Monday, July 30, 2018



Benny Johnson | Reporter At Large

A sharp-eyed sleuth snapped a picture Friday of Democratic National Committee chairman Tom Perez at DC’s Reagan National airport. The former Obama secretary of labor was standing in line, carrying a travel bag that looked outside the working man’s budget.

Benny Johnson/Daily Caller
Benny Johnson/Daily Caller

The bag appears to be a Louis Vuitton Keepall Bandoulière 55 Damier Cobalt Canvas bag, which retails at $1,840 on the Louis Vuitton website.

“In Damier Cobalt canvas, Louis Vuitton’s iconic Keepall 55 travel bag is both timelessly elegant and distinctively modern,” the company describes its bag. “The historic design, dating back to the 1930s, remains as sleek and functional as ever. Spacious, lightweight, versatile, the Keepall epitomizes the art of travel.”
Benny Johnson/Daily Caller/
A DNC spokesman told The Daily Caller that the bag belongs to a staffer.
“Nice try y’all, but he’s holding a staffer’s bag here at the airport. Tom does not own a Louis Vuitton bag,” DNC spokesman Michael Tyler said.
Perez has recently embraced the rise of socialism within the Democratic ranks. He recently described the socialist views of rising star Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez as the “future” of his party.
“I have three kids. two of them are daughters. One just graduated college, one who is in college — and they were both texting me about their excitement over Alexandria because she really — she represents the future of our party,” Perez said in a recent interview. Perez also called Maryland gubernatorial candidate Ben Jealous “spectacular.” Jealous is also a self-described democratic-socialist.
Ocasio-Cortez recently advocated for higher taxes on the wealthy and a steep reduction in military spending.
Editor’s note: After publication, the DNC replied that the bag belongs to a staffer. The article has been updated to include those comments.


Planned Parenthood executives and supporters were on Capitol Hill this week lobbying lawmakers to protect the millions of dollars the nation’s largest abortion provider gets from taxpayers every year and to announce nationwide “speak-outs” during the upcoming congressional recesses.


Kevin De Léon is the LA RAZA “The Race” FASCIST SUPREMACIST for U.S. Senate.

De Léon holds far-left views on immigration, gun control, and other issues. Last year, he admitted that half of his family was in the country illegally. Earlier this year, he appointed an illegal alien to a statewide office. He is also the author of SB 54, one of the three surviving “sanctuary state” laws that the Trump administration challenged earlier this year.



“Free my anchor baby breeding unregistered Democrats!” La Raza Hillaria Clinton






Who ultimately really pays for all the true cost of all that "cheap" labor?

“The Democrats had abandoned their working-class base to chase what they pretended was a racial group when what they were actually chasing was the momentum of unlimited migration”.  DANIEL GREENFIELD / FRONT PAGE MAGAZINE 



One in every eleven persons born in Mexico has gone to the U.S. The National Review reported that in 2014 $1.87 billion was spent on incarcerating illegal immigrant criminals….Now add hundreds of billions for welfare and remittances!  MICHAEL BARGO, Jr…… for the AMERICAN THINKER.COM

"Chairman of the DNC Keith Ellison was even spotted wearing a shirt stating, "I don't believe in borders" written in Spanish.

According to a new CBS news poll, 63 percent of Americans in competitive congressional districts think those crossing illegally should be immediately deported or arrested.  This is undoubtedly contrary to the views expressed by the Democratic Party.

Their endgame is open borders, which has become evident over the last eight years.  Don't for one second let them convince you otherwise." Evan Berryhill Twitter @EvBerryhill.


DOJ Sues to Revoke Citizenship of Convicted Felon Who Led Florida Drug Ring

By Jonathan Mizrahi | July 30, 2018 | 2:14 PM EDT

DOJ Attempting to Revoke Citizenship of Convicted Felon Who Led Florida Drug Ring
U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions (Screenshot)
(— The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a denaturalization lawsuit Thursday against 42-year-old Melchor Munoz-Correa, the former leader of a drug organization in Florida, for not disclosing his criminal activities in his naturalization proceedings.
Munoz, a native of Mexico, led a six-person conspiracy to distribute marijuana and cocaine throughout the southeast United States between 2008 and 2011. According to the DOJ announcement, “Munoz distributed to co-conspirators an average of 80 pounds of marijuana on approximately 60 separate occasions between 2008 and 2010, keeping 400 to 500 pounds of marijuana, gallon zip-lock bags of methamphetamine, and multiple blocks of cocaine on hand most of the time.”
In 2012, Munoz plead guilty to conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine and 100 kilograms or more of marijuana. The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida found Munoz guilty and sentenced him to 188 months’ imprisonment and five years of supervised release, which Munoz is currently
However, Munoz filed his naturalization application in June 2009, and when interviewed in July 2009, lied under oath about his criminal activities and involvement. The DOJ has now filed a lawsuit to strip Munoz of his citizenship.
Munoz defrauded the U.S. government and is now being held accountable, Homeland Security Investigations Deputy Executive Associate Director Derek Benner:
“This criminal led a drug organization responsible for conspiring to distribute massive amounts of cocaine and marijuana, all while he defrauded the government during his naturalization process.
“Today he is being held accountable for his lies and stands to lose one of the greatest benefits our country offers, citizenship, which he obtained by defrauding immigration authorities.”



For all of his talk about leading “political revolution” against the “billionaire class,” Sanders backed Clinton, a shill of Wall Street and 
the Pentagon, who has nothing but contempt for the tens of millions of workers devastated by the 2008 financial crash and Obama’s pro-corporate policies.


America's favorite socialist grifter not named Jill Stein continues to fight for the people by making money hand over fist. And... well... that's it.
While the rest of the media is largely content to print Bernie Sanders' press releases (check the gobbles of fake news about Bernie Sanders not endorsing his own son), VTDigger keeps doing the digging into Casa Bernie that the rest of the media won't. And here's how Bernie is fighting for the revolution/employing his family members.
Last summer, Jane Sanders launched The Sanders Institute, a Progressive think tank backed by star power and big money. It’s goal: “revitalize democracy.” The initiative represented the second stage in what was originally envisioned by Jane and her husband, Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., as a three-pronged progressive political machine.
Jane Sanders, a lawyer and accountant, wears many hats at the institute: founder, fellow, fundraiser and a non-voting member of the board of directors. The institute is being run by her son, David Driscoll, a political neophyte who previously worked at Burton Snowboards. His estimated salary for the job is $100,000.
And the Institute has accomplished a whole lot. Gobs and gobs.
The Sanders Institute website launched on June 7, 2017, with 29,000 unique page views, according to IRS documents obtained by VTDigger. In the first two months of its existence, the site saw 126,000 visitors. With irregular updates and limited original content, traffic has taken a dive. The Sanders Institute saw roughly 12,300 unique page views in June 2018, according to Semrush, a website analytics company.
This post may very well get as many page views as the Sanders Institute.
Under the organization’s “Research and Reports” section of its website, there are 18 posts, 16 of which are reposted from other sources, including from federal agencies and institute fellows. The remaining two posts are authored by Sanders Institute staffers. One is a breakdown of how citizens can contact their elected representatives; the text of the other — entitled A Freedom Budget For All Americans — is largely lifted from Wikipedia.
Socialism. It works until the suckers stop sending you money.

Shocker: Bernie Sanders Health Care Plan Is A $30+ Trillion Economic Catastrophe
Lefty darling Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez loves it, as does Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT). It’s health care for all people. Single-payer is a core tenet of left wing Democrats. It’s sounds great on paper. It resonates with brain-dead Millennials who don’t know their a** from their elbow. And it’s ruinously expensive. The cost is the same as it ever was at $30+ trillion (via AP):
Sen. Bernie Sanders' "Medicare for all" plan would increase government health care spending by $32.6 trillion over 10 years, according to a study by a university-based libertarian policy center.
That's trillion with a "T."
The latest plan from the Vermont independent would require historic tax increases as government replaces what employers and consumers now pay for health care, according to the analysis being released Monday by the Mercatus Center at George Mason University in Virginia. It would deliver significant savings on administration and drug costs, but increased demand for care would drive up spending, the analysis found.
Responding to the study, Sanders took aim at the Mercatus Center, which receives funding from the conservative Koch brothers. Koch Industries CEO Charles Koch is on the center's board.
Sanders' office has not done a cost analysis, a spokesman said. However, the Mercatus estimates are within the range of other cost projections for Sanders' 2016 plan.
It’s not just Mercatus. Even The Washington Post noted that single-payer is absurdly expensive. They were commenting on California’s push for a single-payer system, which was a massive $400 billion effort that included zero mechanisms within the legislation for how it would be funded. California Assembly Democrats balked, and oh how the hate was hurled at them for that last year. Colorado voters also sunk a universal health care initiative. The Post even noted in 2016, how Sanders’ plan could be a disaster for the working poor. Yet, Democrats seem to be looking at the bigger picture regarding socialized medicine, but when voters are told that their employee-based health care plans would be cannibalized in the transition to a single-payer system, support drops…tremendously [emphasis mine]:
The public is divided over a single-payer health care system, with 47 percent favoring such an approach and 46 percent opposing it.
But when supporters are told that all health care costs would be covered under a single-payer system — but that it would eliminate employer plansand that there would be only one government plan — the numbers move to 36 percent favor, 55 percent oppose.
So, it’s not a popular policy proposal. Only the insufferable and urban-based professional Left likes this garbage policy, which by the way isn’t working that well in the United Kingdom

TRAITOR OBAMA: HIS PAYOUT TO TERROR FINANCIERS - No one has ever served Muslim dictators more!


The Radical-in-Chief's enabling of the enemy is exposed once again.

Islamic terrorists, whether affiliated with al Qaeda or the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism, Iran, are enemies of the United States. They have American blood on their hands. The Obama administration aided and abetted these enemies by knowingly funding the terrorists and allowing them to evade the enforcement of U.S. law against them. As Andrew McCarthy once wrote, Obama was an “anti-anti-terrorist.”
For example, as the National Review has just reported, based on a discovery by the Middle East Forum, the Obama administration decided that an al Qaeda affiliate in Sudan was a worthy recipient of U.S. taxpayer funds to the tune of $200,000. The beneficiary of the Obama administration’s largesse, the Islamic Relief Agency (ISRA), also known as the Islamic African Relief Agency (IARA), had been designated by the U.S. Treasury as a terrorist-financing organization a decade earlier. The Treasury Department’s designation was based on ISRA’s links to Osama bin Laden and his terrorist organization, financial support for the Taliban, and fundraising in Western Europe to help finance Hamas suicide bombings.
Not only did the Obama administration disregard the U.S. Treasury Department designation. It overlooked the fact that, as set out in a July 28, 2010 press release issued by USAID (the U.S. Agency for International Development), the executive director of the Islamic American Relief Agency, the U.S. branch office of ISRA, pleaded guilty to illegally transferring funds raised in the United States as purported charitable contributions to Iraq. He had “the assistance of a Sudanese man living in Jordan, who was subsequently identified by the U.S. Treasury Department as a specially designated global terrorist.” Nevertheless, four years laterUSAID itself awarded a grant of $723,405 to a charity known as World Vision Inc. for the purported purpose of providing humanitarian relief in Sudan, out of which $200,000 was provided to ISRA as a sub-grantee. The money was directed “to help provide humanitarian aid, including emergency food, water, sanitation, and hygiene services, to displaced people affected by the ongoing conflict in Sudan,” according to a USAID official. 
Islamic terrorist organizations cause humanitarian suffering on a grand scale, not help relieve it.  Giving money to an al Qaeda affiliate to help provide humanitarian aid is like giving an arsonist the hose to help put out the fire he set.
The Obama administration’s decision to provide funding to ISRA in the face of such evidence of terrorist links was not the product of some inadvertent bureaucratic blunder. It turns out, according to the National Review report, that “government officials specifically authorized the release of at least $115,000 of this grant even after learning that it was a designated terror organization.” World Vision Inc. notified USAID in November 2014 of its belief that ISRA had been designated as a terrorist organization, which the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) confirmed. However, World Vision still wanted to continue working with ISRA because of its “excellent” performance. After OFAC denied World Vision a license to engage in transactions with ISRA because of the terrorist designation, World Vision appealed directly to the Obama administration’s director of USAID’s Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance for help with OFAC. It wanted a new license to pay ISRA what ISRA claimed to be owed for work performed. OFAC relented, authorizing a one-time transfer of $115,000 “for services performed under the sub-award with USAID.” According to the National Review article, an unnamed World Vision official described OFAC’s decision as a “great relief as ISRA had become restive and had threatened legal action, which would have damaged our reputation and standing in Sudan.” A senior USAID official Charles Wanjue wrote to colleagues: “Good news and a great relief, really!”
In short, the Obama administration knowingly rewarded designated terrorists affiliated with al Qaeda, an avowed Islamist enemy of the United States, with taxpayer funds. Sadly, this was not an isolated incident. The Obama administration had a pattern of aiding and abetting Islamist terrorists, including those sponsored by the Iranian regime.
Indeed, former Secretary of State John Kerry admitted that some of the monies released to the Iranian regime as a result of the disastrous nuclear deal would likely end up in the hands of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, which supports terrorist groups, as well as in the hands of “other entities, some of which are labeled terrorists." Just as Kerry predicted, it turns out that at least some of the $1.7 billion ransom payment the Obama administration paid for the Iranian regime’s release of American hostages has ended up in the hands of the Iranian-backed terrorist group Hezbollah as well as with the regime’s Quds Force, which is part of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps. The Quds Force was designated by the U.S. Treasury Department in 2007 for providing material support to the Taliban and other terrorist organizations. Flushed with cash supplied by the Obama administration, Quds’ boss Major-General Qassem Soleimani was emboldened to just threaten the United States, declaring “You know our power in the region and our capabilities in asymmetric war. We will act and we will work…We are near you, where you can't even imagine." 
The Obama administration is also reported to have “derailed an ambitious law enforcement campaign targeting drug trafficking by the Iranian-backed terrorist group Hezbollah, even as it was funneling cocaine into the United States,” according to a Politico report. During the course of a multi-year operation, law enforcement agents had “followed cocaine shipments, tracked a river of dirty cash, and traced what they believed to be the innermost circle of Hezbollah and its state sponsors in Iran.” However, Obama’s Justice Department obstructed the investigation. It refused requests “to file criminal charges against major players such as Hezbollah’s high-profile envoy to Iran, a Lebanese bank that allegedly laundered billions in alleged drug profits, and a central player in a U.S.-based cell of the Iranian paramilitary Quds force.” Once again, the Obama administration was helping the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism and its terrorist proxy Hezbollah by letting them continue to enrich their coffers with the smuggling of cocaine into the United States. Moreover, the Obama administration failed to strongly press the Czech Republic to extradite a Lebanese arms dealer Ali Fayad the Czech Republic had arrested, who, Politico reported, was “a suspected top Hezbollah operative whom agents believed reported to Russian President Vladimir Putin as a key supplier of weapons to Syria and Iraq.” Fayad was wanted on charges that included conspiring in a plan to murder U.S. government employees and to provide material support and resources to a foreign terrorist organization. The Obama administration in effect gave cover to a Hezbollah terrorist operative who was reportedly in league with Vladimir Putin. Talk about real collusion with an enemy of the United States!
Obama did worse as president than simply try to shield Islamists from legitimate criticism that their supremacist jihadist ideology fueled violence against innocent civilians. His administration’s policies helped fund the Islamist terrorists and allowed some to escape legal accountability for their actions.

Groundbreaking delayed for Obama Presidential Center in Chicago

The rush to build a monument to Barack Obama in Chicago has run smack into regulatory red tape.  Savor the irony, especially given the massive deregulation President Trump has undertaken.  Keep in mind that this project is not a presidential library that will be part of the National Archives. It is, instead, a monument to the man, and so far as anyone can tell, books are not a feature of the 3 buildings. There will, however, be basketball courts.
The Obama Foundation Friday announced that groundbreaking, planned for this year (less than 2 years after its namesake left office) will be delayed. Lolly Bowean of the Chicago Tribune reports:
The Obama Foundation has pushed back the groundbreaking date for the Obama Presidential Center after the federal review process was delayed for a second time this summer, officials confirmed Friday.
Disappointed Obama fans will have to postpone their pilgrimages. The Foundation says now that groundbreaking will take place in 2019. Given the ability of opponents of any project to sue, demanding environmental impact statements and the like, this may still be optimistic.
Before the presidential center can be built, the federal government will review its impact on Jackson Park, which is on the National Register of Historic Places, and evaluate the project’s environmental effects. Any impact that the review highlights will have to be resolved before construction can be allowed.
There have already been two public federal review meetings. A third was scheduled in June, but then it was delayed until July. Now it has been delayed until late summer, according to the city of Chicago’s website.
The federal review process has to be conducted because of Jackson Park’s historic status and because it involved closing and expanding major streets.
Nobody has yet discovered an endangered species in the dirt of Jackson Park, nor have any American Indian archeological artifacts yet been discovered.
The Obama Foundation, which is sponsoring the project, has been funded by a long list of what Bernie Sanders likes to call “millionaires and billionaires,” but oddly enough reports no donations from Barack and Michelle Obama, who are themselves worth many millions of dollars, having received a huge advance (reportedly $65 million) from a German-owned publisher for post-presidency books. Most foundations that carry the name of an individual or family (the Ford Foundation, for example) were endowed by that individual or family.
There are more potential hurdles ahead, some of them the product of community organizers, more delicious irony:
The news of the delay comes just a day after activists gathered on the South Side at a meeting to discuss placing a community benefits agreement proposition on the February ballot.
“We have a new window of opportunity before the next election to protect the most vulnerable people in our community,” said Parrish Brown, an activist with the Black Youth Project 100 Chicago Chapter, in a written statement. “We’re gathering to make sure Mayor (Rahm) Emanuel and the local aldermen do the right thing, or we’ll have to elect people who will.”
The coalition wants an ordinance that would require that 30 percent of all newly constructed housing near the presidential center be set aside as affordable housing. They want a property tax freeze for the longtime homeowners closest to the site and an independent monitor to make sure local residents are hired to work on the project. In addition, they are now calling for a community trust fund and support for the neighborhood schools.
Almost certainly, the project will be built, and the rush to break ground is quite understandable. History will be delivering its verdict on the Obama presidency, already looking rather incompetent, given the rapid rise in solid economic growth once some the shackles imposed by Obama were relaxed by President Trump.
But I always thought there was something wrong with building monuments to living people.

The 10 Most Destructive Americans of My 8 Decades

America has undergone enormous change during the nearly eight decades of my life. Today, America is a bitterly divided, poorly educated and morally fragile society with so-called mainstream politicians pushing cynical identity politics, socialism and open borders. The president of the United States is threatened with impeachment because the other side doesn’t like him. The once reasonably unbiased American media has evolved into a hysterical left wing mob. How could the stable and reasonably cohesive America of the 1950s have reached this point in just one lifetime? Who are the main culprits? Here’s my list of the 10 most destructive Americans of the last 80 years.
10) Mark Felt – Deputy director of the FBI, aka “Deep Throat” during the Watergate scandal. This was the first public instance of a senior FBI officially directly interfering in America’s political affairs. Forerunner of James Comey, Peter Strzok, Lisa Page and Andrew McCabe.
9) Bill Ayers– Represents the deep and ongoing leftist ideological damage to our education system. An unrepentant American terrorist who evaded punishment, he devoted his career to radicalizing American education and pushing leftist causes. Ghost wrote Obama’s book, “Dreams of My Father.”
8) Teddy Kennedy – Most folks remember Teddy as the guy who left Mary Joe Kopechne to die in his car at Chappaquiddick. The real damage came after he avoided punishment for her death and became a major Democrat force in the US Senate, pushing through transformative liberal policies in health care and education.  The real damage was the 1965 Hart-Cellar immigration bill he pushed hard for that changed the quota system to increase the flow of third world people without skills into the US and essentially ended large-scale immigration from Europe.
7) Walter Cronkite – Cronkite was a much beloved network anchor who began the politicalization of America’s news media with his infamous broadcast from Vietnam that described the Tet Offensive as a major victory for the Communists and significantly turned the gullible American public against the Vietnam War. In fact, the Tet offensive was a military disaster for the NVA and Viet Cong, later admitted by North Vietnamese military leaders. Decades later Cronkite admitted he got the story wrong. But it was too late.  The damage was done.
6) Bill and Hillary Clinton—It’s difficult to separate Team Clinton. Bill’s presidency was largely benign as he was a relative fiscal conservative who rode the remaining benefits of the Reagan era. But his sexual exploits badly stained the Oval Office and negatively affected America’s perception of the presidency. In exchange for financial support, he facilitated the transfer of sensitive military technology to the Chinese.  Hillary, a Saul Alinsky acolyte, is one of the most vicious politicians of my lifetime, covering up Bill’s sexual assaults by harassing and insulting the exploited women and peddling influence around the globe in exchange for funds for the corrupt Clinton Foundation. She signed off on the sale of 20% of the US uranium reserve to the Russians after Bill received a $500,000 speaking fee in Moscow and the foundation (which supported the Clinton’s regal lifestyle) received hundreds of millions of dollars from those who benefited from the deal.  Between them, they killed any honor that might have existed in the dark halls of DC.
5) Valerie Jarrett - The Rasputin of the Obama administration.  A Red Diaper baby, her father, maternal grandfather and father-in-law (Vernon Jarrett who was a close friend and ally of Obama mentor Frank Marshall Davis) were hardcore Communists under investigation by the U.S. government. She has been in Obama’s ear for his entire political career pushing a strong anti-American, Islamist, anti-Israeli, socialist/communist, cling-to-power agenda.
4) Jimmy Carter  - Carter ignited modern day radical Islam by abandoning the Shah and paving the way for Ayatollah Khomeini to take power in Tehran. Iran subsequently became the main state sponsor and promoter of international Islamic terrorism.  When Islamists took over our embassy in Tehran, Carter was too weak to effectively respond thus strengthening the rule of the radical Islamic mullahs.
3) Lyndon Johnson – Johnson turned the Vietnam conflict into a major war for America. It could have ended early if he had listened to the generals instead of automaker Robert McNamara. The ultimate result was: 1) 58,000 American military deaths and collaterally tens of thousands of American lives damaged; and 2) a war that badly divided America and created left wing groups that evaded the draft and eventually gained control of our education system.  Even worse, his so-called War on Poverty led to the destruction of American black families with a significant escalation of welfare and policies designed to keep poor families dependent on the government (and voting Democrat) for their well-being. He deliberately created a racial holocaust that is still burning today. A strong case could be made for putting him at the top of this list.
2) Barack Hussein Obama - Obama set up America for a final defeat and stealth conversion from a free market society to socialism/communism. As we get deeper into the Trump presidency, we learn more each day about how Obama politicized and compromised key government agencies, most prominently the FBI, the CIA and the IRS, thus thoroughly shaking the public’s confidence in the federal government to be fair and unbiased in its activities. He significantly set back race and other relations between Americans by stoking black grievances and pushing radical identity politics. Obama’s open support for the Iranian mullahs and his apologetic “lead from behind” foreign policy seriously weakened America abroad. His blatant attempt to interfere in Israel’s election trying to unseat Netanyahu is one of the most shameful things ever done by an American president.
1) John Kerry – Some readers will likely say Kerry does not deserve to be number one on this list. I have him here because I regard him as the most despicable American who ever lived.  After his three faked Purple Hearts during his cowardly service in Vietnam, he was able to leave the US Navy early. As a reserve naval officer and in clear violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, he traveled to Paris and met privately with the NVA and the Viet Cong. He returned to the United States parroting the Soviet party line about the war and testified before Congress comparing American soldiers to the hordes of Genghis Khan. It was a clear case of treason, giving aid and comfort to the enemy in a time of war. We got a second bite of the bitter Kerry apple when as Obama’s secretary of state, he fell into bed with the Iranian (“Death to America”) mullahs giving them the ultimate green light to develop nuclear weapons along with billions of dollars that further supported their terrorist activities. Only the heroic Swift Vets saved us from a Manchurian Candidate Kerry presidency. Ultimately we got Obama.

Dishonorable Mentions! (Just missed the list)
John Brennan –Obama’s CIA director who once voted for Communist Gus Hall for president. A key member of the Deep State who severely politicized the CIA. Called President Trump treasonous for meeting with the president of Russia.
Jane Fonda – movie actress who made the infamous trip to Vietnam during the war in support of the Communists. She represents hard left Hollywood that has done so much damage to our culture.
Jimmy Hendrix and Janice Joplin – Both revered entertainers helped usher in the prevailing drug culture and personally suffered the consequences. Karma’s a bitch.
Robert Johnson /BET – Helped popularize ho’s, bitches and pimps while making millions on great hits such as “Jigga my Nigga”, “Big Pimpin’”, “Niggas in Paris” and “Strictly 4 My N.I.G.G.A.Z.”   Many scholars within the African American community maintain that BET perpetuates and justifies racism by adopting the stereotypes held about African Americans, affecting the psyche of young viewers through the bombardment of negative images of African Americans. Who can disagree?
Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, Jr./The New York Times – Once the gold standard of American journalism, the paper always had a liberal tilt and occasionally made bad mistakes. As the years have gone along, the paper has slid further and further left and today is virtually the primary propaganda arm of the increasingly radical Democrat Party. Still retains influence in Washington and New York.
George Soros – Jewish former Nazi collaborator in his native Hungary who as a self-made billionaire has poured hundreds of millions of dollars into left wing groups and causes. The damage he has caused is difficult to measure, but it’s certainly large. He has funded much of the effort to kill the Trump presidency.
Frank Marshall Davis - Anti-white, black Bolshevik, card-carrying Soviet agent.  Probable birth father and admitted primary mentor of young Barak Hussein Obama.                      
Frank Hawkins is a former US Army intelligence officer, Associated Press foreign correspondent, international businessman, senior newspaper company executive, founder and owner of several marketing companies and published novelist. He is currently retired in North Carolina.

July 29, 2018

Lawless Washington

It is useless for conservatives to hope laws against political corruption and violating national security information and colluding with unsavory types will ever apply to leftists.  When is the last time any leftist in Washington faced any successful prosecution for committing crimes of this sort? 
The infinitesimal peccadilloes Democrats allege that Trump and his campaign staff may have engaged in with an essentially harmless Russian Federation – a nation with multiparty elections and many parties represented in the Duma, freedom of worship and speech, and no plans of world conquest – are nothing, even if true.  Russia, one third the size of the old Soviet Empire, is no real threat to America at all and is, in many respects, a natural ally of our nation in many areas. 
The Clintons' utter disregard for both the law and ethical behavior stretches back to Bill's ghastly reign of depravity and dishonesty in Arkansas and Bill's term as president was perhaps the most lawless in American history.  The left was utterly indifferent to his crimes and sins and all he got was a slap on the wrist for lying under oath before a federal judge and a largely symbolic impeachment that gutless Republicans in the Senate tried as best they could to ignore.
JFK was a rat and a scoundrel who, we have learned in the last decade, not only had extramarital affairs, but seduced underage interns and offered these girls illegal drugs.   His family was closely tied to organized crime, and JFK likely shared a mistress with a Mafia kingpin.  JFK doubtless avoided many problems by the simple expedient of appointing his own brother as attorney general.  The left, whose many cadres surely knew of many of his rotten deeds, completely hid those from America and elevated JFK into the wholly undeserved status of martyr.
FDR, JFK, and Clinton all did things much, much worse than Richard Nixon, but because the left cares only about power and never about ethical behavior, the misdeeds of Nixon were raised to ridiculous heights.  As the hypocritical left kept reminding us during Nixon's trials, the Constitution itself, the left claimed, was in jeopardy.  Nixon did resign – not because of the left, but rather because the right, led by truly honorable and decent men like Barry Goldwater, cared about good government.
Conservatives cannot win a game of who behaved worse and who broke what laws because the left is entirely immune to any real sanction for bad behavior, patent dishonesty, and violation of laws and regulations.  The Establishment – not just the media, but all the agencies of government and particularly the criminal justice system – is either hopelessly myopic or purely cynical about the enforcement of laws dealing with government, national security, and the like.  This has nothing to do with the letter of the law but rather the much more important enforcement of the law.  Federal agents, prosecutors, and judges determine who will be left alone and who will be hounded and perhaps imprisoned.
The unspeakable miscarriage of justice against a good and honorable man like Scooter Libby is a perfect example.  His "crime" was so trivial, so problematic, and so ambiguous that it is impossible to doubt that he was like a black in Mississippi seventy years ago being tried before the Imperial Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, which trumpeted its interest in enforcing the law.
Even worse than the left's control of the instruments of investigation, prosecution, and trial is the fact that the venue for nearly all of these cases is in the District Court for the District of Columbia, a place as intolerant of conservatives and fawning toward leftists as anywhere in America.
What can be done?  President Trump could, and should, institute a robust investigation with indictment by a grand jury in mind of every potential crime of a political nature committed by leftists and he should fire any prosecutor or FBI agent who drags his feet or obstructs this action.
Then, once a number of leftists face indictment and trial, Trump ought to issue a blanket presidential pardon for everyone who may have committed these "crimes," putting conservatives and leftists on the same level of forgiveness.  Then Trump ought to convene a commission to review all the laws and regulations with recommendations of repeal of as many laws as possible and the creation of a special counsel law for the investigation and prosecution of all of these "crimes" which remain on the books.
The system for regulating the sorts of  "crimes" Trump and his aides are accused of committing is more than just broken – it has never worked.

Obama attacks wealthy in South Africa before returning to his $8-million home

Barack Obama earned up to $20 million between 2005 and 2016.  He lives in an $8-million mansion.  Everywhere he goes, he has a coterie of Secret Service agents protecting him – at taxpayer expense.
But that didn't stop him from complaining about how rich people shouldn't eat so much or live in such fine houses.
At a recent speech in South Africa, former President Barack Obama criticized wealth inequality, saying those who have more money should share their earnings with the less fortunate.
"Right now, I'm actually surprised by how much money I got," Obama said of the more than $20 million he earned between 2005 and 2016.
Obama then chided wealthy individuals for excess, saying, "There's only so much you can eat.  There's only so big a house you can have.  There's only so many nice trips you can take.  I mean, it's enough."
"We're going to have to worry about economics if we want to get democracy back on track," Obama continued[.]  "We're going to have to consider new ways of thinking about these problems, like a universal income, review of our workweek, how we retrain our young people, how we make everybody an entrepreneur at some level."
This is the exact same mindset that allowed communist officials across Russia and Eastern Europe to justify living like kings while the masses stood in line for toilet paper.  You see, Obama earned his millions.  He's smarter than everyone else.  He worked harder than everyone else.  He feels the pain of the poor more acutely than anyone else.  He deserves what he's gotten from the capitalist system where all those other rich people acquired their wealth by climbing on the backs of the working class.
Democracy is in trouble not because of capitalism or because the rich are "too rich."  Democracy is in trouble because arrogant authoritarians like Obama believe themselves to be more virtuous than the rest of us and thus qualified to judge how much wealth is "too much" and how the benefits of living in a capitalist society should be divvied up.
Obama is oblivious to the irony.  It's a very good thing he is out of power and exerting little influence on politics in the U.S.


Ex-president complains about the problems he helped make worse.

Former President Barack Obama delivered a lengthy speech to an audience of around 15,000 people at the 16th Nelson Mandela Annual Lecture in Johannesburg, South Africa on Tuesday.  Obama leavened his standard rhetoric with effusive praise of Nelson Mandela, who, Obama said, was “one of history’s true giants” and someone whose “progressive, democratic vision” was a model for the world. Obama also praised South Africa’s current President Ramaphosa who, according to Obama, “you can see is inspiring new hope in this great country.” Obama evidently believes that “inspiring new hope” includes government expropriation of land without compensation and plans “to accelerate the land redistribution programme.” 
Obama mentioned Russia in passing, declaring that “Russia, already humiliated by its reduced influence since the collapse of the Soviet Union, feeling threatened by democratic movements along its borders, suddenly started reasserting authoritarian control and in some cases meddling with its neighbors.”
Meddling with its neighbors? Is Obama suffering under some form of amnesia or is he just in a state of denial? Under Obama’s watch, Russia meddled in our presidential election in 2016 without any pushback by the Obama administration. Aside from moving into portions of nearby Ukraine and illegally annexing Crimea, Russia inserted itself into the Syrian civil war on behalf of Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad after Obama drew back from his infamous “red line” over the Assad regime’s chemical attack against its own people.
Prior to the 2012 presidential election, Obama was caught on a hot mic colluding with Dmitry Medvedev (who was then the outgoing Russian president) to pass along a message to Vladimir Putin regarding missile defense. “On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this can be solved,” Obama said in hushed tones, “but it’s important for him [incoming Russian President Putin] to give me space. This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility.” Medvedev replied. "I will transmit this information to Vladimir.”
Obama set the tone of his appeasement towards Russia early in his first term. As Daniel Greenfield has reminded us, during a meeting held in the summer of 2009 at Putin’s dacha, Obama “listened without a word of protest to Putin’s attack on America.” That should be no surprise. After all, Obama himself made a habit of apologizing for America’s alleged wrongs during his overseas trips as president. Obama also went out of his way to praise the Russian dictator. At the beginning of his talks in 2009 with Putin, Obama said to Putin in flattering terms, “I am aware of not only the extraordinary work that you’ve done on behalf of the Russian people in your previous role as prime minis-, uh, as president, but in your current role as prime minister.”
President Trump, in fact, has imposed more severe sanctions against Russia than Obama did, expelled more Russian “diplomats” from the United States, increased U.S. energy supplies to compete with Russian energy, and provided lethal arms to Ukraine. President Trump is building the military back up to a much more effective deterrent fighting force, and has restored confidence among former Soviet bloc nations such as Poland by reversing Obama's abandonment of plans to install missile defense systems in the region.
Obama said in his Nelson Mandela Annual Lecture speech that China’s economy was based on a “model of authoritarian control combined with mercantilist capitalism.” He added that it was “proper for advanced economies like the United States to insist on reciprocity from nations like China that are no longer solely poor countries, to make sure that they’re providing access to their markets and that they stop taking intellectual property and hacking our servers.” Excellent point, but under Obama’s watch China continued to take our intellectual property and hack our servers. The trade deficit in goods with China grew approximately 150 percent during Obama’s two terms in office. His jawboning did nothing. President Trump is at least trying to use some hardball tactics to move China in the right direction.
Obama noted in his speech the downside of globalism, including its effect on workers. He said, “from their board rooms or retreats, global decision-makers don’t get a chance to see sometimes the pain in the faces of laid-off workers.” It is precisely these forgotten men and women whom Obama neglected to address with solutions to their concerns while he was president. In fact, he did the opposite by pushing for amnesty for illegal immigrants, imposing onerous job-killing regulations, and pursuing globalist job-killing agreements such as the Paris agreement on climate change. After Donald Trump won the election, the president-elect tweeted, “The forgotten man and woman will never be forgotten again.” He has kept his word, putting Americans first. Through substantial tax cuts, elimination of burdensome regulations and withdrawal from job killing globalist agreements, President Trump has created the foundation for a booming economy and the creation of millions of new jobs.  
Obama castigated in his Nelson Mandela speech what he labeled “rabid nationalism and xenophobia,” “strongman politics,” and “far-right parties that oftentimes are based not just on platforms of protectionism and closed borders, but also on barely hidden racial nationalism.” He decried what he claimed was the rejection of “objective truth,” referring as an example to the debate over the extent of climate change and its causes.  “People just make stuff up,” Obama said. “They just make stuff up. We see it in state-sponsored propaganda; we see it in internet driven fabrications, we see it in the blurring of lines between news and entertainment, we see the utter loss of shame among political leaders where they’re caught in a lie and they just double down and they lie some more.” While Obama did not specifically mention President Trump or the Republican Party by name, it is not too far a stretch to assume that he had both in mind when he came up with these “pearls of wisdom.” 
It is not “racial nationalism,” “rabid nationalism” or “xenophobia” for the president of the United States to enforce this nation’s immigration laws and place the security of the American people above all else. Obama failed to discharge his paramount responsibility as president to protect the American people. Donald Trump is carrying out his responsibilities as the nation’s chief executive and commander-in-chief.  
Regarding Obama’s lament that people “just make stuff up,” he was guilty of doing just that on repeated occasions while president. He lied repeatedly, for example, about the availability of choice of doctor and insurance provider under Obamacare. He lied about the Iran nuclear deal, or was totally duped by Iran’s thuggish leaders, or both. He lied about the origin of the “Fast and Furious” gun walking program that allowed about 2,000 weapons to fall into the hands of Mexican drug cartel associates, which was started early in the Obama administration’s first term, not during the Bush administration as Obama claimed. He lied when he proclaimed, "There is no spying on Americans." The list goes on and on. 
Finally, there is Obama’s complaint about “strongman politics,” which “are ascendant, suddenly, whereby elections and some pretense of democracy are maintained, the form of it, but those in powers seek to undermine every institution or norm that gives democracy meaning.” Obama is right to be concerned about the ascendancy of “strongman politics.” However, it is too bad he did not worry so much about this phenomenon while he was president. He initially turned his back on the millions of Iranian citizens protesting in the streets in 2009 against a fraudulent election and the repressive theocratic regime running the country. Behind the scenes Obama sucked up to Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei with personal letters and other assurances that his administration would not rock the boat against the regime, all to keep his dream of what turned out to be a disastrous nuclear deal with Iran alive. 
Obama accepted a gift from Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chávez of a book entitled Open Veins of Latin America: Five Centuries of the Pillage of a Continent. Obama said it "was a nice gesture to give me a book. I'm a reader." This was nothing, however, compared to Obama’s obsequiousness to his host in Havana, Cuban strongman Raúl Castro, as the two leaders met to close the door on decades of hostilities between Cuba and the United States. Indeed, Obama offered to open the door wide to re-establishing diplomatic relations and expanding economic ties with the communist country without receiving any commitments in return that the regime would take concrete steps to improve its human rights record. In fact, during their joint news conference, Obama noted in his own remarks Castro’s criticism of “what he views as short comings in the United States around basic needs for people and poverty and inequality and race relations.” Obama added that “we welcome that constructive dialogue as well because we believe that when we share our deepest beliefs and ideas with an attitude of mutual respect that we can both learn and make the lives of our people better.” Obama was engaging in moral equivalency at its worst.
Obama had eight years to address the problems he complained about in his Nelson Mandela speech in South Africa. He failed and in some ways made matters worse. President Trump deserves a chance to try a different approach that puts the American people first.

did you ever hear of HOMELESSNESS before Obama and his banksters showed up???






Barack Obama Lectures World on Racial, Wealth Inequality in South Africa

Former U.S. President Barack Obama, left, delivers his speech at the 16th Annual Nelson Mandela Lecture at the Wanderers Stadium in Johannesburg, South Africa, Tuesday, July 17, 2018. In his highest-profile speech since leaving office, Obama urged people around the world to respect human rights and other values under threat …
AP Photo/Themba Hadebe

Former President Barack Obama on Tuesday delivered the 16th annual Nelson Mandela lecture in Johannesburg, South Africa and called for greater global wealth redistribution, scolding the rich for having more money than they need.

“For almost all countries, progress is going to depend on an inclusive market-based system – one that offers education for every child, that protects collective bargaining and secures the rights of every worker,” Obama began. “That breaks up monopolies to encourage competition and small and medium-sized businesses and has laws that root out corruption and ensures fair dealing in business, that maintains some form of progressive taxation so that rich people are still rich, but they’re giving a little bit back to make sure that everybody else has something to pay for universal healthcare and retirement security, and invest in infrastructure and scientific research that builds platforms for innovation.”
The former president has raised eyebrows over his opulent lifestyle since departing the White House. Obama in February of 2017 vacationed in the British Virgin Islands with Virgin Group founder and billionaire Richard Branson and joined Oprah and Bruce Springsteen on a luxury cruise on Hollywood mogul David Geffen’s $590 million yacht in April of that year.
In a bizarre moment, the former president then criticized himself for amassing too large of a fortune. “I should add, by the way, right now I’m actually surprised by how much money I got, and let me tell you something, I don’t have half as much as most of these folks or a tenth or a hundred thou— there’s only so much you can eat, there’s only so big a house you can have, there’s only so many nice trips you can take. I mean, it’s enough,” he lamented.

Former Pres. Barack Obama: "It is a plain fact that racial discrimination still exists in both the United States and South Africa." 

Obama also offered up criticism of the current state of race relations in the United States. “It is a plain fact that racial discrimination still exists in both the United States and South Africa,” Obama told attendees of the speech at Ellis Park Arena. “And it is also a fact that the accumulated disadvantages of years of institutionalized depression have created yawning disparities in income, and in wealth and in education, and in health, in personal safety, in access to credit.”
Obama opened by describing today’s times as “strange and uncertain,” adding that “each day’s news cycle is bringing more head-spinning and disturbing headlines.” These days “we see much of the world threatening to return to a more dangerous, more brutal, way of doing business,” he said.
This is the former president’s first visit to Africa since leaving office in early 2017. He stopped earlier this week in Kenya, where he visited the rural birthplace of his late father. Obama’s speech highlighted how the Nobel Peace Prize winner, who was imprisoned for 27 years, kept up his campaign against what appeared to be insurmountable odds to end apartheid, South Africa’s harsh system of white minority rule.
The Associated Press contributed to this report. 

The banality of Barack Obama

Obama made a big speech in South Africa and all I can think is: Same old Obama.
His techniques are all there: Nods to the opposition, odd things thrown into sequences of events to deflect attention from his record, and a view of the world that hasn't changed a bit since his days of reading Tom Friedman. Heck, he probably still reads Tom Friedman, and golfs with him out on the toney gated links, too.
He blathers on about the wonders of globalism and takes credit for all of the "progress." Progress, progressivism, get it? He also does quite a bit to ignore his own record, starting with his doubled-down record of lies (Obamacare, Benghazi, Hillary Clinton's emails) and says other politicians do it. Yecch.
Here are some of the most annoying highlights of his dreary speech, which is sure to fade into the ether, given its rote-loathing of President Trump (not mentioned by name but obvious enough) and inability to grasp his own role in all the problems he talks about.
Praise for the big state over the dynamism and enterprise of the private sector, all because of its control:
In those nations with market-based economies, suddenly union movements developed; and health and safety and commercial regulations were instituted; and access to public education was expanded; and social welfare systems emerged, all with the aim of constraining the excesses of capitalism and enhancing its ability to provide opportunity not just to some but to all people. And the result was unmatched economic growth and a growth of the middle class.
Amazing unfamiliarity with how South Africa has fallen apart since Mandela left the scene, with white farmers' farms expropriated Zimbabwe-style, opening the gate for the rest of that same-old-socialism result. Maybe Mandela didn't set up the institutions to prevent that as he should have. Right now, South Africa has tyranny of the majority, the same miserable picture found all over the third world which stays third world, for this reason.
And then as Madiba guided this nation through negotiation painstakingly, reconciliation, its first fair and free elections; as we all witnessed the grace and the generosity with which he embraced former enemies, the wisdom for him to step away from power once he felt his job was complete, we understood that -- (applause) -- we understood it was not just the subjugated, the oppressed who were being freed from the shackles of the past. The subjugator was being offered a gift, being given a chance to see in a new way, being given a chance to participate in the work of building a better world.
Or this:
It is a plain fact that racial discrimination still exists in both the United States and South Africa. (Cheers and applause.)
Using euphemisms for socialism. Name one "closed" economy that isn't socialist. And plenty of those "market-based principles" were little more than crony capitalism, alongside U.S. Democratic Party-linked academics feeding at the U.S. government trough and not introducing "market-based" anything in other than name, as the horrible experience of Russia in the 1990s showed. There's a reason Russia turned to Vladimir Putin:
The introduction of market-based principles, in which previously closed economies along with the forces of global integration powered by new technologies, suddenly unleashed entrepreneurial talents
Bringing up billionaires, not quite getting beyond "fly him out" and getting to how they hand him the six-figure speaking fees, fancy vacations on private islands, and a celebrity lifestyle that characterizes his current hypocritical life. He would have us think he's not enjoying it and all he cares about are the ordinary schmoes - who by the way voted for Trump because of it. Get a load:
Now, it should be noted that this new international elite, the professional class that supports them, differs in important respects from the ruling aristocracies of old. It includes many who are self-made. It includes champions of meritocracy. And although still mostly white and male, as a group they reflect a diversity of nationalities and ethnicities that would have not existed a hundred years ago. A decent percentage consider themselves liberal in their politics, modern and cosmopolitan in their outlook. Unburdened by parochialism, or nationalism, or overt racial prejudice or strong religious sentiment, they are equally comfortable in New York or London or Shanghai or Nairobi or Buenos Aires, or Johannesburg. Many are sincere and effective in their philanthropy. Some of them count Nelson Mandela among their heroes. Some even supported Barack Obama for the presidency of the United States, and by virtue of my status as a former head of state, some of them consider me as an honorary member of the club. (Laughter.) And I get invited to these fancy things, you know? (Laughter.) They'll fly me out.
Here's another whopper of lumped together ideas of problems told in a way that obscures his own bad record in creating them:
And their decisions -- their decisions to shut down a manufacturing plant, or to try to minimize their tax bill by shifting profits to a tax haven with the help of high-priced accountants or lawyers, or their decision to take advantage of lower-cost immigrant labor, or their decision to pay a bribe -- are often done without malice; it's just a rational response, they consider, to the demands of their balance sheets and their shareholders and competitive pressures.
So where was he on the flat tax back when he was president? Flat tax is the only thing that breaks these wrap-arounds on the tax structure. Where was he on illegals that benefited these Democrat-donor tycoons who hired the cheap labor? That's right, practically inviting them in as loyal potential Democrat voters. Where was he on manufacturing? Out denouncing the bitter clingers and saying the jobs would never come back. There are a lot of doozies in that sequence. He throws in bribes for good measure to muddy the waters from his own record. Speaking of bribes, where was he on Hillary Clinton's foundation donations for State Department favors?
It gets worse. Trump voters are his next problem, because Democrats repeatedly say their motivation in voting for Trump is that it's all about their hate for people who 'look different.'
But to say that our vision for the future is better is not to say that it will inevitably win. Because history also shows the power of fear. History shows the lasting hold of greed and the desire to dominate others in the minds of men. Especially men. (Laughter and applause.) History shows how easily people can be convinced to turn on those who look different, or worship God in a different way.
The old bitter clingers, right?
Then there's his tax-the-rich mantra, one that always hits the little guy, not the billionaire Democratic campaign donors he purported claims his aim is at. Look at this drivel and think about Obama's record of hanging out with jet-setting billionaires:
And when economic power is concentrated in the hands of the few, history also shows that political power is sure to follow -- and that dynamic eats away at democracy. Sometimes it may be straight-out corruption, but sometimes it may not involve the exchange of money; it's just folks who are that wealthy get what they want, and it undermines human freedom.
And how we achieve this is going to vary country to country, and I know your new president is committed to rolling up his sleeves and trying to do so. But we can learn from the last 70 years that it will not involve unregulated, unbridled, unethical capitalism. It also won't involve old-style command-and-control socialism form the top. That was tried; it didn't work very well. For almost all countries, progress is going to depend on an inclusive market-based system -- one that offers education for every child; that protects collective bargaining and secures the rights of every worker -- (applause) -- that breaks up monopolies to encourage competition in small and medium-sized businesses; and has laws that root out corruption and ensures fair dealing in business; that maintains some form of progressive taxation so that rich people are still rich but they're giving a little bit back to make sure that everybody else has something to pay for universal health care and retirement security, and invests in infrastructure and scientific research that builds platforms for innovation.
That's his solution, tax "the rich" to pay for bureaucrats and put half the Millennial generation in their moms's basements, for lack of work. Sounds lovely. Been there, done that.
And then with perfect opacity, he natters on about how at some point he's had enough - and praises himself for 'giving back' or some such tale, given that he's doing nothing:
I should add, by the way, right now I'm actually surprised by how much money I got, and let me tell you something: I don't have half as much as most of these folks or a tenth or a hundredth. There's only so much you can eat. There's only so big a house you can have. (Cheers and applause.) There's only so many nice trips you can take. I mean, it's enough. (Laughter.) You don't have to take a vow of poverty just to say, "Well, let me help out and let a few of the other folks -- let me look at that child out there who doesn't have enough to eat or needs some school fees, let me help him out. I'll pay a little more in taxes. It's okay. I can afford it."
He blathers on most disingenously, with a long passage about 'facts' which he doesn't have, and Friedmanian talk about 'technology' which adds nothing new, then his biggest problem, which is that he listens to no one but himself and Ben Rhodes:
Most of us prefer to surround ourselves with opinions that validate what we already believe. You notice the people who you think are smart are the people who agree with you. (Laughter.) Funny how that works.
Best I can conclude from this dreck is that Donald Trump has nothing to worry about from this frozen-in-amber soggy socialist thinking, coupled with a very bad presidential record he seems unaware of. Been there, done that, indeed.

They Destroyed Our Country
“They knew Obama was an unqualified crook; yet they promoted him. They knew Obama was a train wreck waiting to happen; yet they made him president, to the great injury of America and the world. They understood he was only a figurehead, an egomaniac, and a liar; yet they made him king, doing great harm to our republic (perhaps irreparable.)”
'Incompetent' and 'liar' among most frequently used words to describe the president: Pew Research Center

Obama's Dying Vision: The Only Card in the Democratic Deck

As the Democratic Party continues to scrum ahead of the 2018 midterm elections – and ultimately the 2020 presidential election – Democrats of all stripes are eager to see who will be squeezed out of the pack and step up to articulate some kind of unified Progressive vision to challenge the Trump presidency.
Yet, even at this late date, Democrats appear rudderless and out of ideas – still clinging to their relentless intifada of resistance to shake off Donald Trump's occupation of the American government.  As this approach hasn't proven to be an altogether winning strategy, recently, the DNC brain trust announced their intention to enlist the advice of Hollywood writers, directors, and producers to craft Tinseltown-style messaging in the hope of generating Democratic victories.  Given the four-letter tirades of Robert De Niro, the vulgar tweets of Peter Fonda, the nightly broadsides of talk show hosts, and the rallying cries and rants of entertainment elites everywhere, the Hollywood message is loud and clear and can be reduced to two words: F--- you!
What Democrats don't seem to understand is that Hollywood is not a "messaging" apparatus, nor is parading Trump-hating celebrities into the spotlight a winning substitute for a clear enunciation of what the Democratic Party stands for and whom it represents.  Let us not forget the bawdy conga line of Hollywood royalty who stepped up noisily during Hillary's 2016 campaign – and delivered nothing.  Employing a "long time ago in a galaxy far, far away..." approach to a TV political ad or get-out-the-vote appeal bereft of a lucid, straightforward liberal message is, as former Democratic Texas governor Ann Richards once remarked, like this: "you can put lipstick on a hog and call it Monique, but it is still a pig."
The truth is, the Democrats have no message.  There is no vision.  There is no agenda.  There is no Democratic counter to "Make America Great Again."  Nor is there a leader to voice such a vision and stamp it with his imprimatur if there were one.
And therein lies the rub.  Who is the leader of the Democratic Party?  Biden, Pelosi, Schumer, Perez, Ellison, Sanders, Clinton, Gillibrand, Feinstein, Warren, Durbin, Booker, Waters?  This is a motley crew, to say the least, and hardly visionaries, and nary a one who has an electable, national cachet that can inspire transformative change.
Curiously, one name is absent: the Democrat who is the architect of the American anti-capitalist movement and the godfather of the ongoing anti-Trump resistance – former president Barack Obama.
Make no mistake: Barack Obama is still the supreme head of the Democratic Party, and his radical reconfiguring of America remains the sole Democratic vision: redistribution of wealth through vilification and increased taxation of the rich; control of America's production through executive orders and regulations; expansion of the welfare state through entitlements, identity politics, and social realignment; foreign policy through apology and appeasement; and economic equality through racial enmity and class conflict.
Since his college days and perhaps even before, Obama has doggedly sought to reconstruct America from an individual rights-based society where government is answerable to moral law to a left-wing, European-style social state where the individual and his achievements are subordinate to the collective good and the authority of government.  According to Stanley Kurtz, senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center and author of Radical-in-Chief: Barack Obama and the Untold Story of American Socialism, "Obama has made concerted efforts to hide his socialist convictions from the voters who put him in office.  Had the American public known the truth, Obama would never have risen to the U.S. Senate, much less the presidency.  That sort of systematic deception corrodes democracy itself."
Or as Jonah Goldberg characterized it in the National Review after Obama's first term, "[t]he president thinks America would be better off if it was no longer America."
To achieve that end, what better fuel to run his collectivist engine than on America's greatest sin: racism?  In speech after speech at home and abroad (so much for politics stopping at the water's edge); in Rose Garden press conferences with foreign dignitaries; even at the dais of the United Nations, President Obama rarely missed an opportunity to portray America as a place stained with bigotry, injustice, and discrimination.  Along the way, he managed to slander and discredit virtually every institution in our society – the police system, the criminal justice system, the educational system, the economic system, the judicial system, the corporate system, not to mention racist malignancies in employment, opportunity, housing, entertainment, sports...even the words we use.
As a result, the Obama Vision has wrought an America deeply fractured along political and racial lines with a measure of animus not seen since the 1950s – an America where racial and ethnic identity are the primary elements to an individual's self-worth and sense of himself.  In the process, Obama has systematically institutionalized the concept of white racism as a felony, while black or other "colored" forms of racism are declarations of cultural pride and legitimate responses to oppression – which whites can never understand and aren't truly racist because minorities lack political power.
As reported by Politico, in an attempt to reconstitute his vision from the devastating Clinton defeat, as far back as early last year, Obama has been conducting secret one-on-one meetings in his D.C. office in the World Wildlife Fund building – holding court with Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Joe Biden, Deval Patrick, Chris Coons, Eric Holder, Harry Reid, et. al.  Even lesser lights like Pete Buttigieg, South Bend, Indiana mayor; Jason Kander, 2016 Missouri Senate candidate (lost); Los Angeles mayor Eric Garcetti; and former New Orleans mayor Mitch Landrieu have all sat at Obama's knee and sought counsel.
But the sad truth is that Obama's unfulfilled strategy of "fundamentally transforming the United States of America" along racial and collectivist lines is in free fall and has engendered the current ugly Democratic lurch to the far left – where every slight, every hurt, every grief, every rainy day elicits cries of "racist" and "Nazi" and is a call for a national dialogue, a special counsel, or an independent investigation.
Given this trajectory and with no unifying Democratic leader on the horizon with a developed political agenda, President Donald Trump will continue to dismantle the Obama Vision like Hal the Computer in 2001: A Space Odyssey – and Democrats will soon find themselves singing "Daisy" all the way to the mid-terms and beyond.








“Obama’s new home in Washington has been described as the “nerve center” of the anti-Trump opposition. Former attorney general Eric Holder has said that Obama is “ready to roll” and has aligned himself with the “resistance.” Former high-level Obama campaign staffers now work with a variety of  groups organizing direct action against Trump’s initiatives. “Resistance School,” for example, features lectures by former campaign executive Sara El-Amine, author of the Obama Organizing.”



"Cold War historian Paul Kengor goes deeply into Obama's communist background in an article in American Spectator, "Our First Red Diaper Baby President," and in an excellent Mark Levin interview.  Another Kengor article describes the Chicago communists whose younger generation include David Axelrod, Valerie Jarrett, and Barack Hussein Obama.  Add the openly Marxist, pro-communist Ayers, and you have many of the key players who put Obama into power." Karin McQuillan


"We know that Obama and his inner circle have set up a war room in his D.C.

home to plan and execute resistance to the Trump administration and his legislative

agenda.  None of these people care about the American people, or the fact that

Trump won the election because millions of people voted for him."  

Patricia McCarthy / AMERICAN

Eric Holder Hints at Possible 2020 Presidential Bid

Eric Holder
The Associated Press

On Monday night, Former Attorney General Eric Holder toldStephen Colbert that he would decide whether to run for president “sometime early next year.”

Colbert questioned Holder regarding journalist April Ryan’s tweet that sources close to him said he was “seriously considering” running for President of the United States in 2020, to the applause of the studio audience.
“Were you just taking the temperature of America just now?” Colbert asked as the applause died down. “I was just looking to see potential contributors, you know. And cabinet members,” Holder replied.
“I’m thinking about it and what I’ve said is that I’d make a determination sometime early next year,” Holder elaborated. “My focus, really, now is on 2018, the midterms and trying to make sure that Democrats take back the Senate, take back the House, and that we do well, importantly, at the state level.”
But even as 2020 looms, Holder is focused on the 2018 midterms. He leads the National Democratic Redistricting Committee, a self-described “hub for executing a comprehensive redistricting strategy that shifts the redistricting power, creating fair districts where Democrats can compete.”
Of course, this would not be the former attorney general’s first time in the spotlight. In 2012, Holder was found in contempt of Congress by a 255-67 majority for his failure to turn over documents directly related to the “Fast and Furious” gun-running scandal. He has recently been a vocal critic of President Donald Trump, calling the Helsinki meeting with Russian president Vladimir Putin “collusion in plain sight.”


After eight years of the Dodd-Frank bank “reform,” the American financial oligarchy exercises its dictatorship over society and the government more firmly than ever. This unaccountable elite will not tolerate even the most minimal limits on its ability to plunder the economy for its own personal gain.
This was not because of difficulties in securing indictments or convictions. On the contrary, Attorney General Eric Holder told a Senate committee in March of 2013 that the Obama administration chose not to prosecute the big banks or their CEOs because to do so might “have a negative impact on the national economy.”



Those are the subliterate, low-skill, non-English-speaking indigents whose own societies are unable or unwilling to usefully educate and employ them. Bring these people here and they not only need a lot of services, they are putty in the hands of leftist demogogues as Hugo Chavez demonstrated - and they are very useful as leftist voters who will support the Soros agenda.


Of course, the game of the Democrats is to avoid at all costs any of the safeguards against fraud, such as photo ID requirements.  That should tell anyone with integrity what they are up to.  But most media continue to ignore this stain on democracy.  THOMAS LIFSON – AMERICAN THINKER

 BARACK OBAMA and ERIC HOLDER’S SABOTAGE OF HOMELAND SECURITY: The “zero tolerance” program was dismantled by Attorney General Erc Holder once it had successfully cut the transit of migrants by roughly 95 percent. Initially, officials made 140,000 arrests per year in the mid-2000s, but the northward flow dropped so much that officials only had to make 6,000 arrests in 2013, according to a 2014 letter by two pro-migration Senators, Sen. Jeff Flake and John McCain. NEIL MUNRO


Federal agents discovered an underground tunnel crossing the border into Mexico from Naco, Arizona on Tuesday as part of an investigation after a traffic stop that yielded over two tons of marijuana, with a value of approximately $3 million.

 The “zero tolerance” program was dismantled by Attorney General Erc Holder once it had successfully cut the transit of migrants by roughly 95 percent. Initially, officials made 140,000 arrests per year in the mid-2000s, but the northward flow dropped so much that officials only had to make 6,000 arrests in 2013, according to a 2014 letter by two pro-migration Senators, Sen. Jeff Flake and John McCain.


THE DEMOCRAT PARTY’S HISPANICAZATION of AMERICA… first ease millions of illegals over our borders and into our voting booths!

 How the Democrat party surrendered America to Mexico:

“The watchdogs at Judicial Watch discovered documents that reveal how the Obama administration's close coordination with the Mexican government entices Mexicans to hop over the fence and on to the American dole.”  Washington Times

"This is country belongs to Mexico" is said by the Mexican Militant. This is a common teaching that the U.S. is really AZTLAN, belonging to Mexicans, which is taught to Mexican kids in Arizona and California through a LA Raza educational program funded by American Tax Payers via President Obama, when he gave LA RAZA $800,000.00 in March of 2009!

The “zero tolerance” program was dismantled by Attorney General Erc Holder once it had successfully cut the transit of migrants by roughly 95 percent. Initially, officials made 140,000 arrests per year in the mid-2000s, but the northward flow dropped so much that officials only had to make 6,000 arrests in 2013, according to a 2014 letter by two pro-migration Senators, Sen. Jeff Flake and John McCain.

The cost of the Dream Act is far bigger than the Democrats or their media allies admit. Instead of covering 690,000 younger illegals now enrolled in former President Barack Obama’s 2012 “DACA” amnesty, the Dream Act would legalize at least 3.3 million illegals, according to a pro-immigration group, the Migration Policy Institute.”


“The watchdogs at Judicial Watch discovered documents that reveal how the Obama administration's close coordination with the Mexican government entices Mexicans to hop over the fence and on to the American dole.”  Washington Times

The “zero tolerance” program was dismantled by Attorney General Erc Holder once it had successfully cut the transit of migrants by roughly 95 percent. Initially, officials made 140,000 arrests per year in the mid-2000s, but the northward flow dropped so much that officials only had to make 6,000 arrests in 2013, according to a 2014 letter by two pro-migration Senators, Sen. Jeff Flake and John McCain.


“The watchdogs at Judicial Watch discovered documents that reveal how the Obama administration's close coordination with the Mexican government entices Mexicans to hop over the fence and on to the American dole.”  Washington Times

Obama Funds the Mexican Fascist Party of LA RAZA “The Race”… now calling itself UNIDOSus.

"This is country belongs to Mexico" is said by the Mexican Militant. This is a common teaching that the U.S. is really AZTLAN, belonging to Mexicans, which is taught to Mexican kids in Arizona and California through a LA Raza educational program funded by American Tax Payers via President Obama, when he gave LA RAZA $800,000.00 in March of 2009!

Previous generations of immigrants did not believe they were racially superior to Americans. That is the view of La Raza Cosmica, by Jose Vasconcelos, Mexico’s former education minister and a presidential candidate. According to this book, republished in 1979 by the Department of Chicano Studies at Cal State LA, students of Scandinavian, Dutch and English background are dullards, blacks are ugly and inferior, and those “Mongols” with the slanted eyes lack enterprise. The superior new “cosmic” race of Spaniards and Indians is replacing them, and all Yankee “Anglos.” LLOYD BILLINGSLEY/ FRONTPAGE mag


The “zero tolerance” program was dismantled by Attorney General Erc Holder once it had successfully cut the transit of migrants by roughly 95 percent. Initially, officials made 140,000 arrests per year in the mid-2000s, but the northward flow dropped so much that officials only had to make 6,000 arrests in 2013, according to a 2014 letter by two pro-migration Senators, Sen. Jeff Flake and John McCain.

Jose Angel Gutierrez, professor, University of Texas, Arlington and founder of La Raza Unida political party screams at rallies: "We have an aging white America. They are dying. They are s hitting in their pants with fear! I love it! We have got to eliminate the g ringo, and what I mean by that is if the worst comes to the worst, we have got to k ill him!"

Previous generations of immigrants did not believe they were racially superior to Americans. That is the view of La Raza Cosmica, by Jose Vasconcelos, Mexico’s former education minister and a presidential candidate. According to this book, republished in 1979 by the Department of Chicano Studies at Cal State LA, students of Scandinavian, Dutch and English background are dullards, blacks are ugly and inferior, and those “Mongols” with the slanted eyes lack enterprise. The superior new “cosmic” race of Spaniards and Indians is replacing them, and all Yankee “Anglos.” LLOYD BILLINGSLEY/ FRONTPAGE mag
by Michelle Malkin
Only in America could critics of a group called "The Race" be labeled racists. Such is the triumph of left-wing identity chauvinists, whose aggressive activists and supine abettors have succeeded in redefining all opposition as "hate."



Previous generations of immigrants did not believe they were racially superior to Americans. That is the view of La Raza Cosmica, by Jose Vasconcelos, Mexico’s former education minister and a presidential candidate. According to this book, republished in 1979 by the Department of Chicano Studies at Cal State LA, students of Scandinavian, Dutch and English background are dullards, blacks are ugly and inferior, and those “Mongols” with the slanted eyes lack enterprise. The superior new “cosmic” race of Spaniards and Indians is replacing them, and all Yankee “Anglos.” LLOYD BILLINGSLEY/ FRONTPAGE mag
"These figures present a scathing indictment of the social order that prevails in America, the world’s wealthiest country, whose government proclaims itself to be the globe’s leading democracy. They are just one manifestation of the human toll taken by the vast and all-pervasive inequality and mass poverty. 

OBAMA-CLINTONOMICS to serve the filthy rich

The same period has seen a massive growth of social inequality, with income and wealth concentrated at the very top of American society to an extent not seen since the 1920s.

“This study follows reports released over the past several months documenting rising mortality rates among US workers due to drug addiction and suicide, high rates of infant mortality, an overall leveling off of life expectancy, and a growing gap between the life expectancy of the bottom rung of income earners compared to those at the top.”

THE LA RAZA PLAN: California’s final surrender to fly the Mexican flag within 4 years.


"The American Southwest seems to be slowly returning to the jurisdiction of Mexico without

firing a single shot."  -- - EXCELSIOR --- national newspaper of Mexico

The “zero tolerance” program was dismantled by Attorney General Erc Holder once it had successfully cut the transit of migrants by roughly 95 percent. Initially, officials made 140,000 arrests per year in the mid-2000s, but the northward flow dropped so much that officials only had to make 6,000 arrests in 2013, according to a 2014 letter by two pro-migration Senators, Sen. Jeff Flake and John McCain.


They claim all of North America for Mexico!




HTTP Status 403 - Access is denied

User's IP:
Server's IP:
Application: http
Web Reputation: trustworthy-sites
Web Category: hate-and-racism

Barack Obama created more debt for the middle class than any president in US 
history, and also had the only huge QE programs: $4.2 Trillion.

OXFAM reported that during Obama’s terms, 95% of the Wealth created went to the top 1% of the world’s wealthy. 




"We know that Obama and his inner circle have set up a war room in his D.C.

home to plan and execute resistance to the Trump administration and his legislative

agenda.  None of these people care about the American people, or the fact that

Trump won the election because millions of people voted for him."  

Patricia McCarthy / AMERICAN



"Cold War historian Paul Kengor goes deeply into Obama's communist background in an article in American Spectator, "Our First Red Diaper Baby President," and in an excellent Mark Levin interview.  Another Kengor article describes the Chicago communists whose younger generation include David Axelrod, Valerie Jarrett, and Barack Hussein Obama.  Add the openly Marxist, pro-communist Ayers, and you have many of the key players who put Obama into power." Karin McQuillan





Now the outlines of a Watergate-like conspiracy are emerging in which a sitting Democrat president apparently used the apparatus of the state to spy on a Republican presidential candidate. Watergate differed in that President Nixon didn’t get involved in the plot against the Democratic National Committee until later as an accomplice after the fact. Here Obama likely masterminded or oversaw someone like the diabolical Benghazi cover-up artist Ben Rhodes, masterminding the whole thing.


"Cold War historian Paul Kengor goes deeply into Obama's communist background in an article in American Spectator, "Our First Red Diaper Baby President," and in an excellent Mark Levin interview.  Another Kengor article describes the Chicago communists whose younger generation include David Axelrod, Valerie Jarrett, and Barack Hussein Obama.  Add the openly Marxist, pro-communist Ayers, and you have many of the key players who put Obama into power." Karin McQuillan

 OBAMA’S CRONY BANKSTERISM destroyed a 11 TRILLION DOLLARS in home equity… and they’re still plundering us!

Barack Obama created more debt for the middle class than any president in US history, and also had the only huge QE programs: $4.2 Trillion.

OXFAM reported that during Obama’s terms, 95% of the wealth created went to the top 1% of the world’s wealthy. 

They Destroyed Our Country
“They knew Obama was an unqualified crook; yet they promoted him. They knew Obama was a train wreck waiting to happen; yet they made him president, to the great injury of America and the world. They understood he was only a figurehead, an egomaniac, and a liar; yet they made him king, doing great harm to our republic (perhaps irreparable.)”
'Incompetent' and 'liar' among most frequently used words to describe the president: Pew Research Center
The larger fear is that Obama might be just another corporatist, punking voters much as the Republicans do when they claim to be all for the common guy.

CRONY CAPITALISM ...the rise of Barack Obama and the fall of America!
CEO pay is higher than ever, as is the chasm separating the rich and super-rich from everyone else. The incomes of the top 1 percent grew more than 11 percent between 2009 and 2011—the first two years of the Obama “recovery”—while the incomes of the bottom 99 percent actually shrank.
Meanwhile, Obama is pressing forward with his proposal, outlined in his budget for the next fiscal year, to slash $400 billion from Medicare and $130 billion from Social Security… AS WELL AS WIDER OPEN BORDERS, NO E-VERIFY, NO LEGAL NEED APPLY TO KEEP WAGES DEPRESSED



In the media's frantic downhill race to out-rage each other over Trump, there's no bottom. Charles M. Blow, the Cory Booker of media columnists, desperately tried to justify his job with this ridiculous column aimed right at the nerve center of the resistance's id.
Its subtle title is, "Trump, Treasonous Traitor".
That's like a parody of a column like this. In it, Blow declares, "Whether or not Trump himself or anyone in his orbit personally colluded or conspired with the Russians about their interference is something Mueller will no doubt disclose at some point, but there remains one incontrovertible truth: In 2016, Russia, a hostile foreign adversary, attacked the United States of America."
"Trump should be directing all resources at his disposal to punish Russia for the attacks and prevent future ones. But he is not. America’s commander wants to be chummy with the enemy who committed the crime. Trump is more concerned with protecting his presidency and validating his election than he is in protecting this country.
"This is an incredible, unprecedented moment. America is being betrayed by its own president. America is under attack and its president absolutely refuses to defend it.
"Simply put, Trump is a traitor and may well be treasonous."
Remember when the New York Times wasn't a complete joke? Still is this what the left wants as the new metric?
It's incontrovertible that Islamic terrorists attacked America, but Obama insisted on being chummy with Iran, the Taliban and the Muslim Brotherhood: all of whom had plenty of American blood on their hands.
"This is an incredible, unprecedented moment. America is being betrayed by its own president. America is under attack and its president absolutely refuses to defend it.
"Simply put, Obama is a traitor and may well be treasonous."

"But the Obamas are the center of the most delusional cult of personality that the media has yet spawned. And so we get bizarre pieces like these."

The mullahs rolled in cash as a result of rolling Obama and his gullible team over the deal, knowing that Obama was desperate for some sort of legacy.  MONICA SHOWALTER 

THE ENDLESSLY HISPANDERING DEMOCRAT PARTY funded by Wall Street’s biggest criminals says it is “ALL NEW”…. Meaning open borders to keep wages depressed and no regulation of plundering banks!

It’s Obama’s wet dream!



Does the Republican Party have the guts necessary to win the midterms?

In an election, as in a trial, the outcome depends less on a weighing up of all the issues and more on which issues the electorate focuses on.  Succeed in getting the electorate to focus on the most positive achievement of one's own party, and on the most loathsome feature of the opposition, and coast to victory.  Not necessarily in that order, and not necessarily of equal value.
As to President Trump's greatest accomplishment, the economy, economic growth, and the jobs figures lead the pack by a mile.
As to the loathsomeness of the Dems, their increasingly unhinged stands on immigration are equally clearly in first place.
Trump won the nomination and the presidency on the voters' belief that this guy, at last, was someone who meant what he said on immigration.  He, and the Republican Party, can hold the House and the Senate if they focus the electorate's attention on the Dems' immigration lunacy, and then, secondarily, on the president's amazing economic results.
On immigration, the Dems' agenda has become a smorgasbord of electoral emetics that only needs to be served up to American voters to produce a collective gag that will be heard round the country.
I think back to Lee Atwater in 1988, who single-handedly turned the Bush campaign around with a masterful TV ad.  Magnificent political advocacy, which drew attention away from Bush's deficiencies and redirected it to the odiousness of the Dems.
The same brass knuckles approach Atwater used beckons again, on the Dems' suicidal positions of abolishing ICE; open borders for criminals, terrorists, and drug-dealers; and sanctuary cities.  All positions despised by 75% of the electorate. 
America's now hard left party is locked into these positions, and they're not just the Dems' "fringe."  See the California Dems' executive committee's endorsement of the lunatic Kevin de León over incumbent Dianne Feinstein.  See New York senator Gillibrand's mandatory metamorphosis from moderate to open borders whacko.
This is who the Democratic Party is.  The case must be made that a vote for any so-called "moderate Dem" is a vote for the party's destructive national agenda on immigration – an agenda despised by large majorities.
Atwater-like ads on all this stuff could open huge wounds on the electoral support for the Ds' "blue wave" dreams across the country.  
Montages of tattooed MS-13 members, hordes of shrieking demonstrators waving "Abolish ICE" and "No Borders" placards come to mind.  Superimposed on the determined face of the president who's been struggling to stop it all, stirring music in the background.  The Dems' compulsive wrist-slitting on immigration presents limitless theatrical and communicative possibilities.
Not to forget the gift that gives and gives, leftist harridan-in-chief and all-around advocate of violence, Maxine Waters.  But Waters is only the seasoning.  The Dems' irresistible impulse to suicide on immigration is the main course.
Is the Republican Party working on this rich and diverse material now?  If not, why not?
But: I'm haunted by, among other things, McCain's statement early in the 2008 race that Obama's associations (Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, and the rest) would be off limits.  I knew then that he would lose big.  And that he didn't deserve to win.
Will Bushie-McCain niceness prevail again, or this time, does the Republican Party want to win?
Will the Republican Party imprint the Dems' immigration madness on the forehead of every Democratic congressional and senatorial candidate?  Have they learned anything from the president's 2016 triumph?
It's hard to see how a mixture of the amazing list of President Trump's economic accomplishments, achieved under the constant fire of hysterical abuse, together with unceasing blunt reminders of the Dems' suicidal immigration policies, could fail.
As ever with Republicans, whether this campaign approach unfolds is a question of insight, desire, and guts.  I'm not sure the Republican Party has any of these, let alone all three.
Image by Fibonacci Blue, via Wikimedia Commons.

U.S. Election Meddling: Nationwide Voter Fraud, Importation of 15M Foreign-Born Voters

Shelby Lum, Richmond Times-Dispatch via The Associated Press

19 Jul 2018Washington, D.C.

As the establishment media, GOP, and Democrats fret over the influence foreign countries have on U.S. elections, the leading threats to the American electorate remain nationwide voter fraud and mass immigration.

Though President Trump’s administration sought to thoroughly investigate voter fraud through the Presidential Commission on Election Integrity, the board was handed off to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in order to bypass obstruction from national Democrats who refused to turn over voter data.
Voter Fraud
The number of convictions against voter fraud continues to rise, with now nearly 940 criminal convictions on the books across the U.S., according to the latest data from the Heritage Foundation.
Likewise, the number of cases of voter fraud has risen. Heritage’s Voter Fraud Database now features 1,071 cases of voter fraud that spans across 47 states.
In the most recent study by the Government Accountability Institute (GAI) on voter fraud, the think tank found 8,471 high likely cases of double voting. About 7,271 of those cases were inter-state double voting, while the remaining 1,200 cases were of intra-state double voting.
“The probability of correctly matching two records with the same name, birthdate, and social security number is close to 100 percent,” the GAI report noted.
Kansas Secretary of State and gubernatorial candidate Kris Kobach is fighting in his state to enforce voting laws that would mandate voters  prove their U.S. citizenship. This effort has currently been halted by the left-wing ACLU organization and a circuit judge who recently claimed that it was unconstitutional for a state to demand voters provide their U.S. citizenship records. Years ago, proof of citizenship voting laws were upheld as fully constitutional.
“Compare [Russia meddling in the 2016 presidential campaigns] to the kind of foreign influence in the actual election numbers in foreign nationals voting,” Kobach told Breitbart News. “That’s real and much more consequential and it’s happening all over the country.”
Kobach said his expert witness in the suit with the ACLU over the proof of citizenship law revealed that as many as 33,000 foreign nationals are on the voter rolls in Kansas. For states like California, with the largest foreign-born population in the country, the number of foreign nationals on the voter rolls is likely in the hundreds of thousands or even the millions, Kobach says.
Mass Immigration
Similarly, mass legal and illegal immigration to the U.S. continues to be the largest driver of population increases and demographic shifts in the country. Every year, more than 1.5 million immigrants are admitted to the country. The U.S. has imported more than ten million immigrants in the last decade.
The vast majority of foreign nationals arrive through the process known as “chain migration,” where newly naturalized citizens can bring an unlimited number of foreign relatives to the U.S. Every two new immigrants to the country bring an additional seven foreign relatives with them.
As Breitbart News has extensively reported, the U.S. is on track to import about 15 million foreign-born voters by the year 2038. That is nearly quadruple the size of the annual number of U.S. births; about four million American babies are born every year.
Through chain migration alone, the U.S. will import about eight million foreign-born voters in the next two decades.
The country’s continued mass immigration policies are likely to hand over electoral dominance to Democrats in statewide and national elections, Breitbart News has noted.
Analysis conducted by Axios’s Chris Canipe and Andrew Witherspoon shows the overwhelming trend of foreign-born populations voting Democrats into office over Republicans.
The victory of socialist Democrat Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in New York’s 14th District is the latest case where a booming foreign-born voting population pushed the far-left activist over the edge to beat out establishment, high ranking Democrat Rep. Joe Crowley.
Ocasio-Cortez’s district is close to 50 percent foreign-born, a drastic shift of an area that was once populated primarily by native-born Americans. Ocasio-Cortez ran her congressional campaign on abolishing all immigration enforcement across the U.S.
In California, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) is facing a challenge from State Senator Kevin de León (D-Los Angeles), and the California Democratic Party has endorsed León. The far-left challenger was the key proponent of California’s sanctuary state law that protects criminal illegal aliens from being deported.
University of Maryland, College Park researcher James Gimpel has found in recent years that more immigrants to the U.S. inevitably means more Democrat voters and thus, increasing electoral victories for the Democratic Party.
In 2014, Gimpel’s research concluded with three major findings:

·         Immigrants, particularly Hispanics and Asians, have policy preferences when it comes to the size and scope of government that are more closely aligned with progressives than with conservatives. As a result, survey data show a two-to-one party identification with Democrats over Republicans.

·         By increasing income inequality and adding to the low-income population (e.g. immigrants and their minor children account for one-fourth of those in poverty and one-third of the uninsured) immigration likely makes all voters more supportive of redistributive policies championed by Democrats to support disadvantaged populations.

·         There is evidence that immigration may cause more Republican-oriented voters to move away from areas of high immigrant settlement leaving behind a more lopsided Democrat majority.

Years ago, only a handful of elected Democrats would mention how the demographic shift spurred by mass immigration was a benefit to Democrats electorally. Today, it is a widely used talking point of elected Democrats.
Take San Antonio, Texas Mayor Julian Castro, for example. Months ago, Castro admitted that immigration could potentially turn the state of Texas, Florida, and Arizona into Democrat strongholds, like California.

Julián Castro




The Hispanic vote in Texas will continue to increase. By 2024 Democrats can win Texas, Arizona and Florida. A big blue wall of 78 electoral votes.

Kyle Griffin



10:28 PM - Jan 22, 2018


Twitter Ads info and privacy

“The Democrats have now become very open about what they are doing and they state it very clearly,” Kobach said of the Democrats’ use of immigration for shifting the electorate.
“Now, multiple Democrats are saying their plan is to import new voters to change elections,” Kobach said.
In an analysis from Georgetown University, the University of California, and Banque de France, researchers discovered that immigration to the country continuously increases Democrats’ chances of winning elections:
On average across election types, immigration to the U.S. has a significant and negative impact on the Republican vote share, consistent with the typical view of political analysts in the U.S. [Emphasis added]
This average effect – which is driven by elections in the House – works through two main channels. The impact of immigration on Republican votes in the House is negative when the share of naturalized migrants in the voting population increases. Yet, it can be positive when the share of non-citizen migrants out of the population goes up and the size of migration makes it a salient policy issue in voters’ minds. [Emphasis added]
These results are consistent with naturalized migrants being less likely to vote for the Republican Party than native voters and with native voters’ political preferences moving towards the Republican Party because of high immigration of non-citizens. This second effect, however, is significant only for very high levels of immigrant presence. [Emphasis added]
In 2016, the legal and illegal immigrant population reached a record high of 44 million. By 2023, the Center for Immigration Studies estimates that the legal and illegal immigrant population of the U.S. will make up nearly 15 percent of the entire U.S. population.
Mexico has the largest group of legal and illegal foreign nationals in the U.S., with 1.1 million immigrants from the country arriving in the U.S. between 2010 and 2016. Mexican nationals make up roughly one in eight new arrivals to the U.S. On average, every one Mexican immigrant brings six foreign relatives with them to the country through chain migration.
John Binder is a reporter for Breitbart News. Follow him on Twitter at @JxhnBinder. 

CNN Gets Slapped With Reality Asking About The Last Time A President Sided With America’s Enemies

CNN Gets Slapped With Reality Asking About The Last Time A President Sided With America’s Enemies
It’s as if the past eight years never happened. In the wake of the Russia collusion hysteria engulfing the Democratic Party and the liberal media, the Left is becoming obsessed with this notion that Donald Trump committed treason. It reached a boiling point after Trump’s meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Helsinki. It was not Trump’s best moment. There could have been legitimate criticism lobbed his way. Instead, we got a meltdown of epic proportions. The outrage machine was set to 11. So, as Russia-Trump-Treason Theater reached its 90th Act, in which not a shred of solid evidence to corroborate collusion has been found, CNN decided to ask “what happened the last time a President chose America's enemies over its friends?” The piece discusses Reconstruction and Andrew Johnson, as if we have to go that far to find what this person thinks is an example of an American president chose our enemies over our allies. Uh, do you remember Barack Obama and the Iran deal? Yeah, that seems like a prime example:
Yeah, that’s another stepping of the rake right there, but let’s go into this piece for a little bit. It’s quite…entertaining:
Donald Trump likes to compare himself to Andrew Jackson, but the Andrew he really resembles is Andrew Johnson. What they have in common are delusions of personal grandeur and a tainted ascent to the presidency. Trump was elected by a minority of the American electorate, with help from the vagaries of the Electoral College system and from considerable Russian interference.
Johnson became president thanks to an assassin's bullet. While Johnson immodestly compared himself to Jesus and Moses, Trump claims he is the best at everything, even boasting recently on Twitter that his popularity among Republicans exceeds that of Abraham Lincoln.
Indeed, pundits have likened today's partisan divisions to those of the Civil War era. But they more closely resemble the politics of Reconstruction, the period after the war when for the first time in history, an American president, Johnson, was impeached by the House of Representatives.
But the resemblance between the two men goes deeper. Johnson's white-supremacist views were blatant and his policies precipitated a constitutional crisis that put the President at loggerheads with Congress and his own party, the Republicans.
(Remember that everything you know about Republicans and Democrats today should simply be flipped for the 19th century. The Republican Party then was the liberal party of anti-slavery, big government and Lincoln. The Democrats were the party of white supremacy, Southern slaveholders and states' rights. In the 20th century, after the New Deal and civil rights movement, the parties exchanged ideological roles.)
When Johnson became president in 1865, he jeopardized the Union victory and the Republican platform by issuing wholesale pardons to former Confederates and recognizing Southern state governments with repressive "black codes" that pushed African-Americans close to a renewed state of slavery.                                                        
First, let’s kill this narrative right here. Did Hillary Clinton win more popular votes than Trump? Yes, around three million more thanks to the insufferable legions of progressive voters in California. Did she win the popular vote? No. Unless 48 percent is greater than 50 percent, Clinton didn’t win the popular vote. In our entire history, we’ve had five elections where the winner of the race won the Electoral College but lost the popular vote. It's a system that favors those who can win all over, and just the coast and cities; Trump had that, not Hillary. He also won more states than she did. That’s how our Constitution works. This process has worked. And this nation will continue under that system so far, though there have been debates about reforming the Electoral College. We’re still here; that’s the point. We’re not in a crisis every time liberals lose at the ballot box. 
I don’t see how slavery and the Civil War have anything to do with this, especially since the Iran Deal is a much more relevant and applicatory example of when a president sides with America’s enemies, but this closing passage is a good chuckle:
The Republican Party, like Southern slaveholders of yore, is rapidly becoming an anti-democratic force willing to sacrifice the country, democratic institutions and the sanctity of the electoral process to protect its political power and enact its reactionary political and economic agenda. We can only hope that it, like John C. Calhoun, the philosopher of slaveholders and champion of minority rule, will be consigned to the dustbin of American history.
Yeah, the horrible economic agenda that’s created three million new jobs, increased wages, yielded the lowest unemployment rate in nearly two decades, and produced the best consumer and small business confidence numbers in years. Yeah, his agenda is really, really bad…for those who can’t see the forest through the trees. The notion that the GOP is anti-democratic because Hillary Clinton lost is hilarious. Liberals have no sense of history and this CNN is Exhibit A in that regard. 
Also, let's not forget that the Electoral College allowed us to abolish slavery 


Obamanomics: How Barack Obama Is Bankrupting You and Enriching His Wall Street Friends, Corporate Lobbyists, and Union Bosses


 Editorial Reviews

Obama Is Making You Poorer—But Who’s Getting Rich?

Goldman Sachs, GE, Pfizer, the United Auto Workers—the same “special interests” Barack Obama was supposed to chase from the temple—are profiting handsomely from Obama’s Big Government policies that crush taxpayers, small businesses, and consumers. In Obamanomics, investigative reporter Timothy P. Carney digs up the dirt the mainstream media ignores and the White House wishes you wouldn’t see. Rather than Hope and Change, Obama is delivering corporate socialism to America, all while claiming he’s battling corporate America. It’s corporate welfare and regulatory robbery—it’s Obamanomics.

Obama Is Making You Poorer—But Who’s Getting Rich?

Goldman Sachs, GE, Pfizer, the United Auto Workers—the same “special interests” Barack Obama was supposed to chase from the temple—are profiting handsomely from Obama’s Big Government policies that crush taxpayers, small businesses, and consumers.




Records show that four out of Obama's top five contributors are employees of financial industry giants - Goldman Sachs ($571,330), UBS AG ($364,806), JPMorgan Chase ($362,207) and Citigroup ($358,054).




Wall Street firms have chipped in more than $9 million to Barack Obama. Zurga/Bloomberg

Wall Street is investing heavily in Barack Obama.

 Although the Democratic presidential hopeful has vowed to raise capital gains and corporate taxes, financial industry bigs have contributed almost twice as much to Obama as to GOP rival John McCain, a Daily News analysis of campaign records shows.

“Protecting citizens from industrial capitalism’s giant corporations? Where were the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Federal Reserve, the Office of Thrift Supervision, and the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight as the mortgage bubble blew up in 2008, nearly taking the whole financial system with it and producing the worst economic bust since the Great Depression, which even today has sunk the labor-force participation rate and hiked the suicide rate among working-class men and women to record levels?”

“By contrast, many voters give Barack Obama no such credit for his analogous response to the Great Recession.”
“Mexican criminals really have infiltrated the country and really have killed Americans, inevitably, under the administration’s anything-goes immigration stance.”

Haunting this year’s presidential contest is the sense that the U.S. government no longer belongs to the people and no longer represents them. And this uneasy feeling is not misplaced. It reflects the real state of affairs.
We have lost the government we learned about in civics class, with its democratic election of representatives to do the voters’ will in framing laws, which the president vows to execute faithfully, unless the Supreme Court rules them unconstitutional. That small government of limited powers that the Founders designed, hedged with checks and balances, hasn’t operated for a century. All its parts still have their old names and appear to be carrying out their old functions. But in fact, a new kind of government has grown up inside the old structure, like those parasites hatched in another organism that grow by eating up their host from within, until the adult creature bursts out of the host’s carcass. This transformation is not an evolution but a usurpation.
What has now largely displaced the Founders’ government is what’s called the Administrative State—a transformation premeditated by its main architect, Woodrow Wilson. The thin-skinned, self-righteous college-professor president, who thought himself enlightened far beyond the citizenry, dismissed the Declaration of Independence’s inalienable rights as so much outmoded “nonsense,” and he rejected the Founders’ clunky constitutional machinery as obsolete. (See “It’s Not Your Founding Fathers’ Republic Any More,” Summer 2014.) What a modern country needed, he said, was a “living constitution” that would keep pace with the fast-changing times by continual, Darwinian adaptation, as he called it, effected by federal courts acting as a permanent constitutional convention.
Modernity, Wilson thought, demanded efficient government by independent, nonpartisan, benevolent, hyper-educated experts, applying the latest scientific, economic, and sociological knowledge to industrial capitalism’s unprecedented problems, too complex for self-governing free citizens to solve. Accordingly, he got Congress to create executive-branch administrative agencies, such as the Federal Trade Commission, to do the job. During the Great Depression, President Franklin Roosevelt proliferated such agencies, from the National Labor Relations Board and the Federal Housing Administration to the Federal Communications Commission and the Securities and Exchange Commission, to put the New Deal into effect. Before they could do so, though, FDR had to scare the Supreme Court into stretching the Constitution’s Commerce Clause beyond recognition, putting the federal government in charge of all economic activity, not just interstate transactions. He also had to pressure the justices to allow Congress to delegate legislative power—which is, in effect, what the lawmakers did by setting up agencies with the power to make binding rules. The Constitution, of course, vests all legislative power in Congress, empowering it to make laws, not to make legislators.
But the Administrative State’s constitutional transgressions cut deeper still. If Congress can’t delegate its legislative powers, it certainly can’t delegate judicial powers, which the Constitution gives exclusively to the judiciary. Nevertheless, after these administrative agencies make rules like a legislature, they then exercise judicial authority like a court by prosecuting violations of their edicts and inflicting real criminal penalties, such as fines and cease-and-desist orders. As they perform all these functions, they also violate the principle of the separation of powers, which lies at the heart of our constitutional theory (senselessly curbing efficiency, Wilson thought), as well as the due process of law, for they trample the citizen’s Fifth Amendment right not to lose his property unless indicted by a grand jury and tried by a jury of his peers, and they search a citizen or a company’s private papers or premises, without bothering to get judge-issued subpoenas or search warrants based on probable cause, flouting the Fourth Amendment. They can issue waivers to their rules, so that the law is not the same for all citizens and companies but is instead an instrument of arbitrary power. FDR himself ruefully remarked that he had expanded a fourth branch of government that lacked constitutional legitimacy. Not only does it reincarnate the arbitrary power of the Stuarts’ tyrannical Star Chamber, but also it doesn’t even meet the minimal conditions of liberty that Magna Carta set forth 801 years ago.
Adding insult to injury, Wilson, his allies, and their current followers call themselves “progressives,” a fatuous boast implying that they are the embodiments and chosen instruments of the spirit of an ever-improving, irresistible future. In tune with the German idealist philosophy that Wilson and his circle studied, they claim to be marching toward an as-yet-unrealized goal of human perfection. But that perfection, the German philosophers believed, would look something like Prussia’s enlightened despotism. For Americans to think that it is progress to move from the Founders’ revolutionary achievement—a nation of free citizens, endowed with natural rights, living under laws that they themselves have made, pursuing their own vision of happiness in their own way and free to develop as fully as they can whatever talent or genius lies within them—to a regime in which individuals derive such rights as they have from a government superior to them is contemptible. How is a return to subjection an advance on freedom? No lover of liberty should ever call such left-wing statism “progressive.” In historical terms, this elevation of state power over individual freedom is not even “liberal” but quite the reverse.
As these agencies have metastasized, they have borne out not a single premise that justified their creation, and their increasingly glaring failure has drawn citizens’ angry attention to them. Expert? As a New Deal congressman immediately recognized with shock, many of those who staffed the Administrative State were kids just out of law school, with zero real-world experience or technical knowledge. Efficient? Can-do America, which built the Empire State Building in 11 months and ramped up airplane production during World War II from 2,000 in 1939 to nearly 100,000 in 1944, now takes years of bureaucratic EPA busywork to repair a bridge or lay a pipeline, and who knows how many businesses never expand or even start because the maze of government regulation is too daunting and costly to navigate? Only last year, EPA “experts” fecklessly stood by as workers under their supervision accidentally dumped 3 million gallons of toxic wastewater into the Colorado River, and the agency vouchsafed not a word of warning to downstream Colorado and New Mexico officials for an entire day before the poisonous, fluorescent-orange flood hit them. Over at Veterans Affairs, those who’ve fought for their country die in droves while waiting for medical care. But what’s the problem? asks agency head Robert MacDonald blithely. After all, at ever-popular Disneyland, “do they measure the number of hours you wait in line?”
Non-political? Ask Lois Lerner at the Internal Revenue Service. Oh wait: she pleaded the Fifth Amendment—and her boss, John Koskinen, simply ignores Congress’s orders, even as more than 2,000 of his enforcement agents have acquired military-grade weaponry, among 200,000 of such administrative-agency officers now similarly equipped with lethal arms, presumably for coercion of the citizens they supposedly serve. Or there’s the Federal Elections Commission and the Federal Communications Commission, lackeys of President Obama and his ultra-partisan agenda.
Protecting citizens from industrial capitalism’s giant corporations? Where were the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Federal Reserve, the Office of Thrift Supervision, and the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight as the mortgage bubble blew up in 2008, nearly taking the whole financial system with it and producing the worst economic bust since the Great Depression, which even today has sunk the labor-force participation rate and hiked the suicide rate among working-class men and women to record levels? Moreover, from the establishment of the first administrative agency—the Interstate Commerce Commission in 1887, essentially designed to create shared railroad cartels—these agencies have been key instruments of crony capitalism, which today often takes the form of senators and congressmen pressuring agencies for rule changes or waivers to benefit their contributors, usually at the expense of their competitors as well as the public, as the author of the recent Confessions of Congressman X complains of his fellow legislative “puppets.” Little wonder that today’s Americans think that such people don’t represent them. Pollsters report that trust in government is at its lowest level ever, with only 19 percent expecting government to do the right thing, according to last year’s Gallup and Pew polls.
Ensuring the citizens’ health and safety? Where is the Food and Drug Administration as counterfeit medicines and medical supplies from China infiltrate our hospitals? As for the infamously dysfunctional Transportation Security Administration, its Keystone Kops’ regularly reported inability to spot journalists carrying banned weapons onto airplanes, while they are too busy fondling travelers’ private parts or undressing grannies, is a standing national joke—on us. We lost our constitutional safeguards for this?
FDR spewed out his agencies in a “try anything” spirit to cure a Depression that his predecessor’s misguided palliatives had worsened, and debate still surges over whether the New Deal agencies did harm or good, putting aside their doubtful legitimacy. But the majority of Americans at the time gave the president credit for good intentions. By contrast, many voters give Barack Obama no such credit for his analogous response to the Great Recession. They see it as a cynically calculated ploy to extend government’s power over the people, especially given the White House chief of staff’s crack that a president should “never let a good crisis go to waste.” So on the pretext of addressing the financial crisis, the administration partially socialized American medicine with legislation that only Democrats voted for, without bothering to read it, and that citizens who opposed the measure—still a solid majority of those polled—saw as a kind of coup d’état, framed with utter irresponsibility and ignoring the scary financial mess. As happened during the New Deal, a timid Supreme Court found the act constitutional only by the politically driven legerdemain frequent in that institution’s checkered history. It struck many as flimflam, not government by consent.
The result was a spectacular expansion of the Administrative State, with some 150 new agencies and commissions created; no one knows the exact number. And these agencies purposely removed the Administrative State even further from government by the people. One agency, the Independent Payment Advisory Board—the so-called death panel—is so democratically unaccountable that Congress can only abolish it by a three-fifths vote in both houses within a seven-month period next year. After that, the law bars Congress from altering any of the board’s edicts, a provision as far from democratic self-government as you can get.
When the administration finally confronted the financial crisis, lengthened by Obamacare’s disincentives to hiring, its reflex response was to expand the Administrative State still further with the Dodd-Frank Act, named for its two legislative sponsors, both of whom had been in bed with the mortgage racket, one figuratively and one literally. Whether it solved the problem is dubious. What is certain is that it is as undemocratic as Obamacare, with its Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, whose budget Congress can’t control, its Financial Stability Oversight Council, whose rulings no court may review, and its army of regulators occupying the big banks and squeezing multimillion-dollar penalties out of CEOs clinging to their supersize compensation, regardless of what happens to the stockholders. Meanwhile, the opaque Federal Housing Finance Agency, formed during the crisis to salvage the misbegotten mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, seems bent on nationalizing permanently this sizable chunk of the economy, putting the government in charge of citizens’ housing as well as their health care.
As for the “stimulus” that was supposed to give a Keynesian boost to the economy: since you can’t prove a negative, no one can show that if all that money had stayed in the private economy, it would have created more jobs and economic growth than the economically anemic Obama era has done. What unemployed or underemployed workers saw, though, is that a good portion of stimulus money went to protect the jobs of public employees, whose welfare evidently trumps that of the citizens whom they supposedly serve. Coal miners saw that, even as the administration aimed to kill their jobs, its stimulus shoveled out hundreds of millions of dollars to now-defunct Solyndra and other nonviable, crony-capitalist “green” energy companies, supposed solutions to a global-warming crisis that many think a hoax, though some two dozen public officials seem keen to suppress, Inquisition-style, the very utterance of that thought. And voters noticed that America’s three highest-income counties are in the Washington suburbs that house the federal government’s recession-proof functionaries. (See “Hail Columbia!,” Winter 2013.)
Unease over illegal immigration also has stoked today’s fear that the government no longer belongs to the people, and it’s important to understand the separate but mutually reinforcing ways that it has done so. Once again, President Obama has made a bad situation worse—this time, by his contemptuous refusal to execute the laws faithfully. His catch-and-release policy for illegal border-crossers, as well as his ban on deporting young aliens brought here by their illegal-immigrant parents, are imperial, antidemocratic edicts that might have sparked impeachment proceedings, had not Congress’s silly move to impeach Bill Clinton for lying about his sex games with an intern tainted that weapon for years to come. The result of Obama’s diktat, as contrary to the spirit of the Founders’ Constitution as is the Administrative State, is that law-abiding taxpayers must pay for the kids’ welfare support, health care, and schooling—as they already do for “anchor babies” born to mothers who have sneaked over the U.S. border for the purpose of having a child eligible for “child-only” welfare benefits, scarcely less than ordinary welfare payments and vastly more than the income of Central American peasant families. No American voted to incur these costs, which, if current trends continue, are likely to persist for several generations of such families, so they amount to taxation without representation as naked as George III’s.
As for the illegals who work, often for long hours at low pay, off the books: because immigrants, 13 percent of the population, hold 17 percent of the jobs—and no one knows the percentage of workers who are here illegally—jobless working-class citizens have understandably concluded that a lawless government, by countenancing such cheap labor, is taking the bread out of their mouths. Should they eat cake instead?
America’s highest-income counties are in the suburbs that house Washington’s recession-proof functionaries.
What citizens want to know is that, of all the world’s people who seek to live in America, our government will admit those who come legally, whose families will not harm us, and who will add to the wealth of the nation, not reap where they have not sown. After all, public safety—not clean energy or national health care—is government’s purpose. Nevertheless, Mexican criminals really have infiltrated the country and really have killed Americans, inevitably, under the administration’s anything-goes immigration stance. Further, it’s no comfort to any American who has suffered loss from an Islamist terror attack within our borders—from Ground Zero and Fort Hood to San Bernardino and Orlando—that such incidents pose no threat to our existence as a nation, as the president has said by way of reassurance, while refusing to call such outrages by their right name. How many citizens would have to die in a dirty-bomb attack in Grand Central Terminal for such events to strike him as a threat to the nation’s existence?
The question of providing a path to citizenship for the 12 million illegal aliens already here is also germane to the debate about whom the U.S. government serves and to whom it belongs. Talk radio’s Rush Limbaugh jokes that “illegal aliens” is a politically incorrect term; we must say “undocumented Democrats” instead. But it’s a joke with a barb, for no one can doubt that these 12 million, if they could vote, would vote for the Democratic program of an ever-larger, richly paid government extracting ever-larger transfer payments from productive workers to the dependent poor—James Madison’s definition of the tyranny of the majority in Federalist 10. With black poverty and exclusion steadily ameliorating, thanks to decades of striving by well-intentioned Americans of all races—even though Obama’s ex–attorney general Eric Holder devoted his tenure to denying this plain truth—the Democratic Party needs a new class of victims to justify its “helping” agenda and its immense cadre of well-paid government “helpers.” Central American peasants fill the bill.
Formerly, our open economy drew the enterprising and energetic to these shores, and our lack of a public safety net, with only private ethnic and religious charities to help the unfortunate, meant that those who couldn’t contribute to the U.S. economy went home. But today, when we have a vast welfare state that didn’t exist during earlier waves of immigration, the mothers of anchor babies come for handouts, and even the children of hardworking legal Hispanic immigrants end up on the welfare rolls at troublesomely high rates. In addition, our showering of self-proclaimed refugees with welfare benefits, which attracts the shiftless rather than the enterprising, only compounds the government-sustained dependency problem—dependency upon taxpayers who didn’t choose this particular philanthropy.
The phalanx of privately supported settlement houses and other institutions that met the great immigration wave around the turn of the twentieth century, along with the public school system, aimed to “Americanize” the new arrivals—teaching them our language, manners, and customs, and especially our republican civic ethic. Culture, after all, is as important an element of national identity as political institutions. To become an American in those days meant little more than learning English and subscribing to a broadly shared creed of self-reliance, self-government, self-improvement, and allegiance to a tolerant nation that most people agreed was unique in the freedom and opportunity it afforded—as well as in its readiness to confer citizenship on newcomers who almost universally desired it. But today’s legal Hispanic immigrants often don’t apply for American citizenship, or retain dual nationalities: Americanization often is not high on their agendas.
Moreover, our new doctrine of multiculturalism gives today’s immigrants nothing to assimilate to, since current intellectual fashion—set by the universities, Hollywood, and the mainstream media—celebrates everything that makes us different rather than the creed that once made one nation out of many individuals. And multiculturalism’s accompanying creed of victimology encourages dependency rather than self-reliance. Who are the victimizers of illegal Hispanic aliens? According to today’s politically correct “progressivism,” it is the neocolonial United States that has exploited the Third World’s natural resources, shored up its ruling oligarchies, and subverted its incipient democratic governments. And then it further victimizes them with racism when they try to escape to this country.
Deference to the greater wisdom of government, which Wilsonian progressivism deems a better judge of what the era needs and what the people “really” want than the people themselves, has been silently eroding our unique culture of enterprise, self-reliance, enlightenment, and love of liberty for decades. But if we cease to enshrine American exceptionalism at the heart of our culture—if we set equal value on such Third World cultural tendencies as passive resignation, fatalism, superstition, devaluation of learning, resentment of imaginary plots by the powerful, and a belief that gratification deferred is gratification forgone—the exceptionalism of our institutions becomes all the more precarious.
Supercharging American anger over illegal immigration and its consequences is the politically correct ban on openly discussing it, with even the most reasoned reservation dismissed as racism and yahooism. And political correctness generates its own quantum of anger among citizens, who think of freedom of speech and debate as central to American exceptionalism. But elite culture stigmatizes plain speaking, so that now a rapist or a murderer is a “person who committed a crime” or an “individual who was incarcerated,” says the Obama Department of Justice, or, according to the latest humbug from the Department of Education, a “justice-involved individual.” Implicit in these euphemisms is the theory that “society,” not the criminal, is to blame for crime, a long-exploded idea aimed at blurring the distinction between right and wrong.
That’s what makes it so disheartening to learn that the University of California has just deemed it a politically incorrect offense to declare America a land of opportunity, so as not to stigmatize those who’ve failed to seize it. It’s disheartening not only because such a retreat from our traditional culture will hold back immigrants, but also because our long cultural unraveling already has damagingly demoralized the native-born working class in the face of economic change. They dimly know that, and part of what makes them so angry is what they have allowed themselves to become.

When Theodore Roosevelt, who unsuccessfully ran against Woodrow Wilson in 1912 on the Progressive Party ticket, first declared his intention to go into politics, his fellow clubmen jeered at him for wanting to associate with the “saloon-keepers, horse-car conductors,” and other “rough and brutal” characters running the nation’s political parties. “I answered,” recalled TR, “that if this were so it merely meant that the people I knew did not belong to the governing class, and that the other people did—and that I intended to be one of the governing class.” That’s the true voice of “progressivism” speaking. As the Founders often cautioned, a self-governing republic doesn’t have a governing class. Part of America’s current predicament is that it now has such a class, and the American people are very angry about it.