Monthly Archives: March 2016

Let’s Put The Blame Where It Belongs

Posted on by

MSNBC is reporting today on the protests that forced the cancellation of the rally to support Donald Trump in Chicago last night. This is a story that needs to be looked at carefully. America has a First Amendment. Donald Trump has as much right as anyone to speak out. Protesters also have the right to speak out. They don’t, however, have the right to destroy property or prevent anyone else from speaking. For a number of years we have seen conservative speakers shut down at college campuses; now we are seeing a Presidential candidate prevented from speaking. That does not bode well for the future of our country. We need to take a look at these ‘protests’ and see who organized them (they were organized) and what they are actually about.

Yesterday Gateway Pundit posted an article about the Chicago protesters.

The Gateway Pundit article reported:

Obama buddy and domestic terrorist Bill Ayers was seen protesting Donald Trump in Chicago today.

Thousands of leftwing protesters were expected today to protest Donald Trump at the University of Chicago Illinois campus.
5,000-7,000 people were already inside the pavilion at 5 PM Central. Thousands more were still in a line that stretched several blocks.

I guess some leopards just don’t change their spots.

MSNBC reported:

When Ja’Mal Green, a prominent black activist and Bernie Sanders supporter in Chicago, saw that Donald Trump was coming to the University of Illinois Chicago, he knew what he had to do. “Everyone, get your tickets to this. We’re all going in!!!! ‪#‎SHUTITDOWN‬,” he posted on Facebook last week.

Little did he know they actually would shut it down.

Friday night, hundreds of protesters invaded Trump’s rally while thousands more marched outside, leading the candidate to abruptly cancel the event due to safety concerns. The night spun out from there, as angry Trump fans clashed with protesters, who saw the shutdown as a victory.

This sort of political activity does not belong in the American political system.

The article further reports:

A Facebook page was started to promote the protest. By the night of Trump rally, more than 11,600 people had RSVP’d on the page saying they would attend the event. Another 19,000 said they were “interested.” Organizers were shocked when Facebook’s analytics said the page reached more than 1.5 million users.

The page explained how to acquire tickets to the Trump rally, complete with links, instructions on where and when to meet, and exhortations to remain peaceful.

Jorge Mena, a undocumented graduate student at UIC, started a petition on MoveOn.org calling on the school’s administration to cancel the event. The petition garnered more than 50,000 signatures, and once brass at MoveOn, which has endorsed Sanders, caught wind of the UIC backlash, they wanted to help. MoveOn chipped in money to get signs and a banner printed and blasted out an email to members in the Chicago area encouraging them to join the protest.

With just four days to plan, organizers said more than 1,000 students turned out for the march, along with thousands of community members.

It’s a shame that this sort of organization and energy could not have been directed toward something more constructive. Again, protests are allowed; shutting down speech is not.

This Makes No Sense

Posted on by

When President Johnson began the “War on Poverty,” the idea was to help people get out of poverty and become working members of society. President Johnson wanted to make sure that in a land as rich as America, people did not go hungry or homeless. It was (and is) a laudable goal. It becomes a more difficult goal when it encounters the specter of human nature.

The Washington Free Beacon is reporting today on one of the programs that was set up to make sure no Americans would go hungry.

The article reports:

The number of individuals receiving benefits from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, otherwise known as food stamps, has exceeded 45 million for 56 straight months, according to data released by the Department of Agriculture.

…The USDA has been tracking data on participation in the program since 1969, when average participation stood at 2,878,000. Since then, participation in the program has increased by more than 1,470 percent.

The number of food stamp recipients first exceeded 45 million in May 2011. Since then, the number has consistently exceeded 45 million, hitting a record high of nearly 47.8 million in December 2012.

Changes to food stamp policies made it easier for people to apply for benefits, made food stamps available to more people and the benefits became more generous, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

“Economic factors alone do not fully explain the growth in SNAP participation,” states the agency. “Changes in SNAP policies, some of them associated with the 2002 and 2008 Farm Acts, have made benefits easier to apply for, available to more people, and more generous.”

There is a lesson here. The SNAP program was started with the best of intentions, but what it did was take charity out of the hands of the local church and the local community. The local church and the local community were in a position to know who actually needed help and who was taking advantage of the system. I have heard many stories from people who remember a time when their spouse was out of work and they found a bag of groceries on their front steps to get them through. Charity needs to return to a time when it was the result of personal caring. The obvious question here is how much of the SNAP money goes to food. We have all heard stories of people selling their SNAP coupons or EBT cards and spending the money on alcohol or drugs. We are not doing anyone a favor by supporting a destructive habit.

In April 2015 I reported the following:

A Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) spokesman tells the Associated Press that 12,000 non-disabled adults were in Maine’s SNAP program before Jan. 1 – a number that dropped to 2,680 by the end of March.

More than 9,000 Maine residents have been removed from the state’s food stamp program since Republican Gov. Paul LePage‘s administration began enforcing work and volunteer requirements.

I can’t image the impact it would have on the federal budget if all states followed the example of making people work a few hours a month in order to receive food stamps. The problem is that federal money makes people dependent, and dependency determines how people vote. Politicians who want to stay in office will work to make sure that the freebies keep on coming. Politicians who love America will begin to move to cut spending.

What Are These People Smoking?

Posted on by

I will admit that I did not watch the Republican debate last night. I couldn’t face another cage match. I have read a number of reports on the debate, and I am wondering where these candidates get their ideas. Some of their ideas have strains of a possible solution in them, but others really make me wonder.

Late last night The Washington Examiner posted a story highlighting a few things from the debate.

Here are a few things I learned from their summary:

Donald Trump suggested that as president he would finance Social Security by requiring countries that benefit from U.S. military protection to pay for the service.

“We’re the policeman of the world: We take care of Germany; we take care of Saudi Arabia; we take care of South Korea,” he said during Thursday night’s presidential debate. “Saudi Arabia was making a billion dollars a day and we were getting virtually nothing to protect them. … We are going to be in a different world. We’re going to negotiate real deals, now, and we’re going to bring the wealth back to our country.”

This was his solution for bringing solvency to Social Security. Actually it makes a certain amount of sense–Europe has managed to pay for socialism over the years because of the money they did not have to spend on their military. If they were forced to pay America for protection or develop their own military, they might have to go to a free market economy.

The article further reports:

Rubio wants to raise the retirement age to 68 years old for people of his generation and raise it to 70 years old for people who are currently children, while leaving the age alone for current retirees and people close to retirement.

“If you do not do it, we will have a debt crisis, not to mention a crisis of Social Security and medicare,” Rubio said. “Both parties have taken far too long to deal with it. It is one of the major issues confronting America. It’s barely been asked in any of these debates and we’d better deal with it or we’re going to have to explain to our children why they inherited this disaster.”

Just for the record, I would like to point out that George H.W. Bush had a viable plan for fixing Social Security. Unfortunately, it was blocked by the Democrats because they did not want him to get credit for the plan.

There are a few things I would like to note about Social Security. Congress has been spending the money taken out of paychecks for Social Security on other things since the 1960’s. That is a huge part of the problem. Secondly, there are two reasons Democrats want open borders–they want illegals to vote (they believe illegals will vote Democrat) and they believe that bringing in more workers will shore up Social Security until at least the time when the politicians who have spent the money leave office. At that point it will be someone else’s problem.

As I said, I did not watch the debate, but it sounds as if there might have been some intelligent discussion of important issues last night. That is a good thing.

This Is Not Good News For Americans

Posted on by

Investor’s Business Daily posted a story yesterday about the recidivism rate of released Guantanamo detainees.

The article reports:

For the first time, the number of released Gitmo detainees who have re-engaged in terrorism has climbed above 30%, and the rate has been growing steadily under a president bent on emptying the entire prison.

In fact, terrorist recidivists released by the president doubled from six to 12 in the six months through January, according to data released Tuesday by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence. They include Guantanamo alumnus Hamed Abderrahaman Ahmed, who was arrested by Spanish authorities last month and charged with running a recruiting network for ISIS.

The total number of ex-Gitmo detainees rejoining the jihad has grown to 204, the intelligence report reveals. Almost two-thirds remain at large.

There is nothing to be gained by letting terrorist detainees out of Guantanamo so that they can kill American soldiers. There is also nothing to be gained by transferring terrorists to prisons on American soil. The fact that these men have to be kept in prison is unfortunate, but I can’t imagine a deprogramming system that would change their worldview. What we need to remember is that terrorists are trained as terrorists. Just as kindergarten children in Gaza are trained to be martyrs, terrorists are also trained early.

Below is a picture of a graduating kindergarten class in Gaza. It is from a previous article. It tells you all you need to know about when terrorist training begins. Until those in the Middle East who want to set up a caliphate stop teaching hate, we will not have peace and we will not be able to release any prisoners from Guantanamo without putting Americans at risk.

kindergartengraduation2

It will take a miracle of God to accomplish the change of heart that is needed for us to release the prisoners at Guantanamo safely.

Numbers Don’t Lie

Posted on by

The numbers on ObamaCare are now starting to come out. They don’t look good. Power Line Blog posted an article yesterday about the latest statistics. National Public Radio collaborated with Harvard’s T.H. Chan School of Public Health and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation to survey Americans’ recent experience with health care.

Here are two graphs from the article:

ObamaCareStatisticsWhen you look at the numbers, ObamaCare is not a success.

The Justice Department Has Become Totally Political

Posted on by

The Blaze posted a story today about the Obama Justice Department that even surprised me. The article involves Congressional testimony by Attorney General Loretta Lynch. Attorney General Lynch states that the Department of Justice has looked into the possibility of prosecuting climate deniers under RICO statutes.

Here is the video posted on YouTube:

This is the same Department of Justice that has not prosecuted Hillary Clinton for blatant violations of rules governing the handling of classified material. Under President Obama, Attorney General Loretta Lynch has become the head of the Department of Injustice.

This Is No Way To Win An Election

Posted on by

I am a registered Republican. There are a few reasons for that. Last time I checked, there was no Conservative Party, and the Republican party was the closest I could come. The interesting thing about the Republican party is the independence of its members. If you look closely at the Democratic party, you find a conglomeration of various special interest groups and causes. These special interests tend to support each other and vote as a bloc. If you look closely at the Republican party right now, I am not sure what you find. There is an element of small government, fiscal conservatism, etc., but that is not the element that is in charge of the Republican party. Add to that the fact that Republicans tend not to march in lock step, and it gets truly interesting.

North Carolina is currently in the midst of a struggle that is a microcosm of the battle between the establishment and the grass roots that is taking place in the Republican party primary elections. The establishment is tearing its hair out at the possibility of a Donald Trump or Ted Cruz nomination. Either one of these candidates has the potential to end the crony capitalism the establishment Republicans and Democrats have set up in Washington in recent years.

Now, the battle has spilled over to North Carolina. The News Observer is reporting today that the Chairman of the North Carolina Republican Party (who is not a favorite of the party establishment) has been shut out of his email account since Monday. There are a few other grass roots types that have also been shut out of their accounts.

The Daily Haymaker also posted an article about the emails. The Daily Haymaker article states:

State GOP chairman Hasan Harnett has fired the latest shot in an email to executive director Dallas Woodhouse, accountant Greg Fornshell, and to hundreds of GOP bigwigs across the state:

[…] Mr. Woodhouse/Fornshell, I am politely requesting you turn my NCGOP Google email immediately back on. I know you have disabled my Google Email account through Computer Plumber. I have called Greg Fornshell and sent text messages but he remains silent. I had also visited the NCGOP Headquarters in Raleigh and apparently Greg Fornshell slipped out of the office ahead of my arrival. I have contacted the Computer Plumber company who services our email account and they said I need to talk with Greg Fornshell. Pretty interesting. Who gave the command? From my perspective, it’s the same old playbook and routine. Dallas, since you run the staff I know you gave the command to Greg Fornshell to disable my account.

Greg Fornshell, you can hide behind the covering of Dallas Woodhouse because he told you to do it. Dallas, the question remains will you also hide behind Tom Starks, General Counsel of the NCGOP to attempt to usurp his authority again and again over me? Or was it the current Central Committee staying on their talking points to make another bogus decision against me? Evidently, having closed door meetings with you does not work because either you brush me off or you just don’t listen. Why are you playing these silly games? Is this a joke or something?

Why would you stoop so low as to disable the Chairman’s NCGOP Google Email account? Why are fighting me? I have brought sound ideas to the table and have bent over backwards to make great things happen for all of us at the NCGOP. It is apparent that my sincere help and service to the Republican Party is not appreciated or welcomed by you and the Central Committee. It is apparent that you and the Central Committee want to do your own thing by working around me as oppose to working with me.

Is the reason why my account is disabled because you and the Central Committee do not want me to succeed as Chairman of the North Carolina Republican Party? Or will you try to hide behind a some bogus email virus attack to explain why my account is disabled? As Chairman, I require full access to my email account in order to carry out my day to day duties which includes fundraising so we can get Republicans elected. Therefore, shutting me out of my official NCGOP Google Email is suppose to accomplish what again? I really question your purpose and motive. I mean seriously, is this some form of ritual or hazing you would put the first black Chairman of the NCGOP State Party through? Or is it because I am not white enough for you? You keep pushing the limits. I guess time will only tell what your real plot and schemes are all about against me. No, worries. Like chess, I await your next move. […] 

Hasan Harnett was duly elected at last year’s GOP Convention in Raleigh. Since his election, the old guard Republicans in North Carolina have worked tirelessly to undermine him. I would like to quietly remind the establishment Republicans that the worker bees in the party and the enthusiasm tend to come from the grass roots. To play these silly games now is to work against your supposed goal of winning the next election.

Indoctrination Does Not Belong In America

Posted on by

Judicial Watch posted an article today about some documents they have uncovered regarding some of the training American soldiers are receiving.

The article reports:

Judicial Watch announced today that it obtained documents from the United States Department of the Army revealing that in April 2015, 400 soldiers in the 67th Signal Battalion at Fort Gordon, Georgia, were subjected to a “white privilege” briefing, including a PowerPoint presentation instructing the attendees: “Our society attaches privilege to being white and male and heterosexual …”

The slideshow also informed the soldiers: “Race privilege gives whites little reason to pay a lot of attention to African Americans.” It alleged that there are unspecified “powerful forces everywhere” keeping different kinds of people from being valued, accepted, and appreciated, but “we act as if it doesn’t exist.” This alleged privilege creates a “yawning divide” in income, wealth, and dignity.  The material described a mythical African woman who isn’t aware that she’s black until she comes to America, encounters “white racism” and discovers the U.S. is “organized according to race.”

Why in the world is our military doing this? How is it constructive?

The article concludes:

Though news of the indoctrination incident was briefly reported in Stars and Stripes shortly after it occurred, only one of the above slides previously has been made public.  Confronted with the information at the time, an Army spokesperson claimed the presentation was not officially sanctioned.

Judicial Watch previously obtained Defense Department equal opportunity training materials that depict conservative organizations as “hate groups” and advise students to be aware that “many extremists will talk of individual liberties, states’ rights, and how to make the world a better place.”  And last month, Judicial Watch uncovered Air Force Academy documents that show how the Academy used its “Chapel Tithes and Offering Fund” to pay for cadets to participate in worship services featuring witchcraft, “Faery Magick,” and voodoo.

“Outrageous – that is the only word to describe this type of raw racist indoctrination,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.  “The Obama administration undermines the morale of our military with morally repugnant ‘equal opportunity’ that makes many soldiers feel unwelcome because they are the wrong sex, race, religion or aren’t part of a politically correct group.”

Please follow the link to the article and read the excerpts from the presentation. This is totally unacceptable.

Who Is Actually Running America?

Posted on by

Jay Sekulow has published a book entitled, Undemocratic: Rogue, Reckless and Renegade: How the Government is Stealing Democracy One Agency at a Time. The book deals with the fact that unelected federal agencies have formed the fourth branch of our government. These agencies are passing laws that are not going through Congress and are not subject to voter approval.

CBN News posted an article about Jay Sekulow’s new book. The article reports:

Sekulow says that the federal bureaucracy has become the fourth and largest branch of the government, and it’s the only branch not in the U.S. Constitution.

Our federal bureaucracy violates the rights of Americans without accountability. It harasses adoptive parents, denies veterans quality healthcare, discriminates against conservatives and Christians for partisan purposes, and damages our economy with job-killing rules, according to Sekulow.

Americans are bullied by the very institutions established to protect their right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

Sekulow claims our nation’s bureaucrats are on an undemocratic power trip. But he and the ACLJ have a plan to fight back.

Electing a new President is not going to stop this unless the new President decides to begin to limit the size and power of the bureaucracy. We are not currently operating as the Founding Fathers intended. Congress was supposed to make the laws and be held accountable for those laws by the voters. It is time to get back to that model. Voters need to again be able to hold their representatives accountable for the laws we all have to live under. It is time for a change.

A New Example Of Take The Money And Run

Posted on by

The Washington Free Beacon is reporting today that Iran is threatening to walk away from its nuclear deal with the West.

The article reports:

Iran’s most recent ballistic missile test, which violates current U.N. Security Council resolutions, comes a day after the international community’s nuclear watchdog organization disclosed that it is prohibited by the nuclear agreement from publicly reporting on potential violations by Iran.

Iranian leaders now say that they are poised to walk away from the deal if the United States and other global powers fail to advance the Islamic Republic’s “national interests.”

“If our interests are not met under the nuclear deal, there will be no reason for us to continue,” Abbas Araqchi, Iran’s deputy foreign minister, warned during remarks delivered to a group of Iranian officials in Tehran.

“If other parties decide, they could easily violate the deal,” Araqchi was quoted as saying by Iran’s state-controlled media. “However, they know this will come with costs.”

So, if I understand this correctly, the deal will only stay in place if it advances Iran’s interests. Please explain to me how we got into a deal with people with that attitude. It seems to me that a deal should advance the interests of all parties involved. I think we need new negotiators.

The article further reports:

Meanwhile, the U.S. State Department had difficulty Monday explaining why the nuclear agreement limits public reporting by the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, on potential deal violations by Iran.

Yukiya Amano, the IAEA’s chief, disclosed on Monday that his agency is no longer permitted to release details about Iran’s nuclear program and compliance with the deal. The limited public reporting is a byproduct of the nuclear agreement, according to Amano.

When asked about these comments again Tuesday, a State Department official told the Free Beacon that the IAEA’s reports would continue to provide a complete picture of Iran’s nuclear program, though it remains unclear if this information will be made publicly available.

On February 1st, military.com reported:

Iran said Monday it now has access to more than $100 billion worth of frozen overseas assets following the implementation of a landmark nuclear deal with world powers.

Government spokesman Mohammad Bagher Nobakht said much of the money had been piling up in banks in China, India, Japan, South Korea and Turkey since international sanctions were tightened in 2012 over Tehran’s nuclear program.

Iran’s semi-official ISNA news agency meanwhile quoted central bank official Nasser Hakimi as saying nine Iranian banks are now reconnected to SWIFT, a Belgian-based cooperative that handles wire transfers between financial institutions. No foreign banks operate in Iran, and ATMs in Iran are not yet linked to the global system.

The historic agreement brought about the lifting of international sanctions last month after the U.N. certified that Iran has met all its commitments to curbing its nuclear activities under last summer’s accord.

Now that Iran has the money and the sanctions are lifted, is the deal over?

Is This Really What We Want?

Posted on by

Today The Civitas Institute (a North Carolina conservative group) reported some interesting information on the recent bill passed in Charlotte regarding transgender use of bathrooms. The article posted on their website reported some information that was omitted by one of the major Charlotte, North Carolina, papers.

The article at Civitas reports:

For months, residents of Charlotte have been debating whether the city should (or in fact could) pass an ordinance allowing individuals who identify as transgender to use the men’s or women’s bathrooms in places of public accommodation. Those opposed to the ordinance have had serious concerns about its effect on public safety.

This morning, Breitbart News is reporting that Chad Sevearance, president of the Charlotte Business Guild, who has taken a lead role in promoting the transgender bathroom ordinance, is a convicted and registered sex offender.

The article goes on to explain that Sevearance was convicted in 2000 of one charge of sexual molestation of a minor. He was required to register with the police for a minimum of ten years.

The Civitas article concludes:

This is not about further condemnation of Sevearance for his sexual offenses. (Although his advocacy group also knew he was a convicted child molester and defended him by calling reports of his convictions “mudslinging.”) The justice system has dealt with him, and it is not my place to heap further condemnation on a man who surely has been thoroughly condemned. This is about the Observer‘s failure to report on how a major figure at the center of a debate involving sexual predators and children has been convicted of being a sexual predator of children. In this context, the Observer‘s failure is tantamount to concealment. It is unfortunately one more example of our media picking and choosing its causes, leaving the task of actual journalism up to Internet news outlets.

I wonder if having this information before the vote would have changed any votes.

Support The Eleventh Commandment

Posted on by

If you are under 50, you may not be familiar with the Eleventh Commandment. The Eleventh Commandment was created by the California Republican Party and popularized by President Ronald Reagan. The Eleventh Commandment reads, “Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican.” If you have watched any of the Republican debates, you are aware that the Eleventh Commandment has died a violent death.

Holly Robichaud, who writes a column for the Boston Herald, posted her observations on the subject in today’s Boston Herald.

Ms. Robichaud notes:

Where is the Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus?

He is the leader of the Republican Party — not just the establishment wing. It is time for him to lead the entire party by stopping the civil war.

There have been plenty of times when conservatives have been less than thrilled to vote for the Republican nominee, but once the selection had been made there was no ranting or raving about our objections. We kept our nose-holding to ourselves and loyally supported the nominee.

The establishment is having a massive hissy fit over the Trump candidacy. They are not helping the other Republican presidential candidates. They are only hurting our chances to win the White House in November. Shame on them for their self-indulgent whining.

As I have stated many times before, Donald Trump did not get my vote in the Republican primary (North Carolina has early voting, so I have already voted). However, if he wins the votes in the Primary Elections around the country, he is entitled to the nomination.

The maneuverings of the establishment Republicans are amazing. They have ignored the party’s base for years, and now wonder why the base is choosing to ignore them.

The article further reminds us:

Earlier in this election cycle, Priebus got Trump to sign an agreement to not run as a third-party candidate if he did not win the primary. Was it a one-way agreement? Where is the protection for Trump? He’s winning these primaries fair and square. It wasn’t even close in Massachusetts.

Priebus is going to be the last chairman of the Republican National Committee if he doesn’t stop the establishment’s temper tantrum.

What could Priebus do? First and foremost, he needs to shut off all money to people who speak ill of the soon-to-be nominee. That will motivate them.

Second, Priebus can give them a collective dope slap. To suggest that Trump would be a lousy president due to some business failures is beyond ridiculous. According to Forbes magazine, 8 out of 10 businesses fail within the first 18 months. Businesspeople have successes and failures.

On the other hand, Hillary Clinton should be indicted over the email scandal! On her watch as secretary of state, four Americans died because she refused to act! The Clinton Foundation is a disgrace!

The Republican Party is in danger from its own establishment. The establishment that has gone along with higher taxes, more spending, and not using every weapon available to fight ObamaCare and executive orders is reaping what it has sown. The Republicans hold the House and the Senate. Does anyone believe that if the Democrats held the House and the Senate that they would not manage to advance their agenda? If the Republicans continue to avoid success and replace it with whining that they cannot do anything because of President Obama, they deserve to be removed from whatever office they hold. Attacking each other only adds to their problems. If the republican leaders continue to act in a way that ignores the base and encourages attacks against the leading candidate, they may find themselves without a party to lead.

What Did He Say?

Posted on by

I will admit that I am confused. Do we need to grant visas to foreign tech workers or do we not? Last Thursday, The Daily Caller posted an article that totally confused me as to what Donald Trump‘s stand on the issue was.

The article reports:

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump inexplicably changed his position on the H-1B visa program in Thursday’s Fox News debate, saying Silicon Valley actually does need to import tech workers for jobs instead of hiring Americans.

“We need highly skilled people in this country,” Trump told Megyn Kelly in the debate, when she questioned him about statements he’s made that contradict the policy of reducing access to the visas outlined on his website. “I changed my mind,” he added.

I guess my question is, “Why aren’t American schools and colleges training enough tech workers?”

The article continues:

Disney, Southern California Edison and other companies have been in the spotlight recently after laying off scores or even hundreds of workers and in some cases forcing them to train their foreign replacements on H-1B visas. At the same time, big businesses continue to argue there is a shortage of high-skilled tech workers and are demanding an increased supply.

In his reversal, Trump signaled he now believes their argument, saying Silicon Valley needs “high-skilled” workers, and the country needs to bring in more high-skilled workers.

No. We need to instill a work ethic in our schools and improve our educational standards so that we create more high-skilled workers. This is possible. At one point we had the technical people to put a man on the moon. Classical education gave us those people–people with a work ethic who learned the technical skills needed. This is an education problem within the United States–it is not an immigration problem.

Laws That Really Don’t Make Any Sense

Posted on by

Just when you think state legislators couldn’t pass any more weird laws, someone comes up with a new idea. The law I am about to describe is not only unnecessary and useless, it doesn’t even apply where it might matter.

Hot Air is reporting today that California has politically gone off the deep end.

The article reports:

A California lawmaker has introduced a bill that would ban government-funded travel to states with laws that he says discriminate on sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression.

“No one wants to send employees into an environment where they would be uncomfortable,” said Democrat Evan Low, Jon Ortiz, a reporter for the Sacramento Bee, reported this week.

Low said he decided to introduce the bill after Indiana signed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act into law in March 2015.

Does the law include government-funded travel of women to Saudi Arabia and other countries where they do not have equal rights?

I believe that America is made up of states. The last I heard, each state had the freedom to make laws that applied in that state. California is perfectly within its rights to limit the travel of government officials or employees to places where they will not be uncomfortable. Obviously, being within your rights does not mean that what you are doing can be described as logical or sensible.

It gets worse. The article explains:

Low said he doesn’t know which states his bill would apply to yet. He said it would not cover lawmakers and political trips but would affect administrative travel.

So what, pray tell, is the point of this legislation?

 

We Need A New State Department

Posted on by

Anyone can make a mistake, but some people take it to a whole new level. On March 2nd, The Washington Examiner reported that the State Department had set up a hotline to take calls about cease-fire violations in Syria. That in itself is not a bad idea. However, they used volunteers with limited abilities in Arabic languages.

The article reports:

“In order to help monitor the cessation of hostilities in Syria, we did set up an information hotline that was staffed 24/7, where violations could be reported I think via a number of different apps,” State Department spokesman Mark Toner said Wednesday.

“There were some language issues among some of the volunteers,” he added. “And granted, these again are State Department employees who are doing this in addition to their usual jobs.”

“We are aware that there were some language issues, as you note, and we’re working to correct those, obviously, because it’s important that we have Arabic speakers who are able to field incoming calls,” Toner said.

Toner was asked whether proficiency in Arabic was a requirement for volunteering to work the hotline.

“It was, just but, you know, given the time limits on setting this up, probably some of the language skills weren’t properly vetted,” he said.

“Agreed, we should have people … agree,” Toner said when pressed further. “So, we’re working to address that.”

Shouldn’t the State Department have a good idea which of its employees are fluent in Arabic? If the language issue was a concern, could they have borrowed people from other government agencies who were fluent in Arabic? This sounds like a total lack of common sense.

This Is Important

Posted on by

As previously stated, I am not a Trump supporter. However, I understand the anger of the people supporting him and the hope they have that he will change the culture of Washington. He has an appeal that easily crosses party lines. Aol News reported one example of that yesterday.

The article states:

Former Democratic presidential candidate Jim Webb, whose centrist campaign folded not long after the first primary debate, said Friday he won’t vote for party front-runner Hillary Clinton – and is open to giving Republican favorite Donald Trump his vote instead.

“No, I would not vote for Hillary Clinton,” said Webb, a former Democratic senator from Virginia, when asked on MSNBC‘s “Morning Joe” if he could support her. When it comes to Trump, he added, “I’m not sure yet. I don’t know who I’m gonna vote for.”

Though he served with her in the Senate, “it’s nothing personal about Hillary Clinton,” Webb told hosts Joe Scarborough and Willie Geist. A vote for Clinton, he said, is a vote for the status quo, while a vote for Trump is a vote to blow up a gridlocked, dysfunctional system of government.

The above statement is a reflection of the feelings of many people. The reason I don’t support Trump is that I am skeptical of his ability to change the climate in Washington. I fear that people are projecting on him whatever they want him to be, much like what happened with President Obama. I am skeptical, but I will vote for Trump if he is the nominee. Hillary Clinton and her husband belong in jail–not in the White House.

Bernie Sanders Has Won The Democratic Kansas Caucuses

Posted on by

The Hill has just reported that Bernie Sanders has won the Democratic caucuses in Kansas.

The article reports:

The Democratic Party of Kansas projected the result with 90 percent of precincts reporting. It said 40,000 people participated in the caucuses, a larger turnout than 2008.

Sanders is running strong in another Midwestern state, Nebraska, and could be poised for two early Super Saturday wins.

Kansas, which will award its 33 pledged delegates proportionally, is the sixth state to be won by Sanders so far. He has also won New Hampshire, Vermont, Colorado, Minnesota and Oklahoma.

As I have stated previously, I am not a Democrat. However, I understand that the way the Democratic Primary is set up, the Super Delegates are already lined up for Hillary Clinton. She will get the nomination regardless of how many votes Bernie Sanders gets. This system was set up after George McGovern won the nomination and then lost in all but two places because he was so far out of the mainstream of American political thought. The system of Super Delegates was set up to avoid that happening again. Although I understand the logic in this, if I were a Democratic voter who supported Bernie Sanders, I would be livid. Either votes count or they don’t count. I am not a Trump supporter, but if he wins the primary elections, he deserves to be the nominee. If the establishment Republicans take it away from him, I will quite likely leave the Republican party. Again, either votes count or they don’t count. The rule applies to both political parties.

 

Turning A Debate Into A Cage Match

Posted on by

I will admit that I did not watch the latest Presidential debate. I have seen enough of the debates to feel that they are useless at this point, and I knew that I would hear about it the next day. There were a lot of articles about the debate, but one in particular caught my eye.

Yesterday Breitbart.com posted an article stating that during the debate, Fox News was acting as a super PAC for Marco Rubio.

The article pointed out a few things that lead to that conclusion:

Trump was never asked to attack his rivals. On at least three occasions, Trump’s rivals were invited to attack him.

…On a number of occasions, Wallace and Kelly tossed off their roles as moderators to actually debate Trump, in the hopes of tripping him up or cornering him. As bad as the mainstream media has been to Republican presidential candidates over the years, I have never seen anything like this.

…There were two unbelievable moments even lower than that. The first came from Kelly, who used leaked reports and unsubstantiated rumors surrounding an off-the-record interview Trump supposedly had with the left-wing New York Times.  Apparently, the Times leaked information about the off-the-record interview to the left-wing BuzzFeed, who in turn, without hearing the audio, launched a McCarthy-ite attack against Trump, accusing him of saying one thing to the Times and another to the voters regarding immigration.

The article concludes:

Fox News’s brand and reputation is already in freefall. Thursday night, in service to Marco Rubio and the Republican Establishment, Fox News stooped lower than NBC News or CNN — something many of us never thought possible.

*To justify singling Trump out with graphics and videos, Fox News announced at the beginning that the other candidates had faced these in the debate Trump boycotted.

As I have previously stated, I am not a Trump supporter, but this is ridiculous. Please follow the link to the article to read the transcripts that substantiate the various charges. For whatever reason, FOX has chosen to align itself with the establishment Republican party. Based on some of the programming choices FOX has made in recent years, that should not be a surprise. However, it is unfortunate. FOX News had a chance to truly be an objective news source. Obviously, that is not the path they have chosen.

One Suggestion For A Budget Cut

Posted on by

The Washington Examiner is reporting today that the taxpayer-funded Office of the Former Speaker is paying two aides to former Speaker John Boehner more than $10,000 a month.

The article reports:

Boehner stepped down at the end of October. Rep. Paul Ryan was elected to replace him. Boehner’s office opened in November.

The Office of the Former Speaker is an official office that provides space and staff to former House speakers for some five years. Former House Speaker Dennis Hastert ran up a $1.9 million bill, according to reports.

Might I suggest that we abolish the concept of Office of the Former Speaker and any funding that goes with it. I see no reason for extra staff once the Speaker leaves office. This is the culture in Washington that we need to end.

Not All Cultures Treat Everyone Equally

Posted on by

The Daily Caller posted a story today stating:

A top Pakistani religious council responsible for advising the government to ensure that laws conform with Islam has ruled a new law criminalizing violence against women “un-Islamic.”

The inference of that law is that violence against women is not considered criminal in Islam.

The article continues:

Punjab, the largest province in Pakistan, passed the Women’s Protection Act last week. The law is the first of its kind and is intended to protect women from domestic, psychological and sexual abuse. The legislation will also create women’s shelters and a hotline for women to call in order to report crimes. That is, of course, if of course if the law gets by the Council of Islamic Ideology.

“The whole law is wrong,” said Muhammad Khan Sherani, head of the council, during a news conference. Sherani cited verses from the Koran to back up his claim that the law is “un-Islamic.”

According to its website, “the Council of Islamic Ideology is a constitutional body that advises the legislature whether or not a certain law is repugnant to Islam, namely to the Koran and Sunna.” The Sunna is the verbal record of the practices of the Islamic prophet Muhammad.

We need to keep this in mind when allowing people to immigrate to America. I have no problem allowing refugees in if they are thoroughly vetted and want to assimilate into American culture. I see nothing to be gained by allowing a parallel culture in America that allows for the abuse of women.

Some Thoughts On Donald Trump’s Healthcare Plan

Posted on by

Investor’s Business Daily posted an article today about Donald Trump‘s plan to reform ObamaCare. Most Americans who have had to change doctors, had their health insurance premiums rise drastically, or had their deductible amounts skyrocket would consider almost anything on that front good news.

The article reports:

Trump’s written plan at least starts on the right foot, promising to repeal ObamaCare on Day One, and recognizing that Republicans have already developed replacement plans. “The President and a Republican congress,” Trump’s position paper states, must “lead the effort to bring much-needed free-market reforms to the health care industry.”

As with most GOP plans, Trump would lift restrictions on interstate sales of insurance, thereby letting consumers shop around for plans in states that don’t impose a host of costly benefit mandates.

He’d also expand Health Savings Accounts, the one reform that has been a proven success and a standard feature in every GOP reform, although he’s still vague on the specifics.

And Trump proposes to reform Medicaid by turning it into a fixed block grant to states. This is a must-do change, since as currently structured, Medicaid’s matching grant formula only encourages waste and fraud. Trump is right that with a block grant, “states will have the incentives to seek out and eliminate fraud.”

To remove the tax distortions between employer-provided insurance (which is tax exempt) and individual insurance (which has to be bought with after-tax dollars), Trump would allow taxpayers to deduct the full cost of their individual premiums from taxes.

The article goes on to explain that the changes would provide savings for wealthier Americans while not doing much for poorer Americans. However, since the wealthy pay more, you could easily make a case for that.

The article also points out the dangers of depending on Donald Trump to fix healthcare:

This is a guy, after all, who bragged not too long ago that he was “very liberal” on health care, and who often talks as though he still is. The plan says nothing about Trump’s oft-repeated and absolutely horrible proposal to have the government negotiate (that is, fix) drug prices for Medicare. He is still completely vague about how he plans to cover everyone and “have the government pay for it.” And the plan doesn’t mention Trump’s stated support for ObamaCare’s “guaranteed issue” regulations.

Which Trump would ultimately emerge is anyone’s guess. And, since Trump says that everything is negotiable, who is to say he wouldn’t start cutting deals with Democrats as soon as he gets the keys to the White House?

Voters who want ObamaCare replaced with real free-market reforms are taking a big gamble if they think Trump is the man to actually make it happen.

Don’t believe anything until the ink is dry on the President’s signature, whoever that President may be.

Eventually All The Pieces Fit Together

Posted on by

Today’s Washington Examiner is reporting that Donald Trump has named Senator Jeff Sessions as Chairman of his national security advisory committee. That explains a lot.

On February 28, Politico reported the following:

Donald Trump won another major endorsement Sunday, surprising the political world when he walked onto the stage for a rally in Madison, Ala., with Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions.

Two days ahead of Super Tuesday when 11 states will cast votes, Trump continues to dominate the national airwaves and demonstrate growing support from Republican elected officials.

I like Jeff Sessions, but that endorsement did not make sense to me. Ted Cruz is a much more obvious candidate for Jeff Sessions to endorse. They are much better aligned in terms of conservative values. With the announcement today, it is hard to look at this endorsement as anything other than a trade-off.

Some Of Our Justice Department Actually Works

Posted on by

Yesterday Scott Johnson posted an article at Power Line about the ongoing investigation of Hillary Clinton’s emails. Scott Johnson is an attorney and understands what words mean when they are carefully used.

A few highlights from the article:

On the rare occasions when she is asked about the FBI investigation arising from her use of an insecure email server to conduct official business as Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton refers to it as “a security review.” It is, moreover, “a security review” that “was requested,” as though the FBI is doing someone a favor.

…Clinton makes it sound routine. The FBI, however, does not perform “security reviews.” It conducts criminal investigations. Its handling of the Clinton email matter clearly constitutes a criminal investigation.

Yesterday FBI Director James Comey was questioned about the investigation by Representative Steve Chabot.

This is Director Comey’s response:

“As you know we don’t talk about our investigations. What I can assure you is that I am very close, personally, to that investigation to ensure that we have the resources we need including people and technology. And that it is done the way the FBI tries to do all of its work: independently, competently, and promptly. That’s our goal and I’m confident that it’s being done that way but I can’t give you any more details than that.”

In the article at Power Line, Scott Johnson notes that Director Comey is taking responsibility for the investigation. Because Director Comey has a reputation for being an honest man, this could get interesting. I have never believed that Hillary Clinton would pay any price for mishandling classified information. I hope I am wrong. Director Comey’s statement is encouraging.

Watch The Spin

Posted on by

Today’s Washington Post posted an article about Hillary Clinton’s problems with her email server.

The article reports:

The Justice Department has granted immunity to the former State Department staffer who worked on Hillary Clinton’s private email server as part of a criminal investigation into the possible mishandling of classified information, according to a senior law enforcement official.

The official said the FBI had secured the cooperation of Bryan Pagliano, who worked on Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign before setting up the server in her New York home in 2009.

As the FBI looks to wrap up its investigation in the coming months, agents will likely want to interview Clinton and her senior aides about the decision to use a private server, how it was set up, and whether any of the participants knew they were sending classified information in emails, current and former officials said.

That’s pretty straightforward. Basic facts, etc. But later in the article:

Any decision to charge someone would involve Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch, who told Congress when asked earlier this month about the email inquiry: “That matter is being handled by career independent law enforcement agents, FBI agents, as well as the career independent attorneys in the Department of Justice. They follow the evidence, they look at the law and they’ll make a recommendation to me when the time is appropriate.

“We will review all the facts and all the evidence and come to an independent conclusion as how to best handle it,” she added.

Current and former officials said the conviction of retired four-star general and CIA director David H. Petraeus for mishandling classified information is casting a shadow over the email investigation.

The officials said they think that Petraeus’s actions were more egregious than those of Clinton and her aides since he lied to the FBI, and classified information he shared with his biographer contained top secret code words, identities of covert officers, war strategy and intelligence capabilities. Prosecutors initially threatened to charge him with three felonies, including conspiracy, violating the Espionage Act and lying to the FBI. But after negotiations, Petraeus pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge of mishandling classified information.

I am learning how to read between to lines to predict what comes next. Who are these current and former officials?

The article continues:

Petraeus “was handled so lightly for his offense there isn’t a whole lot you can do,” said a former U.S. law enforcement official who oversaw counterintelligence investigations and described the email controversy as “a lesser set of circumstances.”

The State Department has been analyzing the contents of Clinton’s correspondence, as it has prepared 52,000 pages of Clinton’s emails for public release in batches, a process that began in May and concluded Monday. The State Department has said 2,093 of Clinton’s released emails were redacted in all or part because they contained classified material, the vast majority of them rated “confidential,” the lowest level of sensitivity in the classification system.

The above two paragraphs are outright lies. I have posted a number of articles about these emails. Judicial Watch has been on this from the beginning. If you believe the above two paragraphs, I suggest you go to the Judicial Watch website and begin reading. The Washington Post article is setting up the story that Hillary didn’t do anything serious and that she is being picked on because she is a Democrat running for President or because she is a woman. Take your choice. This is an example of how a newspaper can lie to create a narrative. We will see a lot more of this as the election campaign continues.

Articles Like This One Keep Us Divided

Posted on by

There is such a thing as the Washington establishment. It is to their advantage to create imaginary enemies for Americans within America to keep us from actually turning our attention to what is going on in Washington and dealing with it. Our current President is very adept at this tactic. For example, his statements and actions toward out policemen have put their lives at greater risk than ever. In creating the idea that police were people who abused their power, President Obama has divided Americans and reignited the issue of race. The media has helped with this. There are police who abuse their power, but they are a small minority.

Today, the New York Daily News posted an article by Shaun King that proclaims that Donald Trump proves evangelical Christianity is just white supremacy in disguise. I am deeply offended by that remark and do not believe it is true. I have no idea why anyone is supporting Donald Trump other than the fact that there are a lot of Americans who are angry. They feel that their voices are not being heard and that the policies of the Washington establishment are self-serving and hurting average Americans. How Donald Trump would be an answer to these problems is beyond me, but he is very good at voicing their anger.

Just for the record, I attended a conservative caucus in North Carolina late last year. This was before any voting had taken place. There were about 100 or so people there. The caucus was for President and North Carolina Senate. I don’t have numbers on this, but my guess would be that at least seventy-five percent of those attending would have described themselves as evangelical Christians. When the votes were tallied, Ted Cruz got 47, Ben Carson got 45, Donald Trump got 4, and Rand Paul got 1. If evangelical Christians are white supremacists, this group obviously didn’t get the message.

Again, I don’t claim to understand the success of Donald Trump, but it is naive at best to assume that all evangelical Christians are supporting him. Given the choice of Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton, I would vote for Donald Trump–not because I support him, but in the hopes that at least he would be less interwoven with the Washington establishment. I suspect that may be what his supporters are looking at.