Tag Archives: Kamala Harris

Charity Should Begin At Home

Posted on by
Reply

On Friday, Breitbart posted an article about the humanitarian aid America is sending to Lebanon to help in the ‘crisis’ there.

The article reports:

The United States announced that it would be providing $157 million in humanitarian aid to address the “crisis in Lebanon” and those who have been affected by it.

In a press release on Friday, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken revealed that the “nearly $157 million” in humanitarian assistance would go towards addressing “new and existing needs to internally displaced persons and refugee populations” for communities in Lebanon.

“The United States will provide nearly $157 million in new U.S. humanitarian assistance to support populations affected by conflict in Lebanon and the region,” Blinken said in the press release. “This funding will address new and existing needs of internally displaced persons and refugee populations inside Lebanon and the communities that host them. The assistance will also support those fleeing to neighboring Syria.”

The article concludes:

The news that roughly $157 million in humanitarian aid would go towards helping the people affected by the fighting in Lebanon comes as communities in western North Carolina, such as the city of Asheville and the village of Chimney Rock, were affected by heavy rains and flooding from Hurricane Helene. Other communities in eastern Tennessee, southwestern Virginia, Georgia, and Florida were also affected.

President Joe Biden previously announced that the U.S. would be sending $8 billion in military aid to Ukraine. Days after this announcement, Vice President Kamala Harris announced $750 in assistance for the victims of Hurricane Helene.

“The federal relief and assistance that we have been providing has included FEMA providing $750 for folks who need immediate needs being met, such as food, baby formula, and the like. And you can apply now.”

This represents $50 more than the Biden administration gave to those who were affected by the Maui wildfires.

If you live in an area effected by the hurricane and you vote for Kamala Harris, you are delaying or denying any help you will ever get from the government. Ask the people of Hawaii. I believe that if President Trump is elected, he will do what it takes to restore the areas impacted by the hurricane. I am really not impressed by the response of the Biden/Harris administration.

The Government Relief Efforts For Hurricane Helene Are Not Being Handled Well

Posted on by
Reply

On Saturday, Townhall posted an article about the government relief efforts for the victims of Hurricane Helene. Unfortunately, the government is being more of a hindrance than a help.

The article reports:

Into this hellscape of destroyed cities, overturned cars, and shattered lives have parachuted the Presidential “nominee” of the Democratic Party—the one nobody actually voted for—Kamala Harris. Conservative estimates of the cleanup in Helene’s wake exceed $ 300 billion…but the tone-deaf Harris put on her cheeriest face and announced that victims would be getting reparations from Washington. In an October 2nd speech in Augusta, GA (https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2024/10/02/remarks-by-vice-president-harris-on-response-and-recovery-efforts-following-hurricane-helene-augusta-ga/) Mrs. Time To Turn The Page stunned onlookers with these words:

“…And the federal relief and assistance that we have been providing has included FEMA providing $750 for folks who need immediate needs being met, such as food, baby formula, and the like. And you can apply now.”

Wow! Your home has been leveled, your car is crushed under tons of rubble, your streets are closed, and your cell phone is useless. But it isn’t all bad news: you can “apply” for a $750 gift card from Kamala Harris.

And where’s the Federal Emergency Management Agency? FEMA—according to its inept and impeached head Alejandro Mayorkas, speaking on Air Force One–“…does not have the funds to make it through the hurricane season.”

The article notes:

What rubbish. FEMA—crying crocodile tears about not having enough funds—isn’t mounting any substantial operations in many stricken areas. In fact, FEMA left hundreds of thousands of Helene victims without even cellphone communications until Donald J. Trump stepped in and tapped Elon Musk to provide StarLink™ trucks which are now operating in areas where cell towers collapsed during the hurricane.

This is not to diminish in any way the heroic work of the National Guard, state and local authorities and private citizens who have worked tirelessly in the wake of Helene’s fury to rescue people in their communities. Additionally, we all are blessed that groups like Franklin Graham’s Samaritan’s Purse, The Salvation Army and Team Rubicon immediately rolled up their sleeves and mobilized to literally save lives throughout the hurricane’s path. God bless every one of them.

The private sector always does it better! On August 12th, 1986, US President Ronald Reagan said, “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’” He was right.

 

Bringing Aid Without Government Red Tape

Posted on by
Reply

On Tuesday, Hot Air posted an article about communication is being restored in the areas of the country that were devastated by Hurricane Helene. It’s ironic that the very organization that the government prevented from creating an internet infrastructure is the organization that has come to the rescue.

The article reports:

Residents hit by Hurricane Helene are getting internet through Starlink because no other service is working, and in many cases won’t be for weeks or months.

In fact, there are regions with no access to communications at all, but for Starlink, which is why Elon Musk and Donald Trump are rushing in Starlink terminals.

What most people don’t know is that, originally, Starlink was approved as part of Kamala Harris’ plan to connect hundreds of thousands of rural homes to the internet at broadband speeds.

You know, that program that has yet to connect a single home…

I say originally because the FCC–for obviously political reasons–decided to cut Starlink out of the program due to bogus claims that it hadn’t proven that it could provide the service reliably, and there is no way on Earth that the government would spend money on something that wasn’t 100% bulletproof.

As Joe Biden would say, no joke.

Now individuals, local government units, and soon Elon Musk himself will rush into the stricken areas RELIABLE Starlink terminals to provide communications services to people, first responders, and the National Guard. Without Starlink, tens or hundreds of thousands of people would be completely cut off.

This is another example of a person who knows how to get things done vs. a politician who has no idea how the world outside his bubble works. President Trump and Elon Musk are businessmen. Their profits depend on problem solving. Generally speaking, the only way politicians solve problems is to throw more money at them.

This Is NOT A Solution

Posted on by

The mainstream media is happily reporting that the dock workers’ strike is over. Well, it is for now. There are a few problems with that statement. Both sides have agreed to extend the current contract through January 15th (a Wednesday) while they continue to negotiate. The new President (whoever that may be) will be sworn in January 20th (a Monday). We should be prepared for an extended strike at that point.

A U.K. Daily Mail article updated October 4th states:

President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris celebrated the news that the International Longshoremen’s Association union had temporarily paused their strike until after the election.

The union ended their three-day strike until January 15, after reaching a temporary agreement with the U.S. Maritime Alliance.

The port employers offered workers to increase wages by 62 percent, according to reports, which helped reach a ‘tentative agreement.’

That’s a pretty major wage increase. Because it will increase the cost of every item shipped, what will it add to the price of goods and the increasing inflation?

This is not a solution to the problem–it is simply kicking the can down the road so someone else can deal with it.

Conservative Replies to Debate Questions

Posted on by

Author: R. Alan Harrop, Ph.D.

I watched the Vice President candidate’s debate the other night and thought that J.D. Vance did a good job. The following are my answers to some of the critical issues that were raised in the debate.

Climate Change. The climate constantly changes. Always has; always will. The idea that the recent destructive hurricane, Helene, was caused by man-made climate change is pure ignorance and typical of the environmental extremists. Severe hurricanes have occurred as far back as records have been kept–long before man’s burning of fossil fuels could have caused them. The Left continues to spout the idea that man-made climate change is “settled science” when it is not. This allows them to justify ruining our energy production.

Green Energy. The Democrat agenda is to spend more of our taxpayer money on solar and wind projects purchased from China, and importantly, to mandate electric vehicles. Meanwhile, China is building a new coal fired plant about every month and using coal that we ship to them. As Europe has found out, no modern civilization can exist on wind and solar. We need more access to fossil fuels and to start building nuclear plants which the environmental extremists are blocking.

Open Borders. The Democrats want open borders in order to get more voters who will support their socialist agenda. They give illegals free housing, food, cell phones and healthcare and will, if allowed, grant them citizenship so they can vote. They realize that they are losing support from working class Americans, blacks, and Hispanics because of their harmful policies and need to replace these voters. Biden/Harris have had the ability to close the borders just as Donald Trump was able to do. THEY WANT OPEN BORDERS!

Housing Costs. The cost of new homes is up over 30% since Biden/Harris took office. Their reckless government spending caused the highest inflation in 40 years. Soaring fuel prices have increase the production cost and shipping cost of all building materials. Inflation caused a surge in mortgage rates from 3% under Trump to over 7% under Biden/Harris. Their solution–to start another big government program of taking money from working Americans and give it to first time home buyers.

Abortion. There is nothing in the Constitution that addresses abortion as a right. In fact, the Constitution specifically states that if an issue is not specified as the responsibility of the federal government then it must be left to the states. That is exactly what the Supreme Court’s ruling against Roe vs Wade rightfully concluded. The Democrats do not want to follow the Constitution–they want a federal law on abortion. Kamala Harris has promised to remove the filibuster rule and pack the court in order to accomplish this objective. They also want to avoid the reality that terminating a child that can live on its own with proper medical care, is not murder.

As in any debate, there are important issues that were not addressed. For example, the increasing crime rates and the destruction of our cities by failing to enforce the law. Anyone want to visit San Francisco? I do not. Recent reports show that due to the Biden/Harris open border policy, 425,000 criminals, 13,000 convicted murderers, and 16,000 sexual assault offenders were released into this country. The Democrats abuse of the law to go after their political opponents should alarm all Americans. No president has ever been indicted while in office or out of office other than President Trump. Yet, they continue to say that he is the threat to democracy when they are the real threat!

Let’s face reality. Harris/Walz are the most radical socialists ever to run for president and vice president. Their policies will make America a weak, failing, socialist country. Choice: big government socialism or traditional American free enterprise and individual freedom. Easy decision actually.

Clarification On Some Debate Points

Posted on by

Late Tuesday, MPR News posted an article to clarify some of what was said in Tuesday’s Vice-Presidential debate about Minnesota’s abortion law.

The article reports:

While they are allowed, abortions late in pregnancy are exceptionally rare. According to Minnesota data, in the last five years for which data is available just seven induced abortions have been reported in the third trimester of pregnancy. Abortions later in pregnancy are generally sought due to serious or fatal fetal anomalies, risk to maternal health or life or barriers that delay abortion access such as policy or financial need. It is illegal to kill a baby after birth as former President Donald Trump claimed in the presidential debate in September.

The 2023 law also dropped some state reporting requirements for abortion providers and ended the so-called “Born Alive Infants Protection Act.” Doctors and patients who’d pressed for the law change said the new law doesn’t prevent providers from trying to save the life of a child. Instead, they said it would let them bypass previously required medical interventions in situations where parents want to bond with their infant born with a fetal anomaly that is typically fatal.

These are basically wiggle words. As reported, the Minnesota law does allow abortion in the third trimester. The law also does not require providers to try to save a baby’s life. So Tim Walz did sign one of the most liberal abortion laws in the country.

There were other moments during the debate where the moderators made comments that were misleading or outright lies. One has to do with the fact that the moderators stated that the Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, were here legally. That statement is technically true, but very misleading.

As The New York Post reported, Vice-Presidential candidate JD Vance provided some details:

Sen. JD Vance was accurately describing the migrant crisis fueled by Kamala Harris and Joe Biden when CBS moderator Margaret Brennan decided to insert herself with a “fact check.”

“Just to clarify for our viewers, Springfield, Ohio does have a large number of Haitian migrants who have legal status,” she said smugly.

Vance was rightly annoyed by the interruption and said, “The rules were that you guys weren’t going to fact-check, and since you’re fact-checking me, I think it’s important to say what’s actually going on.”

He then proceeded to truthfully, forcefully explain what “legal status” means:

“So there’s an application called the CBP One app, where you can go on as an illegal migrant, apply for asylum or apply for parole, and be granted legal status at the wave of a Kamala Harris open border wand.”

At which point CBS decided to CUT OFF HIS MIC.

This was the most shameful moment in a long history of shameful moments by moderators biased against Republicans. They “fact-checked” the truth, then stopped the politician from responding.

Well played, sir. well played.

Who Decides What Speech Is Acceptable?

Posted on by

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution says:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

This (and the other Amendments in the Bill of Rights) is intended to limit the power of the government to interfere in the rights of Americans. Notice that there is nothing in this amendment regarding limiting speech that may not be true or limiting fake news. However, there is a segment of our political class that is planning to limit speech to what they approve of.

On Sunday, The Conservative Treehouse reported:

Within the recent WEF discussion, Secretary Kerry outlines how freedom of speech is a ‘threat to the global democracy‘ because the governing officials have a difficult time controlling information.  Kerry goes on to posit how the next administration, presumably in his hope Kamala Harris, will forcefully structure all the tools of government to stop Americans from using the first amendment to freely speak about issues.

Governing is too challenging, according to Kerry, when the government cannot stop people from seeking and discovering information that is against their interests.  Effective governing required compliant adherence to a singular ideology.  Against the backdrop of COVID-19 and a host of similarly related government narratives, if people are free to find alternative information and think for themselves, they become increasingly more difficult to control.  Yes, this is said quite openly.  This is the mindset of those in power.

Admittedly, John Kerry has someone lost his influence, but he represents the ideas of a possible Harris/Walz administration.

The article concludes:

There needs to be an open venue for all information. Unfortunately, when we begin to apply labels or categorization to information, there’s an opportunity for information to be manipulated – even weaponized.   We are in this situation right now.

Saul Alinsky spent decades pondering the best techniques to weaponize information and speech.  Alinsky’s intentions in the endeavor to change society by changing how language and information was used were not good. He devoted his completed rulebook book to Lucifer.

Be careful about anyone saying we need to label or categorize information in order to control or remove a certain speaker from the discussion.

You were not born with a requirement to believe everything you are told; rather, you were born with a God-given brain that allows you to process the information you receive and make independent decisions.

COVID-19 and the subsequent government lies, have helped many people to see just how dangerous the modern political Marxists are. Those who proposed a “global information governance board,” are now on their heels and increasingly desperate.  Hence, “governing is now hard” according to John Kerry.

The flickering flame of liberty and freedom has been under assault for decades, we are at an inflection point.  I remain optimistic in our ability to defeat those who are trying desperately to use all the mechanics of every system to retain power, for the same reason that all abusive relationships eventually have to end.

It is up to the public to sort out the truth from the lies–it is not the business of government.

A Level Playing Field Would Be Nice

Posted on by

On September 24th, The Hill reported:

The Senate on Tuesday approved a bill to boost former President Trump’s level of Secret Service protection, putting it one step away from becoming law less than two weeks after he was the subject of a second assassination attempt. 

The bill, which was proposed by Reps. Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.) and Ritchie Torres (D-N.Y.) in the House days after the first assassination attempt, would require the Secret Service to “apply the same standards” to figure out how many agents should be used to protect the president, vice president, and those running for offices granted such protection. 

On Friday, The Federalist reported:

Former President Donald Trump was recently forced to cancel a campaign rally in Wisconsin because the federal task force in charge of safety denied him adequate protection resources.

On Tuesday, Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., sent a letter to the acting director of the Secret Service detailing the allegations of a whistleblower who said the event was canceled because the nation’s premier security agency lacked “sufficient assets” to keep the Republican presidential nominee safe.

“Other whistleblowers with knowledge of Secret Service planning protocols allege that failure to provide protection for a major public event is highly unusual and that a sitting president would never be denied resources in this way,” Hawley wrote.

This is disgusting. The entrenched bureaucracy is doing everything it can to elect Kamala Harris. They don’t care about her abilities or qualifications–they just want to make sure President Trump doesn’t get elected and actually drain the swamp.

Choosing a Candidate

Posted on by

Author: R. Alan Harrop, Ph.D.

Let’s face reality. There are no perfect candidates running for office in any election. Never have been; never will be. That being the case, voters need to be sure to focus on what really matters when selecting a candidate. If we don’t, we will find ourselves victims of propaganda and so-called “dirty politics” attempting to appeal to factors that are not the most important. People making decisions can do so based on reason or emotions. We can only survive as a country if our decisions are based on reason not emotions.

Take as an example, Donald Trump. He is a candidate that could not be better known as to how he will perform in office since we already have his first term to judge him by. We know how he will deal with critical issues such as the economy, energy, the border, and foreign threats and wars. Even so, most of the people who are opposed to Trump when asked why, almost always criticize his style, personality, brashness, or past personal behavior. When asked what he did while president that was not good for the country, rarely if ever, does the person opposing Trump cite any action that was detrimental to America. Now this focus on issues other than actions and promised actions is exactly what the Democrats and others that attack a candidate want us to do. That is what is behind all the coordinated lawsuits and bogus charges being brought against Trump. As well as the attempts to distract him and ruin him financially.

Another example is Mark Robinson. The recent attacks against him have absolutely nothing to do with his platform and the actions he will take if elected governor. They are all focused on his past alleged behavior, all of which supposedly occurred many years ago and have nothing to do with his ability to lead North Carolina in a conservative direction. These personal attacks, which the Democrats are famous for, appeal not to reason but to emotions. They do not want to discuss the issues, because most voters do not agree with the leftist/Marxist agenda that the Democrats are increasingly supporting: like indoctrination of school students, transgender sport activities, mutilation of children, the war against fossil fuels, supporting illegal aliens with taxpayer funding, and higher taxes.

Unfortunately, our modern system of emails and other electronic communications potentially records everything a person says or does. Artificial intelligence allows duplicating a person’s voice. Should an alleged comment by a person made twenty years ago be used to disqualify a person from office? Are any of us so perfect that we have nothing in our past that we regret saying or doing? The very people who want to destroy Mark Robinson are the same who want us to believe that Kamala Harris now supports a border wall, protecting your gun rights, supporting the police, and expanding energy production including fracking.

Voters need to stay focused on what matters: the actions the candidate will take when in office on the key issues that matter. Allowing ourselves to be distracted by personal attacks on things that do not matter is exactly what the political left hopes we will do. Your choice, don’t blow it.

A Campaign Based On Lies

Posted on by

One of the main issues in the Democrat party campaign for the presidency is abortion. Unfortunately, they have decided that rather than fight their fight on the merits, they are simply going to lie about the issue. First of all, Roe v. Wade was overturned because it violated the 10th Amendment. A federal ban on abortion would also violate the 10th Amendment and would also be overturned by the courts. President Trump has already said he would oppose a federal ban on abortion, but that is not what the Kamala Harris campaign is reporting. The campaign is also lying about what constitutes an abortion and what medical care should be available to women who miscarry.

On Friday, The Federalist posted an article explaining how a recent claim by the Harris campaign is a lie.

The article reports:

Democrats and their corporate media allies are so desperate to get rid of pro-life laws that they’ll fabricate stories to wrongly smear them as not only bad for women but deadly.

The latest is ProPublica’s story of a Georgia woman who died after a North Carolina abortionist gave her chemical abortion pills — which, contrary to Democrat narratives, are unsafe. The article, however, pretends the death was caused by Georgia’s pro-life laws. The author of the story repeatedly attempts to conflate a procedure used to treat miscarriages, dilation and curettage (D&C), with elective abortion.

In ProPublica’s telling, 28-year-old Amber Nicole Thurman had ingested the chemical abortion pill regimen, which consists of the drugs mifepristone and misoprostol. Mifepristone ends the life of the developing human being; misoprostol helps achieve complete expulsion of the embryo.

It’s worth noting that the FDA’s 2000 approval of mifepristone acknowledged its risks and enacted safety requirements, including a seven-week gestational limit, requiring women to see a physician in person, and a mandatory one-time post-abortion appointment to confirm that the uterus was empty and that bleeding had subsided. The FDA also required manufacturers of the abortion pill to report all adverse health events that were reported to them, such as infection or excessive bleeding — not just patient deaths. 

But thanks to Democrat efforts to relax safety requirements for abortion pills, important safeguards no longer apply. When Thurman experienced “complications” from the abortion, which ProPublica wrongly asserts are “rare,” she went to the hospital for a D&C.

While ProPublica claims, “Thurman had told doctors her miscarriage was not spontaneous — it was the result of taking pills to terminate her pregnancy,” Thurman was not experiencing a miscarriage. She had undergone an abortion. Her unborn twins had already died, and she had retained parts of their bodies or the placenta — a known complication of abortion pill use and one of the very reasons for the FDA’s requirement for a post-abortion follow-up visit with a doctor. 

The article concludes:

Amber Thurman did not die because of Georgia’s abortion law, which was enacted to protect the lives of mothers and preborn children. She died from complications of medical abortion. Perhaps, had the FDA decided not to remove its mandatory requirement for a doctor’s follow-up visit from abortion pill labeling, and had she received more appropriate care, she might have survived.

ProPublica says, “Thurman’s case marks the first time an abortion-related death, officially deemed ‘preventable,’ is coming to public light.” But what about the death of Alexandra Nunez? Or Rebecca Charland, Tonya Reaves, Jennifer Morbelli, Maria Santiago, Lakisha Wilson, Jamie Lee Morales, Cree Erwin Sheppard, Keisha Atkins, Tia Archeiva Parks, or April Lowery — all of whom died during or shortly after their abortions?

Were their deaths preventable? Or is maternal death associated with elective abortion acceptable, even though such abortions are performed on healthy mothers with healthy babies?

Abortion has risks. I have friends who as a result of legal abortions were not able to have children when they wanted to have them. There was also a study in Japan in the 1970’s linking abortion to an increased risk of breast cancer. This is not a safe procedure whether it is done with drugs or other methods.

Rewarding The Hand That Feeds You

Posted on by

There are people in America who will vote for Kamala Harris for many reasons–the idea of a woman President, the idea of a mixed-race President, and the idea that a Harris presidency will provide free money for a lot of people.

On Thursday, mrctv reported the following:

The union that represents the nation’s Internal Revenue Service (IRS) agents announced Wednesday that it is endorsing Democrat Kamala Harris for president in this year’s election.

Vice President Harris has played a role in “one of the most pro-labor administrations in history,” the National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU) explained in a press release announcing its decision:

“The administration also delivered agency budgets that provide federal employees with additional staffing and resources, including significant new investments to rebuild the IRS under the Inflation Reduction Act.”

Indeed, the Inflation Reduction Act, for which Harris cast the deciding vote to break a Senate deadlock, boosts the IRS budget by $80 billion, enabling the agency to hire an additional 87,000 employees – while increasing the union’s membership in the process.

However, the IRS expansion won’t just increase union membership, it’ll also help the agency to collect an additional $5 trillion of tax increases Harris wants, analysis by Americans for Tax Reform (ATR) finds:

“Harris-proposed tax increases will kill jobs in the private sector but create jobs for IRS agents.

“Agents certainly appreciate her call to make the IRS even larger and more powerful if she wins the presidency. Agents will be hired and deployed to implement the $5 trillion of tax increases Harris wishes to impose over the next decade.”

ATR research also found that 97% of political contributions by the IRS agents’ union went to Democrats in the 2022 election cycle. In all, the union gave $635,170 to Democrats during that election cycle.

Nothing like supporting your local IRS agent.

Saving Money By Enforcing The Law

Posted on by

On Friday, Breitbart posted an article about the impact importing the people who are here illegally would have on the federal deficit.

The article reports:

A study by the Manhattan Institute’s Daniel Di Martino finds that mass deportation of the millions of unskilled, uneducated migrants who have flooded this country thanks to Joe Biden and Kamala Harris’s disastrous border policies would greatly improve the national deficit.

In his study, titled “The Lifetime Fiscal Impact of Immigrants,” Di Martino found that the onslaught of Biden’s unskilled, uneducated migrants is a net loss to the U.S taxpayer, costing up to $130,000 per migrant over the migrant’s lifetime should they choose to stay in the U.S.A., he explained in an op-ed published by Fox News on Friday.

I am perfectly willing to let people come into America if they do it legally and they plan to support themselves, but we can’t support people who are here illegally while we have Americans homeless on our streets.

The article concludes:

As to Trump’s plan to initiate mass deportations of unskilled, uneducated — and often dangerous — illegals, Di Martino says it would absolutely not be the disaster Trump’s critics claim it would be.

“I looked at whether the mass deportation program promised by former President Donald Trump would be the disaster that its critics claim,” Di Martino wrote in his op-ed. “My study shows that mass deportations would actually reduce the debt over the long run by over $1 trillion. But again, selectivity is better: Were a mass deportation policy combined with legalization of college-educated Dreamers, the U.S. could potentially reduce the federal debt by $1.9 trillion — nearly doubling its savings.”

Di Martino concluded, “As the federal debt keeps rising toward unsustainable levels and the border stays wide open, America cannot afford to ignore the fiscal consequences of immigration.”

If you are not familiar with the Cloward-Piven theory, now might be a good time to look it up.

The Real Debate Is At The Kitchen Table

Posted on by

On Friday, The American Thinker posted an article about the real debate in this presidential election cycle–it wasn’t on television–it is at the kitchen table.

The article reports:

ABC staged a debate this week.  A presidential debate.  Ostensibly between former president Donald J. Trump and former senator Kamala Harris, but in actuality between Trump and the partnership of Harris and ABC.

There is always media bias.  To some extent, unconscious media bias is unavoidable.  But we don’t expect it to be blatant; the viewer doesn’t expect antics like we saw this week, when the ABC moderators repeatedly declared Mr. Trump’s statements lies, and never called out Ms. Harris’s blatant lies. 

We call it “fact-checking” today, a term coined in social media for when our high-tech overlords punish a writer for stating something with which the gurus disagree.  But it’s not really fact-checking, is it?  It’s an invasion of a conversation, a denial of free speech, a thumb on the scale.  In the case of a presidential debate, it’s electioneering.

And it virtually invalidates the value of our constitutionally protected free press in this process.  ABC’s refusal even to try to act as an impartial host rendered this debate useless.

So let’s look instead at the other debates — millions of them — going on in America, both that day and every day in 2024.

Across the country, there are millions of families shopping in their local grocery store.  More of them must choose the discount grocery compared to five years ago; more must use coupons, or activate their store’s discount app on their cell phones today.

Please follow the link above to read the entire article. When we vote on election day, we need to remember the impact the change of administration in 2020 has had on almost all Americans. Some of the ‘celebrities’ who are supporting Kamala Harris have not been impacted by the economic policies of the past three years–so until everything collapses, the economy is not a concern of theirs. However, the rest of us will be living with the results of the coming election.

The article concludes:

There are many more such debates taking place across America, in the family car, over the kitchen table, or in the bedroom after the kids are asleep, as hardworking everyday American couples try to compromise on some way to get through these hellish years of Bidenflation.

It’s not one mistake, one policy choice, one single culprit. It’s the entire Biden-Harris regime — their executive orders, their agency regulations, their foreign policy, and their general incredibly thoughtless wastefulness, in everything they touch and everything they do.

Every American knows that the election of Kamala Harris would mean four more years of all this.

These are the debates that matter to the American public this week.

These personal, private, tragic debates — as the cost of living has gone up by three, four, five times as much as salaries have — are the debates on the minds of American working families, and small business owners, and retirees, and young adults desperately trying to look ahead to a future that can’t possibly seem promising.

Forget the debate that ABC ruined on Tuesday.

These other conversations, these other tough choices and compromises — these are the debates to which we should be paying attention.

The Same Thing Happened At The Debate

Posted on by

Do you remember what happened at the debate when Kamala Harris was asked how she would make life more affordable for Americans? She told us about her middle-class upbringing. I have a problem with that concept–her father was a college professor and her mother was a biomedical scientist. That doesn’t sound very middle-class to me. I don’t begrudge anyone wealth, but it appears that Kamala is not being entirely truthful with that statement.

On Friday, The Daily Caller posted an article about an interview with Kamala Harris with the same question and a similar non-answer.

The article reports:

Vice President Kamala Harris was asked in a Friday interview with 6ABC Philadelphia’s Action News how she plans to make life more affordable but quickly diverted into a rambling discourse about her middle-class upbringing and lawns.

During the interview, anchor Brian Taff questioned Harris on her strategies to enhance affordability for Americans, but her response diverged into a recollection of her middle-class roots without offering specific policy details. Harris proceeded to recount her childhood, emphasizing the hard work of her mother and the aspirations of her community, focusing particularly on the symbolic importance of well-kept lawns.

“I’ll start with this. I grew up a middle-class kid. My mother raised my sister and me. She worked very hard, she was able to finally save up enough money to buy our first house when I was a teenager. I grew up in a community of hardworking people, you know, construction workers and nurses and teachers,” Harris told Taff.

…Eventually, Harris mentioned in the interview the concept of an “opportunity economy” aimed at facilitating small business startups, but without delving into the mechanisms or strategies to achieve this goal.

Kamala Harris has worked in government her whole life. She has never run a business and as an adult has only worked in government jobs at various levels. She is not delving into the mechanisms or the strategies because she does not know what they will be. It’s time to throw the politicians out and elect a few businessmen to clean up the mess in Washington!

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.

At Least They Admitted That They Were Wrong

Posted on by

There were a lot of problems with the fact-checking at the Trump/Harris debate. One problem was that all of the fact-checking was done on President Trump and there was no fact-checking on Kamala Harris. Some of the fact-checkers got it wrong. That is starting to come out.

On Thursday, Fox News reported that Time Magazine had corrected one of its fact-checks.

Fox News reports:

Time magazine was forced to correct its coverage of the ABC News Presidential Debate after implying former President Trump’s statement that Vice President Kamala Harris supported free gender-transition treatment for detained migrants was “false.”

During the debate on Tuesday night, Trump remarked on Harris’ old position as one of many left-wing issues she appeared to have walked back on since running for president.

“Now she wants to do transgender operations on illegal aliens who are in prison,” Trump said.

Though Harris pledged she would support taxpayer-funded gender care for detained migrants in an ACLU candidate questionnaire during her first presidential campaign, Time first reported the statement as “false.”

The article notes:

CNN brought Harris’ position back into the spotlight Monday night after senior editor Andrew Kaczynski reported to host Erin Burnett about the recently uncovered 2019 ACLU candidate questionnaire featuring Harris’ policy position.

“It is important that transgender individuals who rely on the state for care receive the treatment they need, which includes access to treatment associated with gender transition. That’s why, as Attorney General, I pushed the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to provide gender transition surgery to state inmates,” Harris pledged.

Time Magazine has admitted it was wrong. Will any other mainstream media follow suit?

The Lies Kept On Coming

Posted on by

I watched the Trump/Harris debate last night. I watched Kamala Harris dismiss comments by President Trump as lies and the moderators fact-check President Trump. Somehow the moderators never fact-checked Kamala Harris. As she accused President Trump of lying, Vice-President Harris told 21 unfact-checked lies that were cited in an article at Breitbart.

This is the list:

1. “Very fine people” hoax

2. Project 2025 hoax

3. False claims on Trump trade deficit

4. Putin can “do whatever the hell he wants”

5. “Dictator on day one” hoax

6. Blaming botched Afghanistan withdrawal on Trump

7. Putin “would be sitting in Kyiv”

8. “Bloodbath” hoax

9. Abortion “monitor” hoax

10. Rental property hoax

11. Central Park Five “execution” hoax

12. “Suckers and losers” hoax

13. False fracking claims

14. False oil production claims

15. National Sales Tax

16. Distorting unemployment figures

17. “I was raised middle-class”

18. “Terminating” the Constitution

19. “Sold us out” to China

20. “Not one” troop in any war zone

21. Taking guns away

Please follow the link to the article for further details.

The relevant question to voters is simply, “Do you really want four more years of what we have now?”

 

More Fiction From The Harris/Walz Campaign

Posted on by

On Monday, Breitbart reported that Kamala Harris has finally put up a policy page on her campaign website. The page includes a number of policy plans.

One idea is to cut taxes for the middle class. Does she not realize that as soon as the Trump tax cuts expire, taxes on the middle class will increase? She states on her policy page that she intends to roll back the Trump tax cuts in order to increase taxes on the rich.

Another idea is to make rent more affordable and home ownership more attainable. Part of this plan includes up to $25,000 for first-time home buyers. Where will that money come from? How will adding $25,000 as a down payment for first-time home owners impact the price of housing (spoiler alert: it will increase the prices a minimum of $25,000 and create a housing shortage).

The article reports:

The policies most notably feature sections that compare and contrast Kamala’s position with that of “Project 2025,” which the Democrats have been trying to pin on former President Donald Trump for weeks now. The “Ensure Safety and Justice for All” section gets particularly spicy.

“Donald Trump is a convicted criminal who only cares about himself. He’s proven that time and time again – from caving to the gun lobby and doing nothing to address gun violence to killing the bipartisan border security deal that would secure our border and keep America safe, just to help himself politically,” the section says.

Just for the record, the bipartisan border security deal was neither bipartisan nor a border security deal. It was worked out in secrecy between some rino Republicans and the Democrats and would simply have insured a new supply of Democrat voters in future elections.

The article concludes:

On Israel, the campaign says that Kamala Harris will defend the Jewish state’s right to exist and will work to end the war in Gaza.

“Vice President Harris will always stand up for Israel’s right to defend itself and she will always ensure Israel has the ability to defend itself. She and President Biden are working to end the war in Gaza, such that Israel is secure, the hostages are released, the suffering in Gaza ends, and the Palestinian people can realize their right to dignity, security, freedom, and self-determination,” it says.

If you believe that, there is nothing more I can say to you.

 

Machines For Harris/Walz!

Posted on by

On Wednesday, The Daily Caller posted an article about Amazon Alexa’s political leanings. Who knew Alexa was political?

The article reports:

Amazon addressed what it called an “error” Tuesday after some of its Alexa devices promoted 2024 Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris over 2024 Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump.

Video of a woman asking Alexa why she should vote for each candidate went viral Tuesday due to the device’s glowing review of Harris versus its neutrality on Trump. Amazon told Variety that its apparent pro-Harris bias was a mistake that the company quickly corrected.

This is the video:

The Daily Caller concludes:

Amazon is not the first major company to face backlash for alleged bias against Trump.

Google came under fire in late July for the alleged censorship of the assassination attempt against Trump from its “autocomplete” search results feature. “There was no manual action taken on these predictions. Our systems have protections against Autocomplete predictions associated with political violence, which were working as intended prior to this horrific event occurring,” a Google spokesperson told the Caller at the time.

The Biden-Harris administration influenced Amazon i n March 2021 to restrict books that expressed skepticism about the COVID-19 vaccine, emails the House Judiciary Committee obtained show.

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg admitted in late August that senior officials under Biden-Harris “repeatedly pressured” Facebook to suppress COVID-19 content that the platform otherwise would not have restricted. Zuckerberg said Biden-Harris officials expressed frustration when Facebook initially hesitated before complying.

Vote carefully. Recently Vice-President Harris described free speech as a ‘privilege.’ It is a privilege I would like to hold on to.

 

National Football Teams Do Not Endorse Candidates

Posted on by

A series of advertisements describing Vice-President Kamala Harris as the presidential choice of the Philadelphia Eagles football team appeared in Philadelphia on Monday. They are counterfeit ads–there is some question as to who created them. The Philadelphia Eagles have put out a press release denying that they have endorsed any candidate.

On Monday, Trending Politics reported the following:

A Philadelphia man could be seen pasting official statements from the Philadelphia Eagles that disavowed a series of pro-Kamala Harris ads that popped up across the city on Monday.

Early Labor Day morning, a series of pro-Kamala Harris ads that had been set up on bus stops across Philadelphia went viral on social media. The ads featured a digitally-generated photo of Vice President Harris in an Eagles helmet, complete with team colors and the official Eagles logo, alongside text referring to her as the, “Official Candidate Of The Philadelphia Eagles.”

…Not long after the ads went viral on social media, the Philadelphia Eagles issued a statement referring to them as “counterfeit” and not linked to the team in any way. “We are aware counterfeit political ads are being circulated and are working with our advertising partner to have them removed,” the team announced in an X post.

The article concludes:

“We are aware that several of our bus shelters located in Philadelphia have been vandalized and that the paid advertising copy in each of those shelters has been replaced with unauthorized copy,” Intersection Media said in a statement to Fox 29.

“While our bus shelters have locks that typically prevent the installation of unaurthorized copy by non-Intersection staff, occasionally people find a way to unlock the ad box and insert unauthorized copy. The unauthorized copy in this case implies an endorsement of Vice President Kamala Harris by the Philadelphia Eagles. We note that the Eagles and Intersection had nothing to do with the creation or posting of this unauthorized copy and Intersection staff will be removing the ads as soon as possible.”

How many low-information voters will believe the phony ads?

Words Matter

Posted on by

The news on Sunday morning reported that the bodies of six of the hostages taken by Hamas had been recovered by the Israeli Defense Forces. Much of the mainstream media reported that the hostages had died–not that they had been murdered by Hamas.

Breitbart posted an article on Sunday about the misleading reports.

Breitbart reported:

Mainstream media outlets, including CNN, NBC, and USA Today, are facing intense backlash for what have been called misleading and “vile” headlines about the brutal murder of six hostages held by Hamas in Gaza.

On Sunday, IDF spokesman Rear Admiral Daniel Hagari announced the hostages had been cruelly murdered by Hamas as Israeli soldiers closed in on their location, possibly based on intelligence provided by a hostage rescued last week.

The six hostages, whose bodies were found Saturday in a tunnel underneath Gaza — including American Israeli Hersh Goldberg-Polin — were discovered in Rafah, the same city that Vice President Kamala Harris had told Israel not to enter.

But mainstream media outlets, including CNN, NBC, and USA Today, covering the recovery of the bodies, sparked outrage by initially reporting that one of the victims had “died” rather than had been “murdered.” 

The cause of the hostages’ death was not clear for about 90 minutes after Hersh Goldberg-Polin was first revealed to be among the victims, which is why some outlets may have been reluctant to use the word “murder.” Mainstream media headlines currently reflect reports by Israeli authorities that the hostages were murdered. However, screen grabs of the initial headlines continued to spark outrage after reports emerged on Sunday that Hamas terrorists had shot each of the six hostages in the head before Israeli soldiers could rescue them.

The war that Israel is fighting against Hamas is as much of a public relations war as it is a kinetic war. Some Israelis who want the hostages released (assuming they are alive) are protesting to pressure Prime Minister Netanyahu into a peace deal which would leave Hamas in power and pave the way for another October 7th attack. Those protests are totally playing into the hands of Hamas as are the calls for a cease-fire from some western countries. You don’t make peace with terrorists unless you want more terrorism. Israelis used to know that. I am disappointed in the Israeli leaders who are using the hostages to try to topple the Netanyahu government. You don’t do that when your country is fighting for its survival–you put personal ambitions aside temporarily at least.

Just for the record, the hostages were murdered to avoid Israel celebrating their release. That illustrates the nature of Hamas.

The article concludes:

Though some headlines have since been corrected, the damage had already been done. Meanwhile, U.S. President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris both affirmed the hostages were brutally murdered by Hamas terrorists.

 

Who Do You Trust To Keep This Promise?

Posted on by

Both the Harris campaign and the Trump campaign have pledged to stop taxing tips in the service industries. When President Trump made the suggestion, the media immediately calculated the missing tax revenue. When Vice-President Harris made the suggestion, the media praised her for the idea. That is how the media works right now.

On August 30, The Center Square reported the following:

In a mirror of national politics, California Republicans followed former President Donald Trump’s lead by proposing to end taxes on tips. While Vice President Kamala Harris, who formerly represented California in the U.S. Senate, embraced the measure, California Democrats said no, shooting down the proposed amendment in the California Senate.

“Even Trump and Harris both say we should eliminate the ‘tip tax,’” said the California Senate Republican Caucus in a statement. 

Soon after Trump announced his proposal to a crowd in Nevada, which has the highest percentage of tipped workers in the nation, Harris also came out in favor of the proposal. The Budget Lab at Yale University reports there are approximately 4 million tipped workers — 2.5% of all workers nationwide. Many tipped workers earn less than the minimum wage, and thus earn the lion’s share of their income from tips. Some higher-paid tipped professions such as barbers and hair stylists would also benefit from this rule change. 

…In the California Senate, Democrats — except for Senate President Pro Tempore Senator Mike McGuire, D-Healdsburg, and State Sen. Nancy Skinner, D-Berkeley, who abstained, voted to put aside the amendment, while all nine Republicans voted for it.

I think it is rather telling that there are only nine Republicans in the California Senate–which has forty seats. Don’t try to blame the Republicans for anything that happens in California!

The Problems With The Harris Tax Plan

Posted on by

Kamala Harris will raise our taxes if she is elected. She says she will only raise taxes on the rich, but that was the same promise made when the Income Tax was passed in 1913–it would only impact the top 1 or 2 percent of the wealthiest Americans–the rest of us would not have to pay any taxes. We know how that went.

On Friday, Townhall posted an article about Kamala Harris’ tax plan.

The first thing you need to be aware of is the Laffer Curve:

It has been proven historically that lower taxes result in higher tax revenue. Why should you take the risk and do the work of starting a business of  you know the government is going to take most of what you earn?

The article at Townhall states:

Experts are warning against Vice President Kamala Harris’ proposed tax strategy, which they say would threaten the future of the United States economically.

The Cato Institute commented:

Harris’s 28 percent federal corporate tax rate and 44.6 percent top capital gains and dividend tax rate would give the United States the highest total tax rate on corporate income in the developed world when combined with state taxes. As I recently explained, workers ultimately bear most of the cost of the corporate income tax through lower wages and fewer job opportunities. Because the corporate income tax is one of the most economically destructive ways to raise revenue, the total economic cost of Harris’ proposed tax hike will likely be multiple times larger than the tax revenue it raises. The Harris plan would also increase top federal income tax rates so that combined state, local, and federal tax rates would be on the wrong side of the Laffer curve in 36 states and Washington, DC—the point at which higher tax rates create so much economic distortion that they no longer bring in additional tax revenue. Via Cato Institute.

I would like to continue to live in my house as a senior citizen on a fixed income. Harris’ plan to tax unrealized capital gains would make that impossible.

Relocating The Blame

Posted on by

Any uninformed voters in America are going to have a hard time with the current election campaigns. The lies are getting so thick you could cut them with a knife. One of the more recent lies from the Harris campaign is that President Trump is to blame for the border crisis. That’s a stretch even bigger than a size 20 women fitting into a size 8 dress.

Ann Coulter posted an article on Substack giving some details about the claim.

The article reports:

The biggest problem Democrats have this year is the mess they’ve made of the border. No matter how many cartwheels the media do for Kamala Harris, immigration remains a top issue for voters — and they blame the Democrats. (I have a theory as to why: Probably because Democrats intentionally flung open the border and let in 10 million illegal immigrants.)

The media-Democratic Party complex has tried all manner of lies to hide the crime, but those deceptions crumbled on the slightest examination. (Kamala was NOT the “border czar”!) 

Apparently, the lie they decided to stick with is the one about Trump ordering Republicans to oppose AN INCREDIBLY TOUGH BORDER BILL! Why, it’s draconian! The harshest immigration bill this century!   But Trump opposed it only so that he could keep the border as a campaign issue. What a cynical, heartless bastard.

As Harris put it in her acceptance speech:

“Last year, Joe and I brought together Democrats and conservative Republicans to write the strongest border bill in decades. … But Donald Trump believes a border deal would hurt his campaign, so he ordered his allies in Congress to kill the deal. Well, I refuse to play politics with our security. And here is my pledge to you: As president, I will bring back the bipartisan border security bill that he killed, and I will sign it into law.”

Well, the bill didn’t actually secure the border–it provided for thousands of illegals to cross the border daily.

The article notes:

But according to the media’s telling — that is, the lie — this bill was sailing through Congress until Trump bigfooted it. After all, why would it bother any Republican that it required Americans to accept at least 1.8 million illegal aliens every year, would grant asylum to anyone who asked for it, provided even more free benefits to illegals and funneled billions of dollars to the NGOs helping illegals into our country, while doing absolutely nothing to strengthen our border? Forget a wall — this bill did nothing.

It was a bad bill designed to provide cover for the Democrat party on immigration. Fortunately it did not pass. The idea that the surge in illegal immigration is President Trump’s fault is one of many lies we can expect to hear in the next two months.

Sometimes It May Not Be Wise To Run As Part Of A Current Administration

Posted on by

Vice-President Harris is attempting to run her campaign as someone who will come into the White House and fix everything that is currently broken. Unfortunately for her, she has been working as part of the White House for the past three and a half years. It has also become apparent that the current President has probably not been making a lot of the decisions. That doesn’t help her case.

On Wednesday, Townhall posted an article about the idea that Kamala Harris represents a change from the current administration.

The article notes:

JD Vance is torching the Harris-Walz campaign over this simple fact: they’re the incumbent party. It’s become a laughable exercise regarding how Harris’ campaign and the media treat her as if she isn’t in the White House right now. Every aspect of Harris’ agenda is Joe Biden’s; the reversals don’t count. We all know what type of politician Kamala Harris is at heart. Yet, the media is doing everything they can to make her not seem like she’s part of the current administration. The most brazen attempt was by Politico, which had this headline: “Our corrupt leadership’: Vance tries to tether Harris to Biden during Michigan rally.” 

The screenshots of Tweets in the article are quite entertaining:

The article concludes:

This ill-fated attempt at interference is probably one of the funniest chapters in the media’s concerted effort to cast Harris as some outsider. She’s not. This election is there for Trump’s taking—but he needs to tighten things up a bit on the messaging.

The entire Harris-Walz campaign is stating that they will fix things on day one. Both have been involved in politics for years. Why haven’t they fixed things before?