wnd--2020-01-20--Whatever happened to upbeat praise songs?

As I write these words , I 'm listening to some beautiful , slow worship music .
How wonderful !
How glorious !
How many times I have encountered the Lord with the help of such songs , lying on my face in tears of adoration and awe .
What a Savior !
What a God !
I will never tire of singing these Jesus-exalting , Spirit-empowered songs .
But I 've noticed something missing in the midst of my ministry travels .
In some of the meetings , every song is slow .
Every song seems like the last @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much as I 've enjoyed beautiful times of worship in meetings like this , I 've also found myself asking , `` Where is the joy and celebration ?
Where are the songs you can dance to and jump to ?
Where 's the time for breaking out and breaking free ? ''
I 'm not talking about working things up .
I hate hype and emotionalism .
Even more , I hate manipulation .
I 'm talking about a contagious joy that is captured in the lyrics and the music .
I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , that transcends a lively beat .
I 'm talking about what Peter calls an inexpressible and glorious joy ( 1 Peter 1:8 ) .
And while we can find that joy in slow worship songs ( or even without music at all ) , we can find it in a unique way in upbeat praise .
TRENDING : Woman abuses red-flag law , lies about innocent man to have his guns confiscated It lifts us out of ourselves into another realm .
A realm of celebration .
A realm of freedom .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ worship can be so somber ( not just reverential , but somber ) .
The songs almost drone on .
And I wonder , `` Are these a reflection of our emotional state ?
Perhaps we need a change ?
Perhaps a change in music would help ? ''
Before I came to faith in 1971 as a heroin-shooting , LSD-using hippie rock drummer , music was front and center in my life .
Hard rock music .
Heavy and loud music .
Cream and Jimi Hendrix and Led Zeppelin .
I saw @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
I saw Zeppelin four times .
I saw Hendrix twice .
I saw the Doors and Janis Joplin .
I saw Jethro Tull four times and Ten Years After four times .
And almost every day of the week , our little rock band would practice and jam , fueled by drugs as we did .
What a change it was for me to start attending a little , Italian Pentecostal church in Queens , New York .
The men wore jackets and ties , and the women wore dresses .
And @ @ @ @ @ @ @ there was the pastor 's wife , playing hymns on the piano .
And it was singing those little hymns with their silly rhymes that I encountered the love of God and the joy of the Spirit .
As a result of that , in one moment of time , on Dec. 17 , 1971 , I was set free .
No more needles !
No more drugs !
I was a new man .
As a follower of Jesus , music has remained important to me , to the point that I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It was titled `` The Power of Music : God 's Call to Change the World One Song at a Time . ''
In the book , I look at the impact music has had on the world , for better or for worse , encouraging the church to use music to its full potential for the Lord .
And that 's why I write this article : I 'm burdened to see the fullness of joy in our worship and praise .
I 'm especially burdened to see it break out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ where joy can be a precious commodity .
To be sure , there is something unspeakably profound about singing contemporary , slow worship songs like `` Revelation Song '' or `` You Wo n't Relent '' or `` What a Beautiful Name '' or `` Way Maker . ''
It is especially wonderful to do this with thousands of other believers .
What a taste of heaven it brings !
It is the same with the classic hymns of old , like Charles Wesley 's `` And Can It Be '' or John @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The words remain transcendent .
But what about those cut-loose , explode-out , joy-filled songs of praise ?
They too take us into unique places in the Lord .
In the old days , in that first church , it was hymns like `` Power in the Blood '' or `` When We All Get to Heaven . ''
( Yes , I went from Zeppelin and Hendrix to songs like these . )
In more recent decades , I think of songs like `` So Good to Me '' ( this still @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and spinning ) or `` This Is How We Overcome '' ( this really does help us overcome ) or `` Shouts of Joy '' ( try listening to this without tapping along ) .
The music itself changes the atmosphere , and when it is joined to powerful lyrics , our innermost beings can be changed .
That 's why people rise to their feet spontaneously when Handel 's Messiah culminates in the `` Hallelujah Chorus . ''
The combination of the lyrics and the music and the Spirit is compelling .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Of course , some of you reading this article have no idea what I 'm talking about , having never encountered the Lord in worship .
I earnestly pray that you will .
Others are asking yourself as you read , `` I wonder what churches he 's attending ?
We 've got plenty of joyful celebration in our midst . ''
Still others , who come from a more liturgical background , are having difficulty relating to the types of services I 'm describing .
But others know exactly what I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the light has gone on .
It 's time to bring back the joyful songs !

As I write these words, I'm listening to some beautiful, slow worship music. How wonderful! How glorious! How many times I have encountered the Lord with the help of such songs, lying on my face in tears of adoration and awe. What a Savior! What a God! I will never tire of singing these Jesus-exalting, Spirit-empowered songs.
But I've noticed something missing in the midst of my ministry travels. In some of the meetings, every song is slow. Every song seems like the last, with little variety. And as much as I've enjoyed beautiful times of worship in meetings like this, I've also found myself asking, "Where is the joy and celebration? Where are the songs you can dance to and jump to? Where's the time for breaking out and breaking free?"
I'm not talking about working things up. I hate hype and emotionalism. Even more, I hate manipulation.
I'm talking about a contagious joy that is captured in the lyrics and the music. I'm talking about something that transcends happiness, that transcends a lively beat. I'm talking about what Peter calls an inexpressible and glorious joy (1 Peter 1:8).
And while we can find that joy in slow worship songs (or even without music at all), we can find it in a unique way in upbeat praise.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
It lifts us out of ourselves into another realm. A realm of celebration. A realm of freedom. A realm of liberation.
Sometimes our worship can be so somber (not just reverential, but somber). The songs almost drone on. And I wonder, "Are these a reflection of our emotional state? Perhaps we need a change? Perhaps a change in music would help?"
Before I came to faith in 1971 as a heroin-shooting, LSD-using hippie rock drummer, music was front and center in my life. Hard rock music. Heavy and loud music. Cream and Jimi Hendrix and Led Zeppelin.
I saw the Who perform the rock opera Tommy. I saw Zeppelin four times. I saw Hendrix twice. I saw the Doors and Janis Joplin. I saw Jethro Tull four times and Ten Years After four times. And almost every day of the week, our little rock band would practice and jam, fueled by drugs as we did.
What a change it was for me to start attending a little, Italian Pentecostal church in Queens, New York. The men wore jackets and ties, and the women wore dresses. And instead of an ear-shattering rock band, there was the pastor's wife, playing hymns on the piano.
And it was singing those little hymns with their silly rhymes that I encountered the love of God and the joy of the Spirit. As a result of that, in one moment of time, on Dec. 17, 1971, I was set free. No more needles! No more drugs! I was a new man.
As a follower of Jesus, music has remained important to me, to the point that I wrote a book about it last year. It was titled "The Power of Music: God's Call to Change the World One Song at a Time."
In the book, I look at the impact music has had on the world, for better or for worse, encouraging the church to use music to its full potential for the Lord.
And that's why I write this article: I'm burdened to see the fullness of joy in our worship and praise. I'm especially burdened to see it break out in the midst of the younger generation where joy can be a precious commodity.
To be sure, there is something unspeakably profound about singing contemporary, slow worship songs like "Revelation Song" or "You Won't Relent" or "What a Beautiful Name" or "Way Maker." It is especially wonderful to do this with thousands of other believers. What a taste of heaven it brings!
It is the same with the classic hymns of old, like Charles Wesley's "And Can It Be" or John Newton's "Amazing Grace." The words remain transcendent.
But what about those cut-loose, explode-out, joy-filled songs of praise? They too take us into unique places in the Lord.
In the old days, in that first church, it was hymns like "Power in the Blood" or "When We All Get to Heaven." (Yes, I went from Zeppelin and Hendrix to songs like these.)
In more recent decades, I think of songs like "So Good to Me" (this still gets me dancing and shouting and leaping and spinning) or "This Is How We Overcome" (this really does help us overcome) or "Shouts of Joy" (try listening to this without tapping along).
The music itself changes the atmosphere, and when it is joined to powerful lyrics, our innermost beings can be changed.
That's why people rise to their feet spontaneously when Handel's Messiah culminates in the "Hallelujah Chorus." The combination of the lyrics and the music and the Spirit is compelling. It is the same with joy-filled praise.
Of course, some of you reading this article have no idea what I'm talking about, having never encountered the Lord in worship. I earnestly pray that you will.
Others are asking yourself as you read, "I wonder what churches he's attending? We've got plenty of joyful celebration in our midst."
Still others, who come from a more liturgical background, are having difficulty relating to the types of services I'm describing.
But others know exactly what I mean, and as you're reading, the light has gone on.
It's time to bring back the joyful songs!


wnd--2020-01-22--Peter Schweizer: 5 Bidens 'cashed in' while Joe was VP

Five members of Joe Biden 's family `` cashed in while he was vice president , '' charges investigative reporter Peter Schweizer in his new book `` Profiles in Corruption : Abuse of Power by America 's Progressive Elite . ''
`` The ship really came in as far as these financial deals when he was vice president , '' said Schweizer in an interview Monday night on the Fox News Channel 's `` Hannity . ''
Hunter Biden 's profiting from a Ukrainian firm while his father was President Obama 's point man for Ukraine policy is at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump .
And Hunter Biden also is under scrutiny for the $ 1.5 billion deal his company obtained from a Chinese-government-owned firm shortly after a trip to Beijing on Air Force Two with his father , who also was in charge of U.S. policy in China .
It was Schweizer who brought those apparent conflicts of interest to light in his previous book `` Secret Empires : How the American Political Class Hides Corruption and Enriches Family and Friends . ''
Now , in `` Profiles in Corruption , '' he presents evidence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ brothers James and Frank , and sister Valerie also cashed in on the vice presidency .
In a column for the New York Post feature an excerpt from his book , Schweizer observes that political figures have long used their families `` to route power and benefits for their own self-enrichment . ''
Biden , in his new book , `` emerges as the king of the sweetheart deal , with no less than five family members benefiting from his largesse , favorable access and powerful position for commercial gain . ''
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some cases , U.S. taxpayer dollars .
His evidence , he says , refutes the claim Joe Biden 's made when the subject came up in 2019 .
`` I never talked with my son or my brother or anyone else — even distant family — about their business interests .
Period , '' Biden said .
Schweizer reacts : `` As we will see , this is far from the case . ''
Joe Biden has been close to his younger brother James since James served as finance chair of Joe 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vice president , James was a welcomed guest at the White House .
Sometimes the visits , Schweizer write in his book , `` dovetailed with his overseas business dealings , and his commercial opportunities flourished during his brother ’ s tenure as vice president . ''
One example is James ' hiring by the construction management firm HillStone International after its president visited the White House and met with Biden adviser Michele Smith in the Office of the Vice President .
`` James appeared to have little or no background in housing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to matter to HillStone , '' Schweizer notes .
James Biden was joining HillStone just as the firm was starting negotiations to win a massive contract in war-torn Iraq .
Six months after James was hired , the firm announced a contract generating $ 1.5 billion over three years to build 100,000 homes in Iraq .
HillStone also received a $ 22 million federal government contract to manage a construction project for the State Department .
David Richter , son of the parent company 's founder , told investors at a private meeting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ attendance , that securing government contracts is much easier when you have `` the brother of the vice president as a partner . ''
An investment company called StartUp Health announced its launch in 2011 in the Oval Office , where its leaders met with President Obama and Vice President Biden .
A day later , the new company was featured at a large health care tech conference run by the Department of Health and Human Services .
And StartUp Health executives became regular visitors to the White House , attending events in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ did the company gain such access ?
Schweizer points out the chief medical officer of StartUp Health , Howard Krein , is married to Joe Biden ’ s youngest daughter , Ashley .
Joe Biden helped Krein promote his company through his last months in the White House , including at a StartUp Health members conference in which 250 people got to chat in a closed session with the vice president .
Vice President Joe Biden 's March 2009 trip to Costa Rica for a one-on-one visit with President Oscar Arias `` came @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Frank , who was busy working deals in the country , '' Schweizer writes .
Just months after the visit , a new multilateral partnership `` to reform Real Estate in Latin America '' among Frank Biden and others was announced .
`` The Costa Rican government was eager to cooperate with the vice president ’ s brother , '' Schweizer writes .
`` As it happened , Joe Biden had been asked by President Obama to act as the administration ’ s point man in Latin America and the Caribbean . ''
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Frank 's project received support from the highest levels of the Costa Rican government .
In June 2014 , Vice President Biden announced the launch of the Caribbean Energy Security Initiative calling for increasing access to financing for Caribbean energy projects that he strongly supported .
`` After Joe Biden brought together leaders for CESI , brother Frank 's firm Sun Fund Americas announced that it was 'engaged in projects and is in negotiations with governments of other countries in the [ Caribbean ] region for both its Solar and Waste to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ writes .
Frank Biden 's Sun Fund Americas later announced that it had signed a power purchase agreement to build a 20-megawatt solar facility in Jamaica .
During his years in the Senate , Schweizer writes , Biden 's family `` benefited financially in other ways as he leveraged political power . ''
Joe 's sister Valerie ran all of his Senate campaigns , as well as his presidential runs in 1988 and 2008 .
`` But she was also a senior partner in a political messaging firm named Joe Slade White & @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at the firm were Joe Slade White and Valerie , '' he writes .
`` The firm received large fees from the Biden campaigns that Valerie was running .
Two and a half million dollars in consulting fees flowed to her firm from Citizens for Biden and Biden For President Inc. during the 2008 presidential bid alone . ''
Schweizer 's book also presents evidence of corruption by Democratic presidential candidates Sens .
Elizabeth Warren , D-Mass.
, and Amy Klobuchar , D-Minn. , among others .
In an interview Tuesday with `` @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is a `` three-layer cake of corruption '' with Warren .
He pointed out she was actually a government consultant paid by the U.S. Congress in the 1990s to rewrite bankruptcy laws .
`` OK , that 's all fine and good , but she did the typical Washington crony move : She cashed in , '' he said .
`` After she rewrote those laws , what did she do ?
She went to the corporations who would benefit from the law and said , 'Hire me , and I will help @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wrote . '
'' Schweizer said she `` made millions of dollars doing that . ''
Warren also has a daughter whose financed her business and obtained advisers `` from the very investment banks that Elizabeth Warren ’ s TARP Committee was bailing out . ''
Schweizer said Klobuchar has `` mastered the art of shaking down contributors and then pushing their legislation . ''
Klobuchar was a prosecutor before she was a U.S. senator .
She `` did not go after people that were donors of hers , who were clearly engaged @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a U.S. senator , she has mastered the art of shaking down contributors and then pushing their legislation , '' Schweizer writes .
`` There are instances where dozens of executives from a corporation over a three-day period will give her the donation , and then literally a few days later , she introduces legislation on their behalf . ''

Five members of Joe Biden's family "cashed in while he was vice president," charges investigative reporter Peter Schweizer in his new book "Profiles in Corruption: Abuse of Power by America's Progressive Elite."
"The ship really came in as far as these financial deals when he was vice president," said Schweizer in an interview Monday night on the Fox News Channel's "Hannity."
Hunter Biden's profiting from a Ukrainian firm while his father was President Obama's point man for Ukraine policy is at the center of the impeachment charges against President Trump. And Hunter Biden also is under scrutiny for the $1.5 billion deal his company obtained from a Chinese-government-owned firm shortly after a trip to Beijing on Air Force Two with his father, who also was in charge of U.S. policy in China.
It was Schweizer who brought those apparent conflicts of interest to light in his previous book "Secret Empires: How the American Political Class Hides Corruption and Enriches Family and Friends."
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
Now, in "Profiles in Corruption," he presents evidence that Joe Biden's son-in-law Howard, brothers James and Frank, and sister Valerie also cashed in on the vice presidency.
See Schweizer's interview with Sean Hannity:
In a column for the New York Post feature an excerpt from his book, Schweizer observes that political figures have long used their families "to route power and benefits for their own self-enrichment."
Biden, in his new book, "emerges as the king of the sweetheart deal, with no less than five family members benefiting from his largesse, favorable access and powerful position for commercial gain."
The deals include foreign partners and, in some cases, U.S. taxpayer dollars.
His evidence, he says, refutes the claim Joe Biden's made when the subject came up in 2019.
"I never talked with my son or my brother or anyone else — even distant family — about their business interests. Period," Biden said.
Schweizer reacts: "As we will see, this is far from the case."
Brother Joe
Joe Biden has been close to his younger brother James since James served as finance chair of Joe's 1972 Senate campaign. After Joe became vice president, James was a welcomed guest at the White House.
Sometimes the visits, Schweizer write in his book, "dovetailed with his overseas business dealings, and his commercial opportunities flourished during his brother’s tenure as vice president."
One example is James' hiring by the construction management firm HillStone International after its president visited the White House and met with Biden adviser Michele Smith in the Office of the Vice President.
"James appeared to have little or no background in housing construction, but that did not seem to matter to HillStone," Schweizer notes.
James Biden was joining HillStone just as the firm was starting negotiations to win a massive contract in war-torn Iraq. Six months after James was hired, the firm announced a contract generating $1.5 billion over three years to build 100,000 homes in Iraq. HillStone also received a $22 million federal government contract to manage a construction project for the State Department.
David Richter, son of the parent company's founder, told investors at a private meeting, according to a Schweizer source in attendance, that securing government contracts is much easier when you have "the brother of the vice president as a partner."
Daughter Ashley
An investment company called StartUp Health announced its launch in 2011 in the Oval Office, where its leaders met with President Obama and Vice President Biden.
A day later, the new company was featured at a large health care tech conference run by the Department of Health and Human Services. And StartUp Health executives became regular visitors to the White House, attending events in 2011, 2014 and 2015.
How did the company gain such access?
Schweizer points out the chief medical officer of StartUp Health, Howard Krein, is married to Joe Biden’s youngest daughter, Ashley.
Joe Biden helped Krein promote his company through his last months in the White House, including at a StartUp Health members conference in which 250 people got to chat in a closed session with the vice president.
Brother Frank
Vice President Joe Biden's March 2009 trip to Costa Rica for a one-on-one visit with President Oscar Arias "came at a fortuitous time for his brother Frank, who was busy working deals in the country," Schweizer writes.
Just months after the visit, a new multilateral partnership "to reform Real Estate in Latin America" among Frank Biden and others was announced.
"The Costa Rican government was eager to cooperate with the vice president’s brother," Schweizer writes. "As it happened, Joe Biden had been asked by President Obama to act as the administration’s point man in Latin America and the Caribbean."
Despite lacking experience in building such developments, Frank's project received support from the highest levels of the Costa Rican government.
In June 2014, Vice President Biden announced the launch of the Caribbean Energy Security Initiative calling for increasing access to financing for Caribbean energy projects that he strongly supported.
"After Joe Biden brought together leaders for CESI, brother Frank's firm Sun Fund Americas announced that it was 'engaged in projects and is in negotiations with governments of other countries in the [Caribbean] region for both its Solar and Waste to Energy development services,'" Schweizer writes.
Frank Biden's Sun Fund Americas later announced that it had signed a power purchase agreement to build a 20-megawatt solar facility in Jamaica.
Joe's sister
During his years in the Senate, Schweizer writes, Biden's family "benefited financially in other ways as he leveraged political power."
Joe's sister Valerie ran all of his Senate campaigns, as well as his presidential runs in 1988 and 2008.
"But she was also a senior partner in a political messaging firm named Joe Slade White & Company; the only two executives listed at the firm were Joe Slade White and Valerie," he writes.
"The firm received large fees from the Biden campaigns that Valerie was running. Two and a half million dollars in consulting fees flowed to her firm from Citizens for Biden and Biden For President Inc. during the 2008 presidential bid alone."
Joe Slade White & Company worked for Biden campaigns over 18 years.
'Three-layer cake of corruption'
Schweizer's book also presents evidence of corruption by Democratic presidential candidates Sens. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., among others.
In an interview Tuesday with "Fox & Friends, he said there is a "three-layer cake of corruption" with Warren.
He pointed out she was actually a government consultant paid by the U.S. Congress in the 1990s to rewrite bankruptcy laws.
"OK, that's all fine and good, but she did the typical Washington crony move: She cashed in," he said. "After she rewrote those laws, what did she do? She went to the corporations who would benefit from the law and said, 'Hire me, and I will help you interpret the law that I myself wrote.'"
Schweizer said she "made millions of dollars doing that."
Warren also has a daughter whose financed her business and obtained advisers "from the very investment banks that Elizabeth Warren’s TARP Committee was bailing out."
WND reported earlier Tuesday Warren's son-in-law produced a film funded by Iran's Islamic regime
Schweizer said Klobuchar has "mastered the art of shaking down contributors and then pushing their legislation."
Klobuchar was a prosecutor before she was a U.S. senator.
She "did not go after people that were donors of hers, who were clearly engaged in corruption."
"And as a U.S. senator, she has mastered the art of shaking down contributors and then pushing their legislation," Schweizer writes. "There are instances where dozens of executives from a corporation over a three-day period will give her the donation, and then literally a few days later, she introduces legislation on their behalf."


wnd--2020-01-22--Hundreds who survived abortion represent millions who didn't

The anniversary of the infamous Supreme Court abortion decision , Roe v. Wade , is upon us again .
And here we are , 61 million abortions later .
Some of the most powerful spokespersons against Roe are those who survived an attempted abortion .
At least 300 Americans alive today are in that category .
Here we will highlight three such survivors .
A couple of months ago , I heard a dramatic talk from Gianna Jessen of Tennessee .
Born in 1977 , Gianna survived a saline abortion , and her story has been told in a Focus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : Aborted , and Lived to Tell about It . ''
Gianna has even run two marathons , despite cerebral palsy caused by the abortion attempt .
It took her several hours longer than the average runner to complete the 26.2 miles .
But she made it .
Twice .
Some say she lacks a `` quality of life , '' but she asks ( as I recall ) , `` Who are you to judge my 'quality of life ' ? ''
Thanks to the faithfulness of the Lord , she has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ '' thank you very much .
Another survivor is Melissa Ohden of Missouri .
I had the privilege to interview her for Christian TV recently .
As a child she knew she had been adopted .
But not until she was 14 did she learn the back story .
Melissa told me , `` I am 42 years old ; and it was in 1977 that my birth mother , as a college student , actually had a saline infusion abortion forced upon her , against her will .
… So that type @ @ @ @ @ @ @ salt solution into the amniotic fluid surrounding me in the womb .
And the intent of that toxic salt solution was to poison and scald me to death .
So typically the procedure lasted about 72 hours .
The child would soak in that toxic salt solution , their life would be ended by it when it was successful ; and they would induce labor believing that that deceased child would be expelled from the womb . ''
In reviewing her medical records , Melissa discovered she had soaked for five days , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ did n't die .
`` But instead of being delivered as a successful abortion , I was accidentally born alive . ''
And then a compassionate nurse was able to rush her to a hospital to help her recover and eventually be adopted .
When you meet Melissa , you would have no idea any of this had happened to her .
Today , she is one of the leading networkers of abortion survivors .
The third abortion survivor I met recently is Claire Culwell of Texas .
As a child she had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about a decade ago she was thrilled to finally get to meet – and to thank in person – the mother who gave birth to her and had given her up for adoption .
But little did she know the back story about her birth mother .
When her birth mother was 13 , she got pregnant .
Her mother beat her and called her `` worthless '' and `` horrible . ''
Then she brought her to an abortion clinic .
The 13-year-old felt terrible for having had her baby aborted .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ that somehow she was still pregnant .
It turns out that the abortionist had missed the fact that she was carrying twins .
By the time they realized this , Claire 's mother was too far along to have another abortion .
Claire told me , `` I was delivered at 30 weeks , and I weighed 3 lbs .
2 oz.
, I was 10 weeks premature , and I had a dislocated hip , club feet .
My visible signs are my everyday reminder of being a twin .
But miraculously @ @ @ @ @ @ @ . ''
Amazingly , there are people who use various platforms , including social media , to somehow deny the validity of Claire 's story .
And that is true of other abortion survivors as well .
Claire observes , `` There are absolutely people opposing what we do because my presence , and people like me who have survived an abortion – our presence – shuts down their entire argument because they are saying that we are not human ; and they are saying we are imaginary and that this does n't @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the life of a child . ''
As another anniversary of Roe comes and goes , it is good to remember the many victims of abortion … beginning with the tens of millions of unborn babies killed .
Also , millions of would-be mothers have been victimized .
Studies show that more than half of them feel forced to abort .
And at least 300 abortion survivors amongst us also bear witness to the inhumanity of abortion .
And of those 300 , the three I spoke with are so grateful to God @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their rocky start in life .
As Melissa puts it , `` I owe my life to Jesus , that 's the only reason why I am alive . ''

The anniversary of the infamous Supreme Court abortion decision, Roe v. Wade, is upon us again. And here we are, 61 million abortions later.
Some of the most powerful spokespersons against Roe are those who survived an attempted abortion. At least 300 Americans alive today are in that category. Here we will highlight three such survivors.
A couple of months ago, I heard a dramatic talk from Gianna Jessen of Tennessee. Born in 1977, Gianna survived a saline abortion, and her story has been told in a Focus on the Family book, "Gianna: Aborted, and Lived to Tell about It."
Gianna has even run two marathons, despite cerebral palsy caused by the abortion attempt. It took her several hours longer than the average runner to complete the 26.2 miles. But she made it. Twice.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
Some say she lacks a "quality of life," but she asks (as I recall), "Who are you to judge my 'quality of life'?" Thanks to the faithfulness of the Lord, she has a high "quality of life," thank you very much.
Another survivor is Melissa Ohden of Missouri. I had the privilege to interview her for Christian TV recently. As a child she knew she had been adopted. But not until she was 14 did she learn the back story.
Melissa told me, "I am 42 years old; and it was in 1977 that my birth mother, as a college student, actually had a saline infusion abortion forced upon her, against her will. … So that type of procedure actually involved injecting a toxic salt solution into the amniotic fluid surrounding me in the womb. And the intent of that toxic salt solution was to poison and scald me to death. So typically the procedure lasted about 72 hours. The child would soak in that toxic salt solution, their life would be ended by it when it was successful; and they would induce labor believing that that deceased child would be expelled from the womb."
In reviewing her medical records, Melissa discovered she had soaked for five days, not three days, yet she still didn't die. "But instead of being delivered as a successful abortion, I was accidentally born alive." And then a compassionate nurse was able to rush her to a hospital to help her recover and eventually be adopted.
When you meet Melissa, you would have no idea any of this had happened to her. Today, she is one of the leading networkers of abortion survivors.
The third abortion survivor I met recently is Claire Culwell of Texas. As a child she had always known she was adopted, so about a decade ago she was thrilled to finally get to meet – and to thank in person – the mother who gave birth to her and had given her up for adoption. But little did she know the back story about her birth mother.
When her birth mother was 13, she got pregnant. Her mother beat her and called her "worthless" and "horrible." Then she brought her to an abortion clinic.
The 13-year-old felt terrible for having had her baby aborted. But a few days later she realized that somehow she was still pregnant. It turns out that the abortionist had missed the fact that she was carrying twins. By the time they realized this, Claire's mother was too far along to have another abortion.
Claire told me, "I was delivered at 30 weeks, and I weighed 3 lbs. 2 oz., I was 10 weeks premature, and I had a dislocated hip, club feet. My visible signs are my everyday reminder of being a twin. But miraculously the abortion instruments never touched my body."
Amazingly, there are people who use various platforms, including social media, to somehow deny the validity of Claire's story. And that is true of other abortion survivors as well.
Claire observes, "There are absolutely people opposing what we do because my presence, and people like me who have survived an abortion – our presence – shuts down their entire argument because they are saying that we are not human; and they are saying we are imaginary and that this doesn't happen, and abortion is not taking the life of a child."
As another anniversary of Roe comes and goes, it is good to remember the many victims of abortion … beginning with the tens of millions of unborn babies killed. Also, millions of would-be mothers have been victimized. Studies show that more than half of them feel forced to abort. And at least 300 abortion survivors amongst us also bear witness to the inhumanity of abortion.
And of those 300, the three I spoke with are so grateful to God for the gift of life – despite their rocky start in life. As Melissa puts it, "I owe my life to Jesus, that's the only reason why I am alive."


wnd--2020-01-22--The 1 issue that could shift the black vote to GOP

Sometimes the timing of events is so auspicious that it is hard to attribute it to coincidence .
The week of Jan. 26 is National School Choice week .
First observed in 2011 , for the 10th time , events will take place around the nation that are focused on raising awareness about parental choice in K-12 education and the options available to parents and children .
A few days before National School Choice week , the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the case Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue , which will address the constitutionality of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ obstacle to school choice the nation faces .
Named after Rep. James G. Blaine , who attempted but failed to enact a federal ban on funding religious schools , 37 states subsequently adopted the provision in their state constitutions .
In the case of Espinoza , the state of Montana passed a law allowing dollar-for-dollar tax credits for funds contributed to scholarship programs that parents could use for paying for education in private schools .
In that some of these funds would be used for religious schools , the constitutionality of the program @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up trashing the whole program .
The hope of many , including me , is that the court will find the rationale behind the Blaine Amendments unconstitutional .
It will be a victory for both religious freedom and education freedom .
It is perverse that the First Amendment , which is meant to guarantee religious freedom , has become a tool for discrimination against religion .
After all , when public funds are available for education of any kind and some parents use those funds for a religious school , this is a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
How can this in any way be understood as government establishing religion ?
It most certainly interferes with the `` free exercise '' of religion , which the First Amendment protects .
A decision wiping out the Blaine Amendment prohibitions will also be another reason to congratulate President Donald Trump , who has given us this solidly conservative Supreme Court .
It 's also another factor in why black voters may realign their political allegiances .
Education freedom is an issue that deeply divides Republicans and Democrats .
And it is an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with Republicans .
In a May 2019 poll by Education Next , 70 % of black Democrats expressed support for targeted vouchers , 60 % for universal vouchers and 55 % for charter schools .
It makes sense .
Black parents understand the importance of education .
Yet their kids are trapped in the worst public schools in the country .
Black parents understand the simple logic of education freedom and the benefits of parents having the power to choose where to send their children to school .
President Trump is now advancing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for up to $ 5 billion in annual tax credits for donations made to scholarships that fund education-choice opportunities .
The Democratic presidential candidates across the board want to slam the door on charter schools and education choice .
They all see one answer to K-12 education : more federal dollars for public school monopolies .
Democrats have their eye on political contributions from teachers unions , not on what children , particularly black children , need .
The electoral model Republicans need to follow for 2020 is that of the 2018 Florida @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his black opponent , liberal Tallahassee Mayor Andrew Gillum , by a margin of 0.4 % .
DeSantis got 14 % of the black vote and 18 % of the black female vote .
By most analyses , the explanation for this unusually high black support is that DeSantis is a stalwart on education freedom and parental choice .
Education could , and should , be a defining issue in 2020 , and be what makes a critical difference in moving black votes into the Republican column .

Sometimes the timing of events is so auspicious that it is hard to attribute it to coincidence.
The week of Jan. 26 is National School Choice week.
First observed in 2011, for the 10th time, events will take place around the nation that are focused on raising awareness about parental choice in K-12 education and the options available to parents and children.
A few days before National School Choice week, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the case Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue, which will address the constitutionality of the so-called Blaine Amendments, arguably the greatest obstacle to school choice the nation faces.
Named after Rep. James G. Blaine, who attempted but failed to enact a federal ban on funding religious schools, 37 states subsequently adopted the provision in their state constitutions.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
In the case of Espinoza, the state of Montana passed a law allowing dollar-for-dollar tax credits for funds contributed to scholarship programs that parents could use for paying for education in private schools. In that some of these funds would be used for religious schools, the constitutionality of the program was challenged, and the state wound up trashing the whole program.
The hope of many, including me, is that the court will find the rationale behind the Blaine Amendments unconstitutional. It will be a victory for both religious freedom and education freedom.
It is perverse that the First Amendment, which is meant to guarantee religious freedom, has become a tool for discrimination against religion.
After all, when public funds are available for education of any kind and some parents use those funds for a religious school, this is a private choice, not a government mandate. How can this in any way be understood as government establishing religion? It most certainly interferes with the "free exercise" of religion, which the First Amendment protects.
A decision wiping out the Blaine Amendment prohibitions will also be another reason to congratulate President Donald Trump, who has given us this solidly conservative Supreme Court.
It's also another factor in why black voters may realign their political allegiances.
Education freedom is an issue that deeply divides Republicans and Democrats. And it is an issue on which blacks are more aligned with Republicans.
In a May 2019 poll by Education Next, 70% of black Democrats expressed support for targeted vouchers, 60% for universal vouchers and 55% for charter schools.
It makes sense. Black parents understand the importance of education. Yet their kids are trapped in the worst public schools in the country.
Black parents understand the simple logic of education freedom and the benefits of parents having the power to choose where to send their children to school.
President Trump is now advancing Education Freedom Scholarships, which would provide for up to $5 billion in annual tax credits for donations made to scholarships that fund education-choice opportunities.
The Democratic presidential candidates across the board want to slam the door on charter schools and education choice. They all see one answer to K-12 education: more federal dollars for public school monopolies. Democrats have their eye on political contributions from teachers unions, not on what children, particularly black children, need.
The electoral model Republicans need to follow for 2020 is that of the 2018 Florida governor's race. Ron DeSantis defeated his black opponent, liberal Tallahassee Mayor Andrew Gillum, by a margin of 0.4%. DeSantis got 14% of the black vote and 18% of the black female vote. By most analyses, the explanation for this unusually high black support is that DeSantis is a stalwart on education freedom and parental choice.
Education could, and should, be a defining issue in 2020, and be what makes a critical difference in moving black votes into the Republican column.


wnd--2020-01-22--Bernie's Iowa team on lockdown after embarrassing video goes viral

Several of Bernie Sanders ' Iowa state directors locked their Twitter accounts after the conservative activist organization Project Veritas leaked a video of a Sanders campaign field organizer named Kyle Jurek making threats of political violence .
Some have unlocked their accounts since then .
Jurek was caught on camera saying things like `` Milwaukee will burn '' if Sanders does n't win the Democratic nomination .
He also said he would like to `` walk into that MSNBC studios , drag those motherf -- -ers out by their hair , and light them on fire in the streets , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ James O'Keefe , a conservative journalist who has made a reputation exposing leftists , pinned the video to his Twitter page with the hashtag # Expose2020 .
According to O'Keefe , Iowa state director Misty Rebik and Iowa co-field-director Brooke Adams had worked with Jurek .
Both Rebik and Adams had reportedly locked their accounts , though as of writing , they are currently unlocked , and Jurek 's Twitter has been deleted .
O'Keefe has insisted this wo n't be the end of the Sanders campaign 's headaches .
He promised that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ '' The conservative activist has sent out multiple videos of Jurek making several statements in favor of violent acts including the use of gulags .
`` I 'm all aboard for gulags , like , I feel there needs to be re-education for a significant portion of our society , '' said Jurek .
`` The hundreds of thousands of Iowans we 've talked to this caucus season do n't care about political gossip ; they care about making healthcare a human right , taking on climate change , making college affordable , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our focus # Bernie2020 , now let 's win , '' Rebik wrote in a tweet .
On Jan. 8 , just days before the video was leaked , Jurek was arrested for the second time since September by Iowa state police , Breitbart reported .
According to Breitbart , he was charged with `` violation of probation , possession of drug paraphernalia , failure to provide proof of financial liability , as well as operating while intoxicated . ''
There has been no comment from Sanders regarding the issue , and Jurek @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campaign .
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal .

Several of Bernie Sanders' Iowa state directors locked their Twitter accounts after the conservative activist organization Project Veritas leaked a video of a Sanders campaign field organizer named Kyle Jurek making threats of political violence.
Some have unlocked their accounts since then.
Jurek was caught on camera saying things like "Milwaukee will burn" if Sanders doesn't win the Democratic nomination.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
He also said he would like to "walk into that MSNBC studios, drag those motherf---ers out by their hair, and light them on fire in the streets," according to the Washington Examiner.
James O'Keefe, a conservative journalist who has made a reputation exposing leftists, pinned the video to his Twitter page with the hashtag #Expose2020.
BREAKING: @BernieSanders “free education” policies to “teach you how to not be a f**king nazi.”; 'There is a reason Stalin had Gulags'; 'Expect violent reaction' for speech. If Bernie doesn't get nomination "Milwaukee will burn" Stay tuned: https://t.co/BFGnoCeJE7#Expose2020 pic.twitter.com/Koh6UTibbe — James O'Keefe (@JamesOKeefeIII) January 14, 2020
According to O'Keefe, Iowa state director Misty Rebik and Iowa co-field-director Brooke Adams had worked with Jurek.
Both Rebik and Adams had reportedly locked their accounts, though as of writing, they are currently unlocked, and Jurek's Twitter has been deleted.
Looks like Kyle Jurek has worked with Iowa Co Field Director @brookew_adams and the Sanders Campaign called Kyle a "top-tier organizer." Looks like the @BernieSanders campaign has already implemented SOVIET style censorship and deleted their praise of this man. #Expose2020 pic.twitter.com/Om0QFWsM84 — James O'Keefe (@JamesOKeefeIII) January 14, 2020
O'Keefe has insisted this won't be the end of the Sanders campaign's headaches. He promised that more tapes are "coming soon."
Iowa @BernieSanders Director @mistyrebik and Iowa co Field Director @brookew_adams LOCKED Twitter accounts. First campaign where multiple state level staffers shut down social media. I though the point of a campaign is to get messaging out What are they hiding? @expose2020 pic.twitter.com/PEjQfBUoqB — James O'Keefe (@JamesOKeefeIII) January 14, 2020
The conservative activist has sent out multiple videos of Jurek making several statements in favor of violent acts including the use of gulags.
BREAKING: Sanders Staffer "That was the intention of gulags...remove people that were like, insidious to the state from the state...you guys are all causing problems...working against revolution...we're going to remove you...learn the f**king value of being a comrade"#Expose2020 pic.twitter.com/2MI5M7OGwd — James O'Keefe (@JamesOKeefeIII) January 15, 2020
"I'm all aboard for gulags, like, I feel there needs to be re-education for a significant portion of our society," said Jurek.
BREAKING: "We don't want to f**king have to like, eliminate people...if people are going to try and fight back against the revolution...if you're going to take up arms against the revolution...expect a violent response" - Kyle Jurek, Sanders Campaignpic.twitter.com/4e9CGjU2Fj — James O'Keefe (@JamesOKeefeIII) January 15, 2020
"The hundreds of thousands of Iowans we've talked to this caucus season don't care about political gossip; they care about making healthcare a human right, taking on climate change, making college affordable, and ending endless wars. That's our focus #Bernie2020, now let's win," Rebik wrote in a tweet.
The hundreds of thousands of Iowans we've talked to this caucus season don't care about political gossip; they care about making healthcare a human right, taking on climate change, making college affordable, and ending endless wars. That's our focus #Bernie2020, now let's win. — Misty Rebik (@mistyrebik) January 15, 2020
On Jan. 8, just days before the video was leaked, Jurek was arrested for the second time since September by Iowa state police, Breitbart reported.
According to Breitbart, he was charged with "violation of probation, possession of drug paraphernalia, failure to provide proof of financial liability, as well as operating while intoxicated."
There has been no comment from Sanders regarding the issue, and Jurek still appears to be employed by the campaign.
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.


wnd--2020-01-22--The Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez School of Economics

On Monday , Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez , D-N.Y. , sat for a discussion with author Ta-Nehisi Coates .
She dropped a number of shocking statements – statements that elicited nothing but murmurs of agreement from Coates .
AOC claimed : `` No one ever makes a billion dollars .
You take a billion dollars . ''
How , pray tell , are American billionaires responsible for such massive theft ?
According to AOC , the very mechanisms of capitalism mandate such theft .
In her view , successful businesspeople simply exploit their workers while maximizing their profits .
Hypothetically speaking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ : `` You did n't make those widgets !
You sat on a couch while thousands of people were paid modern-day slave wages and , in some cases , real modern-day slavery .
… You made that money off the backs of undocumented people . ''
This , of course , is nonsense .
Voluntary exchange of labor for wages is , as stated , voluntary , and the fact that there are many people willing and able to labor in the manufacture of widgets is presumably responsible for lower wages .
Companies @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wages will soon watch those workers migrate to other businesses or other industries .
It is a patent violation of free market principles to utilize force in order to compel someone to work for you ; blaming the free market for coercion is like blaming free speech for censorship .
Exploitation in labor markets is typically accompanied by government subsidies , regulation and interventionism .
So , how does AOC magically turn economic freedom into economic tyranny ?
By suggesting that true freedom lies in collective control of the means of production : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that means that you control a massive system .
… It means that you have a massive labor force under your control , and to be ethical if you 're a billionaire today , the thing that you need to do is give up control and power . ''
But to whom would such power and control be given ?
AOC suggests that major companies be turned into worker cooperatives – companies whose workers own and control the business .
But , of course , that does n't solve her problem : If @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they are properly classified as capitalists .
They will have to make decisions to make the business competitive , which means keeping wages competitive , for example .
This is precisely what has happened with one of the world 's biggest worker collectives , the Spanish Mondragon Cooperative Corporation , whose worker-owners have `` learned to think like the shareholders of any other global business , '' according to The Guardian .
In fact , most companies begin with a few workers who pool their capital and labor : Facebook , for example @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , resulting in a $ 23 billion valuation for their initial employees when the company went public .
Does that make those workers evil capitalists ?
In the end , what AOC truly wants is government control .
Worker collectives wo n't do the trick .
Only top-down government redefinition of the value of labor will .
When AOC claims that capitalists merely leech off the true value of labor , she suggests that labor can be measured without reference to the market .
How would AOC measure the value of such labor @ @ @ @ @ @ @ . ''
There is only one problem with this method : It simply does n't work .
Consumers determine the value of products ; producers do not .
The diffuse informational system of the free market , which rewards the power of entrepreneurship , rather than punishing it , creates prosperity ; top-down control creates poverty .
In fact , the greatest guarantee of the sort of poverty AOC decries is the destruction of the same system she decries .
But according to AOC , we have nothing to fear from government , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ '' The fact that Coates , one of the most prominent writers on the evils of Jim Crow , nodded along should demonstrate that those on the left do not understand the consequences of their own philosophy .
The government is not `` us , '' because we are not a collective .
We are individuals with rights .
But in AOC 's world , we have no rights – we have only our role as members of a collective controlled by those who agree with her .
And that is exploitation and @ @

On Monday, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., sat for a discussion with author Ta-Nehisi Coates. She dropped a number of shocking statements – statements that elicited nothing but murmurs of agreement from Coates. AOC claimed: "No one ever makes a billion dollars. You take a billion dollars." How, pray tell, are American billionaires responsible for such massive theft? According to AOC, the very mechanisms of capitalism mandate such theft. In her view, successful businesspeople simply exploit their workers while maximizing their profits. Hypothetically speaking about billionaires making widgets, she said: "You didn't make those widgets! You sat on a couch while thousands of people were paid modern-day slave wages and, in some cases, real modern-day slavery. … You made that money off the backs of undocumented people."
This, of course, is nonsense. Voluntary exchange of labor for wages is, as stated, voluntary, and the fact that there are many people willing and able to labor in the manufacture of widgets is presumably responsible for lower wages. Companies that refuse to pay their workers market wages will soon watch those workers migrate to other businesses or other industries. It is a patent violation of free market principles to utilize force in order to compel someone to work for you; blaming the free market for coercion is like blaming free speech for censorship. Exploitation in labor markets is typically accompanied by government subsidies, regulation and interventionism.
So, how does AOC magically turn economic freedom into economic tyranny? By suggesting that true freedom lies in collective control of the means of production: "If you're a billionaire, that means that you control a massive system. … It means that you have a massive labor force under your control, and to be ethical if you're a billionaire today, the thing that you need to do is give up control and power." But to whom would such power and control be given? AOC suggests that major companies be turned into worker cooperatives – companies whose workers own and control the business.
But, of course, that doesn't solve her problem: If workers own and control the business, they are properly classified as capitalists. They will have to make decisions to make the business competitive, which means keeping wages competitive, for example. This is precisely what has happened with one of the world's biggest worker collectives, the Spanish Mondragon Cooperative Corporation, whose worker-owners have "learned to think like the shareholders of any other global business," according to The Guardian. In fact, most companies begin with a few workers who pool their capital and labor: Facebook, for example, handed out stock options to employees, resulting in a $23 billion valuation for their initial employees when the company went public. Does that make those workers evil capitalists?
In the end, what AOC truly wants is government control. Worker collectives won't do the trick. Only top-down government redefinition of the value of labor will. When AOC claims that capitalists merely leech off the true value of labor, she suggests that labor can be measured without reference to the market. How would AOC measure the value of such labor? Presumably through appeals to "fairness." There is only one problem with this method: It simply doesn't work. Consumers determine the value of products; producers do not. The diffuse informational system of the free market, which rewards the power of entrepreneurship, rather than punishing it, creates prosperity; top-down control creates poverty. In fact, the greatest guarantee of the sort of poverty AOC decries is the destruction of the same system she decries.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
But according to AOC, we have nothing to fear from government, and "the government is us." The fact that Coates, one of the most prominent writers on the evils of Jim Crow, nodded along should demonstrate that those on the left do not understand the consequences of their own philosophy. The government is not "us," because we are not a collective. We are individuals with rights. But in AOC's world, we have no rights – we have only our role as members of a collective controlled by those who agree with her. And that is exploitation and tyranny.


wnd--2020-01-22--What if every gun on Earth just disappeared?

Author 's note : My inspiration for writing this was a sign I saw displayed at the pro-gun-ownership rally at Richmond , Virginia , on Monday .
It said , `` Making good people helpless wo n't make bad people harmless . ''
There is a myriad of positions taken when it comes to the topic of who should or should n't possess guns , and if and how such possession should be regulated .
One major point raised by those who oppose more stringent gun laws is that laws are , per se , for the law-abiding , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people who view laws with disregard and contempt .
So more stringent gun laws serve to limit access to guns only by people who respect and obey laws , leaving criminals to continue to access guns via theft ( which is how a great many criminals obtain guns ) and illegal channels , and to continue to use those guns for criminal purposes and with a larger pool of potential victims who , by those very laws , have been rendered disarmed and therefore vulnerable .
This is why it 's said , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ outlaws will have guns . ''
But what if all firearms – every single one in existence – could somehow , magically and universally , be rendered non-existent ?
No guns in the hands of citizens , no guns in the hands of police , no guns in the hands of criminals and , while we 're at it , no guns in the hands of soldiers , regardless of what cause they 're fighting for !
What if even criminals , with all their criminal resources and networks , could not obtain @ @ @ @ @ @ @ simply because there were no firearms anywhere for them to obtain ?
Would n't that be a good thing ?
Ca n't people from across the entire spectrum of attitudes about gun ownership agree to what a wonderful , civilized thing that would be ?
Actually , I think there are many , even among the most ardent and vociferous advocates and defenders of the Second Amendment , who would embrace this ( admittedly hypothetical ) notion and think that humanity would be better off if all firearms could be made to disappear @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tell you that it would definitely not be a good thing , not for humanity and not for civilization .
And I 'll tell you why .
The elimination of firearms will not make the world a more peaceful , less violent place .
Quite the contrary !
Those persons who would seek to intimidate or to physically harm or kill another person ( whether driven by greed , lust , jealousy , hate , zealotry or mental illness ) will still do so .
But the tools they employ ( be they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or whatever ) will require a degree of physical size and strength to be wielded as weapons and a degree of physical size and strength to defend against .
Until the advent of firearms , the advantage in combat always went to the bigger and stronger , with the smaller and weaker always at a disadvantage .
The invention of firearms was a watershed moment in human history because it changed this equation , and put the smaller and weaker ( and that includes the frail and the elderly ! )
on equal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of those who happened to be bigger and stronger .
Do we really want a world in which our sisters , mothers and grandmothers , for example , have to depend on being able to muster the physical strength required to attempt to resist a larger , more powerful attacker ?
Sure , little David defeated the much larger and stronger Goliath by employing a shepherd 's sling , which uses centrifugal force to hurl a projectile with much more energy ( and therefore much further and faster ) than it could be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's arm .
But even that sling ( which was , conceptually , a precursor of the firearm , in that it was a projectile weapon employed from a distance ) was n't the equalizer that a firearm can be .
That 's why a popular version of `` All men are created equal '' tells us that `` All men are created by God .
But it was Samuel Colt who made them equal ! ''
Historical note : Samuel Colt certainly did n't invent the firearm .
But he was an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and the mass production thereof ( including the concept of interchangeable parts ) , so that just about anyone could afford to own , maintain , carry and defend oneself with one .
Remember that a handgun is just that : despite the two-handed grip now favored by most pistoleros , a handgun can be effectively employed even by a person who has only one hand !
( My own favorite firearms innovators would include John Moses Browning and Dieudonne Saive , with honorable mention to John Garand , Eugene Stoner , Uzi @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Mikhail Kalashnikov . )
Firearms changed the entire relationship between predator and prey , at least when the prey is human ( and whether the predator is human or otherwise ) .
Through the ages , humans defended against marauding animal predators like tigers and polar bears with little more than sharpened sticks .
Such defensive weapons required physical strength to employ , and often required every able-bodied person in the village to meet the threat , and there were still casualties incurred before the attack was stopped .
The universal elimination @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the world like the home in Monsey , New York , in which , this past December , a single machete-wielding attacker was able to terrorize and do grievous bodily harm to a whole houseful of people .
And that 's only one among many tragic examples .
So , my answer , to anyone who thinks it would be a boon to mankind `` if only all firearms could somehow vanish , '' would be `` Be careful what you wish for ! ''

Author's note: My inspiration for writing this was a sign I saw displayed at the pro-gun-ownership rally at Richmond, Virginia, on Monday. It said, "Making good people helpless won't make bad people harmless."
There is a myriad of positions taken when it comes to the topic of who should or shouldn't possess guns, and if and how such possession should be regulated. One major point raised by those who oppose more stringent gun laws is that laws are, per se, for the law-abiding, and that criminals are, per se, people who view laws with disregard and contempt.
So more stringent gun laws serve to limit access to guns only by people who respect and obey laws, leaving criminals to continue to access guns via theft (which is how a great many criminals obtain guns) and illegal channels, and to continue to use those guns for criminal purposes and with a larger pool of potential victims who, by those very laws, have been rendered disarmed and therefore vulnerable. This is why it's said, "When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns."
But what if all firearms – every single one in existence – could somehow, magically and universally, be rendered non-existent? No guns in the hands of citizens, no guns in the hands of police, no guns in the hands of criminals and, while we're at it, no guns in the hands of soldiers, regardless of what cause they're fighting for!
What if even criminals, with all their criminal resources and networks, could not obtain firearms, laws or no laws, simply because there were no firearms anywhere for them to obtain? Wouldn't that be a good thing? Can't people from across the entire spectrum of attitudes about gun ownership agree to what a wonderful, civilized thing that would be?
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
Actually, I think there are many, even among the most ardent and vociferous advocates and defenders of the Second Amendment, who would embrace this (admittedly hypothetical) notion and think that humanity would be better off if all firearms could be made to disappear.
Well, I'm here to tell you that it would definitely not be a good thing, not for humanity and not for civilization. And I'll tell you why.
The elimination of firearms will not make the world a more peaceful, less violent place. Quite the contrary! Those persons who would seek to intimidate or to physically harm or kill another person (whether driven by greed, lust, jealousy, hate, zealotry or mental illness) will still do so. But the tools they employ (be they blades or sticks, hands or fists or whatever) will require a degree of physical size and strength to be wielded as weapons and a degree of physical size and strength to defend against.
Until the advent of firearms, the advantage in combat always went to the bigger and stronger, with the smaller and weaker always at a disadvantage. The invention of firearms was a watershed moment in human history because it changed this equation, and put the smaller and weaker (and that includes the frail and the elderly!) on equal footing, no longer at the mercy of those who happened to be bigger and stronger.
Do we really want a world in which our sisters, mothers and grandmothers, for example, have to depend on being able to muster the physical strength required to attempt to resist a larger, more powerful attacker?
Sure, little David defeated the much larger and stronger Goliath by employing a shepherd's sling, which uses centrifugal force to hurl a projectile with much more energy (and therefore much further and faster) than it could be thrown with just the strength of one's arm.
But even that sling (which was, conceptually, a precursor of the firearm, in that it was a projectile weapon employed from a distance) wasn't the equalizer that a firearm can be. That's why a popular version of "All men are created equal" tells us that "All men are created by God. But it was Samuel Colt who made them equal!"
Historical note: Samuel Colt certainly didn't invent the firearm. But he was an innovator who did perfect the revolver, and the mass production thereof (including the concept of interchangeable parts), so that just about anyone could afford to own, maintain, carry and defend oneself with one. Remember that a handgun is just that: despite the two-handed grip now favored by most pistoleros, a handgun can be effectively employed even by a person who has only one hand! (My own favorite firearms innovators would include John Moses Browning and Dieudonne Saive, with honorable mention to John Garand, Eugene Stoner, Uzi Galil, Gaston Glock and, grudgingly, Mikhail Kalashnikov.)
Firearms changed the entire relationship between predator and prey, at least when the prey is human (and whether the predator is human or otherwise). Through the ages, humans defended against marauding animal predators like tigers and polar bears with little more than sharpened sticks. Such defensive weapons required physical strength to employ, and often required every able-bodied person in the village to meet the threat, and there were still casualties incurred before the attack was stopped.
The universal elimination of firearms would make every corner of the world like the home in Monsey, New York, in which, this past December, a single machete-wielding attacker was able to terrorize and do grievous bodily harm to a whole houseful of people. And that's only one among many tragic examples.
So, my answer, to anyone who thinks it would be a boon to mankind "if only all firearms could somehow vanish," would be "Be careful what you wish for!"


wnd--2020-01-22--Gun-rights advocates rock Richmond

Gun-rights advocates rock Richmond

As liberal politicians take control of the Commonwealth of Virginia , they are getting a healthy dose of grassroots resistance by legally armed citizens .
A massive crowd of 22,000 descended on its state capitol in Richmond , and the Democratic governor overreacted by declaring an inappropriate state of emergency .
Unlike the women 's march that left trash all over D.C. after Trump 's inauguration three years ago , this peaceful protest by Second Amendment advocates even picked up the garbage afterwards .
The gun groups are motivated , in contrast with media-created protests that quickly fade as the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ armed participants at yesterday 's rally said they are just getting started .
And they have President Trump enthusiastically on their side .
Trump tweeted on Monday that `` The Democrat Party in the Great Commonwealth of Virginia are working hard to take away your 2nd Amendment rights .
This is just the beginning .
Do n't let it happen , VOTE REPUBLICAN in 2020 ! ''
This issue separates Republicans and Democrats more clearly than almost any other issue .
Two recent votes in the Virginia Senate for gun control were along @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in favor of sweeping new restrictions on guns while all Republicans voted against them .
Virginia Gov .
Ralph `` Blackface '' Northam has vowed to sign into law strict gun control legislation .
This would include senseless rationing by limiting handgun purchases to only one per month .
Rationing the number of gun purchases by law-abiding citizens would seem to be a violation of the Second Amendment , just as limiting the amount that someone can say or hear would violate the First Amendment .
How about limiting the number of bills @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Constitution , last week the Democrat-controlled Virginia Senate approved this one-handgun-per-month limit on gun purchases on an entirely party-line vote .
The Democrats also pushed through additional gun control that requires new background checks for private exchanges of firearms .
The gun control legislation encourages and authorizes outright bans on firearms at public events .
Guns can be most helpful at those events to protect against a mass shooting , as recently occurred in Texas when an alert worshiper stopped a massacre by shooting the killer during a church service .
The type @ @ @ @ @ @ @ against the peaceful protesters is a sign of what is to come if there is no push-back on gun control legislation .
He panicked against the peaceful grass-roots gathering by banning the carrying of weapons on the grounds of the state capitol .
Liberals in the media had hysterically predicted violence , which never occurred .
The liberal marches after President Trump 's inauguration resulted in vandalism of stores , but nothing similar was caused by the Second Amendment supporters .
The gun control agenda supported by Virginia Democrats includes broad `` red @ @ @ @ @ @ @ enforcement to seize guns lawfully owned by citizens based on a mere suspicion of a possible safety threat .
The right to bear arms would not mean much if it can be arbitrarily taken away under the guise of suspicion .
Some Virginia sheriffs announced that they will not enforce the gun control legislation if it becomes law .
Towns throughout Virginia could become a new type of sanctuary where the Second Amendment is respected .
How did gun control zealots get elected in a commonwealth that voted Republican in every presidential election @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ) ?
Virginia was home to four of our first five presidents , and once held the largest percentage of Electoral College votes ever : 15.9 % , in 1792 .
A combination of election spending by an out-of-state billionaire , a flood of immigration and liberal federal employees have turned Virginia from red to blue politically .
In this backyard of the NRA , pro-gun control Democrats took control of the statehouse for the first time in a quarter century in the last election .
Billionaire Mike Bloomberg vastly outspent the NRA @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contribute only $ 350,000 to the Second Amendment side .
Bloomberg-funded Everytown for Gun Safety spent $ 2.5 million , including efforts by Moms Demand Action .
Gun control zealots have set their sights on other Republican states too .
They plan to take control of Texas within a few election cycles , and gained ground in the elections there in 2018 .
Texas has a whopping 38 Electoral College votes in presidential elections and will pick up more in the new census .
Two of those electors were `` faithless '' in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ despite how he carried the state .
The Supreme Court just accepted a case to decide if electors can vote contrary to the vote of the people in presidential elections .
With the vast sums of money in politics pushing gun control , it is frightening to imagine what might happen in a close presidential election if switching sides were allowed in the Electoral College .

As liberal politicians take control of the Commonwealth of Virginia, they are getting a healthy dose of grassroots resistance by legally armed citizens. A massive crowd of 22,000 descended on its state capitol in Richmond, and the Democratic governor overreacted by declaring an inappropriate state of emergency.
Unlike the women's march that left trash all over D.C. after Trump's inauguration three years ago, this peaceful protest by Second Amendment advocates even picked up the garbage afterwards. The gun groups are motivated, in contrast with media-created protests that quickly fade as the women's rights march has.
Many armed participants at yesterday's rally said they are just getting started. And they have President Trump enthusiastically on their side.
Trump tweeted on Monday that "The Democrat Party in the Great Commonwealth of Virginia are working hard to take away your 2nd Amendment rights. This is just the beginning. Don't let it happen, VOTE REPUBLICAN in 2020!"
This issue separates Republicans and Democrats more clearly than almost any other issue. Two recent votes in the Virginia Senate for gun control were along party lines, with all Democrats voting in favor of sweeping new restrictions on guns while all Republicans voted against them.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
Virginia Gov. Ralph "Blackface" Northam has vowed to sign into law strict gun control legislation. This would include senseless rationing by limiting handgun purchases to only one per month.
Rationing the number of gun purchases by law-abiding citizens would seem to be a violation of the Second Amendment, just as limiting the amount that someone can say or hear would violate the First Amendment. How about limiting the number of bills a legislature can pass?
Ignoring the Constitution, last week the Democrat-controlled Virginia Senate approved this one-handgun-per-month limit on gun purchases on an entirely party-line vote. The Democrats also pushed through additional gun control that requires new background checks for private exchanges of firearms.
The gun control legislation encourages and authorizes outright bans on firearms at public events. Guns can be most helpful at those events to protect against a mass shooting, as recently occurred in Texas when an alert worshiper stopped a massacre by shooting the killer during a church service.
The type of tyranny imposed by Gov. Northam against the peaceful protesters is a sign of what is to come if there is no push-back on gun control legislation. He panicked against the peaceful grass-roots gathering by banning the carrying of weapons on the grounds of the state capitol.
Liberals in the media had hysterically predicted violence, which never occurred. The liberal marches after President Trump's inauguration resulted in vandalism of stores, but nothing similar was caused by the Second Amendment supporters.
The gun control agenda supported by Virginia Democrats includes broad "red flag" provisions that would authorize law enforcement to seize guns lawfully owned by citizens based on a mere suspicion of a possible safety threat. The right to bear arms would not mean much if it can be arbitrarily taken away under the guise of suspicion.
Some Virginia sheriffs announced that they will not enforce the gun control legislation if it becomes law. Towns throughout Virginia could become a new type of sanctuary where the Second Amendment is respected.
How did gun control zealots get elected in a commonwealth that voted Republican in every presidential election from 1952 through 2004 (except 1964)? Virginia was home to four of our first five presidents, and once held the largest percentage of Electoral College votes ever: 15.9%, in 1792.
A combination of election spending by an out-of-state billionaire, a flood of immigration and liberal federal employees have turned Virginia from red to blue politically. In this backyard of the NRA, pro-gun control Democrats took control of the statehouse for the first time in a quarter century in the last election.
Billionaire Mike Bloomberg vastly outspent the NRA in Virginia, which was able to contribute only $350,000 to the Second Amendment side. Bloomberg-funded Everytown for Gun Safety spent $2.5 million, including efforts by Moms Demand Action.
Gun control zealots have set their sights on other Republican states too. They plan to take control of Texas within a few election cycles, and gained ground in the elections there in 2018.
Texas has a whopping 38 Electoral College votes in presidential elections and will pick up more in the new census. Two of those electors were "faithless" in 2016 by refusing to vote for Trump despite how he carried the state.
The Supreme Court just accepted a case to decide if electors can vote contrary to the vote of the people in presidential elections. With the vast sums of money in politics pushing gun control, it is frightening to imagine what might happen in a close presidential election if switching sides were allowed in the Electoral College.


wnd--2020-01-22--The latest 'diversity' and 'inclusion' insanity

It 's nearly impossible to have even a short conversation with a college administrator , politician or chief executive without the words diversity and inclusion dropping from their lips .
Diversity and inclusion appear to be the end-all and be-all of their existence .
So , I thought I 'd begin this discussion by first looking up the definition of diversity .
According to the Oxford Dictionary , diversity is `` the practice or quality of including or involving people from a range of different social and ethnic backgrounds and of different genders , sexual orientations , etc . ''
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and diversity should be supported for their own sake . ''
The standard definition given for inclusion is involvement and empowerment where the inherent worth and dignity of all people are recognized .
Here 's my question to those who are wedded to diversity and inclusion : Are people better off the less they have in common with one another ?
For example , women are less likely to be able to march 12.4 miles in five hours with an 83-pound assault load .
They are also less likely to be able to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ move a wounded comrade weighing 165 pounds while carrying that load .
Would anyone argue that a military outfit would benefit from diversity by including soldiers who can and those who can not march 12 miles in five hours while carrying an 83-pound load ?
You say , `` Williams , the military is an exception ! ''
What about language ?
The International Civil Aviation Organization has decreed that all air traffic controllers and flight crew members engaged in or in contact with international flights must be proficient in the English language @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to UNESCO , there are about 7,000 languages in the world .
The International Civil Aviation Organization could promote language inclusiveness by requiring language rotation .
Some years , Cebuano ( of the Malayo-Polynesian language family ) and in other years Kinyarwanda ( of the Niger-Congo language family ) could be the language of pilots and air traffic controllers .
Keep in mind that it is claimed that the great benefit of diversity and inclusiveness is that it promotes and fosters a sense of belonging .
It values and practices respect for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ backgrounds and ways of living of its members .
Another issue is : What should be done when people who should know better praise nondiversity and noninclusiveness ?
Civil rights leader Rev .
Jesse L. Jackson said , `` I applaud commissioner Adam Silver 's commitment to diversity and inclusion within the NBA . ''
During the 2018-2019 season , more than 33 % of NBA teams had head coaches of color .
The number of assistant head coaches of color was over 42 % .
The number of black NBA players was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ these statistics , Oris Stuart , the NBA 's chief diversity and inclusion officer said , `` Diversity , inclusion and equality are central to every aspect of our game and our business . ''
I would like for Jesse Jackson and others who claim that there 's racial diversity and inclusiveness in professional basketball to make their case .
The same question can be asked about professional football where 70 % of NFL players are black , and 9 % of team head coaches are black .
The thornier question and challenge @ @ @ @ @ @ @ professional basketball and football look more like the American population ?
Most of the diversity and inclusiveness insanity has its roots in academia .
An example is a paper titled `` Equilibrium Grade Inflation with Implications for Female Interest in STEM Majors , '' written by Naval Postgraduate School professor Thomas Ahn , Duke University economics professor Peter Arcidiacono , Duke University researcher Amy Hopson , and James R. Thomas of the Federal Trade Commission .
The authors argue that science , technology , engineering and mathematics programs at colleges and universities lacking @ @ @ @ @ @ @ harsh grading policies in these fields .
Their solution to increase the number of women 's involvement in STEM is to standardize grading curves , in order to grade less `` harshly . ''
The insanity of this approach is to not only weaken standards for women but to weaken standards across the board .
This is more evidence that George Orwell was absolutely right when he said , `` There are some ideas so absurd that only an intellectual could believe them . ''

It's nearly impossible to have even a short conversation with a college administrator, politician or chief executive without the words diversity and inclusion dropping from their lips. Diversity and inclusion appear to be the end-all and be-all of their existence. So, I thought I'd begin this discussion by first looking up the definition of diversity.
According to the Oxford Dictionary, diversity is "the practice or quality of including or involving people from a range of different social and ethnic backgrounds and of different genders, sexual orientations, etc." The definition gratuitously adds, "equality and diversity should be supported for their own sake." The standard definition given for inclusion is involvement and empowerment where the inherent worth and dignity of all people are recognized.
Here's my question to those who are wedded to diversity and inclusion: Are people better off the less they have in common with one another? For example, women are less likely to be able to march 12.4 miles in five hours with an 83-pound assault load. They are also less likely to be able to crawl, sprint, negotiate obstacles and move a wounded comrade weighing 165 pounds while carrying that load. Would anyone argue that a military outfit would benefit from diversity by including soldiers who can and those who cannot march 12 miles in five hours while carrying an 83-pound load?
You say, "Williams, the military is an exception!" What about language? The International Civil Aviation Organization has decreed that all air traffic controllers and flight crew members engaged in or in contact with international flights must be proficient in the English language as a general spoken medium. According to UNESCO, there are about 7,000 languages in the world. The International Civil Aviation Organization could promote language inclusiveness by requiring language rotation. Some years, Cebuano (of the Malayo-Polynesian language family) and in other years Kinyarwanda (of the Niger-Congo language family) could be the language of pilots and air traffic controllers. Keep in mind that it is claimed that the great benefit of diversity and inclusiveness is that it promotes and fosters a sense of belonging. It values and practices respect for the differences in the talents, beliefs, backgrounds and ways of living of its members.
Another issue is: What should be done when people who should know better praise nondiversity and noninclusiveness? Civil rights leader Rev. Jesse L. Jackson said, "I applaud commissioner Adam Silver's commitment to diversity and inclusion within the NBA." During the 2018-2019 season, more than 33% of NBA teams had head coaches of color. The number of assistant head coaches of color was over 42%. The number of black NBA players was 82%. In the face of these statistics, Oris Stuart, the NBA's chief diversity and inclusion officer said, "Diversity, inclusion and equality are central to every aspect of our game and our business." I would like for Jesse Jackson and others who claim that there's racial diversity and inclusiveness in professional basketball to make their case. The same question can be asked about professional football where 70% of NFL players are black, and 9% of team head coaches are black. The thornier question and challenge is what can be done to make professional basketball and football look more like the American population?
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
Most of the diversity and inclusiveness insanity has its roots in academia. An example is a paper titled "Equilibrium Grade Inflation with Implications for Female Interest in STEM Majors," written by Naval Postgraduate School professor Thomas Ahn, Duke University economics professor Peter Arcidiacono, Duke University researcher Amy Hopson, and James R. Thomas of the Federal Trade Commission. The authors argue that science, technology, engineering and mathematics programs at colleges and universities lacking female enrollment can be attributed largely to harsh grading policies in these fields. Their solution to increase the number of women's involvement in STEM is to standardize grading curves, in order to grade less "harshly." The insanity of this approach is to not only weaken standards for women but to weaken standards across the board. This is more evidence that George Orwell was absolutely right when he said, "There are some ideas so absurd that only an intellectual could believe them."