The 1930s)

My uncle was for 35 years a professor at M.I.T. He was a great engineer, scientist. He was a great guy. And he was … a long time ago, he had feelings — this was a long time ago — he had feelings on this subject. It’s a very complex subject. I’m not sure anybody is ever going to really know. I know we have, they say they have science on one side but then they also have those horrible emails that were sent between the scientists. Where was that, in Geneva or wherever five years ago? Terrible. Where they got caught, you know, so you see that and you say, what’s this all about. I absolutely have an open mind. I will tell you this: Clean air is vitally important. Clean water, crystal clean water is vitally important. Safety is vitally important.

And you know, you mentioned a lot of the courses. I have some great, great, very successful golf courses. I’ve received so many environmental awards for the way I’ve done, you know. I’ve done a tremendous amount of work where I’ve received tremendous numbers. Sometimes I’ll say I’m actually an environmentalist and people will smile in some cases and other people that know me understand that’s true. Open mind.

JAMES BENNET, editorial page editor: When you say an open mind, you mean you’re just not sure whether human activity causes climate change? Do you think human activity is or isn’t connected?

TRUMP: I think right now … well, I think there is some connectivity. There is some, something. It depends on how much. It also depends on how much it’s going to cost our companies. You have to understand, our companies are noncompetitive right now.

They’re really largely noncompetitive. About four weeks ago, I started adding a certain little sentence into a lot of my speeches, that we’ve lost 70,000 factories since W. Bush. 70,000. When I first looked at the number, I said: ‘That must be a typo. It can’t be 70, you can’t have 70,000, you wouldn’t think you have 70,000 factories here.’ And it wasn’t a typo, it’s right. We’ve lost 70,000 factories.

We’re not a competitive nation with other nations anymore. We have to make ourselves competitive. We’re not competitive for a lot of reasons.

That’s becoming more and more of the reason. Because a lot of these countries that we do business with, they make deals with our president, or whoever, and then they don’t adhere to the deals, you know that. And it’s much less expensive for their companies to produce products. So I’m going to be studying that very hard, and I think I have a very big voice in it. And I think my voice is listened to, especially by people that don’t believe in it. And we’ll let you know.

FRIEDMAN: I’d hate to see Royal Aberdeen underwater.

TRUMP: The North Sea, that could be, that’s a good one, right?

[…]

MICHAEL D. SHEAR, White House correspondent: Mr. Trump, Mike Shear. I cover the White House, covering your administration …

TRUMP: See ya there.

[laughter]

SHEAR: Just one quick clarification on the climate change, do you intend to, as you said, pull out of the Paris Climate

TRUMP: I’m going to take a look at it.

Full interview

Related Links: 

UN Armed Security Shuts Down Skeptics After Trump Event – SHREDDED UN Climate Treaty at Summit – Full Video of UN Climate Cops Shutting Down Skeptics

Climate Report to UN: Trump right, UN wrong – Skeptics Deliver Consensus Busting ‘State of the Climate Report’ to UN Summit

Trump wins U.S. Presidency! Climate Skeptics Rejoice! Set to dismantle & Defund UN/EPA climate agenda!

Bjorn Lomborg: Trump’s climate plan might not be so bad after all – Clexit ‘will will stop the pursuit of an expensive dead end’ – ‘So Trump’s promise to dump Paris will matter very little to temperature rises, and it will stop the pursuit of an expensive dead end’

 ‘The Trump Taboo’ at UN climate summit: He is ‘omnipresent…even though nobody is saying his name’ – ‘There is a taboo word at this year’s 22nd UN climate change summit: Trump. The president-elect is omnipresent in Marrakesh. You can feel him lurking behind talks on low-carbon economies and in the cracks between climate-induced loss and damage. He’s never directly addressed, but he’s always in the room. You can tell from the anxiety in people’s voices and their disapproving headshakes, heavy with concern for what the future for action on climate change holds.’

Trump casts HUGE shadow over UN climate summit

RELATED VIDEO: Energy Summit 2016

VIDEO: Five Policy Issues for Donald Trump on Radical Islam

Clarion Project’s National Security Analyst Ryan Mauro examines some of the key challenges a president Donald Trump will likely face in office.

RELATED ARTICLES:

ISIS Recruits Learn to Beat Asylum-Seeker Checks

Raw Footage From the Front Line (GRAPHIC)

Russia Thwarts ISIS Attacks on Moscow and St Petersburg

Pakistan Bomb Blast Kills 52 at Sufi Shrine

Obama Administration turning ‘Sanctuary Cities’ into ‘Safe Zones’

christina ziegler

Christian Ziegler

Christian Ziegler, State Committeeman, Sarasota County, in an email writes:

Just when I thought that the Federal Government couldn’t act more ridiculous than allowing “Sanctuary Cities” to harbor law-breakers, the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agency recently put out a “How To” guide to avoid enforcement by instituting “Safe Zones” for illegal aliens. These “Safe Zones” have been put in place to allow law-breakers the ability to “participate in activities” or “utilize services” in our country “without fear or hesitation”.

Yes, you read that right. Our Federal Government has put out instructions on how to avoid justice for committing a federal crime. The continued encouragement of lawlessness and refusal to hold individuals accountable for their actions by our Federal Government is both concerning and infuriating.

It’s time that we do something about this and it’s just another reason why we must elect Donald Trump and defeat Hillary Clinton in November. Of all of the issues discussed during this election cycle, I believe that the illegal immigration issue is one of the most important issues facing our country. And while Donald Trump has made it clear that we must build a wall and hold illegal aliens accountable for breaking our laws, Hillary Clinton allowed numerous illegal aliens, including one facing a deportation order, to speak during the DNC Convention and made it clear she’s running for Obama’s 3rd term.

Please take a moment to read the article (below) and reply back with any thoughts that you may have on this issue!


U.S. Border Protection Agcy. Advertises SAFE ZONES for Illegal Aliens

Just about any illegal alien can avoid arrest by following these simple rules, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) advertises in a post on its website’s homepage.

Providing a virtual “how-to” guide for illegal aliens in its “Sensitive Locations FAQs,”  CBP explains that immigration laws are not to be enforced at any of a wide range of designated “sensitive locations” – so that illegal aliens may be “free” to live their lives “without fear or hesitation”:

“The policies provide that enforcement actions at or focused on sensitive locations such as schools, places of worship, and hospitals should generally be avoided, and that such actions may only take place when (a) prior approval is obtained from an appropriate supervisory official, or (b) there are exigent circumstances necessitating immediate action without supervisor approval.  The policies are meant to ensure that ICE and CBP officers and agents exercise sound judgment when enforcing federal law at or focused on sensitive locations, to enhance the public understanding and trust, and to ensure that people seeking toparticipate in activities or utilize services provided at any sensitive location are free to do so, without fear or hesitation.”

“This policy is designed to ensure that these enforcement actions do not occurat nor are focused on sensitive locations such as schools and churches” without meeting special exceptions, the ICE Sensitive Locations Policy states.

Locations covered by these policies include, but not be limited to:

  • Schools, such as known and licensed daycares, pre-schools and other early learning programs; primary schools; secondary schools; post-secondary schools up to and including colleges and universities; as well as scholastic or education-related activities or events, and school bus stopsthat are marked and/or known to the officer, during periods when school children are present at the stop;
  • Medical treatment and health care facilities, such as hospitals, doctors’ offices, accredited health clinics, and emergent or urgent care facilities;
  • Places of worship, such as churches, synagogues, mosques, and temples;
  • Religious or civil ceremonies or observances, such as funerals and weddings; and
  • During public demonstration, such as a march, rally, or parade.

So, just almost any illegal alien can escape arrest by either walking with a second person (a march), attending some type of class, or finding a nearby church, medical facility or school bus stop.

“The enforcement actions covered by this policy are (1) arrests; (2) interviews; (3) searches; and (4) for the purposes of immigration enforcement only, surveillance,” the ICE policy says.

Each “FAQ” answer is accompanied by a translation for Spanish-speaking illegal aliens – but, not in any other foreign language.

The CBP website also provides a toll-free number and email address to enable illegal aliens report immigration enforcement efforts taking place at any of the “sensitive locations.”

RELATED ARTICLE: NATO Commander STUNS Media… Vindicates Trump With 1 Sentence

U.S. State Department: We will reach 10,000 Syrian Muslim migrant goal in September

CNS News reporter Patrick Goodenough is staying on top of the numbers coming out of the US State Department and has the latest count today.  Thanks to reader ‘heymister24’ for letting us know about the up-to-the-minute numbers.

(CNSNews.com) – The State Department is committed to meeting President Obama’s goal of admitting 10,000 Syrian refugees into the United States this fiscal year, and expects the numbers to “increase exponentially” over the summer, a spokesman said Tuesday.

With four months left in FY2016, the administration has admitted 3,566 Syrian refugees as of Tuesday – or 35.6 percent of the 10,000 target number.

Read it all and see their very informative graph which tells us that in the first 7 days of June:

Of the 761 admitted since the beginning of June, none are Christians. The 761 refugees comprise 759 Sunnis, and two other Muslims.

Remember readers that September 30th is not the end of it. All of those new resettlement sites we have been writing about (Reno, NV, Missoula, MT, Rutland, VT etc.), will get their Syrians next year.  Obama has one more shot at ‘determining’ who comes to the US and how many (for FY2017) just as he is leaving office and he has already said the numbers will be much greater than this year. Could a newly elected President in November, put a halt to the flow in January—YES! But, you can be sure Hillary won’t!

Other articles by Patrick Goodenough are here.

See the graph (Obama is saving Sunni Muslims as a first priority):

refugees-graph

RELATED ARTICLES:

Arrests Show Jihadists Infiltrating Syrian Refugees

Alabama county eyed for federal camp to house unaccompanied alien children

Last week’s Islamic terror bust in Germany did involve refugees

Ten things your town needs to know as it is targeted for refugee resettlement

Hawaii Poll: Clinton, Trump Lead Races for Nomination by Andrew Walden

This is what democracy looks like?

The Star-Advertiser/Ward Poll released Sunday January 17, 2016 gives Hawaii a glimpse of what the presidential horse-race might look like if Hawaii conducted a State-run Presidential Primary as many other states do.

But Hawaii doesn’t.  Instead voters are invited to cast their ballots in the caucuses organized by the Republican and Democratic parties.  Party-organized caucuses normally attract only about 1-2% of the registered electorate—1/20th of the turnout for Hawaii’s State-run August, 2014 Primary which attracted 41.5% of registered voters.

The Hawaii Republican Presidential Caucus is to be held at 44 locations statewide Tuesday, March 8 from 6pm to 8pm.  The result will determine the allocation of 16 of Hawaii’s 19 delegates to the Republican National Convention to be held July 18-21 in Cleveland, Ohio.

Hawaii Democrats are set to caucus Saturday March 26 (locations not yet announced) and vote in a ‘Presidential Preference Poll’ which will determine the mandate of a few of Hawaii’s 34 delegates to the July 25-28 Democrat National Convention in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Hawaii lacks party-identification of registered voters, a circumstance which aids the maintenance of the one-party Democrat-controlled status quo.  If they were participating in the caucuses—which most respondents will not–self-described Democrats would vote:

  • 52%  — Clinton
  • 18% – Sanders
  • 6% – Trump
  • 8% — Other Republicans
  • 1% – Will not vote
  • 15% — Other/refused

Self-identified Republicans would vote:

  • 22% — Trump
  • 11% – Cruz
  • 11% — Clinton
  • 9% – Bush
  • 9% – Carson
  • 8% – Rubio
  • 4% – Christie
  • 4% — Sanders
  • 1% — Will not vote
  • 19% – Refused/Other

Because Caucus turnout is such a small percentage of the electorate—comprised of more highly motivated and partisan voters–refined numbers can be attained by stripping out party-crossing results and refusals.

The result among Democrats:

  • 74% – Clinton
  • 26% – Sanders

The result among Republicans:

  • 34% – Trump
  • 17% – Cruz
  • 14% – Bush
  • 14% – Carson
  • 13% – Rubio
  • 6% – Christie
  • 2% – Fiorina

Of course all of these numbers will shift dramatically as the results come in from Iowa, New Hampshire and other early states.

SA: Clinton enjoys large lead in Hawaii presidential poll

PDF: Hawaii Poll — Presidential Race

Poster of the Week: Can’t Be Bought Trump

I feel sure our friends at VDARE won’t mind if I post Maryland grassroots warrior Ed Hunter’s letter to VDARE about what happened on Friday evening when the indefatigable Hunter unfurled one of his highway overpass banners for French TV.

Here is Hunter’s banner for this week, but you can see others of his novel campaigns to circumvent the mainstream media and get his message directly to American citizens, at Blue Ridge Forum.

This is what happened on Friday evening as a French TV crew filmed him (from VDARE where you should go for links).  In Ed’s words, but emphasis is mine:

Last week the Washington desk of the French TV station “France 2” contacted us at the Maryland Tea Party and said they wanted to go up on the overpass and conduct an interview on the Donald Trump phenomenon***. About 2 PM we arrive at the bridge over I-95 Northbound, and we set up the banners and are waving to people on the interstate below.

Ed Hunter shows how to get his message directly to citizens and around the MSM.

The rush hours is beginning and the traffic is starting to slow down as it passed under us. The French TV crew arrives about an hour later around 3 PM. They get out their big expensive TV camera, and the French reporter Valerie begins asking questions.

Some of them were hard to answer such as “What does Donald Trump mean?” or “Is this a popular provocation?” (The usual French stuff. How can you answer those types of questions?) Anyway, they get around to the subject of immigration and I can sense I am up against the usual PC wall as they try to get “racist” stuff out of me. So she says “Okay just try to summarize Trump in a way that makes sense to people in France.” So I said “Donald Trump is an American version of Marine Le Pen.” Then she asked if I supported Le Pen and I said, “Absolutely”.

I told her that Muslim immigration will be the end of France and Europe.

Then I asked them (off camera) if they felt that way, and they replied “Oh no…it is all a stunt, we do not have a immigration problem in France. These Muslims are French. They came to France to help us rebuild France. I said. ”French built France. Why can’t you rebuild it yourself?”

They looked at me as the typical redneck American. So as we are talking the noise from the honking from the interstate is rising to a crescendo. The honking and cheers for the Trump banners are getting so loud we can’t continue the conversation. The French say goodbye and get into their car and leave. I am asking myself “What is going on? Why is everyone reacting to the banners, which read ‘CANT BE BOUGHT…VOTE TRUMP’?” The whole Interstate has erupted. Everyone below as far as I can see is going nuts and cheering and leaning on their horn and screaming out the windows “Donald! Donald!” And we are waving back and this is going on for about an hour. And we can’t figure it all out. So it’s 5:30 PM and getting dark and cold. We take down the banners and drive to Starbucks for coffee when someone calls with the news about the Paris attacks.

The very moment that the French media elites were repeating the PC leftist party line… “We do not have an immigration problem. We are multicultural” etc., the news of the Paris attacks is hitting the car radios of the people on the highway below and they are going nuts in support of Trump and his defiance of the political, media and academic elites.

I called Valerie the French reporter and she had just heard the news. All she could say is “I am so shocked…so shocked!!” I said ”Why? You had to know this was coming, you were told a million times—”. At which point she hung up. The next morning I read Ann Coulter in Mediaite: “Donald Trump Was Elected President Tonight.” And I believe he was.

I saw it happen. I watched an almost physical wave of noise and cheering and honking roll up I-95 from as far as I could see south towards DC, to where it disappeared over the horizon to the north, up towards Baltimore, New York and points beyond.

All of this only confirms again for me—for middle class Americans, immigration is THE issue of 2016.  And, I urge all of you to find your place in the battle to save us—to save America.  You might not have Ed’s guts to get up on a highway overpass, but find your talent and put it to work to save us from becoming Europe!

***One last thing….when we attended the Georgetown Law School pro-open borders gathering in DC a couple of weeks ago, attendees were in complete shock over what they described as the “Trump phenomenon” here.

This post is filed in a category we hope to use more often—-called creating a movement.’

Addendum! Angry about Paris?  READ THIS POST and do it!  Tell Congress to stop the funding for the Refugee Admissions Program NOW!