Trump’s announcement that schools must teach patriotism inflames leftists

By Andrea Widburg

On Thursday, President Trump announced an upcoming executive order intended to return patriotism to American education.  The “1776 Commission” will counter the Critical Race Theory training that schools across America are embracing under the banner of the New York Times’ racist and divisive 1619 Project.

Leftists responded with fury, charging Trump with everything from imposing non-factual propaganda on American education to creating his version of the “Hitler Youth.”  The response was sickening, but it also showed how badly needed the 1776 Commission is if we are to prevent Marxists from completing their intellectual takeover of America.

Trump seemed to realize only a couple weeks ago that Critical Race Theory (CRT) is growing exponentially fast in America.  This theory is both anti-white and anti-black.  As to whites, it teaches that whites are innately evil and can, at best, be marginally redeemed if they acknowledge how evil, wrong, and racist they are, and then just bow out of life.

As to blacks, CRT teaches them that traditional American virtues such as self-reliance, hard work, ambition, punctuality, faith, etc., are all inextricably intertwined with whiteness.  A black person who embraces those values is subordinating himself to the white privilege worldview and denying his essential blackness.  In other words, CRT encourages the values that have kept generations of blacks stuck in physical and mental ghettoes, and dependent on the Democrat party to fulfill their basic life needs.

Trump’s first attack on CRT was his order that federal agencies may no longer impose CRT on their employees.  Showing how deep the CRT toxin runs in the federal government, the CDC nevertheless announced that it would host a 13-week CRT seminar despite the order, although it was quickly disabused of that idea.

Now Trump is attacking CRT in America’s schools:

“Critical race theory, the 1619 Project, and the crusade against American history is toxic propaganda — an ideological poison that, if not removed, will dissolve the civic bonds that tie us together,” Trump said. “The only path to national unity is through our shared identity as Americans. That is why it is so urgent that we finally restore patriotic education to our schools.”

[snip]

“The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are the greatest charters of freedom the world has ever known,” Pence said. “Our Founders knew history, but sadly we live in a time when too many are forgetting history today.”

America’s history isn’t just being forgotten; it’s being perverted as America’s teachers, many of whom embrace the BLM movement, are aggressively inserting CRT into their classes.

Trump’s initiative can’t happen fast enough.  If you’re wondering how important the 1776 Commission is, look at the ugliness and ferocity of the pushback against Trump’s announcement.

Yamiche Alcindor, the BLM propagandist who works for NPR as a faux reporter, cannot understand how the president can walk back the “facts” in the 1619 Project:

Trump is correct that we have to reinstate a balanced and respectful approach to American history in our schools.  If Trump gets another four years in office, he can make it happen.  If he cannot, expect that our schools will swiftly continue their descent into being Marxist propaganda academies.

Item: Signing of the Declaration of Independence by Armand-Dumaresq (1873).  Public domain.

Nothing but the facts –mam

Falling for the Biggest Hoax in History

By Alicia Colon

It will probably take months if not years for the truth of the Covid-19 pandemic to emerge, but when it does will any politician take responsibility for the lies and disinformation or the damage this hoax caused this great nation? I don’t think so, but what it did prove was what happens when the Democrats are in charge. They may not be in the White House but it is the House that wields the power over legislation and our money.  Couple this power with the useful idiots in the mainstream media to promote the widespread hysteria, and we then had the total capitulation of a frightened nation that accepted an unprecedented total lock-down of its existence. Shame on us.

If the fourth estate had done its job or had any integrity left, it would have reported the actual figures of the corona-virus’ impact instead of what would generate the most fear. So what is the truth? Why did hospitals and doctors count practically all deaths, even motorcycle accidents and cancer deaths, as Covid-19 deaths? Could it be because of extra government funding for these cases?

The CDC released a very controversial report that the actual death rate due to the Covid-19 alone was minuscule compared to what was reported in the mainstream news. Reuters is listing 194,147 as covid deaths as of September 14, 2020.

In an August article by Leslie Eastman in Legal Insurrection.com, a chart was posted with CDC figures:

“To begin with, it doesn’t mean that the virus killed only about 9700 Americans. The data demonstrates that unless there is another underlying health condition, most people infected have very little chance of dying. This is especially true of young people who fall prey to the pathogen.

Yet, those people who had heart conditions, kidney problems, or other medical conditions who died might still be alive except that they were infected with COVID-19.

Since the inception of this pandemic, COVID-19 deaths have been lumped together into a category that included presumed deaths. 

Before the Covid-19 pandemic hit the news, over 12,000 Americans had died in 2019 of the regular flu. This new virus was supposedly deadlier because it was highly contagious, and no one was immune to it. But while the virus originated in Wuhan, China, progressives refused to name it the Chinese virus. Morons were even calling it the European flu. In January, Trump ordered restrictions on flights from China. In February, Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi was suggesting that we should go to Chinatown and hug a Chinese person to show we’re not discriminating against them.

Unless your source of news is only the mainstream press, then you probably have not heard this quote from a Chinese virologist Dr. Li-Meng Yan, who says she did some of the earliest research into COVID-19 last year. She escaped from Hong Kong and had been hiding in fear but has stepped out into the public eye again to make the explosive claim that she has scientific evidence to prove that Covid-19 was human-made in a lab in China.

“When asked where the deadly virus that has killed more than 900,000 around the globe comes from, Yan — speaking via video chat from a secret location — replied, “It comes from the lab — the lab in Wuhan and the lab is controlled by China’s government.” “The first thing is the [meat] market in Wuhan … is a smoke screen and this virus is not from nature,” Yan claimed, explaining that she got “her intelligence from the CDC in China, from the local doctors.”

BTW, Twitter just shut down her account. Quelle surprise!

The truth is that we’ve been lied to continuously since the media decided to scare us to death with bogus data, and our lack of common sense. Since I am high risk due to my age and health issues, I have been self-quarantined for several months. My daughter and her husband who works for the MTA came down with the virus and recovered because they are young and had no serious health issues. In other words, the young and healthy are unlikely to succumb and should never have been locked down. The vulnerable, on the other hand, needed to take proper steps to quarantine voluntarily.

When the Covid-19 press conferences began with the medical experts dispensing their opinions and advice, Dr. Anthony Fauci became the so-called expert to go to, but I never cared or trusted him. Fauci would roll his eyes, bring his hand to head, and smirk while Trump was talking and once when leaving the room nodded in solidarity with the CNN reporter. The MSM made him a superstar in spite of the fact that he kept changing his opinion and hadn’t seen a patient in over 35 years.

 

In previous severe flu seasons, there were much higher death rates yet there were no mandatory lock-downs.  Why do I call this pandemic a hoax?  The only reason why politicians, especially the Democrats in charge, pushed for shutting down the economy was because economic destruction was their ultimate goal. Trump’s strong economy, low unemployment numbers for all Americans was a real obstacle to a Joe Biden victory. Democrats have seized on this pandemic because they never let a crisis go to waste.

Americans have been gas lighted. We can’t take anything reported by the New York Times, Washington Post, Associated Press, Reuters, CNN, MSNBC, the Drudge Report and the Alphabet Networks as gospel because it’s all designed to frighten and delay the recovery. Dr. Fauci insists that things will not return to normal until 2021. Joe Biden if elected will mandate mandatory mask wearing for all. What a joke. Masks don’t even work and I feel sorry for all those required to wear them all day at work because they are breathing in carbon dioxide and moisture.

There is one good thing about the pandemic. I wrote before about the new thrilling novel, Silent Strike, by Dr. Francis Bandettini and Matt Nilsen, about a deadly bio attack by Iran. What made it deadly was the fact that we were unable to handle the shortage of medical equipment needed to battle the epidemic of respiratory cases. This administration proved that it could produce whatever we needed in a short space of time. Kudos to our POTUS.

I hope and pray that if President Trump is reelected and the Democrats lose the House and the state legislatures in the states overrun by Antifa riots and BLM protests, normalcy will return swiftly and the economy will boom.

From my lips to God’s ears.

 

Fight — or the Dems Will Steal This Election.

By William L. Gensert

It did not start when Barack Obama descended from the heavens to lead an ignorant, savage, and unfair country. Yet he certainly epitomized the left’s hoped for “new America” of which his bitter half only then became proud.

Schools have been teaching identity politics to our children for decades. The left seeks to abrogate of our nation’s moral fiber with the deliberate destruction of absolute right and wrong under written and duly enacted law. While we seek to debate, they seek to silence. While we accept differences of opinion, they cancel. While we would live and let live, they will burn it all down. We see the consequences of this in the disaffected youth playing “resistance” dress-up and burning down our cities.

The process of using identity politics to maximize victimhood has damaged the values and principles this nation was founded upon and its citizens have lived by. Self-sufficiency, taking responsibility for one’s own actions, equality under the law, property rights, and law and order have been cast aside in favor of Critical Race Theory and the 1619 Project.

It is the left’s attempt to see anarchy reign in our streets as rioters run amok, steeped in the victim hood and righteous violence taught to them all their lives. It is all part of their plan to steal the presidency, one way or another.

Yet, it is important to note the BLM and Antifa goons currently wreaking havoc are doing so almost exclusively in America’s Democrat-run states and cities.

It is a fake “revolution,” executed for the cameras and done to justify chaos as a tool to be used on a grand scale this election. It is a “revolution” that persists only under the aegis of the Democratic Party of America and the blind blessings of its propaganda arm, the media. This faux rebellion is the Obama of insurrections, a mile wide and an inch deep. It exists solely because right-minded Americans “have not yet begun to fight.”

The left hopes to use the upheaval to steal this election and banish America to the ash heap of history. To the left, people must either be outraged victims, with every brutality undertaken against others deigned acceptable, no matter how violent and destructive, or they are oppressors who deserve outrage and atrocity.

When you need people to believe something new for your plans to succeed, you must first destroy what they believe in presently.

In this they have failed. Trump’s win in 2016 showed the left they cannot depend on free and fair elections. To prevail in their plan to take over America, they would need an army. With the training of outraged victims and the removal of any restraint or consequences for their actions, they believe they have built one. It is an army they plan to deploy with vengeance, before, during, and after the actual vote.

After years of using the tools of government and bureaucracy to unsuccessfully rid the world of the troublesome Trump, the left has had enough. They are planning this Presidential Election to be the last one they will need to steal. After attaining power, they plan to rig all future elections so they cannot lose.

The left aims to use the riots to keep people from voting on Election Day. Therefore, we are seeing a new tactic of storming restaurants and physically attacking and hurling obloquy at bewildered and frightened diners. The Democrats want to create an ascendant, all-encompassing aura of universal fear among voters to suppress turnout and preclude a Trump landslide.

The riots are integral to the left’s purposes; they will not be stopped by anything other than force or surrender. Biden is the “surrender.” Trump and the American people are the “force.”

If Biden fails to attain victory at the polls, they will ratchet up the savagery as the “will of the people” afterward to either steal the presidency in the courts or depose Trump in a mostly unpeaceful coup.

We know this because they have told us so. Just as with training the nation to accept the violence from their minions before, during, and after the election, they are advertising this election as one that will not be over when the polls close and not settled until the courts, California, Oregon, Washington State, and the armed forces have their say. Hillary told moldering Joe to never concede, no matter the vote count, because she knows vote counts can be changed. Electoral votes can be stolen. In fact, that is part of their plan.

Recently the Democrats published a 22-page report entitled: “Preventing a Disrupted Presidential Election” from an organization called the Transition Integrity Project led by Georgetown law professor Rosa Brooks, among others. In it they described war-gaming four possible electoral results. The interesting outcome was the one where Trump won and Biden, played by political hack John Podesta, refused to concede and instead convinced California, Washington, and Oregon to threaten secession. They would then let the army decide what to do.

It doesn’t take a conspiracy nut to see the connection in letting the army decide the election and the coordinated “Trump hates and disrespects the military” smear by Jeffery Goldberg of the Atlantic, the same-day release of the military men denigrating Trump commercial, and the softball question and already prepared answer from Biden at his press conference.

As Gore tried to do with his, “we count until I win” strategy in 2000, in 2020, the Democrats and their newly hired 600 lawyers are going to insist that every vote be counted no matter how long it takes. And when the mail-in votes suspiciously turn a Trump landslide into a Biden victory, they will declare Democrats believe in science and were afraid of COVID and therefore, voted by mail.

Why do you think Biden wears the mask and keeps mentioning the pandemic? Why do you think Democrat governors are keeping economies closed even though COVID is fast disappearing as a threat?

The riots were kept alive by Democrats to get Americans used to the violence that they will use to help steal this election. The vote by mail push is to make it easier to steal. The lawyers are to make it legal for them to do so.

It does not have to be this way. Americans in both blue and red states can and should be prepared to defend themselves, their families, their livelihoods, their property, and their vote when challenged by those on the left. America is comprised of the best armed and trained citizenry this world has ever seen. It is why the 2nd Amendment will be the first thing the left will come after should they prevail. An armed people can say, “No!” It is high time Americans said, “Hell No!” A popular mostly peaceful uprising from the right is not uncalled for in the situation we find the nation in.

Also, Trump is also no dope. They have thrown everything at the man for years and he has beaten them silly at every turn. Only the naïve would believe that he is not aware of what the left is trying to do and does not have a plan to counter it. That is the thing with successful businessmen — they think in exigent circumstances and contingencies.

The easiest way to kill this coup-baby in the crib is for Americans to get out and vote. If Republicans hold onto the Senate and take the House, and if the people show up at the polls and give Trump a majority-vote and electoral win of such magnitude that stealing the election would be too obvious, the worm will turn and the left will return to its status of malignant impotence.

There comes a time in the “course of human events” when people need to stand up and fight for what they believe in.

If the people believe in America, now is that time.

 

 

 

‘Something’s going on here and it’s much bigger than people think’

By Monica Showalter

Following the conclusion of the Republican National Convention, the far left’s “fiery but peaceful” protesters had a pretty disgusting plan: instead of just yelling at the top of their lungs from the outside, or attempting to disrupt the convention from the inside, or burning and looting nearby shops to give the whole thing a bad public relations odor, they decided to physically attack Republicans as they exited the convention.  That was the plan.

They certainly attacked random nobodies exiting the front, but when Sen. Rand Paul attempted to get to his hotel two blocks away on foot after waiting 45 minutes at the wrong hotel, the mobs recognized him and got really excited, first swarming him and his wife in a group of 30, and then swelling to 60, and then to a 120-sized turban mob.  They made lunging attacks at the senator and his luckily spotted police escort who were trying to protect Paul and his wife and deflect the “protesters.”

It was a travesty.  Paul described it very well.

Some excerpts: “We cannot go outside now, it’s too dangerous.”

“The United States is going to become Portland.”

“We’ll eff you up.”

“This is happening in all our cities, thank God for the police.”

“I want to live the life of a normal person, where I go to the grocery store and buy groceries, or stop at the Minute-Mart.”

Paul’s most important statement came here:

“This also is not normal.  There’s something … going on here.  This is like, the FBI needs to be involved.”

And more specifically, as the Fox News reporter probed:

My feeling is there is interstate criminal traffic being paid for across state lines, but you won’t know it unless you arrest them. Otherwise you just think oh these are just some normal hoodlums from a big city. I promise you that at least some of these members and people who attacked us were not from D.C. They flew here on a plane, they’ve all got fresh new clothes, and they were paid to be here. It is a crime to do that and it needs to be traced. The FBI needs to investigate. But the only way you can do it is you have to arrest people. And usually we say ‘oh, well, you didn’t get hurt, so we’re not going to arrest them.’ They were inciting a riot, and they would have killed us had the police not been there. They all need to be arrested, and I’m not saying forever, but they need to be arrested, questioned, they need to say where you’re staying, and the bills need to be subpoenaed by a judge, to say ‘who paid for your bill, how did you get here on a plane and staying in a fancy hotel, and yet you’re acting like a criminal.’ Something’s going on here and it’s much bigger than people think. But the bottom line is, we can’t let the United States become Portland and that’s what my fear is…

This is pretty much the most important question that can be asked of any of this lunacy engulfing the country.

Two things stand out.

One, dangerously opaque foundations, such as the Tides Foundation, which takes cash in big amounts from anonymous donors and has been known to contribute to terroristic organizations such as Earth First! and the “Ruckus Society,” have stepped up their donations to “social justice” and “criminal justice” and “racial justice” organizations.  George Soros’s Open Society Foundation, while less opaque, given that the group’s money comes from Soros’s vast fortune as a currency speculator, is in this category, too.  Here is what the New York Post, via the Center for Consumer Freedom, noted:

The New York Post reports today that the secretive Tides Foundation began organizing attacks on President Bush after receiving millions of dollars from foundations controlled by presidential candidate John Kerry’s wife. Tides’ role in this “charitable money-laundering” operation is hardly surprising. After all, for over two decades it has been a major financial clearinghouse for radical activist groups. Many major philanthropies like the Ford Foundation and Pew Charitable Trusts fund projects through Tides to disguise themselves as the funding source.

Anti-consumer beneficiaries of Tides’ “anonymous” funds include Greenpeace, the
Ruckus Society, the Center for Science in the Public Interest, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), and Earth First!. Earth First! spun-off the FBI-certified “terrorist” Earth Liberation Front in 1992. Tides was instrumental in NRDC’s now-infamous (and unfounded) health scare about Alar on apples. NRDC paid the PR firm that was promoting the scare through the Tides Foundation.

Second, the Democrats, who also take money from the donors to these foundations that may be behind these riots, have been curiously silent in their failure to condemn the violence, even on people they know and work with from the Senate building.  Joe Biden made a general condemnation of violence after poll numbers showed that rioter violence was not playing well with the American voters, but he hasn’t said a thing about the attack on Sen. Rand Paul.  His running mate, Kamala Harris, is even worse, witcherily cackling that the violence will never stop, as noted in this well written blog item today by Bill Dunne here.

Paul noted the irony of his own role in attempting to get justice for Breonna Taylor, who was killed in a no-knock raid on apparently the wrong apartment, writing a bill to ban no-knock raids.  But he came off as a little naïve there — these mobs aren’t interested in reform.  They want to tear the whole edifice down, and some huge billionaires are behind them.  More than tanks in the streets, there needs to be an investigation into who’s funding these mobs and arrests of the foundation executives and moneybag billionaires found to be involved.  We still don’t know precisely which ones are doing this, and it’s critical that we find out, because as Harris says, the attacks won’t stop (and we need to know how Harris would know this, too).  Some big swoop-downs need to happen, and one hopes the Trump administration is willing to take on the task or is already on it.  Paul would be wise to initiate some Senate investigation, too, because someone’s getting away with this, and the attacks are growing more brazen, targeting not just shopkeepers, but now police and elected officials.

 

Kamala Harris’s dog whistle to rioters, looters, and arsonists

By Civis Americanus

Kamala Harris, AKA “Mike Nifong in a Dress,” wants to be vice president of the United States.  Given Joe Biden’s age and apparent health, she could easily become president if he wins. Voters need to know about Harris’s dog whistles in support of the violence that is ravaging cities around the country. Let’s begin with Harris’s verified tweet of June 1.

If you’re able to, chip in now to the @MNFreedomFund  to help post bail for those protesting on the ground in Minnesota.

The link goes to “Kamala Harris for the People,” which says, “Make a donation to the Minnesota Freedom Fund. Your support will help post bail for those protesting on the ground in Minnesota.”

Kamala, you’re a lawyer, so you know full well that protesters do not need bail because protest is not a crime for which one can be legally arrested.  It is, in contrast, a federal crime to arrest somebody for the lawful exercise of his First Amendment right to protest.  Looters, rioters, vandals, arsonists, illegal road-blockersdisturbers of the peace, assailants, harassers, and carjackers need bail because they have committed crimes.

In this Late Show interview, Harris elaborates further.

YouTube screen grab

Everyone beware[.] … They are not going to stop before Election Day in November, and they are not going to stop after Election Day. … They’re not going to let up, and they should not.”\I must stipulate that the interviewer said protests and not riots, so Harris did not openly advocate riots.  Given the unlawful nature of many of the “protests” in question, however, in combination with Harris’s promotion of a bail fund for “protesters,” she comes across as giving at least tacit dog whistle support to the civil disorder that is ruining people’s homes, livelihoods, and neighborhoods in primarily Democratic-majority urban areas.

Harris’s dog whistle to rioters and looters is not an isolated incident.  The rest of the Democratic Party is “trying to find the right balance between their support for the racial justice protests and their opposition to the destructive elements of the demonstrations[.]”  If Democrats think there is some kind of acceptable “balance” between lawful and peaceful freedom of expression, and arson, vandalism, looting, aggravated assault, murder, carjacking, and rioting, there is a real problem.  The former is an absolute constitutional right, and the latter are criminal activities.  There is no gray area between them in which one can find a “balance.”

Only much later (August 30) did Joe Biden and Kamala Harris condemn the violence, while Biden challenged Trump to do the same.  I guess they haven’t been paying attention because President Trump condemned violence three months ago, and he condemned racism and white supremacy last year.

Civis Americanus is the pen name of a contributor who remembers the lessons of history and wants to ensure that our country never needs to learn those lessons again the hard way.  The author is remaining anonymous due to the likely prospect of being subjected to “cancel culture” for exposing the Big Lie behind Black Lives Matter.

 

Who is Behind the 1619 Project?

By Anne-Christine Hoff

Third Reich Minister of Propaganda Joseph Goebbels once said, “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.” The 1619 Project tells many doozies, but the biggest lie that the New York Times propagates, in this radical and anti-American document, is that the Revolutionary War was fought because of a desire to maintain slavery, which they thought the British were about to abolish.

The lie makes your head explode in its sheer audacity. Thomas Paine’s Common Sense is the pamphlet that circulated for months before the war, generating discussions at taverns and other public venues, and yet there’s nary a word within its pages about slavery. Instead, Paine’s work focused on galvanizing the colonies to break free from England and create an independent republic, a system of self-government, that was not monarchical and that recognized the rights of the individual.

The other document that lays out the reasons for the Revolutionary War is of course the Declaration of Independence. Twenty-seven reasons are given for the need to break from the tyranny of England. Taxation without representation, a hierarchical system that favored British soldiers and gave them unfair rights over the citizens of the colonies, an inability to respond to the needs of its colonial subjects, and other complaints are given as reasons for the need for war. Again, the desire to maintain slavery is not among those complaints listed.

How can such a document that propagates such a big lie be now widely circulated and even promoted by stars like Oprah Winfrey? Who is behind this project that so reduces the history of the United States and leaves the key primary sources out of the equation?

The major voice behind the project is of course its creator, and now project director, New York Times reporter Nicole Hannah-Jones. Hannah-Jones created a stir a few months ago when she was asked how the rioting and looting in cities should be interpreted. She responded that property theft is not violence. (That’s news to me.) She also penned an article on June 30, 2020 called “What is owed?” making a case for reparations to be paid to blacks for the legal slavery that was abolished over 150 years ago.

Her most egregious statements about whites came as a student at Notre Dame University in 1995 when she wrote, “The white race is the biggest murderer, rapist, pillager and thief of the modern world.” In this letter to the editor, which is still available to read online (indicating that she is not ashamed of her open hatred of the majority of Americans), she responds to another student’s piece on Christopher Columbus by describing Columbus as “no different then [sic] Hitler.” She calls whites “barbaric devils” and says that they acted like savages because of “some lacking” that made them “[need} to constantly prove their superiority.” 

Smart people who also have access to the internet give this woman money to peddle the 1619 Project. Surely, they also have access to Wikipedia to find out that she said these things as a student in 1995 and that she has never disavowed them. Oprah Winfrey and Lionsgate, for example, just announced a collaboration project with Hannah-Jones (and the New York Times) to adapt the 1619 Project for television and film.

The Smithsonian Institute, a government-financed group of museums and research institutions, collaborated with Hannah Jones on the 1619 Project. (The Smithsonian also, by the way, collaborated with the National African American History Museum, which also openly peddles anti-white propaganda about the blandness of white food (Italian, French, Austrian, Swedish food are all a monolith, you see) and the monolithic oppressive patriarchal culture of white people).     

Hannah-Jones’ Ida B. Wells Society for Investigative Reporting (of which she is the cofounder) lists Google News Lab, Knight Foundation, and George Soros’ Open Society Foundations as funders of the non-profit which bills itself as a “news trade organization dedicated to increasing and retaining reporters of color” who are investigative journalists.

The National African American History Museum lists Target, Walmart, Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Lilly Endowment, The Andrew. W Mellon Foundation, 3M, American Express, Smithsonian Channel, 21st Century Fox, Walt Disney, Nike, Toyota, Time Warner, AARP, Coca-Cola, Lowe’s, Verizon, and Wells Fargo as donors of amounts ranging from $1 million to $20 million. (The list is worth checking out for yourself because it is so extensive and includes most of the major corporations in the United States today.)

So what happened? Did these funders give the money and not anticipate the anti-white rhetoric espoused by Nicole Hannah-Jones, the 1619 Project, or by the National African American History Museum? Or are they also able to do research like me, meaning they’re aware of the rhetoric but choose to ignore it? Maybe it is like the case of Nick Cannon’s anti-white rant. He can be fired for saying something anti-Semitic, but when he says something anti-white, the New York Times, National Public Radio, and the other major media outlets will simply ignore it.

I’m of the opinion that these multimillionaires simply don’t care. They are our modern-day British oppressors who simply do not care about the problems of their colonial subjects. If the property of “these American lowlifes” gets destroyed, well, let’s just ignore it. If they don’t feel safe in their own homes, that’s not my problem as long as they keep buying Nike shoes. And as for the race peddlers like Nicole Hannah Jones who promote big lies with the intent of tearing down the foundations of the country, these are people who care about a narrow ethnic nationalism only and their hatred of the “other,” (who constitute the majority) is patent to anyone willing to open their eyes and see it.

Anne-Christine Hoff is a proud American whose father lived through the propaganda of Nazi Austria. She considers the big lies being peddled today as dangerous as the ones peddled during the 1930s and 40s Nazi period. Her work has appeared in New English ReviewAmerican ThinkerMiddle East Quarterly, and LifeSite News.

The Christian case for Trump

By Mark Landsbaum

The world spends a lot of effort persuading people that evil is really something good: the killing of babies in the womb, engaging in sexual perversion, confiscating of what belongs to someone to give to someone it doesn’t belong to.  These are all evil acts — unless you ask the worldly.

But the Evil One is even more insidious.  He also ironically manipulates good people’s fear of embracing evil.  A handful of Christian friends, among those who receive a weekly Bible study I write, have announced they cannot vote for Donald Trump.  Their bottom-line objection is that a Christian shouldn’t vote for such an unpleasant, some say despicable person.

The irony of their self-righteousness apparently is lost on these friends.  I confess to having had similar reservations four years ago.  But as the election neared, I decided that impetuousness and obnoxiousness were a better bet than a proven criminal who would unashamedly advance outright evil, such as baby-killing.  Time has shown that I gambled right.

Donald Trump has done more for the cause of life, for religious liberty, for improved economic conditions of people of all races, for law and order, for ratcheting down overbearing government, for easing tax and regulation burdens and a host of other good things than any president in my lifetime.  Even Ronald Reagan.

It’s understandable that people are put off by the prospect of having to choose “the lesser evil.”  But that’s the wrong way to frame the choices.

Every candidate falls short of the glory of God.  The choice is, and always is, which candidate will do more good.  That choice in November is obvious, especially given Trump’s track record and the threatening promises of his opponent to renew Barack Obama’s destructive transformation of America.

For my Christian brethren, who are considering voting for Trump’s opponent or not voting at all, I add to my prayers this reminder.  Throughout history God has used people to do great things even to be His own disciples whom the self-righteous wouldn’t have chosen.  As the apostle wrote:

For consider your calling, brothers: not many of you were wise according to worldly standards, not many were powerful, not many were of noble birth.  But God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise; God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong;  God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are,  so that no human being might boast in the presence of God. (1 Corinthian 1:26-29)

If that is not sufficient reminder, consider the roster of the Christian faith hall of fame, as it were, as enumerated in Hebrews 11:32.  Christian author Gary DeMar reminds us that this is a list of bad guys that probably no political party would have nominated for dogcatcher.  But God chose them. 

  • Gideon (an idolater)
  • Barak (a coward)
  • Samson (a womanizer far worse than JFK and Bill Clinton)
  • Jephthah (son of a prostitute, who “lived with a gang of scoundrels,” and made a reckless vow that cost his daughter her life)
  • Samuel (a terrible father who raised evil sons)
  • David (an adulterer and murderer)

As has been the case for several election cycles now, this vote comes at a pivotal time for the nation.  Americans have clear-cut alternatives: big, invasive, dictating government that will advance actual evil (see their party’s platform).  Or voters can choose a continuation of the liberties and blessings delivered by a too-often abrasive and obnoxious president, who already has shown what great good he can deliver.

Donald Trump is a fallen sinner like Gideon, David, Samuel, and the rest of us.  But his track record is proof that he is clearly the better choice.  This should be clear even for those of us inhibited by self-righteousness.

As one of my favorite Bible study leaders frequently reminds us, “Get over it.  Do the right thing.”

Let’s not forget he is not a politician, but a genuine leader a real, executive. The office of the president is called the executive office.

Stop Infantilizing African Americans

By Lipton Matthews

All too often, the message conveyed by media, academia, and government is that African Americans are incapable of expressing agency. Policy wonks never discuss a Jewish, Asian, or white agenda, because these groups are deemed sufficiently competent to solve their own problems. Few recognize the covert racism of attempts to “assist” African Africans. Economic freedom, for example, does not feature prominently in the liberal quest to ameliorate the conditions of American blacks, because it does not fit the agenda. We are told that there is something inherently fragile about African Americans, making them perpetual victims. 

Many have espoused the subtle racism of the Black Lives Movement, without recognizing an effort to infantilize African Americans. African Americans possess the foresight and talent to uplift themselves from the trenches without the benevolence of the state. Abolitionist Frederick Douglass understood this quite clearly even in the nineteenth century. In an address to the Massachusetts Anti-Slavery Society in 1865, Douglass noted everybody had asked, “What should we do with the Negro?” Douglass remarked: “I have had but one answer from the beginning. Do nothing with us! If the apples will not remain on the tree of their own strength, if they are worm-eaten at the core, if they are early ripe and disposed to fall, let them fall… And if the Negro cannot stand on his own legs, let him fall also. All I ask is, give him a chance to stand on his own legs! Let him alone!”

Perhaps we need to be reminded of the strides African Americans made in creating self-sufficient communities before the Great Society. Residing in an environment rampant with racism and actual structural barriers, the African American community attained phenomenal success in improving social welfare. During, the late nineteenth to the early twentieth century, African Americans were pioneers in chartering self-help societies. “The popularity of the fraternal society among African Americans rivaled, and often exceeded, that among immigrants,” writes historian David T. Beito in his essay, “Mutual Aid for Social Welfare: The Case of American Fraternal Societies.” “Unlike their white counterparts, African American secret societies were more likely to offer formal life and sickness insurance as well as informal mutual aid. In 1919, the Illinois Health Insurance Commission estimated that 93.5 percent of the African American families in Chicago had at least one member with life insurance. African Americans were the most highly insured ethnic group in the city.”

Some reformers automatically assume that more government programs can reduce poverty in the African American community. Yet the evidence shows that such initiatives not only sap individual efforts but also crowd out nongovernmental actors necessary for fostering trust and social capital in communities. Private welfare allows people to develop relationships in their communities, thereby creating long-lasting networks that are often useful in other aspects of life such as business and professional relationships. In detailing the pernicious effects of welfare, economist Assar Lindbeck notes that “generous welfare-state arrangements in Western Europe are, therefore, an important explanation for the limited per capita hours of work in that part of the world. As a comparison, per capita hours of work (per year) in the United States are between 30 and 50 percent higher than in Western Europe.”

Furthermore, history informs us that when African Americans are provided with the freedom to participate in the economy their community thrives. Professor Loren Schweninger has furnished a surplus of data chronicling the rise of African American entrepreneurs in the South, during the late eighteenth century. He sharply illustrates the success of African American entrepreneurs in an environment of hostile racism: “Despite the anti-free black sentiment among some whites, free Negroes in the region entered a variety of business pursuits. In towns and cities, they became builders, mechanics, tradesmen, grocers, restaurateurs, tailors, merchants, and barbers. Even during the American Revolution, a small group of skilled artisans and craftsmen had emerged in Charleston, South Carolina. By the 1790s, several had built up thriving businesses, especially in the furniture and building trades. Housebuilder and carpenter James Mitchell, who for many years lived above his shop, had become so prosperous by 1797 that he sought to rent a six-room house with stables and outbuildings.”

Even in the presence of deep-seated racism, African Americans are indeed capable of functioning on their own. Maverick economist Thomas Sowell promulgates this argument in his book Civil Rights: Rhetoric or Reality? Sowell argues that the number of blacks in high-level professions more than doubled between 1954 and 1964, whereas their advancement in other types of occupations was astounding in the 1940s, before the apex of the civil rights revolutions, than in the 1950s, when the civil rights movement was in its heyday.

Helping African Americans means creating an environment where they can unleash their entrepreneurial abilities. A major impediment to economic empowerment in the black community is occupational licensing. Matthew D. Mitchell of the Mercatus Center reports that “the licensing of barbers reduces the probability of a black individual working as a barber by 17.3 percent.” States like Florida and Pennsylvania have successfully embarked on major reforms to reduce the impact of occupational licensing requirements on employment prospects. Similarly supporting educational freedom by promoting school choice in the form of charter schools, for example, is a proven strategy to boost the performance of African American students. Studies show that African American charter school students outperform their peers in the public-school system, but they are consistently berated by leftists as agents of racism. Notwithstanding the reverence for government handouts on the left, the truth is that the government can only empower African Americans by offering them the freedom to fail or succeed as individuals. 

Why It Should Matter that Kamala Harris Is Not a Natural Born Citizen

By Mark A. Hewitt

If the media were to ask President Trump, “Are you a natural born citizen?,” he would probably respond with, “My father, an American citizen, Fred Trump, was born in New York City, and my mother, Mary Anne, was born in Scotland and became a naturalized American citizen in March 1942.  I was born in Queens in 1946.  Yes, I am a natural born citizen.” 

When Kamala Harris was asked the same question, her response was anfractuous and curious: “Look, I’m very clear-eyed about the fact that they are going to engage, as you said, in what they have done throughout this administration, which is just, let’s just be very candid and straightforward, they’re going to engage in lies, they’re going to engage in deception, they’re going to engage in an attempt to distract from the real issues that are impacting the American people.”

In other words, “No.”

If you are constitutionally eligible, what is the harm in laying out a response?  “Mom and dad were both American citizens.”    

But Senator Harris would rather engage in actions to circumvent the U.S. Constitution over articulating her ineligibility.

If you listened to the media, you would think there is no definition anywhere of “natural born citizen.”  The media assert that the clause “natural born citizen” isn’t defined anywhere in the U.S. Constitution.  But the media hide the fact that “natural born citizen” was specifically defined in the Naturalization Act of 1790

Here is the law and the wording.  Congress’s first act concerning citizenship, the Naturalization Act of 1790, provided that “the children of citizens of the United States, that may be born beyond the sea or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens” (Act of March 26, 1790. 1 Stat. pages 103, 104 [emphasis added]).

Let’s be clear because this is important: the Naturalization Act of 1790 unambiguously defined that children of citizens of the United States shall be considered natural born citizens irrespective of where they are born.  Children of citizens of the United States may be born beyond the sea, out of the limits of the United States.  It doesn’t matter.  Being a natural born citizen has nothing to do with where you are born but strictly to whom you are born — as long as it’s to American citizens.  This is the media’s and the Democrat Party’s great lie going on twelve years now.  There are many ways to become a U.S. citizen, but if you are to seek the office of the president (or the vice president), you must be a child born of American parents. 

And it was so blindingly obvious and repetitive that children of citizens of the United States shall be considered natural born citizens irrespective of where they are born that Congress removed the wording during the replacement Naturalization Act of 1795.  What else can it be?  For over 200 years, no one had any questions about what was meant by natural born citizen until despicable and reprehensible lawyers claimed that the Constitution was wrong or discriminatory in order to disqualify Republican presidential candidates who were born abroad to American parents, such as Barry Goldwater, Lowell Weicker, George Romney, and Christian D. Herter. 

And now, when the political foot is well on the other side of the aisle, now any challenge is considered a “distraction.”

What we see is that when there is an obvious case of ineligibility and the media’s chosen candidate is a Democrat, such as Barack Obama (father was a British subject, a Kenyan national, on a student visa and was never a naturalized citizen) or Kamala Harris (mother and father both born abroad; one naturalized citizen at the time of birth), the media freak out, attack, and smear Republicans.  Instead of acknowledging they are not natural born citizens or seeking to resolve the issue in a court of law, they choose to circumvent the U.S. Constitution.

That is what all this media-driven red herring birtherism nonsense has been about — not place of birth on birth certificates, but, two lines down, the nationality of parents who are not American citizens whose children wish to run for the office of the president (or vice president). 

How did we get to this place?  In 2020?  This is unadulterated media malfeasance.  They act like three year-olds caught stealing candy.  They could have been adults and reported the law and the facts but chose not to. 

Up until the 2008 election, every previous presidential candidate knew the constitutional requirements, but only Barack Obama chose to circumvent the Constitution.  Emboldened by Obama’s successful run at the White House, Senator Harris is making a go.  Good luck, Kamala.  It will not work this time.

The Founders were sensitive to foreign influence in the new government.  The natural born citizen requirement for presidents has always been about erecting a barrier against foreign powers scheming a way into our government. 

This is a topic that will not ever go away.  The left rejects the Constitution and will keep throwing ineligible candidates for high office for as long as it takes to have a president who can shred the Constitution. 

The Federalist Papers made it clear.  The below is from No. 68, The Mode of Electing the President, from the New York Packet, Friday, March 14, 1788.  (My emphasis.)

Alexander Hamilton expressed his concerns:

Nothing was more to be desired than that every practicable obstacle should be opposed to cabal, intrigue, and corruption.  These most deadly adversaries of republican government might naturally have been expected to make their approaches from more than one quarter, but chiefly from the desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils.  How could they better gratify this, than by raising a creature of their own to the chief magistracy of the Union?

A reasonable, intelligent person who isn’t committed to deceiving the American people should have little problem recognizing the spirit and intent of the definition of “natural born citizen.”  Liberal lawyers writing in law reviews and their friends in the media have always attacked the Constitution as faulty, and they cite the law and references that support their twisted view of a fairly straightforward topic. 

The U.S. Constitution, the Naturalization Act of 1790, and the Records of the Federal Convention of 1787 cite multiple instances of “natural born citizen” and make clear the Framers’ connotation and intent: that children of citizens of the United States shall be considered natural born citizens irrespective of where they are born. 

It is a lie of the left that the natural born citizen clause is ambiguous.

Even if they do any research, the left will fail to cite the letter predating the appearance of the phrase in the Committee of Eleven report, when John Jay wrote to George Washington (The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787, page 61):

Permit me to hint, whether it would not be wise … to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government, and to declare expressly that the command in chief of the american (sic) army shall not be given to, nor devolve on, any but a natural born citizen.

The Jay letter is consistent with Hamilton in Federalist 68; some have assumed the Jay letter to be the source of the phrase in Article II of the U.S. Constitution.  The only firm conclusions that may be drawn from Hamilton and Jay is that it was in the interest of the new government to keep foreigners away from the presidency and that the president and commander in chief should be a natural born citizen.

I do not see any ambiguity; the president must not be born of a parent of a foreign power and need not be native born, but must be born of American citizens.  To be a natural born citizen, it doesn’t matter where you are born as long as your parents are American citizens.

A Pandemic of Socialism

By Anthony J. Ciani

In mid-March of 2020, the United States of America became a socialist country, despite President Trump’s promise in his State of the Union address one year prior.  To those who lost their non-essential jobs, those who met empty shelves, those who discovered that their “free” education was too costly, those driven insane by incessant fear-mongering, and those faced with capricious and nonsensical restrictions — welcome to socialism.  Deceived by the arrogance of science and appeal to authority, or perhaps with false science to mask nefarious motives, public health and safety were used as a contrivance to replace liberty, freedom, and democracy with the Game of Socialism, in which (elected) tyrants play with our lives.  Do health and safety trump liberty and freedom, and must we sacrifice one for the other?

The Constitution of the United States provides for no limitation of our liberty, freedom, or democracy in an emergency.  Is this because our Founding Fathers had never heard of the Black Death (1347, multiple) or the Great Plague of Marseille (1720) or the Yellow Fever from the Caribbean (1793) or smallpox (vaccine 1770)?  Why, then, did they limit powers in the face of such great calamities?

Absent such powers, the federal government cannot take advantage of panic, real or contrived, to tyrannize the states or the people, and with the 9th and 14th Amendments, neither can the states (or cities) tyrannize their people.  The protections of our Constitution have been eroded over the last century by a crisis culture that has people abandoning liberty for (illusory) safety, as notes Robert Higgs,

But if the dominant ideology does not give strong support to the Normal Constitution, it will eventually be overwhelmed by the Crisis Constitution.  Step by step, a ratcheting loss of rights will attend each episode of national emergency.  And we may as well admit that such emergencies are inevitable.

But without that “Crisis Constitution,” how can government keep us safe from disease?  There is no scientific study demonstrating that liberty and freedom are required to spread disease, although there are works of assumptions masquerading as such.  To the contrary, a 2001 study published by George Washington University and Johns Hopkins University recommends against large-scale quarantine, isolation, and other liberty-infringing actions in favor of informed individual action.  One finding is particularly interesting:

During the past century in the United States, professional medical and public health familiarity with the practice of quarantine has faded.  A review of the medical literature found no largescale human quarantine implemented within US borders during the past 8 decades.

The 1918 “flu” pandemic has been largely compared to COVID-19.  Just like with COVID-19, wide-spread quarantine and isolation were implemented.  While many modern public health experts credit the quarantine with saving lives, one article noted:

Despite high mortality rates and the need for increased appropriations, the 1918 pandemic failed to stimulate extensive influenza research or a dramatic increase in permanent funds for PHS. … [Surgeon General] Blue’s appeal for a permanent mechanism to prevent and control diseases such as influenza was quickly forgotten as postwar America sought to heal its war wounds and seek a return to “normalcy.”

During experiments with the 1918 influenza virus in 1931, Shope showed that it was a mild infection; indeed, its progeny are still with us.  “Flu” often appears in quotes among medical writings, indicating it as an incorrect term.  Shope showed that the 1918 disease was likely two separate infections: viral influenza followed by bacterial pneumonia caused by Haemophilus influenzae (the “flu”).  Modern research has shown that oxidative stress and immune depletion after a viral respiratory infection open the way for bacterial pneumonia.  Perhaps you have noticed increased sensitivity to allergens or irritants after a cold?  There is nothing novel about 2019-nCoV; many common viruses do the exact same thing.

So how did a mild influenza turn into a “flu” pandemic, and why did the country abandon mass quarantine and isolation?

The National Archives hosts documents related to the 1918 pandemic, including letters from nurses and doctors.  A letter from Dr. D.A. Richardson describes the two distinct stages.  The first is “influenza proper,” from which the patient recovers in four days.  While convalescing during the required (and unnecessary) ten-day quarantine in hospitals filled with pneumoniacs, the victims caught pneumonia and died of the “flu.”  The 1918 pandemic was secondary, hospital-acquired bacterial pneumonia spread in quarantine.  They made the (healthy) patients wear masks, which probably caused something akin to ventilator-associated pneumonia.  If patients recovering from influenza proper were instead sent home to recuperate in fresh air, sans mask, they probably would have lived, and 1918 would have been unremarkable.

The quarantine, isolation, and mask-wearing failed to diminish the spread of the influenza.  Instead, the practices likely increased fatality and had disastrous economic consequences.  The medical policy of 1918 was contrary to the medical science of 1918, and the destructive practices of quarantine, isolation, and mask-wearing were largely abandoned.  The United States embraced socialism in the first half of the 20th century, and the pain sent us running back to freedom and liberty in the 1950s and 1960s, until 100 years later, when socialists once again abandoned medical science in favor of panic and socialist policy.

The parallels between 1918 and 2020 are extreme.  The mass isolation and quarantine had no effect on 2019-nCoV and ruined our economy.  The mass quarantine of the most vulnerable into nursing homes and the use of mechanical ventilators with their high occurrence of ventilator-associated pneumonia (1.5% per day) led to over 60% of the deaths, otherwise 2019-nCoV is far from the mass murderer it was hyped to be.  Why quarantine and intubation?  Medicare cut reimbursement for non-invasive ventilators, and Congress rewarded the use of ventilators on (presumed) COVID patients and their deaths.  Socialist medicine transforms doctors into highly paid executioners of the elderly, weak, and infirm.

You say these were just mistakes of science and implementation?  Under “ideal” socialism, the restriction of liberty is still valid?  Perhaps mistakes, but an argument over science trumping liberty is a red herring.  Lives versus lives is part of the Game of Socialism, which ignores the possibility that liberty is necessary for the public good — rather, dismisses it.

Social media trolling and unethical reporting exaggerated a cold into a plague, and socialist health and safety advocates panicked the world into surrendering liberty and implementing socialism.  All of the damage attributed to COVID-19 was instead caused by the socialism meant to protect us.  COVID-19 is a pandemic of socialism.

America has always favored strong political leaders and rejected the weak.  We need ballsy politicians to confront the socialist nonsense masquerading as health and safety.  Elect Biden, who embraces health and safety, and the socialists pulling his strings will abuse the “Crisis Constitution” to give us COVID-19 every day.

Previous Older Entries