Sean Parnell, an American hero and candidate for Representative in Pennsylvania, speaks at the RNC (full text)

Featured

Sean Parnell recounts a uniquely American experience

On the first day of the Republican National Convention, Sean Parnell shared part of what he learned in combat and from his grandfather:

I’m Sean Parnell and it is an honor to be here.

In 2006, the Army sent me to Afghanistan as a young platoon leader placed in command of Americans from every corner of our planet. Our platoon reflected the diversity of our nation: every race, creed, and religion. Despite those differences, we were bound together as brothers from the same American family. On June 10, 2006 our platoon was attacked just after dawn. Outnumbered 10 to 1, we endured mortar and machine gun fire as hundreds of Taliban charged us from three sides.

We had 24 men that day.

Wave after wave of Taliban advanced up the hill. I was wounded three times in the fighting. Nearly all of my platoon was wounded within the first minute, but the enemy kept coming. We fought to our last rounds of ammunition and when it was over, we held the hill.

In the face of death, I saw ordinary Americans become heroes. In our darkest hour, when our survival depended on each other, my men and I learned an important lesson: we all bleed red.

Our differences did not define us. United, we were unbeatable. After 485 days of combat, I came home eager to enjoy the freedoms I risked my life to defend, but I watched with alarm as the party of my grandfather (a life-long, union Democrat) turned against the very people it professed to represent.

I watched as Joe Biden spit venom at an auto worker who dared to question Joe’s intent to dismantle the Second Amendment and take your guns. Where Democrats once stood for hard-working, law-abiding Americans who displayed our flag with pride, this new Democrat party considers these people uneducated racists “clinging to guns and Bibles.”

The party of Harry Truman became the party of hedge fund managers, Hollywood celebrities, tech moguls, and university professors — all bloated with contempt for middle America. I look across the aisle and I do not see a party that wants you to pursue your dreams. I see a Democrat party that wants to dictate what those dreams are. I don’t see a party that wants you to be free. I see a party that wants to chain you into conformity and will destroy anyone they deem heretic.

I swore an oath to defend my country and its Constitution. President Trump has sworn to do the same. That’s why he’s advanced freedom despite savage political attacks to overcome the agenda of the radical Left.

President Trump has unleashed the economic might of this nation like no other president in our history. He triggered the rising tide of working families, brought us energy independence, reclaimed jobs from overseas (that, you know, Democrats said would never return).

He has fiercely defended the besieged First and Second Amendments. That is just a start.

With four more years, imagine what we can achieve by simply working with our President. I believe in our President’s vision for the future. I stand here tonight calling on all Americans to join us. It doesn’t matter what you look like, who you love, how you worship, your gender, or your job. If you’re a traditional Democrat who’s become disillusioned with how radical your party has become, then stand with us. You are most welcome.

America needs all her patriots to rush to her defense.

My fellow Americans, I promise you this: in our tent, you are free. Free to speak the truth, choose your journey, define your life. You have the power to go as far as you aim. Then aim higher and and keep going, because that is what Americans do. We are idealists and dreamers, lovers of adventure. We’re rugged and independent. We don’t make excuses, we make the impossible a reality.

Think about it. In a century, we went from ground-bound dreamers gazing to the stars to doers who created the means to reach them.

This is not the time to stand on the sidelines. If you love our country (as we do)(as our President does) join the chorus of patriot voices that will preserve this exceptional union.

Mister President lead the way. Millions in our American family believe in this path to destiny. Guide us to that horizon. Thank you and may God bless the United States of America.

By the way, if you like this message from Sean Parnell and would like to see more like him in Congress, you might want to visit his campaign web site at SeanForCongress.co. Any gift would probably help immensely.

Four more times the Democrat message turned into Anti-Americanism


Snuffing out the freedom of religion, step by step

  1. California’s Governor forbids Christians from singing in church houses

Christian Broadcasting Network shows us how churches now have to decide whether to obey God or Governor Newsom of California.

GavinNewsomGolden State Christians have been ordered by California’s governor to stop singing in church. This is a direct assault on the First Amendment, as I warned folks about in my new book, “Culture Jihad: How to Stop the Left From Killing a Nation.” Click here to read.

“Californians are still free to attend their house of worship. But they’re forbidden from singing or chanting,” read the lead paragraph in a story published by the Sacramento Bee. 

The new guidance for places of worship was issued on July 1.

“Discontinue singing (in rehearsals, services, etc.), chanting, and other practices and performances where there is increased likelihood for transmission from contaminated exhaled droplets. Consider practicing these activities through alternative methods (such as internet streaming) that ensure individual congregation members perform these activities separately in their own homes,” the 14-page order reads.

The previous guidelines only encouraged churches to “strongly consider” ending corporate worship, the Sacramento Bee reported.

(Read more at the Christian Broadcasting Network)

In the early history of the church (Acts of the Apostles, chapter 5), a similar event happened.

Peter and the apostles were confronted with a similar command by a similar governmental leader. In Acts 5:29, Peter and the apostles responded:
Sing to God, O kingdoms of the earth, Sing praises to the Lord, Selah. (Psalms 68:32 NASB)

But Peter and the apostles answered, “We must obey God rather than men.

We have the same choice. We can let the government mandate that we abandon our Biblical acts and beliefs or we can follow the Word of God. We can we can kowtow to a more politically-correct message or choose to share the good news of the gospel. We can hold our praise and singing or we can obey the mandates in the Psalms. We can ignore the Bible and go the World’s way or we can follow what we read in the Bible.

By the way, since this article centers on singing, here are some of the Psalm verses commanding Christians to sing praises to God:

  • Sing praises to God, sing praises; Sing praises to our King, sing praises. For God is the King of all the earth; Sing praises with a skillful psalm. (Psalms 47:6‭-‬7 NASB)
  • My heart is steadfast, O God, my heart is steadfast; I will sing, yes, I will sing praises! (Psalms 57:7 NASB)
  • All the earth will worship You, And will sing praises to You; They will sing praises to Your name.” Selah. (Psalms 66:4 NASB)
  • Sing to God, O kingdoms of the earth, Sing praises to the Lord, Selah. (Psalms 68:32 NASB)
  • Sing to the Lord a new song; Sing to the Lord , all the earth. (Psalms 96:1 NASB)
  • I will sing of lovingkindness and justice, To You, O Lord , I will sing praises. (Psalms 101:1 NASB)
  • Sing to Him, sing praises to Him; Speak of all His wonders. (Psalms 105:2 NASB)
  • Sing to the Lord with thanksgiving; Sing praises to our God on the lyre, (Psalms 147:7 NASB)

Believe me, there are multiple other verses.

Nike hopes that the silent majority will visit their stores when based on Nike’s silence

  1. Nike remains quiet after Kaepernick calls Independence Day a ‘Celebration of White Supremacy’

Breitbart points out the silence of Nike as they ignore their spokesperson’s words on Independence Day.

NikeKaepernickNike has not responded to a request for comment after Colin Kaepernick, one of their leading pitchmen, called Independence Day a “celebration of white supremacy.”

On Saturday afternoon, as 4th of July festivities were getting underway across the country. Kaepernick took to Twitter and accused America of having “dehumanized, brutalized, criminalized + terrorized” black people for centuries.

(Read more at Breitbart)

This ignores stories like that of Richard Allen: From slave to pastor to founder of AME church to Founding Father and many other firsts

Kaepernick’s narrative ignores the true potential of America. Kaepernick’s narrative says: “Look over here at these cases of injustive.” Never mind that America elected a Black President for two terms. Never mind that people like Oprah Winfry, General Colin Powell, HUD Secretary Ben Carson, and many others enjoy success in America. However, even from the beginning, some have been able to apply the teachings of the Bible and the principles of the Declaration of Independence to the betterment of all. For example, the Christian Broadcasting Network recounts the accomplishments of Richard Allen, a Black founding father.

From his young years, Richard Allen knew the humiliating and dehumanizing pain of being a slave. Born in 1760, his entire family was sold from his first master to another. And when that second master fell on financial hard-times, he divided the family by selling Richard’s mother and three of his siblings to another plantation.

Then the teenager known as “Negro Richard” went on in toil and drudgery with just one of his brothers and sisters still with him. That’s when he met the Lord Jesus Christ when listening to the preaching of an abolitionist pastor. He and his brother decided their best Christian witness would be to serve their master all the more and with excellence.

Richard then got his slave master to listen to that preacher too, and his master also came to know the Lord. One of his Christian deeds was to offer Richard his freedom within five years if Richard could pay for that freedom. Throwing himself into odd jobs for cash, Richard managed to buy his way out of slavery in just one and a half years.

He educated himself and became an itinerant preacher in the mid-Atlantic states, changing his name from Negro Richard to Richard Allen. He thought soul-saving would now be the major mission of his life. But he also frequently advocated for an end to the enslavement of the colonies’ 700,000 black people, even as America was fighting for its liberty from Britain.

A Methodist Episcopal church in Philadelphia asked Allen to preach on a more regular basis. His sermons became so popular that black people began to flood the church to overflowing. The church built a new balcony area and then tried to force the African Americans to worship there, separated from their white Christian brothers and sisters. It literally picked some blacks up off their knees and dragged them away from praying with those whites.

Allen and many of his fellow congregants decided to walk out of that church. He decided they needed their own house of worship.

Dr. Peter Lillback founded and heads up the Providence Forum, a group that wants to keep in Americans’ hearts how much God and faith figured into the founding of their nation and the forming of its values.

Lillback said of Allen, “This now former slave who’s been educated is going to establish a church that reaches out to the African Americans.”

The popular pastor had earlier purchased land in 1787 with the help of George Washington and Declaration of Independence signer Dr. Benjamin Rush.

Allen eventually bought a blacksmith’s shop, and in 1794 had it dragged by horses to this property, which has become the piece of land continually in the possession of African Americans longer than any other real estate in the US. He turned that blacksmith shop into a church, meant to be for blacks only so they wouldn’t have to deal with the degrading prejudice of whites and being pushed around by them in the holy space of a church.

But white Methodist leadership in Philadelphia fought back and demanded control over aspects of Allen’s church. He finally took them to court and what’s come to be known as Old Mother Bethel African Methodist Episcopal Church won its independence.

This became the nation’s first major African-American church. Then Allen convinced several other black congregations in the region – who also wanted to be free of racist overseers – to join with his church. In 1816, they became the African Methodist Episcopal Church, America’s first independent black denomination and oldest formal institution in the US for African-Americans.

Allen was named its first bishop. The AME now has 2,500,000 members in more than 7,000 congregations in 39 countries spread across five continents. And Allen’s Old Mother Bethel is still a lively church within that denomination.

Those weren’t Allen’s only firsts. He was the first black activist invited into a US president’s home. He was the first African American to write a copyrighted pamphlet; the first black to write a eulogy for George Washington (and the only person at that time to write of Washington emancipating slaves).

“If you love the God of love,” he wrote in 1794, “clear your hands from slaves, burden not your children or country with them.”

Allen also helped put together the first convention of African American activists. Conventions became a major place for blacks to push for reforms, abolition and civil rights.

He and fellow reformer Absalom Jones formed the Free African Society to benefit blacks. And he made his own church a major place to educate African Americans and help them improve their place in the young nation. That church harbored more than 30 Jamaicans who’d escaped their slave masters. It became an early stop on the Underground Railroad and helped finance it.

He went on to influence major black reformers in the 1800s like Frederick Douglass and such civil rights activists in the 1900s as Martin Luther King Jr.

While slave owners were using the Bible to justify slavery, Allen was using that same Bible and the Declaration of Independence to battle against racism and men owning their fellow men.

Frederick Douglass went so far as to say that what Allen preached about freedom and equality for his fellow African Americans formed “a new Declaration of Independence.”

(Read more at the Christian Broadcasting Network)

Corporate Cancel Culture forces a communications exec to resign for stating the military’s official position when he was a Navy pilot

  1. Boeing forces Golightly to resign for an op-ed in a Navy internal publication 35 years ago

The New York Post reports on the forced resignation of Neil Golightly.

BoeingBoeing communications boss Niel Golightly has resigned over a sexist article he wrote three decades ago opposing women’s service in the military.

His exit leaves the embattled planemaker searching for a new top spokesman as it works to get its troubled 737 MAX jet flying again.

Golightly stepped down Thursday as Boeing’s senior vice president of communications following an employee complaint about the 1987 article, which he called “embarrassingly wrong and offensive.”

“At issue is not whether women can fire M-60s, dogfight MiGs, or drive tanks,” Golightly, then a US Navy lieutenant, wrote in a US Naval Institute magazine. “Introducing women into combat would destroy the exclusively male intangibles of war fighting and the feminine images of what men fight for — peace, home, family.”

Golightly, who had only been with Boeing about six months, said he decided to resign for the company’s sake even though the article does not reflect his current views.

“My article was a 29-year-old Cold War navy pilot’s misguided contribution to a debate that was live at the time,” Golightly said in a statement. “The dialogue that followed its publication 33 years ago quickly opened my eyes, indelibly changed my mind, and shaped the principles of fairness, inclusion, respect and diversity that have guided my professional life since.”

Boeing said it disagreed with the content of Golightly’s article and that it has started a search for his successor. Greg Smith, Boeing’s chief financial officer and executive vice president of enterprise operations, will oversee communications in the meantime, the company said.

Boeing President and CEO David Calhoun talked with Golightly about the article and its implications for his role as the company’s top spokesman, Calhoun said. He added that Boeing has an “unrelenting commitment to diversity and inclusion in all its dimensions.”

“I greatly respect Niel for stepping down in the interest of the company,” Calhoun said in a statement.

(Read more at the New York Post)

Everybody thinks their sins are too small to be noticed and their accomplishments are too big to ignore

We are all self-centered. We all think too highly of ourselves (and we know it, unless we have become self-deluded and have begun to drink our own Kool Aid).

However, from God’s perspective, our best deeds are like a dirty diaper or used bandage.

For all of us have become like one who is unclean, And all our righteous deeds are like a filthy garment; And all of us wither like a leaf, And our iniquities, like the wind, take us away. (Isaiah 64:6 NASB)

Therefore, maybe these punks are letting us know something that any Bible-reading Christian knows: we have feet of clay (we sin, we are fallible).

However, this makes me wonder what these self-righteous Marxists will think in 10 or 20 years when people change values and destroy their icons. Hey, maybe it won’t even be that long. Maybe the next generation will value babies and wonder how America could sacrifice over 60 million to Molech.

Maybe the next generation will find itself knee deep in debt and will wonder why we squandered our economy for a cold.

Cancel Culture creeps into the Church

  1. Indiana Priest Suspended for Condemning BLM’s Violence, Marxism and Destruction — BUNKERVILLE | God, Guns and Guts Comrades!

As I first found at BUNKERVILLE, an Indiana priest has been reported to have suspended for condemning BLM‘s violent Marxism. Here is part of Bunkerville’s assessment:

We are witnessing the wholesale capitulation of the bishops before the Marxist mob.

Father Theodore Rothrock from St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Church in Carmel, Indiana was suspended this week after his condemnation of the radical Black Lives Matter protest movement published in the parish’s Sunday bulletin on June 28, 2020.  Liberal media outlets almost immediately published excerpts from the bulletin article and called for Rothrock’s removal.

Here is the Father Rothrock’s column in its entirety:

The lady (doth) protest too much, methinks

Today in Saint Elizabeth Ann Seton
Thirteenth Sunday in Ordinary Time
28 June 2020

This dialogue from Hamlet is taken from Act 3, scene 2 and is a response to Hamlet’s query: “how like you this play?” The line suggests a hidden agenda that is revealed in the objections, where the accuser is actually the perpetrator. History is replete with examples of misdirection. In 2001 the Taliban destroyed the Buddhas of Bamyan, the 6th century monumental statues of Gautama Buddha in central Afghanistan, claiming them to be pagan idols. The world was horrified, but did nothing about it.

Despots and tyrants have always employed accusation and distortion to achieve all manner of mischief in an effort to shape and mold public opinion. Anyone currently doing business with Amazon could not help but notice the prominent banner headline from the internet giant touting their proud support for “Black Lives Matter.” But do those black lives really matter to the community organizers promoting their agenda? Is “Antifa” concerned with the defeat of fascist right-wing nationalism or more interested in the establishment of left-wing global socialism?

The brutal murder of a black man in police custody has sparked a landslide of reaction to the alleged systemic racism in America. We are being told that the scars of race relations in this country are really unhealed wounds that continue to fester and putrefy; amputation is required! Reforms must be sweeping and immediate to crush the rising wave of racism that pervades the nation and perverts the body politic.

On the heels of the Covid sequestration, the bottled-up tension of an isolated population has exploded into riots and demonstrations that we have not seen the like in fifty years. What would the great visionary leaders of the past be contributing to the discussion at this point in time? Would men like Fredrick Douglas and the Reverend King, both men of deep faith, be throwing bombs or even marching in the streets? Would they be pleased with the murder rates in our cities or the destruction of our families by the welfare system? Would they see a value in the obliteration of our history to re-write a future without the experience and struggles of the past? Would we tear down their monuments?

Who are the real racists and the purveyors of hate? You shall know them by their works. The only lives that matter are their own and the only power they seek is their own. They are wolves in wolves clothing, masked thieves and bandits, seeking only to devour the life of the poor and profit from the fear of others. They are maggots and parasites at best, feeding off the isolation of addiction and broken families, and offering to replace any current frustration and anxiety with more misery and greater resentment.

The message of peace that comes to us in Christ is the gospel we carry in common with the Orthodox Churches and other Christians. We must stand in solidarity with our brethren across the world to oppose this malevolent force. Black Lives Matter, Antifa, and the other nefarious acolytes of their persuasion are not the friends or allies we have been led to believe. They are serpents in the garden, seeking only to uproot and replant a new species of human made in the likeness of men and not in the image of God.  Their poison is more toxic than any pandemic we have endured. The father of lies has not just been seen in our streets, we have invited him into our home. Now he is prowling like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour. Resist him, strong in your faith.

On Tuesday, Fr. Rothrock was forced to issue an apology, stating “It was not my intention to offend anyone and I am sorry that my words have caused any hurt to anyone.”Apparently this was not enough for the “frothing at the mouth” Marxists calling for his removal.  On Wednesday, Bishop Timothy Doherty removed Fr. Rothrock from public ministry.

(Read the statement from the church on Fr. Rothrock’s removal at BUNKERVILLE)

Since I come from a denomination that has leading factions that have promoted “gospel diversity” and other idiocy, I don’t point to a perfect church

Since my church includes the likes of Russell Moore, JD Greear, and other inventors of attempts to pull the world’s philosophies into the church, I cannot claim to have a perfect church.

With that said, this act against Fr. Rothrock seems to be like a huge step back toward liberation theology.

May Jesus come soon.

Five times America received and reacted to electronic discrimination from the Cyber-Left


In an effort to further snuff out the conservative message on online, Facebook takes action

  1. Facebook announces hate speech advertisement ban

One America News Network reports that Facebook has decided to ban advertisements it deems as hate speech.

Mark_ZuckerbergMark Zuckerberg recently announced Facebook will prohibit hate speech from now on. On Friday, the CEO announced the platform will prohibit any advertisements that claim society is threatened by members of a particular race, ethnicity, gender or other protected category.

This came after several major companies threatened to pull Facebook advertisements for the month of July. Zuckerberg specifically noted posts from politicians will be removed if they “incite violence or suppress voting.”

According to the CEO, other posts may be flagged if they do not adhere to the company’s rules.

“We’re going to start labeling content that we find newsworthy that might otherwise violate our policies,” he said. “…If we determine the content may lead to violence or deprive people of their right to vote, we’re going to take that content down, no matter who says it.”

Facebook will also notify users if they try to share a post that has been flagged.

This comes as many social media users on both sides of the aisle have pointed out censorship abuses by big tech.

Attorney General William Barr has addressed how the Department of Justice might handle big tech censorship. In an interview with Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Barr claimed the department is investigating several tech companies on the grounds of antitrust laws.

According to reports, he will be announcing specific measures in the next few weeks.

The attorney general is reportedly considering revisions to Section 230, which protects companies from content on their sites and ensures equal speech representation.

“They built up this powerful network, very strong market power, based on the representation that they were sort of open to all as sort of a bulletin board,” explained Barr. “When they got that market power, now they’re censoring views.”

(Read more at One America News Network)

Considering the American government developed the resource they now use to deliver their product, these Internet companies might deliver a balanced product

Considering that the Internet came from ARPANET (a network between universities and the military) and that the overall network within the borders of the U.S. cannot be disputed to as a U.S. asset, the American government might exercise the same rights as it does over the airwaves. That is, just as it requires television stations and radio stations to prove that they are broadcasting in the public interest.

Moreover, considering that all of these social networking companies say that they are platform where ideas are shared freely; however, in practice, they act as publishers (by editing the messages that are allowed out and choosing winners and losers among the field of message bearers). Therefore, if they are going to act like publishers, they should be open to lawsuits like publishers.

Another instance that reminds us that the speech everybody likes does not need protecting

  1. Reddit bans r/The_Donald and r/ChapoTrapHouse as part of a major expansion of its rules

As seen on The Verge, Reddit has banned subreddits “The_Donald” and “ChapoTrapHouse” as part of an expansion of its rules.

redditReddit will ban r/The_Donald, r/ChapoTrapHouse, and about 2,000 other communities today after updating its content policy to more explicitly ban hate speech. The policy update comes three weeks after Black Lives Matter protests led several popular Reddit forums to go dark temporarily in protest of what they called the company’s lax policies around hosting and promoting racist content. It marks a major reversal for a company whose commitment to free expression has historically been so strong that it once allowed users to distribute stolen nude photos freely on the site.

“I have to admit that I’ve struggled with balancing my values as an American, and around free speech and free expression, with my values and the company’s values around common human decency,” Reddit CEO Steve Huffman said in a call with reporters.

In a blog post that cites the company’s new rules, Huffman said users of the r/The_Donald subreddit had violated the site’s policies for years. (The site has no official connection to President Donald Trump, although he did do an Ask Me Anything there as a candidate in 2016.) “The community has consistently hosted and upvoted more rule-breaking content than average (Rule 1), antagonized us and other communities (Rules 2 and 8), and its mods have refused to meet our most basic expectations,” Huffman said.

Similarly, r/ChapoTrapHouse had also hosted content that violates the site’s rules, Huffman said. The subreddit is a spinoff of the popular left-wing podcast.

Reddit’s new policy begins with a first rule that requires users to “consider the human.” It reads:

Remember the human. Reddit is a place for creating community and belonging, not for attacking marginalized or vulnerable groups of people. Everyone has a right to use Reddit free of harassment, bullying, and threats of violence. Communities and people that incite violence or that promote hate based on identity or vulnerability will be banned.

That formed the basis of a policy framework that bans hate speech.

“Reddit’s mission is to bring community and belonging to everybody in the world, and there is speech in the world and on Reddit that prevents other people from doing so,” Huffman told reporters. “Harassing speech or hateful speech prevents people from coming to Reddit and feeling safe and sharing their vulnerabilities … So if we have speech on Reddit that’s preventing people from using Reddit the way that we intend it to be used, or that prevents us from achieving our mission, then it’s actually a very easy decision.”

The introduction of the new policies has resulted in the removal of about 2,000 subreddits so far, and the company says “the vast majority” were inactive. Only about 200 of them had more than 10 daily users, the company said. They include:

  • r/DarkHumorAndMemes
  • r/ConsumeProduct
  • r/DarkJokeCentral
  • r/GenderCritical
  • r/Cumtown
  • r/imgoingtohellforthis2
  • r/Wojak
  • r/soyboys

Last year, Reddit “quarantined” r/The_Donald, placing it behind a warning screen after it was found to host content that incited violence. The company had previously prevented posts on the forum from reaching Reddit’s front page. Former users of the forum began moving to a new site off Reddit last year.

While Monday’s removals hit some high-profile political communities, Huffman said the company would continue to support a broad range of political speech.

(Read more at The Verge)

It sounds like these restrictions would have stopped A Modest Proposal by Jonathan Swift

Although I do not support the transfer of nude pictures, this clampdown on the conservative segment of the Reddit audience does not match up to the standards that they claim to hold. As with the previous article, this seems like a case of a company that claims to be an online billboard acting more like an online publisher that edits the works on it.

Censorship of Conservatives by Liberal Twitter creates a response

  1. Parler hits 500K as an alternative to liberal Twitter

One America News Network reported in a 27 June 2020 article that Parler has gained 500K users due (in most part) to the censorship from liberals at Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube.

ParlerAmid rising censorship of conservative voices on Twitter and other social media platforms, the new app Parler has seen a large influx of users. According to reports, more than 500,000 new people created accounts on the site after Twitter recently banned two conservative accounts.

Parler’s user base skyrocketed by 50% this week alone, bringing the total number of users to 1.5 million.

Conservatives like Rep. Matt Gaetz and Sen. Ted Cruz announced they joined site after experiencing what they called “unfair banning of right-wing accounts.”

“They use that power to silence conservatives and to promote their radical left-wing agenda,” stated Cruz. “Big tech has shown the ability to shadow ban what you say or post without anyone ever knowing about it.”

(Read more at One America News Network)

I have been on Parler as @Mark1one since 4 June 2019

Feel free to follow me at @Mark1one, since I have been there for some time.

Of course, since I am not a heavy hitter (and even if I were), all I can say is: the more the merrier.

Potential Democrat leaders encourage discrimination by the Left on social media

  1. Democrat Congressional candidate urges Twitter followers to ‘report’ Trump supporters

Breitbart shares the rantings of McMurray, the ]Democrat candidate for New York’s 27th Congressional District.

Nate McMurrayNate McMurray, the Democrat candidate for New York’s 27th Congressional District, urged Twitter followers Wednesday to “report” Trump supporters.

“When you see fake videos, when you see racism, when you hear support for Trump, do not roll your eyes, do not play nice, do not worry about hurting someone’s feelings, CALL IT OUT — REPORT IT — FIGHT IT,” he wrote:

Thursday, immigration lawyer Matthew Kolken shared a screenshot of McMurray’s tweet and said, “This is a dangerous chill of 1st Amendment freedoms”:

However, McMurray appeared to have amended the “REPORT IT – FIGHT IT” command with “TALK TO THEM – DO NOT GO WITH THE FLOW” in another tweet on Friday:

(Read more at Breitbart)

This “Fight it” stance seems to go with someone who thinks their supporters have made their mind(s) up and cannot be confused with the facts

Much like the times I have noted the Cancel culture, this “Cancel campaigning” seems to ignore the opposition and encourages the followers of the campaign to do the same. It looks like this guy has thoroughly gotten lost in his own confirmation bias.

Facebook doubles down on eliminating the First Amendment

  1. Facebook blacklists Laura Loomer’s campaign ads

Breitbart reports on what might seem to be violation of Laura Loomer’s First Amendment rights.

Laura LoomerFacebook has reportedly banned all ads on behalf of Laura Loomer, the frontrunner in the GOP primary race for House candidate in Florida’s 21st district.

Loomer’s personal account is banned on Facebook, as well as on Facebook-owned Instagram, and her campaign was prevented from creating a page to reach voters on Facebook last November. Now the campaign is being banned from running ads on the platform as well.

Loomer’s most recent ad can be viewed on YouTube:

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has previously said it’s not right for “private companies to censor politicians.”

“The Laura Loomer for Congress Inc. Campaign represents more than just Laura Loomer, the candidate,” said Karen Giorno, chief strategist for the Loomer campaign and formerly the campaign manager for Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign in Florida.

The Loomer campaign, said Giorno,  “embodies a national movement, that radiates from within President Donald J. Trump’s home district, FL-21 and is made up of millions of voices from across the country. Many have become volunteers, donors and have pledged to vote for Laura Loomer in the August 18th primary and again in November to retire the radical, elitist, entrenched Democrat incumbent, Lois Frankel. ”

“This community of citizens that are Republican, Democrat and Independent are choosing to support Laura Loomer for Congress to represent them in Washington, because she embodies their values, their mores, their beliefs and their norms.  By Facebook banning Laura Loomer for Congress Campaign ads from running, they are essentially going against their own policy, and canceling millions of voices as well.”

“This is a perfect example of how Big Tech is committing blatant election interference in the form of illegal in-kind contributions to the Democrat party and their candidates in a race that is taking place in the President’s backyard.”

(Read more at Breitbart)

The Left is out to destroy America. Sadly, Loomer is getting in the way of that.

While Zuckerberg claims he wants free speech, his actions show that he only wants free liberal speech or free Marxist speech. If you step over the boundaries and start to become in the least conservative (as with the first article in this post), he will shut you down.

It seems that Starbucks has seen the light


Antifa carries AK-47’s and takes over 6 square blocks of Seattle (Starbuck’s home)

Starbucks bans employees from wearing anything in support of Black Lives Matter

The Hill reports that Starbucks now has decided to pull back from supporting Black Lives Matter.

SeattleAR-15
Antifa member carrying an AR-15

An internal memo sent to Starbucks employees last week specifically warned staffers against wearing accessories or clothes bearing messages in support of the Black Lives Matter movement.

The memo, obtained by BuzzFeed News, reminds staffers that such messages are prohibited under the company’s policy against accessories that “advocated a political, religious or personal issue.”

Numerous employees told the news outlet, however, that the company regularly allows or even encourages employees to wear pins in support of LGBTQ equality, especially during Pride Month every June.

“Starbucks LGBTQ+ partners wear LGBTQ+ pins and shirts, that also could incite and create violent experiences amongst partners and customers,” one black transgender employee of the coffee chain told BuzzFeed. “We have partners who experienced harassment and transphobia/homophobia for wearing their pins and shirts, and Starbucks still stands behind them.”

A video from a top company executive reportedly sent with the memo warned employees that “agitators who misconstrue the fundamental principles” of the movement could seek to “amplify divisiveness” if the messages are displayed in stores.

“We know your intent is genuine and understand how personal this is for so many of us. This is important and we hear you,” the memo read.

(Read more at The Hill)

Do you think that the light-handed reports from main stream media influenced Starbucks?

Since CNN took the word of Mayor Jenny Durkan at face value (as evidenced by the tweet below) and did not investigate the violence within the barricades, maybe they (and the other Democrat-supporting press) has made themselves a non-factor as far as Starbucks is concerned.

You see, Starbucks would know that the tripe that this Democrat mayor spews (refer below) does not match with reality. With people in Seattle, they would know that backing the Antifa side and the Black Lives Matter side would mean the economic death of a company that asked for more than a pittance for their services. So they produced this memo from reality.

Reality like that experienced by freelance reporters and the Seattle Police Chief.


Reality like that experienced by those accused of crime or those who have an unpopular opinion.


A reality that we all will contend with should another Democrat administration come to power along with a Democrat House and Senate.

A hat tip to The Last Refuge.

Seven stories on the foolishness of “the Squad”


Problems with Rashida Tlaib

  1. Rashida Tlaib Boos Hillary Clinton at Bernie Sanders Rally: ‘No, No, I’ll Boo’

Breitbart reports in a 1 February 2020 article that Rashida Tlaib bucked the lead of the moderator and led the crowd in booing Hillary Clinton.

rashida-iowa-boo-hillaryRep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) booed Hillary Clinton at an Iowa event for her candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) on Friday evening, drawing laughter from the audience.

Tlaib made an appearance at Sanders’ “Caucus Concert” in Clive, Iowa, on Friday, which also featured a performance by the indie folk band Bon Iver, and took an opportunity on stage to boo Sanders’ former challenger.

During the panel discussion, the moderator, Dionna Langford, made a reference to Clinton’s recent remarks that “nobody likes him [Sanders].”

“We’re not going to boo. We’re not going to boo. We’re classy here,” Langford told the audience.

Tlaib interjected.

“No, no, I’ll boo,” she said, shouting “boo” loudly into the microphone:

(Read more at Breitbart)

Had this been a Republican, this would be on the front page of the New York Times

As we all know, had a conservative or other out-of-favor group booed Hillary Clinton, they would have been pilloried by most media outlets, both left and right. However, because this politician has a Democrat and a Muslim label, the main stream media has decided to ignore this event. The only way we find out about it is that a few right-wing media do the job that the main stream media as abandoned.

  1. Rashida Tlaib Releases Apologetic Statement After Booing Hillary Clinton

Breitbart also reports in a 1 February 2020 article that Rashida Tlaib has flip-flopped on her opposition to Hillary.

rashida-tlaib-apologizes-after-clip-booing-hillary-clinton-goes-viralRep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) on Saturday released an apologetic statement after going viral for booing Hillary Clinton at a campaign event for Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) on Friday evening, explaining that she allowed her “disappointment with Secretary Clinton’s latest comments about Senator Sanders and his supporters get the best of me.”

Tlaib released the statement after booing at the mention of Clinton at Sanders’ “Caucus Concert” in Clive, Iowa, explaining her frustration with attempts to “dismiss the strength and diversity” of Sanders’ movement.

“I am so incredibly in love with the movement that our campaign of #NotMeUs has created. This makes me protective over it and frustrated by attempts to dismiss the strength and diversity of our movement,” she wrote.

“However, I know what is at stake if we don’t unify over one candidate to beat Trump and I intend to do everything possible to ensure that Trump does not win in 2020,” she continued, explaining that she “allowed my disappointment with Secretary Clinton’s latest comments about Senator Sanders and his supporters get the best of me”:


(Read more at Breitbart)

Although the main stream press will not let us know, there is a war going on in the Democrat party

Between the Clinton moderates and the Warren/Sanders/Buttigieg socialists, people have come to a war of words (refer to the post Kyle Jurek to see how a Bernie supporter says cities will burn if Bernie doesn’t get the nomination).

Problems with AOC

  1. Ocasio-Cortez Tells Billionaires: The People Don’t Want Your Money; They Want Your Power

In a 21 January 2020 article, Breitbart repeats the claims by AOC that socialists don’t want billionaires’ money — they want the billionaires’ power.

AOC_isAnIdiotRep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) on Monday delivered a message to billionaires, stating that the people want their “power” — not their money.

The New York lawmaker spoke at the Blackout for Human Rights: MLK Now 2020 in Harlem’s Riverside Church on Monday, stating that if billionaires want to be ethical, they should relinquish their power.

“If Jeff Bezos wants to be a good person, you turn Amazon into a worker cooperative,” she said to cheers. “You know, like what do I do with all this money that I have created with this unjust system?”

“And if — usually if you’re a billionaire, that means that you control a massive system. It means that you own oil supplies. It means that you control textiles. It means that you have a massive labor force under your control,” she continued.

“And to be ethical, if you’re a billionaire today, the thing that you need to do is give up control and power. So I don’t want your money as much as we want your power. The people. Not me,” she clarified:

(Read more at Breitbart)

What power (other than money) do all billionaires have?

According to the decision of the Supreme Court in Buckley versus Valeo, the ability to direct money to support a cause or a candidate constitutes free speech. Therefore, other than the billionaire’s ability to support a candidate with money or resources (food, transportation, goods, services, …) — what power does the billionaire have that AOC supposedly wants over the money?

This woman is a bloviating moron.

  1. AOC claims Democrats are center or center-conservative

The Washington Times provides the words of Representative Ocasio-Cortez — who said Democrats are the “center or center-conservative.”

If one is a socialist, the Democratic Party probably does look conservative.

At a Martin Luther King Day event Monday, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, New York Democrat, derided her party as insufficiently left-wing and too beholden to capitalism.

AOC_isAnIdiotTwo“We don’t have a left party in the United States. The Democratic Party is not a left party,” the freshman congresswoman said to audience applause. “The Democratic Party is a center or a center-conservative party.”

(Read more at the Washington Times)

How has “socialist” become “center or center-conservative?”

How has the party who staged cry-ins outside of a inner-city school in South Texas now transformed into a conservative party? How has the party who denies due process to a
sitting President
become a conservative party? When has the party who cannot handle a caucus of the Democrat part of a small state (but still wants to nationalize our health care) somehow transformed into a conservative group?

More centrally, when has the controlling socialist (as exposed through the Green New Deal) become the freedom-loving, job-creating conservative?

  1. A-Owe-C riles Dems by refusing to pay party dues, bankrolling colleagues’ opponents

Fox News points out how AOC has been marginalizing herself by both refusing to pay her Democrat party dues and then bankrolling opponents in the Democrat party who are not liberal enough for her tastes.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has already topped the fundraising charts in her short time in Congress, but the liberal darling won’t donate a cent of her millions to Democrats’ House campaign organization — a position that has rankled some of her colleagues, Fox News has learned.

Instead, Ocasio-Cortez is building her own fundraising operation for fellow progressive candidates to bypass the official Democratic Party infrastructure. Already, she’s actively funding primary challengers to oust certain Democratic colleagues.

“Sometimes the question comes: ‘Do you want to be in a majority or do you want to be in the minority?’” Rep. Gregory Meeks, D-N.Y., told Fox News, when asked about AOC’s stance. “And do you want to be part of a team?”

Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) Chairwoman Cheri Bustos downplayed Ocasio-Cortez’s decision to shun dues and pointed to the record-breaking fundraising numbers the committee has notched without her.

“That’s always up to individual members so I guess I don’t think about it one way or another,” Bustos said when asked about Ocasio-Cortez’s stance. “We’re raising record amounts of money from our members.”

(Read more at Fox News)

Democrats deserve this. This is socialism in action.

Democrats birthed the baby of class warfare and then got rich off of the taxpayers. Therefore, it follows that one of their own kind would start to step in their path. Ocasio-Cortez has only begun to take from the rich Democrat party and give to her poor socialist comrades.

Problems with Ilhan Omar

  1. Iranian Journalist Says Ilhan Omar Helped Smear Her After She Criticized Soleimani

The Daily Caller reported in a 10 January 2020 article that Masih Alinejad became the victim of a smear campaign after that Iranian journalist criticized General Soleimani.

Masih Alinejad
Masih Alinejad

Iranian journalist and author Masih Alinejad says Democratic Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar has been a part of a smear campaign against her.

Alinejad wrote an op-ed for the Washington Post criticizing the late Iranian General Qasem Soleimani and claiming that many Iranians viewed him as a warmonger and even a war criminal rather than a celebrated leader — and Friday evening, she told Fox News host Martha MacCallum that Omar had joined those attacking her.

Alinejad said that she believed the attacks were a response to her recent article, saying, “I criticized Soleimani and I’ve said that many Iranians do not see him as a hero. They see him as a warmonger, as a war criminal. And that is why I got a lot of attacks by these Islamist lobbyists and she actually shared one of these defamatory articles against me.”

Alinejad said that what really bothered her was the fact that she had reached out to the freshman congresswoman on a number of occasions, asking her repeatedly to lend her voice to different situations.

“One time, six women got arrested just because of protesting compulsory hijab. Another time, 29 women in Iran got arrested in one day because of protesting compulsory hijab, and I asked Omar to join us and show solidarity. She was silent,” Alinejad began. “And another time when my brother was taken hostage by the Revolutionary Guard, I reach out to her. Silence again. My mother was interrogated for three hours just because of my activities. Again, she was silent. 1500 people got killed, she was silent. Right now, 176 people got killed in a suspicious situation in Iran, Ukrainian airplane — she’s silent!”

“Are you suggesting that she doesn’t care about the freedom that you are fighting for?” MacCallum pressed, asking whether Alinejad believed Omar was actually siding with the regime and against the people.

(Read more at the Daily Caller)

Why should we expect a leftist Representative who seems to have cheated the system to gain entry to the USA to act differently?

Why would we expect a Democrat (who comes from a pool of identity politics and bases her election on her religion and race) to treat this journalist fairly when that journalist bucks the Democrat norm and took stances the elected Democrat did not like?

  1. Ilhan Omar Continues To Dump Big Bucks Into Alleged Boyfriend’s Firm

The Daily Caller reports how Ilhan Omar continues in 2020 to dump money into her boyfriend’s firm.

Over half of Democratic Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar’s campaign expenditures in the last quarter of 2019 went to her alleged boyfriend’s consulting firm, according to Federal Election Commission filings released Friday.

Omar’s campaign paid $217,000 to E Street Group LLC between Oct. 1 and Dec. 31 for research services, digital advertising, fundraising consulting, travel and more, filings show. The firm is run by Democratic consultant Tim Mynett, who was accused by his ex-wife in August of having an affair with Omar.

The fourth-quarter spending figures represent yet another significant uptick in the level of campaign funds Omar has dedicated to Mynett’s firm.

In the third quarter of 2019, Omar disbursed about $146,713 to E Street Group, and in the 10-month period prior, from August 2018 to June 2019, her total spending with the firm was $223,000.

In total, Mynett’s firm has received $587,000 from Omar’s campaign, the bulk of which was received after he was alleged to be dating the congresswoman.

(Read more at the Daily Caller)

So, Ilhan Omar may have married her brother, may have lied to gain entrance to the USA, and seems to have broken up a marriage while married

While Ilhan Omar may have married her brother, lied to gain entrance to the USA, seems to have committed campaign finance violations, seems to have broken up a marriage while she was also married — she does not seem to be slowing down with her illegal and immoral acts.

All the time, she wears a hijab — a symbol of her Islamic chastity and morality.

This woman wearing a hijab for chastity makes about as much sense as Americans handing over their health care to Democrats (who got hacked in 2016 and could not run a 200K member caucus in 2020).

If the Presidential election were today, who has earned your vote


Democrats: the party of “Do as I say, not as I do”


Democrats show how not to promote a free press

The Democrat press accuses Trump of suppressing the Freedom of the Press

I cannot count the times the press has accused President Trump of oppressing the members of the American press. However, finding an example of the whining required reference to an 8 January 2019 commentary at The Federalist that detailed the scaremongering by the American press on freedom of the press.

committee-to-protect-journalists

The Committee to Protect Journalists, a group alleging to promote press freedom and the rights of journalists, awarded President Donald Trump the “Overall Achievement in Undermining Global Press Freedom” in its “Press Oppressors” awards this week. The story was giddily retweeted across the liberal Twitterverse, because, one imagines, people actually believe it.

From there, the author (David Harsanyi) goes on to characterize the battle between the American press and President Trump as a “slap fight (between) a couple of sloshed Real Housewives.” Sadly, until President Trump moved his press gatherings out to the edge of Marine One, I would have to agree with Mr. Harsanyi and say that the press got too much press out of the White House. Nonetheless, the move to the edge of Marine One happily put an end to much of the grandstanding by the press.

Additionally, I would suggest that any freedom-loving conservative read this article by Mr. Harsanyi so as to glean:

While Trump’s efforts to stop Michael Wolff’s fabulist “Fire and Fury” from being published are silly and counterproductive and sure to fail (update: as is his new lawsuit against Buzzfeed), he is merely accessing the legal rights that all Americans enjoy. In the meantime, Democrats, right now, support new laws that would allow the state to ban political books and documentaries. The Obama years made overturning the First Amendment via the Citizens United a tenent of its party platform. Obama, in perfect syntax, engaged in an act of norm-breaking, called out the Supreme Court publicly for upholding First Amendment. That was rhetoric, too. Few defenders of the press seemed bothered by any of it.

(Read more at The Federalist)

Although sometimes embarrassed by Trump’s foibles, I still support a President who punches back

Admittedly, there are times that I wince at the words tweeted by the President; however, I appreciate this President who fights (unlike some seemingly spineless Republicans).

thefighter1

This is particularly accentuated since I have seen that this President has taken into consideration many of the topics that have been heavy on my heart. He has held the hope presented by the pro-life position. Moreover, he took in mind the effect the misdirected courts have had on our lives by appointing constitutionally-minded jurists. Furthermore, he removed the chains placed by previous administrations on our economy through unnecessary regulation. More to the point, he removed the mandate that we be required to kowtow to governmental meddling between me and my doctor.

And while I will not make this portion of this post into a listing of the major accomplishment of the administration, I do find it necessary to reiterate the mistrust I have in the press due to their 90% negative reporting on this President.

Democrats show how not to allow journalism

O’Rourke ejects a conservative journalist

We find by reading Breitbart that Presidential hopeful Robert Francis O’Rourke tossed a conservative journalist (Joel Pollack) out of a public meeting.

NothingStopORourke

Former Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D-TX) has styled himself as a champion of press freedom, tweeting last October: “The press is not the enemy of the people but the best defense against tyranny.”

It is now August, and with his poll numbers falling in the Democratic presidential primary, O’Rourke has decided that he is entitled to abuse members of the press who cannot be relied upon to provide favorable coverage.

O’Rourke’s campaign ejected this Breitbart News reporter from a speech at Benedict College, a historically black college, on Tuesday afternoon.

JoelPollack_EjectedByBeto

This reporter was standing along the side of a lecture hall in the basement of the Henry Pinder Fine Arts Humanities Center, waiting for the event to start, together with roughly 200 students and college staff members. Other news outlets had set up cameras in the back of the room.

Several minutes after the 3:00 p.m. event had been scheduled to begin, a staff member in a Beto O’Rourke t-shirt approached this reporter and asked what outlet I represented. Upon reading the press credential on my chest, he put a hand on my shoulder and said, cheerfully, “Oh, hey. All right.”

A few minutes later, before the event began, a campus police officer approached this reporter and motioned for me to accompany him to the back of the room, adding that I should bring any property I had with me. In the hallway outside, he informed me that I was to leave.

A different member of the O’Rourke campaign staff, who said his name was “Steven” and would not give a last name, said that I was being ejected because I had been “disruptive” at past events.

This reporter has covered two O’Rourke events. The first was at a protest outside a shelter for migrant teens in Homestead, Florida, in June; the second was at the College of Charleston “Bully Pulpit” lecture in Charleston, South Carolina, on Monday evening. At no point was there any disruption whatsoever.

This reporter asked a question during a press gaggle on Monday evening; that was the only interaction of any kind with the candidate.

The question asked the Democratic presidential hopeful whether misquoting Trump’s comments on riots in Charlottesville, Virginia, in 2017 was consistent with O’Rourke’s pledge to “heal” and not “inflame” divisions in this country.

Considering how the Left howled when Jimmy Acosta was barred from White House briefings, this should have made front-page news

However, unlike the spats between the White House and Jimmy Acosta, Kaitlan Collins, and others, they might have forgotten about Obama’s blacklisting of Fox?

iu

Or, more to the point, did they think that we did not notice how they encircled Acosta after he was called out for blocking a female White House staffer from taking the microphone he had repeatedly been told to relinquish? News to the Nightly News: you cannot successfully champion both the #MeToo movement and a bully of females.

Bodyguards for April Ryan rough up an invited guest photojournalist

The New York Post lets the cat out of the bag by reporting on the attack that one bodyguard of April Ryan perpetuated on a photojournalist who was trying to ply his trade.

AprilRyanBodyguard

CNN political analyst April Ryan — who has repeatedly blasted President Trump for attacking and vilifying the press — got her bodyguard to forcibly remove a journalist from an event she was speaking at in New Jersey, leading cops to charge him Monday with assault.

“This was more than just an assault on me,” tweeted New Brunswick Today editor Charlie Kratovil. “This was an assault on freedom of the press.”

Kratovil claims he was violently tossed from the New Jersey Parent Summit on Aug. 3 by Ryan’s goon after spending two hours inside filming other guests and speakers without any problems.

Kratovil had been invited to The Heldrich Hotel, where the event was held, by a public relations firm and asked to cover it. Video posted online shows him sitting in the audience as Ryan takes the stage and starts speaking.

Moments later, her bodyguard — Joel Morris, 30, of Illinois — comes into view and is told something by Ryan. He promptly walks over to Kratovil and allegedly attempts to take his video camera.

“Put that down,” Kratovil yells. “Don’t you dare — put that down, sir! That’s my camera!”

A tussle allegedly ensues and Morris winds up walking Kratovil out of the venue — with his arm twisted around his back, the journalist says.

“This is a personal event,” Morris can be heard telling him. “You’re not allowed back in.”

A woman can be heard screaming at Kratovil at one point, saying: “How dare you come in here and interrupt this event like this!”

“I didn’t interrupt,” he fired back.

Kratovil posted a video on his Twitter page Monday, explaining how cops found “probable cause” to charge Morris with harassment, assault and theft.

“I was there to cover April Ryan’s speech,” Kratovil explained. “Joel Morris stole [my] camera, high-tailed it out of the room. One thing led to another, I ended up being assaulted after retrieving the camera. But now Mr. Morris is going to have to show up on Sept. 12…in Superior Court.”

Kratovil added, “It’s a shame that we even have to be at this point.”

He read a statement from the NJ Society of Professional Journalists, saying: “It is never under any circumstances permissible for a person aggrieved at being photographed or videotaped to lay hands on the journalist, or attempt to take away the journalist’s equipment.”

“It is sad we have to say this, and remind people of this — and it’s super sad that we have to remind another journalist of this,” Kratovil said. “We are still waiting for [Ryan] to comment on this unfortunate incident…Maybe now that there’s criminal charges we might hear something from her. I hope sincerely that she does comment and I hope she does condemn this. This is unacceptable…Not in our country, we have freedom of the press here.”

(Read more at New York Post)

Although this started in full view of April Ryan and the bodyguard was in her employ, she denied involvement

Somehow, a person who made a name for herself by reporting on other people has surrounded herself with bodyguards and will not allow herself to be the subject of reporting.

Another phase of the killing of the Freedom of the Press: Liberals stand against the free flow of ideas

Facebook bans ads from The Epoch Times after huge pro-Trump buy

Due to the slanted reporting by NBC News in their 22 August 2019 article on the Epoch Times, it becomes evident that maybe this outlet (that liberals want to close down) merits our support.

To quote NBC (and, thence, read beyond the liberal bias to see the possible truth):

Facebook has banned The Epoch Times, a conservative news outlet that spent more money on pro-Trump Facebook advertisements than any group other than the Trump campaign, from any future advertising on the platform.

The decision follows an NBC News report that The Epoch Times had shifted its spending on Facebook in the last month, seemingly in an effort to obfuscate its connection to some $2 million worth of ads that promoted the president and conspiracy theories about his political enemies.

“Over the past year we removed accounts associated with the Epoch Times for violating our ad policies, including trying to get around our review systems,” a Facebook spokesperson said. “We acted on additional accounts today and they are no longer able to advertise with us.”

Facebook’s decision came as a result of a review prompted by questions from NBC News. The spokesperson explained that ads must include disclaimers that accurately represent the name of the ad’s sponsors.

The Epoch Times’ new method of pushing the pro-Trump conspiracy ads on Facebook, which appeared under page names such as “Honest Paper” and “Pure American Journalism,” allowed the organization to hide its multimillion-dollar spending on dark-money ads, in effect bypassing Facebook’s political advertising transparency rules. Facebook’s ban will affect only The Epoch Times’ ability to buy ads; the sock-puppet pages created to host the new policy-violating ads were still live at the time of publication.

Nicholas Fouriezos, a reporter for the website OZY, tweeted about the move Thursday. It was first spotted last week by Lachlan Markay of The Daily Beast.

A recent NBC News investigation revealed how The Epoch Times had evolved from a nonprofit newspaper that carried a Chinese-American religious movement’s anti-communism message into a conservative online news behemoth that embraced President Donald Trump and conspiracy content.

(Read more tripe at NBC News)

Facebook as one of the gatekeepers for the Democrat party

Nobody can deny the numerous times Facebook has acted to suppress points of view that counter the Democrat orthodoxy. When at a gathering of liberals, Mark Zuckerberg bragged that Facebook had banned pro-life ads to the platform just prior to the Irish referendum on abortion (something that at least one Spanish article corroborates).

PJWBanned-1200x630

So, how can we consider Facebook (or Google or Twitter) a unbiased platform for the digital exchange of information? Considering that it took Facebook years of anti-Semitic offenses by Louis Farrakhan to get him banned, but only months of right-wing reporting or commentary by Paul Joseph Watson, Milo Yiannopoulos, and Laura Loomer to get them banned, there is no way to trust Facebook in such a manner.

NYTwits: You’re not the resistance

NYT Staffer Pleads With Newsroom: ‘We’re Not F**king Part Of The Resistance’

Through a 14 August 2019 article in the Daily Caller, we are told of an instance where a member of the press resisted “The Reistance.”

The New York Times takes a lot of heat from the right for just existing.

But this week things turned majorly introspective at a newsroom meeting in which a staffer told his coworkers that they all need to remember that they’re not part of the left-wing movement.

But this week things turned majorly introspective at a newsroom meeting in which a staffer told his coworkers that they all need to remember that they’re not part of the left-wing movement.

That they even needed a reminder on this matter speaks volumes.

The meeting came after Manhattan’s paper of record caught hell when editors ran — and then changed — a headline that put President Trump in a favorable light. The headline changed after the Twitterverse descended on the NYT like an angry swarm of bees.

“Trump Urges Unity Vs. Racism,” last Monday’s headline read after Trump delivered a speech denouncing white supremacy after the recent spate of mass shootings in Dayton and El Paso killed 30 people.

Lefty Joan Walsh, a CNN contributor and longtime editor at The Nation, dramatically dropped her subscription. If you lose Joan Walsh you know you’re in trouble (eye roll)

In the next edition, the NYT changed the headline to “Assailing Hate But Not Guns.”

CNN media writer Oliver Darcy wrote about a newsroom town hall that happened at the behest of Executive Editor Dean Baquet last Friday.

New York Times Illustrations Ahead Of Earnings Figures

Stating the obvious, one staffer said, “There are a lot of people that think The Times is too liberal, and when you start throwing words like that around, people will accuse us of editorializing.”

Baquet didn’t need his arm twisted. “It was a fucking mess,” he told reporters and editors of the headline choice.

(Read more at the Daily Caller)

A headline to state the obvious: the New York Times is only objective as a mouthpiece for Democrats

Nobody can gloss over it. All pretense that there might be true objectivity at the New York Times has evaporated.

Muslim-American Journalist Says Twitter Shadow-Banned Her After Asking Ilhan Omar For An Interview

Through a 14 August 2019 article in the Daily Caller, we hear the story of Dalia Al-Aqidi, a Muslim, female journalist and refugee, who was shadow-banned from Twitter after pressing Ilhan Omar for an interview.

DaliaAl-Aqidi_IlhanOmar

A Muslim-American female journalist and refugee was shadow-banned from Twitter after criticizing Democratic Minnesota Rep. Ilhan Omar.

Dalia Al-Aqidi said Omar has largely refused to grant sit-down interviews to U.S. media outlets, while doing so with Al Jazeera, which is owned by the government of Qatar.

Al-Aqidi is a longtime journalist who has covered the White House and the Iraq war for Alhurra TV, a U.S.-based Arabic network, where the Chicago Tribune lauded her as the “most-watched TV reporter no one in America has seen.” She has also contributed stories to the U.S. government-run Voice of America and the Saudi-government-run Alarabiya in the past. She previously fled Hussein’s Iraq.

“I dared her to give me a 30 minute 1-on-1 interview. I believe we have things in common we can discuss — we’re both immigrants, women, and Muslims. And from what I’ve seen from her she only gives interviews to Al Jazeera,” Al-Aqidi told the Daily Caller News Foundation.

“Two hours later, CAIR started following me” on Twitter, she said, referring to the Council on American-Islamic Relations. “So I pointed out CAIR’s connection to the Muslim Brotherhood.”

Soon after, it was as if Al-Aqidi didn’t exist on Twitter. From her side, everything looked normal. She never received communications from Twitter notifying her of violating its terms of service, and she could log in and send tweets.

But no one could see them. When a user searches her name on Twitter, it never comes up in the autocomplete. If you type in her screen name “@dalia30,” it does not come up, with Twitter instead suggesting @dalia30900915. When you search for key words that she has tweeted, her own missives are missing from the search results.

Known as a “shadow-ban,” the practice of Twitter secretly preventing others from seeing someone’s tweets, while misleading the user that this is not happening, is so common that a website, shadowban.eu, tests for it. It confirms that Al-Aqidi is shadow-banned.

(Read more at 14 August 2019 article in the Daily Caller)

This goes to prove that insider politics has killed journalism

Just as Dalia Al-Aqidi got shadow banned for asking questions of the untouchable Ilhan Omar, Laura Loomer got banned from Facebook shortly after reporting on Nancy Pelosi and Sharyl Attkisson left from CBS with her persistence in investigating the Obama excesses.

And Democrats present themselves as tolerant.

Democrats on race relations: Ilhan Omar demonizes all White men

Ilhan Omar suggests people should be ‘more fearful of white men’ than jihadists in 2018 interview

The New York Post reveals through a 25 July 2018 article how Rep. Ilhan Omar demonized all White men.

ilhan-omar-FearWhiteMen

Rep. Ilhan Omar said Americans should be “more fearful of white men” when discussing the threat of “jihadist terrorism.”

The Minnesota progressive was asked in a resurfaced interview with Al Jazeera from August 2018 about the rise of Islamophobia, citing the attacks that killed eight people on a Manhattan bike path in 2017 and the 2015 terror attack in San Bernardino, Calif., that killed 14.

“I would say our country should be more fearful of white men across our country because they are actually causing most of the deaths within this country,” Omar answered.

“And so if fear was the driving force of policies to keep America safe — Americans safe inside of this country — we should be profiling, monitoring, and creating policies to fight the radicalization of white men,” she continued.

Omar, a Somalia-born Democrat, along with other first-year Democratic congresswomen — Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Rashida Tlaib and Ayanna Pressley — have been feuding with President Trump after he tweeted earlier this month that they should “go back and help fix the totally broken and crime-infested places from which they came.”

(Read more at the New York Post)

If the Democrat press held Ilhan Omar to account …

If the Democrat press held Ilhan Omar to account for this statement (or her accusations that represenatives friendly to Israel held dual allegances or her “Some people did something” comment about 9/11 or her many anti-Semitic statements), then it might again start to set unfortunate trends.

I say “again” because the last time the Democrat press dismissed the words of a prominent Democrat, riots erupted. On another instance with that same Democrat, towns burned in support of lawlessness.

Ilhan Omar must not have believed her own advice on White men (quoted above), since she had an affair with a married White man

In yet another article, the New York Post explains how Rep. Omar has been accused of having an affair with her white, male campaign worker.

A Washington, DC, mom says her political-consultant husband left her for Rep. Ilhan Omar, according to a bombshell divorce filing obtained by The Post.

Dr. Beth Mynett says her cheating spouse, Tim Mynett, told her in April that he was having an affair with the Somali-born US representative — and that he even made a “shocking declaration of love” for the Minnesota congresswoman before he ditched his wife, alleges the filing, submitted in DC Superior Court on Tuesday.

The physician, 55, and her 38-year-old husband — who has worked for left-wing Democrats such as Omar and her Minnesota predecessor, Keith Ellison — have a 13-year-old son together.

“The parties physically separated on or about April 7, 2019, when Defendant told Plaintiff that he was romantically involved with and in love with another woman, Ilhan Omar,” the court papers say.

“Defendant met Rep. Omar while working for her,’’ the document states. “Although devastated by the betrayal and deceit that preceded his abrupt declaration, Plaintiff told Defendant that she loved him, and was willing to fight for the marriage.

“Defendant, however, told her that was not an option for him’’ and moved out the next day, the papers say.

“It is clear to Plaintiff that her marriage to Defendant is over and that there is no hope of reconciliation,’’ according to the filing.

The Mynetts lived together for six years before marrying in 2012, the filing said.

Omar — a member of “the Squad,” a group of far left-leaning female freshman House members including Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and two others — recently separated from her husband, according to reports.

ilhan-omar-tim-mynett

The 37-year-old congresswoman and mom of three paid Tim Mynett and his E. Street Group approximately $230,000 through her campaign since 2018 for fundraising consulting, digital communications, internet advertising and travel expenses.

Omar was spotted enjoying time with Tim Mynett at a California restaurant in March.

(Read more at New York Post)

If Ilhan Omar were anything but a hypocrite

Hypocrit_UntilThen

If Ilhan Omar were a true, principled politician, she might consider taking acts that would be best for her constituents.

If she were true to Islam, there would be no room in her life for infidelity or racism.

If she were a dedicated racist, she never would have had an affair with a White man.

With all of this said, all I can say is that she definitely is a hypocrite.

Democrat hypocrisy on personal protection

In response to the Odessa shooting, Democrats call for ineffective gun control

On Saturday, 31 August 2019, an insane man went on a shooting spree after he was fired and then pulled over for failing to signal a turn. Previously described by neighbors as “scary” and “violent,” this nut called the FBI and began “incoherently rambling” after his firing. Although he had both a criminal record and had been diagnosed with a mental illness, and, therefore, failed his background check, this madman purchased a rifle by way of a private sale. By the end of his rampage, the man who won’t be named here had killed seven and wounded 22 as he drove around shooting randomly before he was stopped by a policeman’s bullet near a movie theater.

During the same weekend in Chicago (where gun laws are in effect), eight were killed and 26 injured during a respite from violence (this is the lowest murder rate since 2011).

Over the years, articles demonstrate that Democrats want gun protection for them, not you

Democratic Congressman: Yeah, You Don’t Need Guns, But ‘We Deserve’ Armed Guards

The Daily Wire reports in a 23 June 2016 article on the hypocrisy of Charlie Rangel.

Democratic New York Representative Charlie Rangel, no stranger to hypocrisy, told The Daily Caller in an interview that while members of Congress “need” and “deserve” to be protected by guns, law-abiding citizens should not own guns.

(Read more at the Daily Wire)

These are the Democrats who carved special payments out that cover their Obamacare expenses

If anyone finds any bit of surprise in the fact that Congress expects armed protection even as they devise methods of disarming the people, then remember these similar situations. Remember that they exempted themselves from Obamacare. Remember that insider trading laws that apply to you do not keep Congress members from using their Congressionally-acquired information to profit.

7 Liberal Hypocrites Who Call For Gun Control While Being Protected By Guns

Townhall comments on the liberal hypocrisy that surrounds the topic of gun control.

One of the great ironies of the gun control debate is that everyone who calls for gun control still wants a man with a gun protecting him. Every governor in America has armed security. You have to go through a metal detector guarded by men with guns to get into the Capitol building. Barack Obama has hundreds of Secret Service agents carrying fully automatic weapons who protect his safety. Even run-of-the-mill Democrats who want to take guns away from everyone else will unhesitatingly pick up the phone and call the police if they feel threatened — so that a man with a gun can show up and make them safe.

But, if a man in a bad neighborhood wants a gun to make his family safe, a rape victim wants a gun to be protected, or just the average Joe wants a gun in case his life is endangered by a burglar, thug or the next Adam Lanza, these same people want to take their guns away. Pro-gun control Democrats may think we have an “upper class” that deserves to be protected with guns while it’s okay if the “peons” get shot, but that goes against the core of what America is supposed to be. If your child’s life is in danger, you should have every bit as much of a right and opportunity to defend his life as the Secret Service does to defend the President of the United States when he’s threatened.

Unfortunately, there are some people in this country who apparently believe they’re so special, so elite, so much better than the rest of the “riff-raff,” that they should have a right to be protected even if you don’t.

(Read the list of seven people and organizations who use guns but campaign for gun laws at Townhall)

Beyond knowing who to ignore and boycott

By knowing to avoid the print of the Journal-News and the bloviating of politicians like Nancy Pelosi or Diane Feinstein or that of celebrities like Mark Kelly, Shania Twain, Rosie O’Donnell, or Michael Moore — we can be happier when we ignore it all.

Democrats accuse the NRA of profiting from bloodshed

Ridiculous Hypocrite Celebrities Launch Dumb New Attack on NRA

Red State rightfully points out one instance of where celebrities started a hypocritical attack on the NRA.

Even as it becomes apparent that Tinseltown’s celebrity set is an increasingly inconsequential political faction, they continue to hector and lecture the rest of as if they are still socially relevant and influential.

Undeterred by the fact that their overwhelming support of and assistance for Hillary Clinton in 2016 not only didn’t push her over the finish, but actually contributed to her defeat, the luminary Illuminati continue to offer up their unnecessary and unwanted opinions.

Since the election the famous have led the #Resistance — resulting in zero change. They have loudly backed the Women’s March, and their donning of vagina hats has provoked far more laughter than change. Celebrities have openly funded and supported the latest surge of gun control fervor following the Parkland school shooting, and the result has been an increase gun sales and a huge spike in new memberships for the NRA.

So not merely inconsequential to success for their liberal causes, but actively detrimental to it, and yet totally unaware of it.

This lack of awareness has led to a particular crowd of celebrities who, unable to ascertain the reason for rising NRA memberships and gun ownership, to concoct a plan to counteract it. Remarkable.

The formation of The NoRA Initiative is meant to be a direct salvo against the NRA. By way of introduction, this outfit crafted an open letter (PDF) to NRA President Wayne LaPierre, and it is a marvel of ignorance and misinformation, all delivered in a demeaning, condescending, angry tone. Just as you’d expect from these geniuses.

This letter — signed by a lengthy list of actors, performers, and dozens of other deeply important people — wastes no time in being an easily disregarded missive of mirth. It begins by addressing the Columbine High School shooting, and our celebrities fall on their collective faces by sentence Two. “Three of the four guns used in the shooting were legally in the possession of the shooters.”

Uh, no. Sorry, Hollywood gun experts, but the two killers at Columbine — Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold — were below the age to “legally” own their firearms. The guns were purchased by another individual, and despite the claim by NoRA, the straw purchase for underage individuals was illegal.

The letter then mentions the NRA held its convention in Denver weeks later. This is another wild inaccuracy. Rather than marching in behind the tragedy, the convention had long been planned for Denver and following the shooting then President Charlton Heston canceled most of the event activities, save for his legally mandated annual speech. This was done out of respect of the victims. Then NoRA engages in more sophistry.

(Read more at Red State)

Not terrorists, but founded by pastors seeking to protect former slaves from the KKK

As I previously blogged in 2016, there are a number of Blacks who support Second Amendment rights. Still, when you compare the support that should exist for the protection of Black families against the stated support for senseless Democrat policies, there really can be no comparison.

Additionally, considering that the NRA was established by former abolitionist pastors who wanted Blacks to be able to protect their own families against the KKK (the Southern Democrat’s violent tool of oppression), there should not be a debate within poor America as to whether only the rich deserve the protection of sidearms via bodyguards (refer to April Ryan above).

As evidenced by the words of the Black conservatives in the 2013 conference documented in the below two videos (both long and short versions), we have ample evidence to support the good intentions of the founders, leaders, and members of the National Rifle Association.

The O’Rourke campaign shows no control in promoting itself after the Odessa shooting

Beto O’Rourke campaign selling ‘this is f—ed up’ T-shirts to help gun control activists

In a 1 September 2019 USA Today article, the sickness of one Democrat campaign comes out.

Former Rep. Beto O’Rourke did not mince words when describing the deadly shooting in Midland-Odessa, Texas, that left at least seven people dead and 22 wounded.

“This is f—ed up,” he said on Twitter Saturday evening and in a television interview on Sunday morning.

Later Sunday, his presidential campaign announced that the “f—ed up” quote had become a T-shirt being sold for $30 on the campaign website.

TeamBeto

“100% of the proceeds from the sale of this item will be shared equally between Mom’s Demand Action and March for Our Lives,” the campaign wrote on the O’Rourke campaign website, referring to two prominent gun violence prevention groups.

According to the campaign, the shirt was printed by a union and made in the United States.

The campaign has defended O’Rourke’s profanity on Twitter.

“if you’re angrier about a swear word than a baby being shot in the face, consider your choices,” the campaign wrote, referring to a 17-month-old girl who had been shot in the Texas shooting.

(Read more at USA Today)

News for “Beto”

What I am angry about stems from the continual attack by “Beto” on my Second Amendment rights any time he can make an emotional plea based on the acts of someone else.

Unlike “Beto,” I believe that murderers should be executed (rather then babies). Unlike “Beto,” I believe that the guilty should be punished, not those law-abiding citizens who have done nothing and who want to protect themselves.

Lead Democrats hypocrisy on “Climate Change”

Obama commits America to higher taxes with the Paris Climate Accord

According to a 1 June 2017 Business Insider article, Obama brought the USA into the Paris Climate Accord in order to supposedly slow the progress of global warming.

In December 2015, nearly every country, including all of the world’s biggest polluters, came together in Paris and agreed to limit carbon emissions.

The Paris Agreement was designed to keep the planet from warming by more than 1.5 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels.

It was a cornerstone of President Barack Obama’s environmental legacy. Now President Donald Trump is withdrawing the US from the accord.

Here’s a quick primer on the Paris Agreement.

What did the US agree to?

The Paris Agreement laid out a framework for countries to adopt clean energy and phase out fossil fuels. Each country submitted a climate-action plan laying out how it would achieve these goals.

The US’s plan, which the Obama administration submitted in March 2015, set the goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 26% to 28% by 2025. The baseline level this reduction is measured against is 2005, when the US emitted 6,132 million metric tons of carbon dioxide.

(Read more at the Business Insider)

After claiming the seas would rise due to global warming, Obama buys multi-million dollar beachfront property

As discussed at PJ Media, Obama has purchased a mulit-million dollar beachfront property which would easily be wiped out by global warming, if it existed.

After the news broke that former President Barack Obama and former First Lady Michelle Obama are buying a $15M waterfront estate in Martha’s Vineyard, some took to social media to accuse the Obamas of hypocrisy on climate change.

“If I genuinely believed in 12 years coastal areas would be under water, I wouldn’t buy a $15 million mansion on…Martha’s Vineyard. Call me crazy, but it doesn’t seem like Obama is taking climate change all that seriously,” wrote Twitter user @RantyAmyCurtis.

Others made a similar point in reaction to the news of the Obamas purchase, which has reportedly not been finalized yet.

“If climate change is as bad as Obama said it was, why is he buying property on or near the beach?” wrote Twitter user @Huffman_Hippy.

“How about Obama pushing climate change legislation then buying a coastal mansion at Martha’s vineyard?” wrote Twitter user @Mikel1618.

Twitter user @Chris_Roy wrote that the Obamas $15 million investment in a waterfront property “seems odd for a climate change alarmist believing in sea level rise and the destruction of coastal regions.Hmmm 🤔. Obviously not thinking of what he will leave his children.”

(Read more at PJ Media)

This was not the first high-profile Democrat to become a climate hypocrite

Al Gore, who hit his peak during his years in the as the Vice President under Bill Clinton, told a German audience in 2008 that “the entire North polarized cap will disappear in five years.” Additionally, he told American households to conserve by keeping the air conditioning and heating at uncomfortable levels (while he maintained a sprawling mansion that included an Olympic-sized, heated pool). Likewise, he encouraged America to abstain from burning gasoline while he uses a fleet of jets and gas-guzzling sedans.

More recently, AOC has been called out for jet-setting and using SUV’s while advocating her drastic “Green New Deal.”

Democrats on terrorism

Democrats want to both coddle and demonize terrorists

When The Atlantic pointed out the incoherence within liberal (hence, Democrat) thought on terrorists.

Shortly after three men with knives and a van spent eight minutes murdering and maiming people at random on London Bridge, one of the Democratic Party’s leading voices on national security responded on Twitter. Chris Murphy began by criticizing Donald Trump for sounding the alarms. “My god,” he wrote. “@POTUS has no idea that the goal of terrorists is to instill a level of fear in the public disproportionate to the actual threat.” The Connecticut senator tried to put the threat in proper proportion. “Terrorism is a real threat,” he acknowledged, “but remember that since 9/11, you have a greater chance of being killed by a falling object than by terrorists.” Murphy then issued a five-point rebuttal to Trump’s approach to terrorism. He did not issue a five-point plan for defeating falling objects.

LondonBridgeMuslimAttackers

Maybe Murphy didn’t do this because falling objects are not equivalent to three men ramming and hacking people to death on London Bridge. Terrorists attack not just individuals but society, which makes mortality rates a poor measure of the danger terrorism poses. Falling objects “attack” neither. The men behind the carnage in London appear to have been inspired by ISIS, the same organization that has recently motivated young Muslim men to mow down civilians from Minya to Manchester, Berlin to Baghdad, Istanbul to Orlando, and beyond. Telling people not to be frightened by such acts—that fear is what the terrorists want—does not make those acts less frightening. Many people are scared by terrorism, despite the allegedly comforting statistics, because terrorism is scary. It’s designed to be. And most people recognize that while terrorism takes various forms, one of the most virulent strains these days is extremist violence committed in the name of Islam. They distinguish, in other words, between wobbly furniture and jihadist terror.

In the raw moments after a terrorist attack, people are often looking for recognition of the horror and reassurance that they’ll be kept safe, not to be told that they’re overreacting or to be soothed with unconvincing arguments. Franklin Roosevelt famously told Americans during the Great Depression that “the only thing we have to fear is fear itself—nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror.” Less famous is how he contextualized that message. He listed the country’s many “dark realities”—the government deprived of revenue, families stripped of their savings, the unemployed facing the “grim problem of existence,” and so on. The good news, Roosevelt said, was that these were merely “material things,” and they could be regained. Before fear could be feared, it had to be reckoned with.

Murphy’s reaction to the London attack captures a common line of reasoning, particularly on the left, and it recalls some of the clinical rhetoric that Barack Obama used in similar circumstances. In repeatedly resisting (with some exceptions) any language that associated terrorism with extremist interpretations of Islam, the former president provided fodder to right-wing critics who argued that he was misleading people about the nature of the problem. And in his cerebral approach to counterterrorism, Obama could come across as tone-deaf to the public mood. After attackers killed 130 people in Paris , for example, Obama scoffed at reporters’ questions about whether the bloodshed would change his ISIS strategy. My colleague Jeffrey Goldberg documented what happened next on the president’s overseas trip:

Air Force One departed Antalya and arrived 10 hours later in Manila. That’s when the president’s advisers came to understand, in the words of one official, that “everyone back home had lost their minds.” Susan Rice, trying to comprehend the rising anxiety, searched her hotel television in vain for CNN, finding only the BBC and Fox News. She toggled between the two, looking for the mean, she told people on the trip.

Later, the president would say that he had failed to fully appreciate the fear many Americans were experiencing about the possibility of a Paris-style attack in the U.S. Great distance, a frantic schedule, and the jet-lag haze that envelops a globe-spanning presidential trip were working against him. But he has never believed that terrorism poses a threat to America commensurate with the fear it generates. Even during the period in 2014 when ISIS was executing its American captives in Syria, his emotions were in check. Valerie Jarrett, Obama’s closest adviser, told him people were worried that the group would soon take its beheading campaign to the U.S. “They’re not coming here to chop our heads off,” he reassured her. Obama frequently reminds his staff that terrorism takes far fewer lives in America than handguns, car accidents, and falls in bathtubs do. Several years ago, he expressed to me his admiration for Israelis’ “resilience” in the face of constant terrorism, and it is clear that he would like to see resilience replace panic in American society. Nevertheless, his advisers are fighting a constant rearguard action to keep Obama from placing terrorism in what he considers its “proper” perspective, out of concern that he will seem insensitive to the fears of the American people.

Into this emotional void stepped Donald Trump, who on terrorism is the id to Obama’s ego. He rails against political correctness, portrays “radical Islamic terrorism” as a grave threat to the nation, and embodies the fearful alarmism that terrorism can provoke.

Obama’s stance on terrorism also contained a contradiction. He argued that the terrorist threat was much less severe than other challenges such as climate change and gun violence. But he didn’t scale back his counterterrorism policies to reflect that assessment. After criticizing the excesses of George W. Bush’s war on terror, Obama launched a massive drone war against suspected terrorists in several countries. He urged the government to do more on gun violence, which is responsible for far more deaths per year in the United States than terrorism is, while simultaneously claiming that the U.S. government was right to “spend over a trillion dollars, and pass countless laws, and devote entire agencies to preventing terrorist attacks on our soil.” Either Obama never managed to invest in counterterrorism at the level he felt it deserved, or he was tacitly acknowledging that terrorism is, in fact, a big problem that statistics only partially capture.

(Read more at The Atlantic)

From these and other instances, Democrats seem to want to have their cake and eat it, too

In the event that one might review the above article (or consider how radical Islam was never mentioned during a Senate hearing on the 9/11 attacks or think about how Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib have never been punished for their many anti-Semitic attacks, just remember.

San Francisco City government declares the NRA to be a terrorist organization

By reading between the lines of the New York Times, we discover the degree of disrespect doled out by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors toward the National Rifle Association.

Unsettled by recent mass shootings across the nation, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors unanimously approved a resolution this week declaring the National Rifle Association a domestic terrorist organization.

The resolution was introduced by Supervisor Catherine Stefani on July 30, two days after a shooting at a garlic festival in Gilroy, Calif., in which three people were killed and more than a dozen others injured.

Before the resolution was put to a vote on Tuesday, Ms. Stefani spoke about the “carnage across this country,” also citing mass shootings last month in El Paso; Dayton, Ohio; and near Odessa, Tex.

Ms. Stefani said the N.R.A. conspires to limit gun violence research, restrict gun violence data sharing and block every piece of sensible gun violence prevention legislation proposed at local, state and federal levels.

“The N.R.A. exists to spread pro-gun propaganda and put weapons in the hands of those who would harm and terrorize us,” Ms. Stefani said in a statement. “Nobody has done more to fan the flames of gun violence than the N.R.A.”

While the resolution has no practical effect, Ms. Stefani said in an interview on Wednesday, “I firmly believe that words matter, and I think this is a step in fighting the negative impact of the N.R.A.”

(Read more at the New York Times)

Consider the results of the Board of Supervisors on San Francisco

To those who might consider the words of Ms. Stefani, walk the streets of San Francisco and decide whether the NRA or the Board of Supervisors has done the most to terrorize San Francisco.

AOC and Pressley raise bail funds for Antifa members who attacked police in Boston

According to the New York Post, AOC and Pressley raised bail for Antifa.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and a fellow member of “the Squad,” Rep. Ayanna Pressley, vowed Saturday to contribute to a fund that is raising bail money for the 36 counterprotesters arrested at the “Straight Pride Parade” in Boston.

Nine of the counterprotesters arrested have been charged with assaulting police officers, the Boston Herald reported. Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and Pressley (D-Mass.) both tweeted out a link to a crowdsourcing page called The Solidarity Against Hate Legal Defense Fund, which has raised nearly $25,000 to pay bail and other legal fees of those arrested while protesting the march.

“One way to support the local LGBTQ community impacted by Boston’s white supremacist parade?” Ocasio-Cortez said on Twitter, sharing a link to the fund. “Contribute to the Bail Fund for the activists who put themselves on the line protecting the Boston community.”

Ocasio-Cortez retweeted Pressley’s initial tweet about the fund. Pressley slammed the “Straight Pride” event as an “#LGBT hate march” and asked followers to join her in making a contribution to the fund.

(Read more at the New York Post)

An answer that aligns with our founding

We can stop mass shootings without restricting Second Amendment liberties

Tom Giovanetti of the Institute for Policy Innovation argues that America need not give up its guns in response to the recent violence.

PoliceProtection

It is often said by people of all political persuasions, and certainly by my fellow conservatives, that the primary duty of the federal government is to keep us safe.

The problem is, that’s not true. The founding documents, the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and especially the Federalist Papers, make it clear that the primary duty of the federal government is the preservation of liberty, not safety. The Founders had very clear ideas about the trade-offs between safety and liberty, and they willingly gave up their own security in order to take a desperate shot at more political liberty.

The Founders were primarily concerned about preventing tyranny, and they correctly understood that a free people could keep themselves safe, but a safe people might not be able to keep themselves free. You could live safely in a police state or a military dictatorship, or remain subjects of King George, but you wouldn’t be free.

That’s why Thomas Jefferson said, “I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it.” Americans in the tradition of the Founders don’t trade liberty for safety.

But liberty and safety are not mutually exclusive. The Founders believed that a free people could, through self-organization, create the means and the institutions necessary to maintain public safety. Liberty logically precedes safety, but it doesn’t preclude it.

Confronted with the horror of repeated mass shootings, proposed solutions have rushed toward restricting Second Amendment rights. But an American solution for reducing mass shootings should not focus on erosions of liberty.

On the other hand, when defenders of Second Amendment rights offer no practical solutions, they leave open the implication that liberty requires us to tolerate the occasional (or not-so-occasional) mass shooting. Not only is that a losing argument with the public in the long run, it’s also not true. Americans are entitled to both liberty and safety.

And let’s not get distracted by discussions about root causes. That might strike you as peculiar, but root causes are notoriously difficult to address, and government is particularly ill-equipped to do so. So what can we organize to do now to increase safety without eroding liberty?

Travel almost anywhere else in the world and you will commonly encounter armed security in public places. Somehow, uniquely in America, we see this as a bad thing. That needs to change.

In the church my family attends, we adapted after a threat. There is now armed security scattered throughout the congregation, in the sanctuary, in the lobby, and even on the platform. Air transportation obviously adapted after 9/11, with added airport security and air marshals on flights.

It’s time to adapt to the era of mass shootings. Every school, every church, every large retailer and every government facility should have armed, obvious guards at all entrances. We don’t need to force teachers to take up arms, we simply need ever-present, trained, armed security in schools. This is now the cost of protecting our children and of protecting the public.

(Read more at the Institute for Policy Innovation)

Things that should give us pause regarding China, Hong Kong, gun control, and the Second Amendment


Chinese “paramilitary” at Hong Kong border

Reuters reports in a 14 August 2019 article that “paramilitary” forces have moved to the border of Hong Kong (in stark violation of the agreement made with Britain when Hong Kong was surrendered as a British colony).

Hong Kong braced for more mass protests over the weekend, even as China warned it could use its power to quell demonstrations and U.S. President Donald Trump urged his Chinese counterpart, Xi Jinping, to meet with the protesters to defuse weeks of tensions.

Hundreds of China’s People’s Armed Police (PAP) on Thursday conducted exercises at a sports stadium in Shenzhen that borders Hong Kong a day after the U.S. State Department said it was “deeply concerned” about the movements, which have prompted worries that the troops could be used to break up protests.

ShenzhenSportsCenterParamilitaryParking

Trump told reporters on Thursday he did not want to see a resort to violence to quell the protests in Hong Kong and reiterated that he wanted to see China “humanely solve the problem.”

“I am concerned. I wouldn’t want to see a violent crackdown,” Trump said, speaking in Morristown, New Jersey. “If he (Xi) sat down with the protesters – a group of representative protesters – I’d bet he’d work it out in 15 minutes. … I know it’s not the kind of thing he does, but I think it wouldn’t be a bad idea.”

(Read more at Reuters)

Patriots, think about these things regarding the mainstream media and how they frame this conflict

In the United States of America, “paramilitary” brings up images of overweight guys in worn-out fatigues bought at the Army Surplus store. These guys likely spend some part of their weekends shooting holes in cans or putting meat on the table by hunting small game.

Truthfully, although I have never belonged to any paramilitary group, I support the overall goals of such groups. I support the freedom afforded by the Second Amendment. I support those who put in the time needed to be prepared to defend against threats against their families. Additionally, I support the patriotism and other elements of preparedness often associated with these groups.

However, the “paramilitary” that the American “news” agencies refers to seems to come equipped with hundreds of vehicles with turrets and what seem to be guns.

ShenzhenSportsCenterVehiclesWithTurrets

This should be a reason for pause.

Even though this might just be a threat against the Hong Kong protesters, these “paramilitary” forces might be deployed against people who have no guns and no body armor. These Hong Kong citizens definitely do not have military-grade rifles or side arms.

Therefore, with the power of words, the American press has equated six-wheeled tanks and armored personnel carriers with non-professional weekend warriors. Reuters wants the headline readers to believe that little threat is offered against the brave people standing up for what little rights they have left.

Think about this the next time a Democrat calls for the American people to be disarmed and the press paints a sad picture in support of the Democrat.

Trump ties China trade deal to Hong Kong protest

In a 15 August 2019 article by Fortune, Trump’s tweet brings the Hong Kong protests into the China trade deal.

HongKongMillions.png

President Donald Trump late Wednesday seemed to conflate the protests in Hong Kong with the U.S.’s trade war with China. “Of course China wants to make a deal. Let them work humanely with Hong Kong first!” he tweeted. If Trump thought wielding the Hong Kong protests as leverage in the ongoing U.S.-China trade war would prompt concessions from Beijing, he seemed to have miscalculated—by a large margin.

Trump turned his Twitter attention to the growing unrest in Hong Kong on Wednesday, when he urged those involved to “be calm and safe” amid reports that the Chinese government was amassing troops on the border with Hong Kong. He later picked up the thread, looping the ongoing trade war into the matter.

“I know President Xi of China very well,” Trump tweeted. “He is a great leader who very much has the respect of his people. He is also a good man in a ‘tough business.’ I have ZERO doubt that if President Xi wants to quickly and humanely solve the Hong Kong problem, he can do it. Personal meeting?”

Trump’s decision to link the protests in Hong Kong with the trade war negotiations may have been a misstep, as it plays into China’s narrative of what the demonstrations are all about. Over the past two months, Beijing has repeatedly accused the U.S. of stirring up unrest in Hong Kong in order to serve the White House’s trade agenda. State media now runs news stories alleging that white foreigners attending the Hong Kong protests are actually CIA operatives instigating turmoil. The protesters themselves, meanwhile, cite demands for greater democratic freedoms as the reason for taking to the streets.

(Read more at Fortune)

Think about how President Trump introduced this narrative

Although the press seems to want to downplay this narrative, President Trump bypassed them by putting the information out in a tweet (below).

However, had the President gone to CNN or CBS to spread his message, he would have been nearly silenced.

China Is Waging a Disinformation War Against Hong Kong Protesters

Even the New York Times recognizes in a 15 August 2019 article the measures taken by China against the Hong Kong protesters.

china-propaganda

When a projectile struck a Hong Kong woman in the eye this week as protesters clashed with the police, China responded quickly: Its state television network reported that the woman had been injured not by one of the police’s bean bag rounds, but by a protester.

The network’s website went further: It posted what it said was a photo of the woman counting out cash on a Hong Kong sidewalk — insinuating, as Chinese reports have claimed before, that the protesters are merely paid provocateurs.

The assertion was more than just spin or fake news. The Communist Party exerts overwhelming control over media content inside China’s so-called Great Firewall, and it is now using it as a cudgel in an information war over the protests that have convulsed Hong Kong for months.

In recent days, China has more aggressively stirred up nationalist and anti-Western sentiment using state and social media, and it has manipulated the context of images and videos to undermine the protesters. Chinese officials have begun branding the demonstrations as a prelude to terrorism.

(Read more at New York Times)

Only a few observations regarding the review of the expected at the New York Times

First, for the most part, the violent images of the Hong Kong protests have been excised from our media because they don’t want to reflect badly on another socialist society (remember, Venezuela shot and killed its own unarmed citizens).

Second, this comes from the outfit (the NYTwits) that still accuses the Trump administration of treasonous acts performed in conjunction with the Russians despite the findings in the Mueller report.

Just as China has made westernization a boogeyman here, many of the New York Times articles depend on demonizing a person or groups. One prime example might be summarized as “Orange man bad.” Another might be the habit at the New York Times of associating Christians with Timothy McVeigh and Eric Rudolph.

Fourth, Google has worked with the Chinese government to suppress Internet searches within China, has blocked their Google Maps application to searches in China, and works with the Chinese military. Considering the left-leaning tendencies of Google, how might they use their findings to change elections across the globe (including in the US)?

Philadelphia shooting: Mayor calls for gun control

In a 15 August 2019 article by the BBC, several of the most common Democrat talking points on gun confiscation came out.

MayorKenney
Mayor Kenney calls for gun laws when multiple gun laws were already violated.

The mayor of Philadelphia has joined growing calls for gun control after a shootout in his city left six officers injured as they served a drug warrant.

“Our officers need help,” said Mayor Jim Kenney. “They need help with keeping these weapons out of these people’s hands.”

A gun battle broke out between police and a gunman on Wednesday, leading to a seven-hour stand-off.

The suspect reportedly carried a semi-automatic rifle and several handguns.

Mr Kenney called out politicians for their failure to address the gun crisis and confront the National Rifle Association’s powerful gun rights lobby.

“It’s aggravating, it’s saddening,” Mr Kenney said. “If the state and federal government don’t want to stand up to the NRA and some other folks, then let us police ourselves.”

He added: “Our officers deserve to be protected and they don’t deserve to be shot at by a guy for hours with an unlimited supply of weapons and an unlimited supply of bullets.”

US President Donald Trump also weighed in on the shooting, tweeting Thursday morning that the Philadelphia shooting suspect “should never have been allowed on the streets”.

“Long sentence – must get much tougher on street crime!” he wrote.

(Read more at the BBC)

Pointing out the lies and fallacies

This article focuses on the following:

  1. Our sympathy and respect for the Philadelphia police who were fired upon
  2. Our assumed respect for those who are in positions of power (such as this mayor)
  3. The desire of many to be within a perceived majority (that is, we would also like to be with those who “joined growing calls”)
  4. Our assumed fear of scary-sounding weapons (“semi-automatic rifle and several handguns”)

Additionally, it gives primacy to the Democrat talking points by mentioning them first and more fully. The first six paragraphs (160 words) support the Democrat line of “reasoning.” Only after that is there any discussion of President Trump’s suggestion of more jail time for this repeat offender (two paragraphs encompassing 37 words).

Nonetheless, the BBC does not consider the following issues with their line of reasoning:

  1. The shooter was a drug dealer with previous drug and gun-related convictions. It was already illegal for him to own the guns. Adding more gun laws would not have stopped this criminal from committing this crime.
  2. It is illegal to try to kill or attempt to kill an officer of the law. This criminal had already determined to disobey this law when he pulled together his arsenal and began firing on the police.
  3. Both murder and attempted murder is illegal.
  4. Pennsylvania and Philadelphia have gun laws that were violated by this criminal. Adding another gun law would not prevent anything.
  5. Gun laws have little effect on murder rates. Look at Chicago, New York, and London.
  6. As jihadists have taught us, planes, bombs, cars, trucks, and knives can be used when guns are not available.

Three ways five stories tell us how we are losing our freedoms


  1. Emails Show Omar’s Committee Boasting of Being Able to Shut Down Stories in Star Tribune

Personnel in the office of Democrat Representative Ilhan Omar have taken to bragging about suppressing the freedom of the press as shown by a 14 June article in the Tennessee Star Tribune.

Ilhan-Omar-Emails

Internal emails released this week show members of Rep. Ilhan Omar’s (D-MN-05) 2016 Minnesota House campaign committee attempting to “shut down” a story “as we do with the Strib.”

“Strib” refers to the nickname used for The Star Tribune, Minnesota’s largest newspaper. The shocking emails were obtained by Powerline from the Minnesota Campaign Finance Board, which discovered the emails during its investigation into Omar’s campaign finance violations.

As Powerline notes, the emails were written following the outlet’s publication of an August 12, 2016 story questioning Omar’s marital status—the first story discussing Omar’s alleged marriage to her brother.

In response, Omar’s campaign committee temporarily hired Ben Goldfarb as a crisis communications manager.

“Does anyone on the team have a relationship with Blois?” Goldfarb wrote in an August 15 email, referring to Blois Olson, best known in media circles for his popular newsletter, Morning Take. That morning, Olson had linked to Powerline’s article in his newsletter.

“Someone should probably reach out to talk off the record and shut it down with him as we do with the Strib,” Goldfarb continued. “I don’t know him, but can do it if nobody has a relationship. And we can tighten up the statement today in case it does spread and we feel like we need to broadcast something later today.”

Goldfarb was attempting to craft a statement addressing the allegations against Omar, but admitted in a later email that “it’s impossible without making it even more confusing.”

“It just doesn’t work in writing,” he continued, noting that he’s “talked to the Strib and they are generally in a good place.”

“They get that there are not 2 legal marriages and are not pursuing the brother angle, but have pieced together that the person she is legally married to is not the father of children, on the website, etc. They are asking for confirmation of that,” Goldfarb wrote. “I think this gets us the best result of a closed case in the Strib that we can then point people to and say no more comments.”

Olson addressed the emails Thursday morning in his newsletter, claiming “no one ever reached out” and “we weren’t ‘shut down.”

“This is the type of reporting that other media should be doing, which is why there continues to be fair criticism about local coverage of Omar and others,” he added.

(Read more at the Tennessee Star Tribune)

When fake-news Acosta stood in a press conference and usurped the time allotted to other political commentators,

This degree of “compliant silence” has not come out of the press since Obama had his “Department of Justice” seize the emails of James Rosen. Of course, a close second might have been when Obama’s Internal Revenue Service targeted conservative groups (an event which liberals still deny despite the IRS apology letters that substantiate the conservative side).

  1. a. New York Ends Religious Exemptions For Required Vaccines

National Public Radio seemingly covers the public-safety side of the issue of requiring people to vaccinate themselves and their children.

orthodox-jews_CanariesInTheReligiousMines

New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo signed a bill Thursday ending vaccination exemptions based on religious beliefs, the latest attempt to address the growing measles outbreak, the worst the U.S. has experienced in decades.

Cuomo said plugging the loophole should help contain the spike in measles cases in New York, the state hardest hit by the uptick in the contagious virus due to low vaccination rates in ultra-Orthodox communities.

“The science is crystal clear: Vaccines are safe, effective and the best way to keep our children safe,” Cuomo said after signing the bill. “While I understand and respect freedom of religion, our first job is to protect the public health and by signing this measure into law, we will help prevent further transmissions and stop this outbreak right in its tracks.”

The Democratic-controlled Legislature approved the measure, which also eliminates other nonmedical exemptions for schoolchildren across the state.

“We are facing an unprecedented public health crisis,” said Sen. Brad Hoylman, the legislation’s sponsor. “The atrocious peddlers of junk science and fraudulent medicine who we know as anti-vaxxers have spent years sowing unwarranted doubt and fear, but it is time for legislators to confront them head-on.”

(Read more at National Public Radio)

Just looking at one side of the equation, it seems easier to say that the need to maintain the public’s health interests.

However, if you look at both sides of the equation (which the National Public Radio does not, but the purportedly “right-wing” Fox News — shown below — does in full measure), then a different picture develops.

  1. b. New York Ends Religious Exemptions For Required Vaccines

Fox News presents both the religious and the public-safety sides of the issue of requiring people to vaccinate themselves and their children.

NY_Measles_poster

New York eliminated the religious exemption to vaccine requirements for schoolchildren Thursday, as the nation’s worst measles outbreak in decades prompts states to reconsider giving parents ways to opt out of immunization rules.

The Democrat-led Senate and Assembly voted Thursday to repeal the exemption, which allows parents to cite religious beliefs to forego getting their child the vaccines required for school enrollment.

Gov. Andrew Cuomo, a Democrat, signed the measure minutes after the final vote. The law takes effect immediately but will give unvaccinated students up to 30 days after they enter a school to show they’ve had the first dose of each required immunization.

With New York’s move, similar exemptions are still allowed in 45 states, though lawmakers in several of them have introduced their own legislation to eliminate the waiver.

The issue is hotly contested and debate around it has often been emotional, pitting cries that religious freedom is being curtailed against warnings that public health is being endangered. After the vote in the Assembly, many of those watching from the gallery erupted in cries of “shame!” One woman yelled obscenities down to the lawmakers below.

The debate has only intensified with this year’s measles outbreak , which federal officials recently said has surpassed 1,000 illnesses, the highest in 27 years.

“I’m not aware of anything in the Torah, the Bible, the Koran or anything else that suggests you should not get vaccinated,” said Bronx Democrat Jeffrey Dinowitz, the bill’s Assembly sponsor. “If you choose to not vaccinate your child, therefore potentially endangering other children … then you’re the one choosing not to send your children to school.”

Hundreds of parents of unvaccinated children gathered at New York’s Capitol for the vote to protest.

Stan Yung, a Long Island attorney and father, said his Russian Orthodox religious views and health concerns about vaccines will prevent him from vaccinating his three young children. His family, he said, may consider leaving the state.

“People came to this country to get away from exactly this kind of stuff,” Yung said ahead of Thursday’s votes.

Supporters of the bill say religious beliefs about vaccines shouldn’t eclipse scientific evidence that they work, noting the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 1905 that states have the right to enforce compulsory vaccination laws. During the Assembly’s floor debate, supporters brought up scourges of the past that were defeated in the U.S. through vaccines.

“I’m old enough to have been around when polio was a real threat,” said Assemblywoman Deborah Glick, D-Manhattan. “I believe in science…. Your personal opinions, which may be based on junk science, do not trump the greater good.”

(Read more at Fox News)

If I understand it correctly, the stated need for immunization (to keep the unimmunized public from catching illnesses virtually wiped out by vaccination campaigns) is nothing more than an exercise in Nanny Statism. That is, if vaccines work, then the people (and their children) who are endangered by not being vaccinated are those choosing to honor their religious traditions.

These laws impose an undesired cure to an almost eradicated disease in violation of these people’s religious liberty.

What will be next? Will they impose the Equality Act, requiring all to accept all phases of the trans agenda in violation of religious convictions?

  1. c. Migrant Detention Centers Are Getting Slammed with Mumps, Chickenpox, Measles, TB, …

Unlike American schoolchildren, the children from Honduras, Nicaragua, and other Central American nations do not receive regular vaccinations. Therefore, when they flood our southern border, the possibility of an outbreak exists. Hence, a 4 June 2019 Vice News article reports on how immigrant have been quarantined in over 30 ICE centers for mumps.

Immigrants have been quarantined in over 30 ICE detention centers across the U.S. for mumps and a few cases of chickenpox in recent months, according to a Quartz investigation into information shared by attorneys.

Why it matters: Mumps is from a fast-spreading but relatively mild virus that sometimes causes serious complications. But the people who are quarantined also are not allowed access to their attorneys and cannot attend bond or asylum proceedings, Quartz points out.

By the numbers: Quartz found nearly 300 confirmed cases of mumps in ICE facilities and other immigration detention centers across the country — with the most cases concentrated in Texas, Mississippi, Arizona and Georgia.

ICE_Detention_Center

Yes, but: Not all state or county health departments monitor disease outbreaks in ICE facilities. Louisiana and California “said they had no data on disease in ICE facilities,” Quartz reports — so the case numbers could be higher.

Where it stands: “Local health authorities tasked with keeping civilian populations in their areas safe said they have no idea how widespread the mumps epidemic is in immigration facilities around the US,” Quartz reports.

Of note: The recommended 2 doses of MMR vaccine is roughly 88% effective at preventing mumps, per the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

(Read more at Vice News)

This incredibly shallow article on the danger of unvetted illegal aliens and the diseases they can carry at least mentions a few of the diseases common to the ICE facilities.

This article doesn’t mention the numbers at the immigration detention centers who carry tuberculosis, scabies, or other common diseases.

Additionally, just as the previous articles do not explore the “Nanny State implications of requiring people to surrender their religious convictions due to the vaccination requirements of the state — this article does not explore why so many individuals break laws to enter the U.S. and thereby have been interred in detention centers during the Clinton, G. W. Bush, Obama, and Trump administrations.

  1. Pinterest Suspends Pro-Life Organization, Places it on Pornography Blocklist

The Daily Signal points out how Pinterest has stifled the free speech of Live

Pinterest has suspended the account of pro-life group Live Action, saying it violates the social media company’s policies on “misinformation.”

Alison Centofante, director of external affairs for Live Action, tweeted about the incident last week as the organization appealed Pinterest’s decision.


Pinterest_Suspends_Live_Action

“LiveAction.org” is the only pro-life website included on Pinterest’s list of banned websites, Centofante said in a tweet.

The nonprofit educates on, reports on, and investigates the abortion industry, according to its webpage, and seeks to inspire others in the pro-life movement.

Project Veritas, an undercover investigative journalism nonprofit, received and published information from Pinterest employee Eric Cochran, revealing the social media platform added Live Action’s website to a list of sites blocked for pornographic content.

The whistleblower has since lost his job at Pinterest and was interviewed Wednesday on Fox News Channel’s “Tucker Carlson Tonight” about his decision to speak out.

“I saw a big tech company saying quietly behind closed doors that they believe Live Action shouldn’t have a platform to speak. … I want them to have to say this explicitly,” Cochran told host Tucker Carlson.

(Read more at the Daily Signal)

When the framers of our Constitution created the Bill of Rights, they put the freedom of the press along with the freedom of religion in the First Amendment expecting that extra-governmental forces would work to keep the government honest. Part and parcel of this arrangement was that a free press would expose corruption within government and free churches would keep the populace both honest and demanding honesty from their government.

However, in an era where 97% of the “journalists, reporters, news editors or television news anchors” identified by the Center for Public Integrity in 2016 donated to Hillary Clinton, can we expect balanced reporting? In an time when a Harvard study found Trump to have received 93% negative coverage (compared to 41% negative coverage for Obama in the same study), can you expect balanced reporting?

Not So Fake News: the WSJ, AP, & NYP report on elector harassment


Trump’s 306 electoral votes.

The Wall Street Journal reports on the harassment of electors

A 15 December 2016 Wall Street Journal shared the trials of a few of our mostly-faithful electors (along with some comments on the futility of the effort of the electoral college coup and related topics):

“Electors from the 30 states Donald Trump carried are being ‘hounded to abandon’ the president-elect and cast a vote for somebody else when they meet Monday, the Associated Press reports. The effort will not succeed:

Whether they like Trump or not, and some surely don’t, scores of the Republicans chosen to cast votes in the state-capital meetings told AP they feel bound by history, duty, party loyalty or the law to rubber-stamp their state’s results and make him president.

A team of nine AP reporters attempted to contact all 538 electors from both parties, and was successful in reaching ‘more than 330 of them. . . . Only one Republican elector told AP he won’t vote for Trump. . . . Even a leader of the anti-Trump effort, Bret Chiafalo of Everett, Washington, calls it a losing bet. ‘ The GOP defector is almost certainly Chris Suprun of Texas, who announced his intention last week in a New York Times op-ed piece.

Some of the details are entertaining:

‘Let me give you the total as of right now: 48,324 emails about my role as an elector,’ said Brian Westrate, a small-business owner and GOP district chairman in Fall Creek, Wisconsin. ‘I have a Twitter debate with a former porn star from California asking me to change my vote. It’s been fascinating.’ . . .

Most of the pleas to reject Trump are coordinated, automated, professionally generated and, for those reasons, none too persuasive.

‘We got a stack of letters from idiots,’ said Republican elector Edward Robson, 86, a Phoenix, Arizona, homebuilder.

(Read more at the 15 December 2016 Wall Street Journal)

Somehow, I wonder if this article was written from the knowledge that the left-leaning press may have pushed this anti-democratic, pro-democrat movement to the point that they can see the next step might involve the destruction of the freedom of the press.

The Associated Press reports on elector harassment

A 15 December 2016 Associated Press article mentions the plight of several of the electors while also pointing out the futility of the Left’s attempt to upend Trump’s election.

“There’s more hustle than hope behind an effort to derail Donald Trump’s presidency in the Electoral College.

Republican electors are being swamped with pleas to buck tradition and cast ballots for someone else at meetings across the country Monday that are on course to ratify Trump as the winner. AP interviews with more than 330 electors from both parties found little appetite for a revolt.

Whether they like Trump or not, and some plainly don’t, scores of the Republicans chosen to cast votes in the state-capital meetings told AP they feel bound by history, duty, party loyalty or the law to rubber-stamp their state’s results and make him president. Appeals numbering in the tens of thousands — drowning inboxes, ringing cellphones, stuffing home and office mailboxes with actual handwritten letters — have not swayed them.

The interviews found widespread Democratic aggravation with the electoral process but little expectation that the rush of anti-Trump maneuvering can stop him. For that to happen, Republican-appointed electors would have to stage an unprecedented defection.
Still, people going to the typically ho-hum electoral gatherings have been drawn into the rough and tumble of campaign-season politics. Republicans are being beseeched to revolt in a torrent of lobbying, centered on the arguments that Clinton won the popular vote and that Trump is unsuited to the presidency. Most of it is falling on deaf ears, but it has also led to some acquaintances being made across the great political divide.

“Let me give you the total as of right now: 48,324 emails about my role as an elector,” said Brian Westrate, a small-business owner and GOP district chairman in Fall Creek, Wisconsin. “I have a Twitter debate with a former porn star from California asking me to change my vote. It’s been fascinating.”

Similarly deluged, Republican elector Hector Maldonado, a Missouri National Guardsman, has taken the time to console one correspondent, a single mother and Air Force veteran who is beside herself with worry about what a Trump presidency will mean.

‘Everything’s going to be OK,’ he said he told her. ‘I know you’re scared, but don’t worry. Everything’s going to be OK. And I know that it will be.’

Maldonado, a Mexican immigrant and medical-equipment seller in Sullivan, Missouri, backed Ted Cruz in the primaries but will cast his vote for Trump with conviction. ‘I took an oath once to become a U.S. citizen,’ he said, ‘and on Aug. 14, 1995, that was the first oath that I’ve taken to support the U.S. Constitution. A year later I took the oath again, to support the duties of being an officer in the U.S. Army. This was the third oath that I’ve taken to execute what I promised to do.’

Even a leader of the anti-Trump effort, Bret Chiafalo of Everett, Washington, calls it a ‘losing bet’ — but one he says the republic’s founders would want him to make. ‘I believe that Donald Trump is a unique danger to our country and the Founding Fathers put the Electoral College in place to, among other things, stop that from happening,’ said Chiafalo, 38, an Xbox network engineer who backed Bernie Sanders in the Democratic primaries.

It takes 270 electoral votes to make a president. Despite losing the national popular vote, Trump won enough states to total 306 electoral votes. He would need to see three dozen fall away for him to lose his majority. Only one Republican elector told AP he won’t vote for Trump.

Over the sweep of history, so-called faithless electors — those who vote for someone other than their state’s popular-vote winner — have been exceptionally rare.

Nashville attorney Tom Lawless, who chose Marco Rubio in the primaries, described his vow to cast his electoral vote for Trump in blunt terms. ‘Hell will freeze and we will be skating on the lava before I change,’ he said. ‘He won the state and I’ve pledged and gave my word that that’s what I would do. And I won’t break it.’

Nor will Jim Skaggs, 78, a developer from Bowling Green, Kentucky, despite deep concern about Trump. ‘His personality worries me,’ Skaggs said. ‘He is not open-minded.’ Skaggs knew Trump’s father through the construction business, met the son in his 20s, and ‘I wasn’t impressed.’

‘ hope he is far better than I think he is,’ Skaggs said. Even so, ‘I fully intend to vote for Donald Trump,’ he said. ‘I think it’s a duty.’

State law and practices vary for electors, but even in states where electors don’t take an oath to vote a certain way or don’t face legal ramifications for stepping out of line, the heavy expectation is for them to ratify the results. As much as they don’t want Trump in office, some Democrats are as reluctant as Republicans to go rogue.

‘We lost the election,’ said John Padilla of Albuquerque, New Mexico, a Democratic ward chairman. ‘That’s how elections are and you shake hands with your opponent and you get on with what you have to do and support your candidate.’

Yet Democratic electors, stung by losing an election to a Republican who trails Clinton by more than 2.6 million votes nationwide, spoke strongly in the interviews in favor of overhauling or throwing out the electoral system. Republican electors generally supported it, reasoning that it provides a counterweight to political dominance by coastal states with huge, and largely Democratic, populations, like California and New York.”

(Read more at the Associated Press)

If the popular vote replaces the electoral college, the power of the states will quickly evaporate.  As soon as the popular vote makes it possible for the federal government to pay off the biggest parts of this society with benefits, the tyranny of the majority will be the elephant in the room.  Taking that in mind and considering that America largely consists of conservative people, you would think that the liberals (who champion marginal populations like homosexuals, illegal aliens, and the like) would avoid the tyranny of the majority.

Additionally, why the liberals of the Democrat party and the press overlook the hatefulness of those who harass the electors escapes me.

Hateful acts by liberals

//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js

The New York Post comments on the hypocrisy of liberals

Rich Lowry of the New York Post points out the futility of the electoral college coup in his 16 December 2016 article.

“Surely there were alarmists who thought 2016 might end in an undemocratic coup. But who predicted Democratic opinion leaders would be the ones agitating for it?

For fear that Donald Trump will violate democratic norms, liberals want to have the Electoral College throw out the results of a presidential election and impose their choice on the nation for the first time in our history.

The hypocrisy is rather astonishing. A major theme of the Democrats and the press during the election was the absolute imperative of accepting the results. This lasted as a bedrock principle of democratic governance all the way until roughly 4 a.m. Wednesday, Nov. 9, when it became clear that Trump had won, and angry protests in the streets, pointless, harassing recounts and calls for an Electoral College coup became the order of the day.

In theory, 37 electors could flip against Trump on Dec. 19, deny him the 270 electoral votes needed to win and precipitate one of the gravest constitutional crises in the history of the republic.

If you spin out the scenarios, it’s hard to see how Trump would actually be denied the presidency (if no one gets 270 electoral votes, the contest is thrown into the Republican House). So the point of the exercise would simply be to disrupt as much as possible the heretofore sacrosanct peaceful transfer of power.

More than anything else, the calls for an Electoral College coup expose a standardless will to power of a left that professes to value democratic procedure. What else to make of opponents of the Electoral College urging the Electoral College to overthrow an election?”

Additionally, I have read that the House of Representatives (the house of Congress closest to the people) would have to limit their selection of the president to those who had run.  Therefore, they could select Trump, Clinton, Cruz, .or any of the other candidates.  However, if the Republican-dominated House picks anyone but the Republican who drew the most votes in each of the states, they can write off their support in those states.