Tag Archives: Democrat Party

Something To Remember

Posted on by

On Tuesday, American Greatness posted an article about the odd alliance between the Islamists and Communists (the red-green alliance). We are seeing that alliance in action in America right now with the Democrat Socialists of America and some of their Islamist candidates. But the Islamists and the Democrats actually have little in common in their overall philosophies. The Democrats support gay rights, the Islamists kill homosexuals by throwing them off rooftops or hanging them from cranes. The Democrats encourage women’s rights, the Islamists deny even basic rights to women. Their common goal is to overthrow the system in place. But what happens after they overthrow the existing system?

The article reports:

If political alliances were based primarily on shared values, these two movements should be enemies, not allies.

History tells us otherwise.

Iran in 1978 offers perhaps the clearest example. Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi saw an extraordinary coalition forming against his government. He described it as an alliance of “black reaction and red terror”—black representing the Shia clerical forces, red the communists and revolutionary left.

The CIA dismissed the possibility.

Then came 1979. The Shah fell, Ayatollah Khomeini returned to Tehran, and the Islamic Revolution seized power. Iran’s communist Tudeh Party embraced the revolution and supported Khomeini.

What happened next matters even more.

Once secure in power, Khomeini turned against his former allies. In 1983, the regime launched a sweeping crackdown on the Tudeh Party. Its leaders were arrested; members and sympathizers were imprisoned, executed, or driven into exile. A party that had helped welcome the revolution was ultimately destroyed by it.

The article notes:

The left believed Khomeini and the clerics were merely one component of a broad revolutionary coalition and that, after the Shah’s fall, competing factions could continue struggling over the revolution’s direction. Khomeini’s followers, meanwhile, could use the left’s organizational networks, intellectual influence, and street power.

Each side thought it was using the other.

Then the common enemy disappeared. What remained was a power struggle, won by the faction that was more ruthless, better organized, and less constrained by liberal rules.

That is the recurring logic of revolutionary coalitions. Fundamental contradictions can be postponed while a common enemy remains. Once that enemy disappears, yesterday’s allies begin reaching for their knives.
Which is why a recently recirculated video of American left-wing streamer Hasan Piker deserves attention. Piker talks about bringing a Chinese-style Cultural Revolution into the Democratic Party, subjecting establishment Democrats such as Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer to “struggle sessions,” and even putting political opponents in prison.

Please follow the link to read the entire article. It is a picture of what could happen in America.

For great insight into life in Iran before, during, and after the revolution in 1979, I recommend the book A TIME TO BETRAY by Reza Kahlili. He supported the revolution, joined the Revolutionary Guard, and eventually went to work for the CIA.

Why No One Should Vote For Democrats In The Mid-Term Elections

Posted on by

Usually when a political party is out of power and running in an election to gain power, they lay out their plan to make the country and everyone in it more successful. The out-of-power party gives us a positive reason to elect them. That is not the case in this November’s election.

On Monday, Townhall posted an article detailing some of the Democrat’s plans if they retake Congress. Nothing they plan will actually benefit the American people.

The article reports:

Democrats have given a glimpse of what they plan if they win back control of either chamber of Congress.

Other than launching another impeachment attempt against President Donald Trump, it appears Democrats also plan to renew their lawfare against Trump and his family. They plan to investigate the president’s family business to find something they can use against him.

The article quotes the U.K. Independent:

If Democrats win a majority in either the House or Senate in November’s midterm elections, corporate contributors funding President Donald Trump’s ballroom and participants in Trump family business transactions could face immediate congressional scrutiny, according to several lawmakers, legal experts, and Capitol Hill aides.

Securing command of either chamber would give Democrats subpoena authority and the financial resources to expand oversight staff. This would allow inquiries to begin as early as February, likely triggering prolonged legal disputes that would bring the Trump family’s business holdings into sharp focus.

Such congressional inquiries could define the second half of Trump’s term, following two years during which his family ventured into artificial intelligence, prediction markets, drones, and cryptocurrency, while the president’s personal wealth expanded by an estimated $2.2 billion.

“I don’t think the Democrats are going to have patience. They’re going to expect documents pretty quickly. You’re not going to play the old run-out-the-clock game,” noted Ashley Callen, an attorney at Jenner & Block and former general counsel to Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson.

Speaking to reporters on September 17, US House of Representatives Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York stated: “We’re going to hold the crooks accountable, beginning on day one.”

Much of President Trump’s worth is in real estate, which has increased in value during the past two years. I suspect that his other investments in Truth Social and other things have also paid off. President Trump was a shrewd businessman before becoming President. Why would that change? I would also like to point out that in America people are innocent until proven guilty. We also prosecute crime. We do not go after people searching for crime. We do not need two years of witch hunts–we need two more years of moving forward. Despite the fact that the mainstream media chooses not to report it, the Trump economy is doing very well. According to AI, the predicted third quarter growth of the American economy is 4.3%, significantly exceeding earlier forecasts. Let’s keep moving in that direction.

The article at Townhall concludes:

If they (the Democrat party) regain control of either chamber of Congress, not only are they going to launch impeachment proceedings against Trump, but they are going to pick up where they left off before they lost control of the House.

Of course, this strategy has two purposes. Attack Trump and distract from the fact that they won’t actually have any real solutions to the problems Americans face.

Looking Behind The Curtain

Posted on by

In approximately six weeks, Americans will go to the polls and vote in the mid-term elections. Spending in the mid-term elections is projected to exceed $1 billion. That is an indication of how important these elections are. Let’s look at some of the people who want the Democrats to win the mid-terms and what the consequences of that victory would be.

The European Union (EU) and Canada want the Democrats to win. There is currently a proposal to make Canada an ‘associate member’ of the European Union. Why would the EU do that? America and its freedom are the only thing standing between the EU and its dream of global dominance. Our current energy prices have a lot more to do with European exchange traders in London than they do with producers. If energy prices can be kept high through early November, those high prices could impact the mid-terms. America’s increased oil production and oil deal with Venezuela may help, but that won’t totally solve the issue.

If the Democrats win the mid-terms, what happens to the war in Iran? Chances are they will end the war without ending Iran’s nuclear program, and the can will be kicked down the road as it has been since 1979. I will predict that if the Democrats win the mid-terms, Iran will have a nuclear weapon within two years.

If the Democrats win the mid-terms, the tax cuts in the Big Beautiful Bill will go away. The price of energy will go even higher as government restrictions are put on drilling, electric plants, etc. There will also be an end to any plans for building more oil refineries in America (refineries that are desperately needed).

If  Democrats win the mid-terms, you can also expect increased attacks on religious freedom. Right now there is a case in Maine where a mother who has custody of her daughter is being denied the right to take her daughter to church. In another state, the Little Sisters of the Poor are currently being sued because they refuse to take part in euthanasia. A daughter has been taken away from her parents in Massachusetts because they did not support her transitioning to a boy. You can expect more support for those things under a Democrat congress.

Today’s Democrat party is not the Democrat party of 1960. Unfortunately, they are not the patriots they used to be–it’s party first, personal glory second, and country third. If you chose to vote for a Democrat candidate in the mid-term elections, you will be denying your children and grandchildren the freedom and opportunities you grew up with.

Who Is The Democrat Party?

Posted on by

On Friday, The Daily Caller posted an article about a recent Quinnipiac University poll asking Democrats if they support the Democratic Socialists of America. The results are frightening.

The article reports:

The majority of Democrats support the Democratic Socialists of America, a Quinnipiac University poll released Thursday found.

The latest survey shows that among Democrats, 59% consider themselves DSA supporters, compared to just 30% who do not. Out of total voters polled just 26% consider themselves supportive of the DSA, compared to 66% who do not consider themselves backers of the socialist group.

This is a far cry from the 2016 Democrat primaries when the Democrat party elites worked behind the scenes to make sure Bernie Sanders was not the presidential candidate. The Democrat elites remembered the resounding defeat of George McGovern and did not want to repeat that mistake.

The article notes:

If a candidate for elected office identifies as a DSA supporter, 17% of respondents say it makes them more likely to back that candidate, the survey states. By comparison, 43% of voters say it makes them less likely to vote for that candidate while 35% of respondents say it makes no difference.

The DSA did not immediately respond to the Daily Caller News Foundation’s request for comment.

…In June, the DSA released a new platform, dubbed “Workers Deserve More,” which in part proposes to “draft a new constitution, and create a democratic socialist republic.” The socialist group’s platform has drawn intense public criticism from congressional Republicans.

“The DSA Communists have now published their insane agenda to take over Congress and America,” House Speaker Mike Johnson wrote in a June 27 X post. “We will not let it happen! WE ARE READY FOR THIS FIGHT!!”

The Quinnipiac University survey was conducted from Sept. 3-6 throughout the contiguous U.S. The poll surveyed 970 self-identified registered voters with a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 3.9 percentage points, including the design effect.

If the people surveyed knew their world history, their answers would have been very different.

Bring On The Class Warfare

Posted on by

On Wednesday, Issues & Insights posted an article about tax-the-rich idea to end the federal deficit.

The article reports:

The theater kids who have taken over the Democratic Party have brought to the forefront the long-held proposition of the left to tax the rich to pay for a utopian future. Even before the DSA surge, the party insisted there is plenty of money out there, all the government had to do was grab it and problems would be solved. It’s nonsense of course. An even more draconian tax structure than the one we have now wouldn’t fund the federal government for even a year.

Washington, now facing a $40 trillion debt, spent more than $7 trillion in fiscal 2025, doling out an average of almost $21,000 per person. Democrats have always argued that if they could just tax the rich hard enough, they could erase all of society’s ills while eliminating deficits and debt. Either they know better and can’t help but lie, which is an organizational foundation of communism, or their math is below grade-school level.

Using IRS data to make its case, the Cato Institute says that if the federal government in 2023 “had confiscated every dollar earned over half a million dollars, it still would have run a budget deficit.”

If that won’t work, then try harder, right? Go after the villains, the billionaires. So what if Washington seized every asset they owned, not just their annual income, but “every home, property, business, investment, car, and yacht, right down to their kids’ teddy bears — and sold it all for full market value?” asks researcher Jessica Riedl.

Wouldn’t that get the job done? Nope.

“That would raise enough revenue to finance the federal government for nine months,” she says. But not nine months every year. Nine months one time only. “Then, with no billionaires left to pillage, it’s gone — as is your 401(k), because most of that wealth would’ve been liquidated out of the stock market.”

It has been stated before–the problem is not the revenue–it’s the spending. These wonderful ideas of confiscating wealth fail to take into consideration that the wealthy have tax attorneys, places offshore to move valuables to, and other ways to avoid wealth confiscation. Also, why are you taking away the incentive to be successful just to fund an inefficient government that is rife with fraud and waste? It would make more sense to eliminate the fraud and waste.

Exactly What Are The Democrat Policies?

Posted on by

On Monday, The Federalist posted an article about some recent policies voted on by the Democrat National Committee (DNC) Resolutions Committee.

The article reports:

When the accomplice media tell you that there is such a thing as a “moderate” wing of the Democratic Party,  remember what the Democratic National Committee did on August 15, 2026. And remember that November’s midterm elections come down to the sane versus the insane on the ballot. 

In an effort to offer voters varying degrees of insanity, the DNC on Saturday staked out two positions on U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement: A resolution seeking to abolish ICE, and another looking to gut it. Each measure passed unanimously by voice vote during the committee’s summer meeting in Austin, Texas. 

…The DNC Resolutions Committee advanced the motion (25-12) late last week urging “Democratic members of Congress to craft legislation abolishing ICE and enacting immigration reform that provides pathways to citizenship, protects workers, and ensures dignity for all impacted people,” according to Common Dreams, a left-wing nonprofit “news” organization founded by Dem operative Craig Brown. 

In a lame attempt to soften the abolishment proposal, the Resolutions Committee backed a separate advisory resolution calling for “concrete reforms” to ICE. 

Neither resolution is binding. The final DNC platform will be set at the 2028 Democratic National Committee Convention in August 2028, in a leftist-led city yet to be selected. 

The immigration debate is becoming tiresome. You are not a racist because you want people to come to America to work and add to the country. You are not a racist because you believe that people should follow the law in coming here. You are not a racist because you believe that laws regarding illegal entry into America should be enforced. These used to be mainstream ideas.

The article concludes:

Now a Democratic Party that has been commandeered by the radical left wants to abolish ICE. They can’t pretend they don’t want to do that any longer. They just passed a resolution spelling out their intentions.

“Instead of trying to abolish ICE, Democrats should be thanking ICE law enforcement officers for putting their lives on the line to arrest and remove murderers, rapists, pedophiles, and gang members from American communities,” the White House said in statement.

“Many of these criminals were released from jails by Democrat radical politicians. President Trump’s efforts to remove criminal illegal aliens from American communities is already delivering results including the lowest murder rate in 125 years.”

Refusing To Learn The Lessons Of History

Posted on by

On Friday, Hot Air posted an article about California Governor Gavin Newsom’s support for a wealth tax. You would think that with all of the people moving out of California because of its high taxes, he might have observed a pattern. Remember, this man may be a presidential candidate.

The article reports:

Gavin Newsom has, until now, opposed wealth taxes, or so-called “Billionaire” taxes. 

No longer. Joining Ro Khanna, Elizabeth Warren, and the more radical left-wing in his party, he is jumping on board the crazy train,  calling for an “economic reset” by seizing a fraction of the wealth—almost all of which is unrealized capital gains, and hence the ownership of companies and not actual cash money—and transferring to the government to spend on…whatever. Making the world poorer but “fairer.”

To quote Thomas Sowell:

What exactly is your ‘fair share’ of what ‘someone else’ has worked for?

There is also the matter of the Laffer Curve:

On Friday, CNN reported:

California Gov. Gavin Newsom on Friday proposed a national tax on billionaires that he says is the first part of an “economic reset for America” agenda, which aides explicitly say is part of his considering to launch a presidential campaign.

“The system America’s founders built was designed to prevent the concentration of power in a few hands, but we have allowed that concentration to happen anyway, slowly, in plain sight, over decades,” Newsom writes. “We can reverse it together, as a country.”

It is extremely early in the presidential campaign cycle for a policy proposal — but comes as Democrats continue to embrace economic populism and moves against the wealthy. It also comes as California voters in November will decide on a billionaires’ tax after the governor and opponents of the tax late Thursday failed to reach a deal to keep it off the ballot.

Class envy and greed are ugly, but they are often useful in political campaigns.

The article at Hot Air concludes:

Other First World countries have committed economic suicide. Argentina used to be the 7th largest economy in the world. Then it became fascist/socialist, and it has taken decades to just get back on the right track. Europe has been committing economic suicide.

America could too.

Newsom’s move shows that at least some, and probably many, Organized Crime Democrats are going to try to throw the babies and old people to the ravening wolves, and you and I are those babies and old people.

This is one of many reasons I am urging common-sense Americans to vote Republican in the mid-term elections. The Democrats are very scary right now.

A Not-So-Surprising Change

Posted on by

Alan Dershowitz has been a voice of reason for a long time. He has been outspoken and fair in his commentary on current events. Although he has been a Democrat, he has not been blind to the events around him. Alan Dershowitz has now become a Republican.

On Tuesday, Hot Air reported:

What happened? It starts with Democrats’ sharp turn toward anti-Semitism with Israel as its political golem, but as Dershowitz argues, that serves more as a harbinger for a broader radicalization within the party. The catalyst came last week when most of the Senate Democrat caucus voted to withhold funds for Israel’s defensive systems, where the scales fell from his eyes on the power of anti-Semites within the Democrat Party:

The Democratic Party has become the most anti-Israel party in U.S. history. Last week all but seven Senate Democrats voted for an arms embargo against the Jewish state, and an avowed enemy of Israel, Abdul El-Sayed, is gaining ground in the Democratic campaign for U.S. senator from Michigan.

There is no denying that the hard left, anti-Israel wing of the Democratic Party has moved from the fringe to the mainstream. Until recently there was an age gap, with younger voters more strongly opposing Israel, but recent polls suggest that the trend now includes Democrats of all ages. Republicans have their own antisemitic fringe, but for now it remains a fringe.

Let’s hope it stays on the fringe. Antisemitism has never been good for anything.

The article quotes Alan Dershowitz:

I believe that the Democratic Party’s hostility to Israel represents a deeper and more dangerous shift away from the center and toward a radical approach that is bad for America and the free world. So I intend to work hard to prevent the Democrats from gaining control of the House and Senate, and I urge those who share my concerns about the increasing influence of radicalism in the Democratic Party to vote, campaign and contribute for continued Republican control of Congress. I will contribute money to Republican candidates, campaign for them, make speeches at Republican events, and urge pro-Israel Americans to change party affiliation or at least vote against Democrats. Until something changes, I will vote Republican for representative, senator and president.

Wow.

Why The Democrats Want Illegal Immigrants To Stay In America

Posted on by

On Wednesday, Legal Insurrection posted an article with an explanation as to why the Democrat party is so against deporting people who are here illegally.

The article reports:

In a recent interview with Fox News, former ICE Acting Director Jonathan Fahey said that “Democrats fight each deportation as if it’s a Democratic vote.” Rarely have truer words been uttered.

The American Redistricting Project, a nonprofit group focused on “constitutional redistricting, and election transparency,” published its 2030 Apportionment Forecast on Tuesday — and what it revealed was remarkable.

Based on the Census Bureau’s July 1, 2025, population estimate — released Tuesday morning — the ARP apportionment map shows California losing four congressional seats. Illinois, Minnesota, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Wisconsin would each lose one seat, for a total of 11 seats lost among blue states.

Meanwhile, the map shows red and purple states gaining those same 11 seats. Texas would pick up four new districts, Florida would gain two, and Arizona, Georgia, Idaho, North Carolina, and Utah would each gain one.

…Independent journalist Greg Price attached the ARP map to a post on X and noted:

Under this forecast, President Trump would have won the 2024 Electoral College 322-216. And even if Kamala had won PA, WI, and MI — President Trump still would have won 280-258.

This [is] the one and only reason Democrats are fighting so hard to stop illegals from being deported.

Their ability to continue winning elections is at stake without them and they’ll burn down the country to keep them here.

The average America does not share the goals of today’s Democrat party. A large number of Americans share the values of yesterday’s Democrat party. Many of the values of yesterday’s Democrat party have become the values of today’s Republican party–support the working man, equality (not equity), etc. President Kennedy lowered taxes, saying, “A rising tide lifts all boats.” I can’t picture a Democrat saying that today, and I doubt that JFK would be welcome in today’s Democrat party.

The article concludes:

Perhaps Americans also looking for some sanity and honesty from their public servants.

If I were a Minnesota resident right now, I’d be strongly considering selling my home — and it’s hard to believe many others aren’t doing the same.

State and local leaders are currently locked in a desperate fight with the federal government to stop them from deporting illegal aliens — even those who have committed serious crimes. Although any reasonable person would celebrate the removal of criminals from their city or state, Democrats in Minnesota, as well as the outside agitators who have converged upon the state in the last month, are fighting tooth and nail to keep them there.

Why? Because Jonathan Fahey was right when he said, “Democrats fight each deportation as if it’s a Democratic vote.” Because, at least in the blue states that don’t require photo identification at the ballot box, that’s a true statement.

Why Turn Left?

Posted on by

Many of us assume that with age comes wisdom (generally gained through attendance at the School of Hard Knocks, but wisdom nonetheless). However, there is, in many cases, a feeling by the younger generation that they can correct what they see as the mistakes of the older generation. They believe they can do it better, whatever “it” is. The generation under thirty is the group the current Democrat party is wooing by moving their party to the left. This is not a new thing for Democrats.

In 1971, Amendment 26 of the U.S. Constitution lowered the voting age to eighteen. The Democrats nominated then Senator George McGovern as their presidential candidate. In 1972, 48 percent of people between 18 and 20 voted. They made up 6.2 percent of all voters. People between the age of 21 and 24 voted at 50.7 percent. They made up 8 percent of the voters. People between 25 and 44 voted at 62 percent. They made up 35.93 percent of the voters. In 1972, the early Baby Boomers were 26. They were a rebellious generation that was just beginning to make their political presence known.

As the Baby Boomers numbers are decreasing, younger voters are going to make up more of the electorate. The Democrats are counting on these voters to be ignorant of the lessons of history. Unfortunately, the American education system has willingly or unwillingly been helpful in creating an uninformed electorate.

Some of us remember what happened in the 1972 presidential election. The liberal wing of the Democrat party learned that they did not have popular support. They also learned the the youthful voters don’t always show up at the polls. Some of us are hoping that this denunciation of ultra-liberal policies will again show itself at the voting booth in the mid-term and upcoming presidential election. Unfortunately, that may not be the case this time. Younger voters often have no idea of the consequences of what they are voting for.

If you are looking for some interesting reading, in June 2011, Forbes Magazine posted an article about an op-ed written by former Senator George McGovern about his experiences after leaving the Senate. He definitely was rethinking his liberal slant.

Who Is Paying For This?

Posted on by

When you look at the funding behind the No Kings protests that are going on this weekend, you begin to understand why the Democrats were so upset when the NGO funding from Congress began to dry up.

On Saturday, Zero Hedge reported:

The Democratic Party’s dark-money NGO network, bankrolled by left-wing billionaires, is reportedly preparing to activate a coordinated, color-revolution-style mobilization across the U.S. this weekend – a replay of failed agitation attempts seen earlier this year targeting President Trump and Elon Musk. The operation, marketed under the “No Kings” banner and portrayed publicly as a grassroots movement, in reality functions as a professionalized protest-industrial complex. Its composition includes a blend of paid activists, white boomers suffering from Stage 4 Trump Derangement Syndrome, and a smaller contingent of organic, unhinged leftists who recite MSNBC talking points by heart. 

Little do these white boomers know, the “No Kings” movement, supposedly against “kings and billionaires”, is, in reality, funded by leftist billionaire kings themselves. In truth, No Kings is bankrolled by far-left foundations backed by the same billionaire class that has been waging a political war against President Trump since his first term. Essentially, one faction of billionaires hates another, so their woke non-profit soldiers create a front group, brand it “No Kings,” and bankroll an army of paid protesters and unhinged left-wing activists. This is America in 2025: the permanent protest-industrial complex of hate and chaos, financed by the left.

The article includes a screenshot showing where the money is coming from:

We need to remember that America is the major obstacle to those who want one-world government. Our freedom is an obstacle to their success. The No Kings movement is an attempt to sow unrest in America and create enough chaos to overthrow our Republic. Note that we are not and never have been a democracy.

The article notes:

Last week, during the Antifa roundtable at the White House, Bruner briefed President Trump (read here): “We have identified dozens of radical organizations, not just the decentralized Antifa organizations, but dozens of radical organizations that have received more than $100 million from the Riot Inc investors.” In fact, tackling Antifa is not the proper strategy, as Bruner told Trump, start with dark-money NGOs. 

I wonder if those protesting understand the actual goals of the people paying them to protest. I heard an interview on a recent news show of a pro-Palestinian protester complaining that now that there is peace in Gaza, he will be losing his protest money and doesn’t know how he will pay his rent!

Things Are Changing

Posted on by

On Friday, Breitbart reported that Garfield New Jersey Mayor Everett E. Garnto, Jr. will be leaving the Democrat Party and endorsing Republican Jack Ciattarelli for governor.

The article reports:

The announcement came during Ciattarelli’s Garfield Rally. Michael Casey, New Jersey State Director for Early Vote Action, reported on X that the rally was “standing room only as hundreds of Garfield residents were in attendance,” calling it a “MAJOR endorsement for @Jack4NJ in a city that has been a longtime Democrat stronghold.”

Garnto, a retired Garfield police officer who served 29 years on the force and 12 years as president of the local Police Benevolent Association, was elected to the city council in November 2024 as a Democrat. He later became mayor after his colleagues selected him for the position. The lifelong resident also served as a school board member and vice chair of the Garfield Housing Authority before winning elected office.

The party switch carries weight in Garfield, home to more than 30,000 residents and the fifth-largest municipality in Bergen County. Although Murphy narrowly carried the city by just over 150 votes in 2021, Donald Trump won Garfield by nearly nine points in 2024. Local voter registration trends and Garnto’s own admission that he supported Trump in the last presidential election underscore the city’s shifting political climate.

The article concludes:

Addressing attendees on Thursday, Ciattarelli said Democrats joining his effort demonstrates that voters across the political spectrum are dissatisfied with the state’s leadership. “It’s not just Republicans who are crying out for change,” Ciattarelli remarked. “It’s unaffiliated, independent voters and yes, even moderate Democrats who’ve come to the realization that this current administration has failed.” He added that his campaign’s focus remains on “getting up and down this state” to present voters with a vision for lowering costs and restoring affordability.

Aside for the high taxes, high cost of living, and congestion, New Jersey residents who leave the state have to pay a tax on the sale of their home. If they are not buying another house in New Jersey, they have to pay an exit tax. It is definitely time for a change.

What Exactly Are You For?

Posted on by

On Wednesday, Ed Morrissey at Hot Air posted an article about the loss of Democrat party supporters and members.

The article reports:

…The New York Times’ Shane Goldmacher did a deep dive into the trends of partisan affiliation, partnering with data firm L2 to determine those ebbs and flows. (Full disclosure: L2 partnered with me on my book Going Red gratis and allowed me to use their powerful database.) If Goldmacher’s data is accurate, the census may be the least of Democrat worries.

They are in the middle of a bleed-out that may have no end in sight. They are losing ground in literally every corner of the country:

…In fact, for the first time since 2018, more new voters nationwide chose to be Republicans than Democrats last year.

All told, Democrats lost about 2.1 million registered voters between the 2020 and 2024 elections in the 30 states, along with Washington, D.C., that allow people to register with a political party. (In the remaining 20 states, voters do not register with a political party.) Republicans gained 2.4 million.

On Thursday, Victor Davis Hanson posted an article at American Greatness that might partially explain what is happening to the Democrats.

The article at American Greatness notes:

The Pavlovian Left goes berserk at the mere prospect of each new Trump initiative.

Its escalating reactive venom and hysteria are calibrated to the success of Trump’s latest policy.

Yet the new hard-left Democratic Party offers no counter-agenda to explain its furor.

Still less do Democrats attempt bipartisan efforts to craft shared legislation.

Take foreign policy.

Democrat senators trashed the recent Trump-Putin Alaskan summit as a failure. Then they became depressed when, just days later, an entourage of European leaders and President Zelensky of Ukraine suddenly flew to the White House.

The Euros praised Trump for offering some sort of negotiated pathway to peace after over three years of war and some 1.5 million dead, wounded, missing, and captured on both sides—on Europe’s doorstep.

So why did Democrats object to such negotiations by Trump?

Was the reason that no such thing occurred during the Biden administration, when Putin invaded Ukraine, after his earlier invasions during the Obama era?

What is the left’s alternate plan? The old Biden idea of supplying Ukraine with enough money and arms to keep fighting and dying, but with no path to either victory or a negotiated peace?

Would they prefer a fourth, fifth, or sixth year of war, or an additional one million casualties?

That is just one of many examples listed in the article. We know what the Democrats are against (anything President Trump is for), but what are their policies? Until Americans see solutions rather than griping from the Democrats, they will continue to lose support. We need action, not complaining.

There Are Many Ways To Influence An Election

Posted on by

There are many ways to influence an election. One way is to limit the amount of money paid to a political party or candidate. Another way is to make sure a political party has plenty of money to spread around. It is not a coincidence that the massive cut to the funding of The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) has resulted in a shortage of funds at the Democrat party. The money given to the non-governmental organizations (NGO’s) somehow had a way of winding up in groups that supported causes friendly to Democrats. Supposedly non-political organizations can also play a role in how much money a political party has to spend.

On Thursday, Townhall reported:

A political consulting firm, Targeted Victory, claims Gmail has been flagging Republican fundraising emails containing WinRed links as “dangerous” and sending many straight to spam folders. WinRed, the GOP’s central online fundraising platform, brought in roughly $1.6 billion for the 2023–2024 cycle. Its Democratic counterpart, ActBlue, appears to face no such labeling, with emails containing its links going through unimpeded.

The article concludes:

While Targeted Victory was the first to experience the problem, they said the “issue is occurring across vendors’ campaigns and personal Gmail accounts, eliminating the possibility of it being a Targeted Victory-specific or network issue.”

If accurate, this goes beyond a simple technical hiccup; it affects the flow of political funding and the effectiveness of campaigns. In an environment where small-dollar donations drive those campaigns, filtering one party’s platform while clearing its rival’s creates a built-in advantage with real electoral consequences. Something the GOP cannot afford in the upcoming midterm elections.

As more Americans become aware of some of the questionable activities of the Democrat party, I suspect the Republicans will be okay in the midterms.

The Goal Of The Democrat Party

Posted on by

On Thursday, PJ Media posted an article explaining what the Democrats plan to do if they gain control of Congress in 2026. Obviously, the first thing they plan to do is to impeach President Trump. We all want to go back to the Biden economy, right? Voters need to see the dangers ahead if the Democrats gain control of Congress–the danger is not just economic.

The article reports:

Democrats have completely dropped the pretense of fair play and now openly admit that they intend to rig the system to secure permanent control. James Carville, a longtime Democratic strategist, declared that if Democrats win big in 2028, they should use that victory as a launchpad to cement their power in ways never seen before.

Carville explicitly called for adding Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia, both reliably Democratic strongholds, as new states to skew electoral influence. On top of that, he advocated expanding the Supreme Court to 13 seats, packing it with leftist judges to tilt future judicial decisions in their favor. In other words, Democrats are no longer content with trying to win elections; they want to change the rules so they can’t lose them.

“If the Democrats win the presidency, the Senate and the House in 2028, which is not impossible — I don’t know if you’d say likely or possible, I don’t know what word, you know, but it’s certainly not impossible — they are just gonna have to unilaterally add Puerto Rico and District of Columbia states,” he said.

We have already seen the howls of panic at the idea that the Republicans might copy the Democrats and gerrymander election districts. Now the Democrats are hoping to change the rules so that America only has one political party in power indefinitely. So who is the threat to democracy? Just for the record, we are a constitutional republic–not a democracy.

Let’s get an accurate census, redistrict in a way that favors neither party, and have an honest election.

The Problem With People Who Refuse To Leave The Stage

Posted on by

On Friday, former President Biden gave a speech in Delaware to celebrate Memorial Day. That’s very appropriate–former Presidents are often asked to speak at various celebrations around the country. The speech was typical of his speeches–more about himself than anything else.

Friday night, The Daily Caller posted an article about President Biden and his various speeches since leaving office. The article was less than kind.

The article reports:

Former Democrat strategist Dan Turrentine said Friday on “The Ingraham Angle” that it appears no one in his party will tell former President Joe Biden to stop publicly speaking about the 2024 election, adding that the former president is holding the party back.

After delivering a Memorial Day event speech in Delaware, Biden said he was “very proud” of his “record” prior to dropping out of the race, appearing to suggest President Donald Trump had been “last” in favorability. While discussing Biden’s comments, Fox News host Laura Ingraham told Turrentine that the former president had been “pushed out” of the 2024 race.

“One of the ironies is that as Donald Trump’s poll numbers went down earlier this year, our poll numbers didn’t go up,” Turrentine said. “One of the reasons that they didn’t go up is that we are struggling to move forward, and Biden keeps pulling us backwards.”

Just for the record, President Trump’s approval record has not dropped below 44 percent since he took office. He began his term at about 50 percent. Considering the press coverage he gets, anything above 40 percent is amazing. When he left office, former President Biden’s approval rating was about 40 percent, amazing when you consider the press coverage he got. The current Democrat party rating is at about 35 percent favorable. That might have something to do with their stand on many issues that Americans oppose–open borders, medicaid for people who are here illegally, transgender surgery for minors without parents’ knowledge or permission, and shrinking the government bureaucracy, etc.

Currently the most popular people in the Democrat party are Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Pete Buttigieg. Right now, that is the future of the Democrat party.

The Republican Party Now Contains The Old Obama Coalition

Posted on by

On Saturday, Townhall posted an article about the Obama political coalition and how it has become the Trump coalition. It’s really not surprising when you look at the issues the Democrat party has supported in recent years–massive illegal immigration, boys in girls’ sports, and transgender medical treatments for children. These are generally 80/20 issues, with 80 percent of Americans supporting the Republicans’ views on the issue. The Democrat party needs new issues that are popular with the American voters.

The article reports:

Former Obama aides Jon Favreau and Dan Pfeiffer spoke about one of the main things that’s gnawing at liberals: Trump has taken over their coalition. The Republican Party is now a multi-racial working-class party. Republicans are winning enough women and Latino voters, which makes this latest iteration of the GOP virtually unbeatable. The only good news for Democrats is that Trump is term-limited, and there’s nothing permanent in politics.

It’s an underreported gripe, but the data and the exit polling don’t lie. Pfieffer especially went into how if Democrats don’t reverse course and have the tough discussions about their messaging, agenda, and campaign strategy, they’re on the path toward total annihilation. Latino voters are fleeing the Democrats, and the current leadership and political operative class seems to be banking more on waiting for Trump to ‘screw up.’ It’s not going to work.

Being against President Trump is not a viable political platform. Until the Democrats come up with a few solutions to problems that voters can related to, they are going to have a problem.

The article concludes:

It’s funny how things have flipped: high turnout doesn’t favor Democrats anymore. If every registered voter had been dragged out of their homes and taken to the polls during the 2024 election, Trump would’ve won the popular vote by five points instead of 1.7.

The Democratic Party can’t focus on these issues because it lacks the bandwidth to face them. These people stick their heads in the sand when pressed and given facts that obliterate its views and messaging.

It will be interesting to see if the Democrats can sort this out in the coming year.

Moving Left While The Voters Move Toward The Center

Posted on by

There is a political divide in America. There is also a political divide in the Democrat party. There are some Democrats who quietly support ending government waste and ending open borders, and there are some Democrats that want to continue to failed policies of President Biden and President Obama. Unfortunately, the party seems to have chosen to move further left, away from its base, rather than moving toward the center. The Democrats are no longer the party of the working man. They are the party of people traveling in private jets railing at the oligarchy and wanting to ‘tax the rich.’

On Wednesday, PJ Media reported:

…There’s been a slow-moving coup… but nobody’s noticed!

It’s tied to the larger political realignment nationally: Under the MAGA banner, the GOP has evolved into the party of the working man. The Bush-era days of country club conservatives has come and gone (assuming the club isn’t Mar-a-Lago, of course). We’ve gone from Wall Street to Main Street.

But the Democratic Party is realigning, too.

Liberals are frothing in furious rage — and not only at Republicans. A record number have lost faith in the Democratic Party. Its favorability has never been this dismal. Liberals are begging — pleading — for new leaders and a new direction. Even in New York, 53% of Democrats want to fire the Democrats’ Senate leader… who is FROM New York. (Sorry, Chuck Schumer.) This isn’t normal behavior.

There’s never been a better time for an outsider to seize control.

Our first big story is the Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) whistlestop tour with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). (In honor of Bernie Sanders, I hereby dub it the B.S. tour.) Although they’ve been generating headlines for the size of their enormous crowds — even in ruby-red districts — that’s not the most meaningful part.

There’s a consensus forming amongst their supporters: They want to go to war.

Liberals are demanding to be represented by a fighter. Among Democratic voters, an overwhelming majority — 72% — want someone “more aggressive” to battle Trump. Less than a third (28%) sought a “moderate” approach.

The liberal base will choose the most aggressive, fiery liberal candidate. Moderates need not apply.

The article notes that David Hogg, the current Vice-Chairman of the Democrat party, is planning to primary any moderate Democrat currently in office. The goal is a radical Democrat party with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez as its leader. It will be interesting to see how the voters react to this.

Quote Of The Day

Posted on by

You can always count on Senator Kennedy from Louisiana for a good quote.

On Tuesday, Red State quoted Senator Kennedy who was sharing his advice to the Democrat Party:

“Look, you just gotta try harder not to suck,” said Kennedy. 

Kennedy elaborated, saying that Democrats spent the past four years mismanaging everything they were put in charge of, including congress, the pandemic, the economy, Afghanistan, and more. Now, with Trump and Musk ripping through the government to trim away the fat and corruption, they’re going out of their way to side with bureaucracy. 

This is one of those losing “80/20” positions Scott Jennings talked about a while back, but Democrats can’t stop themselves from automatically taking the opposite position that Trump is at every turn. 

Kennedy continues by noting the Democrat Party’s support for illegal immigration and transgendered people in women’s sports, and sympathize with Hamas, which are just more 80/20 positions Democrats can’t seem to stop advocating for. 

“The party is being controlled, right now, by people who majored in online activism with a minor in puberty blockers,” said Kennedy. “I know these people. They think men can breastfeed!” 

“Most fair-minded Americans look at this, and they go, ‘these people are about ten exits past normal!” he added. 

It’s hard to believe the Democrats are fighting to keep the corruption in Washington going.

Words Have Impact

Posted on by

On Sunday, Miranda Devine at The New York Post posted an article about the attempted assassination of President Trump. She mentioned the rhetoric the political left consistently uses to describe President Trump. Aside from the fact that at least three quarters of what the media says is false, almost all of it is inflammatory.

The article reports:

Donald Trump was targeted Sunday in a second apparent assassination attempt in as many months.

An eagle-eyed Secret Service agent reportedly spotted the barrel of a gun in bushes a few hundred yards from where the former president was playing golf and shot at the would-be assassin, who was later arrested.

It’s a frightening development that highlights the recklessness of the hateful rhetoric constantly aimed at Trump by his political opponents, even after he was shot at a rally in Pennsylvania in July.

Last week, Kamala Harris falsely accused Trump of calling Nazis “fine people,” promising a “bloodbath,” and being responsible for “the worst attack on our democracy since the Civil War.”

She and Joe Biden and their surrogates constantly exaggerate the J6 Capitol riot and use it to frame Trump as a “threat to democracy.”

Biden has labeled Trump and “MAGA Republicans” as “semi-fascists” and domestic terrorists.

Tim Walz called Trump a “fascist” and a “threat to Democracy” who will “put people’s lives in danger.”

On Saturday, Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) described Trump as “a candidate explicitly running on the promise of political violence.”

The article concludes:

CNN host Dana Bash even accused Trump’s running mate, JD Vance, on Sunday of “causing the hospitals, the schools, the government buildings to be evacuated because of bomb threats” in Springfield.

What will it take for these demented partisans to lower the temperature?

Whoever said, “Accuse others of what you do,” would have been very happy in today’s Democrat party.

Waking Up

Posted on by

On Friday, The New York Post posted an opinion piece by California Democrat Gloria Romero who has walked away from the Democrat party.

The opinion piece states:

I walked away from the Democratic Party and joined the Republicans.

I will vote for Donald Trump for president.

I’ve been a true-blue Democrat, a former California state senator who chaired its Senate Democratic Caucus and served as Senate Majority Leader.

I was a Democratic National Convention delegate for Jesse Jackson and Barack Obama, and state co-chair for President Obama’s re-election.

But I’ve said goodbye, adios, I’ve had enough.  

This is not the Democratic Party I once championed. I don’t recognize it anymore.

The so-called “party of democracy” eradicated 14 million votes, including mine, to install Vice President Kamala Harris as its nominee.  

Just for the record, the reason those 14 million votes were eradicated was that the party had been totally dishonest about the mental state of the candidate for the past three years. They didn’t eradicate the votes as much as they refused to give the voters a choice.

The piece continues:

Like a banana republic, the dedazo was used by political elites to tap the candidate they chose.  Essentially, they executed a political coup. 

As California’s attorney general, Harris was unimpressive.

She made an intentional choice to hitch herself to the powerful teachers’ union and was clearly being coddled by a power elite that was even then shaping her political future.

Her manipulated rise is in line with the Democratic Party’s giant leap toward authoritarianism and censorship.  

President Ronald Reagan warned that if fascism comes to America it will come as liberalism, and he was right: I have witnessed individual freedoms being trapped, silenced, censored. 

The piece concludes:

I watched the Oct. 7 terror attack on Israel with horror. 

The Democratic Party has forsaken our ally to placate the pro-Hamas wing and win a swing state.  

I have seen the best of America: a nation that went to the moon and beyond. 

But our American landing has become like quicksand under a Democratic Party that is sinking the hopes and lives of Americans.

So I finally walked away. I stayed for as long as I could: I tried reforms, I spoke out, I voted. 

Today, I turn toward the future — an America that still shines, despite inequities that need change; a blessed land of opportunity — and join the party of the greatest American, Abraham Lincoln. 

The challenges of rebuilding our republic will take all of us.

I join the Republican Party to make America great again.

I am free at last.

We CAN rebuild our republic, but we won’t be able to if Kamala Harris is elected.

The Role Of President Trump In Revealing The Problems Within The Republican Party

Posted on by

On Monday, Mark Steyn posted an article about the unity in the Democrat party and the lack of unity in the Republican party. He explains that actually the lack of unity among Republicans is a good thing because it exposes the uni-party.

The article reports:

~~The Democrat convention featured a full set of the party’s presidents, save for Jimmy Carter, who turns one hundred next month. But, otherwise, there were present not only both Obamas but both Clintons, and even both Bidens, even though almost every one in that sextet loathes the other five, and certainly all six despise Kamala. But they’re Democrats first, so they suck it up.

How’s it going over on the Republican side? Well, former president George W Bush has announced he won’t be endorsing anyone in this election. On the other hand, over two hundred Bush, McCain and Romney staffers have declared they’re voting for Kamala. I’m not sure I’ve heard of any of them, but, as you know, the McCain and Romney campaigns remain bywords for hugely successful political operations, so no doubt many of those hundreds of staffers helped craft what are widely acknowledged to be two of the most impressive concession speeches in American history.

The article also notes:

So Trump has performed a great service in driving the likes of Cheney to vote Kamala. The feeble charade of TweedleDem vs TweedleRep is designed to obscure the central fact of end-stage western “democracy” – that, on anything that really matters, nothing can be permitted to change. Thus, having Dick Cheney and Ilhan Omar formally on the same team is very helpful. Trump has driven the “respectable” political class to make the Uniparty literal, and its consolidation has freed up space for an actual second party. (On his recent podcast, my former National Review colleague John Derbyshire has more on this.)

For most of this century, while the “right” shrivelled conservatism to unwon wars, globalist economics and cultural surrender, the voters kept telling the political class they would like a wider choice on Election Day. Hence, eventually, even in the frozen American system, the coming of Trumpism. Whatever happens after November, there are no takers among the GOP base for a return to Bush-Cheney “conservatism”.

The article concludes:

Be that as it may, it quickly became clear – not least through multiple lies and obfuscations in Congressional testimony – that the Secret Service and other elements in the federal government created the conditions that permitted that bullet to hit a former president in the head (and kill an American citizen). And that’s putting it at its mildest: even after the shooting was underway, it was a local copper – not the feds – who was the first to fire back and hit the alleged perp.

Consider the implications of that, especially if you’re the family of Corey Comperatore. That’s a far “greater threat to our republic” than the man those corrupted alphabet agencies failed to protect. Cheney is contemptible.

We are at a crossroads. We can align with those who desire a uni-party rule where changing presidents really doesn’t matter or we can align with a system where changing presidents can actually make a difference.

 

The Truth About Censorship

Posted on by

On Monday, The Daily Wire posted an article about some recent statements by Mark Zuckerberg regarding censorship under the Biden-Harris administration.

The article reports:

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg said in a letter on Monday that the Biden-Harris administration repeatedly pressured his company — which includes Facebook, Instagram, Messenger, WhatsApp, and more —  to censor content that is protected free speech.

Zuckerberg made the admission in a letter to House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) this week in which he said that his goal moving forward was to “be neutral and not play a role one way or another” for either any political party or ideology. He said he doesn’t even want the appearance of playing a role and will not be making political contributions.

“In 2021, senior officials from the Biden Administration, including the White House, repeatedly pressured our teams for months to censor certain COVID-19 content, including humor and satire, and expressed a lot of frustration with our teams when we didn’t agree,” he said in the letter. “Ultimately, it was our decision whether or not to take content down, and we own our decisions, including COVID-19-related changes we made to our enforcement in the wake of this pressure.”

The censorship during Covid probably resulted in people unnecessarily dying from the disease. We now know that there are some serious risks associated with the vaccine–that was kept quiet. We now that ivermectin used correctly can be an effective weapon against the disease–that information was suppressed. We now know that Hunter’s laptop was real–that information was censored. How much information about the current Democrat party candidates for President and Vice-President is being censored?

The article notes:

He (Zuckerberg) said that the company made a mistake by temporarily demoting a New York Post story during the 2020 election about Hunter Biden’s laptop after officials falsely suggested that it was part of a “Russian disinformation operation.”

“It’s since been made clear that the reporting was not Russian disinformation, and in retrospect, we shouldn’t have demoted the story,” he said. “We’ve changed our policies and processes to make sure this doesn’t happen again – for instance, we no longer temporarily demote things in the U.S while waiting for fact-checkers.”

We are living with the results of an election that was probably stolen in more then one way. Let’s not let that happen again.

Politics Makes Strange Bedfellows. Or Does It?

Posted on by

As someone who lived in Massachusetts for 35 years (and Rhode Island for 10), I would like to comment on the addition of Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., to the Trump team. At first glance, it’s an odd combination, but a closer look reveals that it’s a natural fit. If nothing else, both men have been mocked, maligned, and shoved aside by the media and the deep state. This may be their chance to have the last laugh.

Let me say something about the Kennedy family. There have been a few bad apples (as is the case in most families), but the majority of them have spent much of their time trying to help those less fortunate. After his bout with drugs, Patrick Kennedy started a foundation to oppose the legalization of marijuana (something he regarded as a gateway drug). One of the Kennedys started a program in Massachusetts to provide heating oil for low-income families. Some Kennedys are involved in politics, but many of the family members have been working under the radar to help people who are less fortunate. There are some womanizing issues, but in today’s political world, that’s not even noteworthy.

So what does Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., bring to the party? John Kennedy and Robert Kennedy Senior were old-school Democrats. They represented the working people. John Kennedy lowered taxes significantly. He also supported civil rights–not quotas. Robert Kennedy went after the mob and the corruption in the labor unions. Neither John or Robert Kennedy would be welcomed in today’s Democrat party. Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., was obviously not welcomed. There are a lot of people today who have been life-long Democrats who do not recognize today’s Democrat party. Because Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., has joined President Trump, these people have a place to go. It is also an unabashed call to unify the country under our basic Constitutional principles.

The Democrats could have had a real primary election. A primary election between President Biden, Vice-President Harris, and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., would have allowed to voters to choose the Democrat candidate. Instead, the party chose to hide President Biden’s infirmity from the public (with the help of the Vice-President, the Cabinet, and the news media) and at the last moment install a candidate no one voted for. No wonder Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., chose to support President Trump–his own party treated him very badly.

President Trump and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., are not in agreement about everything, but they are willing to work together on the things they do agree on. That’s an example we all should follow.

 

Big Brother Is Watching ALL Of Us!

Posted on by

On Wednesday, Racket News posted an article about the government surveillance of former Hawaii Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard. Congresswoman Gabbard left the Democrat party in late 2022.

The article reports:

Tuesday night, while self-styled Democratic nominee Kamala Harris pledged to defend “freedom, compassion, and the rule of law” to cheers in Philadelphia, Hawaii’s Tulsi Gabbard described being tracked by teams of government agents in a surveillance regime more reminiscent of East Germany than a free country. Whistleblowing Air Marshals told Uncover DC Gabbard was singled out as a terror threat under the so-called “Quiet Skies” program, and the former presidential candidate says she noticed.

“The whistleblowers’ account matches my experience,” says Gabbard. “Everything lines up to the day.”

This story began two weeks ago, when the former Hawaii congresswoman returned home after a short trip abroad. In airport after airport, she and her husband Abraham Williams encountered obstacles. First on a flight from Rome to Dallas, then a connecting flight to Austin, and later on different flights for both to cities like Nashville, Orlando, and Atlanta, their boarding passes were marked with the “SSSS” designation, which stands for “Secondary Security Screening Selection.” The “Quad-S” marker is often a sign the traveler has been put on a threat list, and Gabbard and Williams were forced into extensive “random” searches lasting as long as 45 minutes.

“It happened every time I boarded,” says Gabbard. The Iraq war veteran and current Army reservist tends to pack light, but no matter.

“I’ve got a couple of blazers in there, and they’re squeezing every inch of the entire collar, every inch of the sleeves, every inch of the edging of the blazers,” she says. “They’re squeezing or padding down underwear, bras, workout clothes, every inch of every piece of clothing.” Agents unzipped the lining inside the roller board of her suitcase, patting down every inch inside the liner. Gabbard was asked to take every piece of electronics out and turn each on, including her military phone and computer.

That was the other strange thing. “I use my military ID to get through security sometimes,” says Gabbard, who among other things traveled to her reservist base in Oklahoma during this period. Once, she was unable to get through security with military ID. Transportation Security Administration (TSA) agent saw the “SSSS” marker. “The TSA agent said, ‘Why are you Quad-S? You’re in the military,’” explains Gabbard. “And I said, ‘That’s exactly what I’m wondering.’

Please follow the link above to read the rest of the article. What has happened to her is chilling, particularly since she was a sitting Congresswoman and has a military ID. This could happen to any one of us who speaks out against the Biden administration.