wnd--2020-06-25--House Freedom Caucus chair: Mask mandates are 'symbolic' of an 'authoritarian state'

Government-issued face mask mandates are a `` symbol of tyranny '' and of an `` authoritarian state , '' the chairman of the conservative House Freedom Caucus said Tuesday .
In an interview with The Western Journal at a Students for Trump event in Phoenix , Republican Rep. Andy Biggs of Arizona contended that such mandates take away residents ' ability to make their own choices .
Last week , the Board of Supervisors in Maricopa County , which Biggs represents parts of , adopted a resolution that requires most residents to wear masks `` while inside the enclosed area @ @ @ @ @ @ @ '' The resolution came after Arizona Gov .
Doug Ducey , a Republican , gave local governments the ability to mandate mask use in public amid a statewide surge in confirmed COVID-19 cases .
But according to Biggs , government mask mandates are antithetical to the concept of self-determination .
`` [ Mask mandates ] are very symbolic of a kind of authoritarian state , '' he told The Western Journal .
`` Instead of saying , 'Look , you know what , folks , we trust you , you 're free , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ do n't want to go someplace because you think there 's a risk , do n't go to that place , ' what they 're saying is , 'We 're going to impose these on you and everyone . '
`` And I think that 's problematic , '' Biggs said .
And just like this sort of mandate is a symbol of authoritarianism , Biggs said he believes `` it 's a symbol of tyranny '' as well .
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention do recommend that all Americans cover @ @ @ @ @ @ @ CDC recommends wearing cloth face coverings in public settings where other social distancing measures are difficult to maintain ( e.g.
, grocery stores and pharmacies ) especially in areas of significant community-based transmission , '' the CDC says on its website .
`` Cloth face coverings fashioned from household items or made at home from common materials at low cost can be used as an additional , voluntary public health measure . ''
But according to Biggs , the issue is n't whether or not Americans should be wearing masks -- it 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ government 's place to force them to do so .
`` A free society might handle this differently , '' the Arizona Republican wrote in an Op-Ed for the Washington Examiner last week .
`` The easiest case is to allow private businesses and landowners to determine the measures they think most appropriate for public health and safety .
We used to do that , prior to the outbreak of COVID-19 .
`` Further , those who are uneasy about the safety programs of the business would , as a responsible person , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ business .
Some businesses would see the need to be stricter in enforcement of health and safety measures , some less so .
Biggs emphasized that the `` key '' is for people to be able to decide for themselves what they want to do .
`` The key is that each free person would be able to make their choice , '' he wrote .
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal .

Government-issued face mask mandates are a "symbol of tyranny" and of an "authoritarian state," the chairman of the conservative House Freedom Caucus said Tuesday.
In an interview with The Western Journal at a Students for Trump event in Phoenix, Republican Rep. Andy Biggs of Arizona contended that such mandates take away residents' ability to make their own choices.
Last week, the Board of Supervisors in Maricopa County, which Biggs represents parts of, adopted a resolution that requires most residents to wear masks "while inside the enclosed area of any Place of Public Accommodation."
The resolution came after Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey, a Republican, gave local governments the ability to mandate mask use in public amid a statewide surge in confirmed COVID-19 cases.
But according to Biggs, government mask mandates are antithetical to the concept of self-determination.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
"[Mask mandates] are very symbolic of a kind of authoritarian state," he told The Western Journal.
"Instead of saying, 'Look, you know what, folks, we trust you, you're free, you make the choice, if you don't want to go someplace because you think there's a risk, don't go to that place,' what they're saying is, 'We're going to impose these on you and everyone.'
"And I think that's problematic," Biggs said.
And just like this sort of mandate is a symbol of authoritarianism, Biggs said he believes "it's a symbol of tyranny" as well.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention do recommend that all Americans cover their faces while in public.
"CDC recommends wearing cloth face coverings in public settings where other social distancing measures are difficult to maintain (e.g., grocery stores and pharmacies) especially in areas of significant community-based transmission," the CDC says on its website.
"Cloth face coverings fashioned from household items or made at home from common materials at low cost can be used as an additional, voluntary public health measure."
But according to Biggs, the issue isn't whether or not Americans should be wearing masks -- it's that he believes it's not the government's place to force them to do so.
"A free society might handle this differently," the Arizona Republican wrote in an Op-Ed for the Washington Examiner last week. "The easiest case is to allow private businesses and landowners to determine the measures they think most appropriate for public health and safety. We used to do that, prior to the outbreak of COVID-19.
"Further, those who are uneasy about the safety programs of the business would, as a responsible person, determine whether they wanted to patronize that business. Some businesses would see the need to be stricter in enforcement of health and safety measures, some less so.
Biggs emphasized that the "key" is for people to be able to decide for themselves what they want to do.
"The key is that each free person would be able to make their choice," he wrote.
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.


wnd--2020-06-25--San Francisco 49ers fly Black Lives Matter flag next to American flag at stadium

If you had any doubts about the NFL ’ s stance on prioritizing social issues ahead of the upcoming season , look no further than the new flag hoisted at Levi 's Stadium in Santa Clara , California .
On Tuesday , the San Francisco 49ers shared an image on social media of a Black Lives Matter flag waving in the wind next to an American flag and a California state flag .
“ Indivisible with liberty and justice for all .
# BlackLivesMatter , ” the former team of national anthem kneeler Colin Kapernick captioned the photo on Instagram @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on Twitter , retweeting a post from Levi Stadium .
Team CEO Jed York said the new flag is about “ progress ” and is a form of “ taking action ” four years after then-49ers quarterback Kaepernick decided to protest during the anthem .
`` First and foremost , you 're saddened and outraged when you see events take place , especially when they 're specifically violent events that are targeted at African-Americans .
We 're focused on taking actions , ” he said at a state-of-the-franchise meeting Monday , according to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to work with people that are experts , so that we can make real , serious change in this country , ” York said .
“ The thing we do know better than the political aspect of things that need to be changed , we certainly understand education , '' he said .
`` We understand giving people equal opportunities .
That ’ s where we ’ ve done work for decades and will continue to do work .
“ We want to make sure we empower everybody in our organization and out @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and to have what I believe is equality for all and justice for all.
” In the wake of mass protests following the May 25 death of George Floyd in Minneapolis police custody , the NFL is apparently going woke .
The decision by the 49ers to hoist a flag bearing a weighted political statement comes as players , coaches and officials throughout the league have signaled they are onboard with turning the league into a platform for leftist platitudes .
Get ready for anthem kneeling like you ’ ve never seen before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Brien has said he will not stand for the country ’ s national anthem this coming season .
Texans defensive end J.J. Watt indicated he might be joining them in the divisive protests .
It ’ s unclear if longtime anthem-kneeling holdout Drew Brees will stand during “ The Star-Spangled Banner , ” but don ’ t be surprised if he takes a knee .
In an Instagram post earlier this month directed at President Donald Trump , the star New Orleans Saints quarterback said , `` Through my ongoing conversations with friends @ @ @ @ @ @ @ black community , I realize this is not an issue about the American flag .
It has never been .
We can no longer use the flag to turn people away or distract them from the real issues that face our black communities .
`` We did this back in 2017 , and regretfully I brought it back with my comments this week .
We must stop talking about the flag and shift our attention to the real issues of systemic racial injustice , economic oppression , police brutality , and judicial & @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a critical juncture in our nation ’ s history !
If not now , then when ? ''
A great number of NFL fans would prefer it if conversations about perceived systemic racial bias and alleged widespread police brutality occurred off the field , not during a time set aside for Americans to come together to honor their country and those who have served under its flag .
But it is the right of players and coaches to engage in overt political acts while on the job , as long as their employers @ @ @ @ @ @ @ appear to be in support of turning the NFL into a platform for left-wing political causes amid a pandemic and racially charged nationwide civil unrest .
It is also the right of football fans to find something else to do on Sundays , and many of them probably will .
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal .

If you had any doubts about the NFL’s stance on prioritizing social issues ahead of the upcoming season, look no further than the new flag hoisted at Levi's Stadium in Santa Clara, California.
On Tuesday, the San Francisco 49ers shared an image on social media of a Black Lives Matter flag waving in the wind next to an American flag and a California state flag.
“Indivisible with liberty and justice for all. #BlackLivesMatter,” the former team of national anthem kneeler Colin Kapernick captioned the photo on Instagram.
The 49ers also shared the photo on Twitter, retweeting a post from Levi Stadium.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
Team CEO Jed York said the new flag is about “progress” and is a form of “taking action” four years after then-49ers quarterback Kaepernick decided to protest during the anthem.
"First and foremost, you're saddened and outraged when you see events take place, especially when they're specifically violent events that are targeted at African-Americans. We're focused on taking actions,” he said at a state-of-the-franchise meeting Monday, according to The Mercury News.
"We want to work with people that are experts, so that we can make real, serious change in this country,” York said.
“The thing we do know better than the political aspect of things that need to be changed, we certainly understand education," he said. "We understand giving people equal opportunities. That’s where we’ve done work for decades and will continue to do work.
“We want to make sure we empower everybody in our organization and out to make the most of their lives and to have what I believe is equality for all and justice for all.”
In the wake of mass protests following the May 25 death of George Floyd in Minneapolis police custody, the NFL is apparently going woke.
The decision by the 49ers to hoist a flag bearing a weighted political statement comes as players, coaches and officials throughout the league have signaled they are onboard with turning the league into a platform for leftist platitudes.
Get ready for anthem kneeling like you’ve never seen before.
Houston Texans coach Bill O’Brien has said he will not stand for the country’s national anthem this coming season.
Neither will Cleveland Browns quarterback Baker Mayfield.
Texans defensive end J.J. Watt indicated he might be joining them in the divisive protests.
A) don’t speak for me B) if you still think it’s about disrespecting the flag or our military, you clearly haven’t been listening https://t.co/tnsEq5D9WC — JJ Watt (@JJWatt) June 13, 2020
It’s unclear if longtime anthem-kneeling holdout Drew Brees will stand during “The Star-Spangled Banner,” but don’t be surprised if he takes a knee.
In an Instagram post earlier this month directed at President Donald Trump, the star New Orleans Saints quarterback said, "Through my ongoing conversations with friends, teammates, and leaders in the black community, I realize this is not an issue about the American flag. It has never been. We can no longer use the flag to turn people away or distract them from the real issues that face our black communities.
"We did this back in 2017, and regretfully I brought it back with my comments this week. We must stop talking about the flag and shift our attention to the real issues of systemic racial injustice, economic oppression, police brutality, and judicial & prison reform.
"We are at a critical juncture in our nation’s history! If not now, then when?"
A great number of NFL fans would prefer it if conversations about perceived systemic racial bias and alleged widespread police brutality occurred off the field, not during a time set aside for Americans to come together to honor their country and those who have served under its flag.
But it is the right of players and coaches to engage in overt political acts while on the job, as long as their employers green-light it.
Thus far, teams appear to be in support of turning the NFL into a platform for left-wing political causes amid a pandemic and racially charged nationwide civil unrest.
It is also the right of football fans to find something else to do on Sundays, and many of them probably will.
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.


wnd--2020-06-26--Long live the designated hitter

Long live the designated hitter

Major League Baseball is moving toward a 60-game 2020 season .
For the first time in history , the designated hitter rule will be implemented in both the American and the National Leagues .
This is fantastic news for anyone who loves baseball and America , and not simply because the nation will be treated to more home runs but because we will no longer witness professional athletes clumsily swiping at balls or sticking out their bats and praying to make contact .
It 's not just about offense .
Yes , historically the American League scores more runs per @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fact , it has every season since 1973 , when the DH was first implemented .
The differential , however , has been shrinking .
The top four offensive teams in the game resided in AL in 2019 , but overall there was less than a 0.20 run advantage per-game on average .
This trend is partly due to NL pitchers batting less .
As roles have become more specialized , relief pitchers rarely pick up a bat anymore .
In 2019 , the number of plate appearances by pitchers per game in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ least 1973 .
The sacrifice bunt , a rare and great triumph for any pitcher , has basically been stripped from the game because anyone hitting over .220 has a higher probability of moving a runner or reaching base if he takes a swing .
Right now , pitchers are hitting around 160 points under the average position player .
Most of the best-hitting pitchers in the game -- basically , anyone not named Shohei Ohtani -- are simply terrible .
And they 're getting worse every year .
Their presence in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of games .
There is no other major sport where an athlete is asked to perform a task so completely out of his comfort zone .
There 's a reason that NHL goalies do n't participate in shootouts and 350-pound NFL linemen do not line up as wide receivers .
It 's fair to argue , as many purists do , that baseball is n't just a contest of home runs and big swings but of pitching , fielding , running , etc.
, and that more offense does n't necessarily translate into @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's a difference , however , between a low-scoring contest that is dictated by superior pitching and one that is dictated by the inept rally-killing hitters who aspire to reach the Mendoza line .
The DH generates excitement and tension and pits the world 's best hitters against the world 's best pitchers .
There are other popular arguments against the DH , some stronger than others .
National League fans , for instance , seem to believe that the DH will blunt the finer complex strategic aspects of the game .
Listen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tackling quantum physics every time they pull a double switch , but it 's really not that complicated or interesting .
Change is not inevitable ; it is a choice .
Rushing haphazardly to implement a fundamental change to the game is not optimal .
Nor do I dismiss the importance of continuity in baseball , which , perhaps more than any other sport , is invested in its past -- statistically , aesthetically and otherwise .
Given what the world looks like these days , it 's even more important to preserve @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , baseball is still a game .
We have no sacred obligation to avoid changes that can improve it .
There 's little evidence that the designated hitter damages its authenticity .
The designated hitter is 46 years old .
It 's already created a string of exciting moments for fans and extended the careers of a number of great players .
The DH itself has evolved , from a spot typically reserved for aging or rotund sluggers to one that is utilized by managers to create more-balanced lineups .
Moreover , can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Yankees or the Boston Red Sox or Cleveland Indians or Detroit Tigers have less claim to the rituals and traditions of baseball than do the Arizona Diamondbacks or the Colorado Rockies , neither of which even existed when the DH was first implemented ?
The designated hitter has been around longer than the wild-card format .
It is only four years older than the lowered mound .
The latter change was imposed by the athletic evolution of the game .
As is the designated hitter .
The DH rule does n't prohibit pitcher @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a day baseball will be teeming with Ohtanis , and the designated hitter wo n't matter anymore .
That day is not today .

Major League Baseball is moving toward a 60-game 2020 season. For the first time in history, the designated hitter rule will be implemented in both the American and the National Leagues.
This is fantastic news for anyone who loves baseball and America, and not simply because the nation will be treated to more home runs but because we will no longer witness professional athletes clumsily swiping at balls or sticking out their bats and praying to make contact.
It's not just about offense. Yes, historically the American League scores more runs per game than the National League. In fact, it has every season since 1973, when the DH was first implemented. The differential, however, has been shrinking. The top four offensive teams in the game resided in AL in 2019, but overall there was less than a 0.20 run advantage per-game on average.
This trend is partly due to NL pitchers batting less. As roles have become more specialized, relief pitchers rarely pick up a bat anymore. In 2019, the number of plate appearances by pitchers per game in the NL was the lowest since at least 1973.
The sacrifice bunt, a rare and great triumph for any pitcher, has basically been stripped from the game because anyone hitting over .220 has a higher probability of moving a runner or reaching base if he takes a swing. Right now, pitchers are hitting around 160 points under the average position player. Most of the best-hitting pitchers in the game -- basically, anyone not named Shohei Ohtani -- are simply terrible. And they're getting worse every year. Their presence in the batter's box unnecessarily slows the momentum of games.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
There is no other major sport where an athlete is asked to perform a task so completely out of his comfort zone. There's a reason that NHL goalies don't participate in shootouts and 350-pound NFL linemen do not line up as wide receivers.
It's fair to argue, as many purists do, that baseball isn't just a contest of home runs and big swings but of pitching, fielding, running, etc., and that more offense doesn't necessarily translate into more-compelling baseball. No doubt. There's a difference, however, between a low-scoring contest that is dictated by superior pitching and one that is dictated by the inept rally-killing hitters who aspire to reach the Mendoza line. The DH generates excitement and tension and pits the world's best hitters against the world's best pitchers.
There are other popular arguments against the DH, some stronger than others. National League fans, for instance, seem to believe that the DH will blunt the finer complex strategic aspects of the game. Listen, you can pretend that managers are tackling quantum physics every time they pull a double switch, but it's really not that complicated or interesting.
Change is not inevitable; it is a choice. Rushing haphazardly to implement a fundamental change to the game is not optimal. Nor do I dismiss the importance of continuity in baseball, which, perhaps more than any other sport, is invested in its past -- statistically, aesthetically and otherwise. Given what the world looks like these days, it's even more important to preserve traditions.
In the end, though, baseball is still a game. We have no sacred obligation to avoid changes that can improve it. There's little evidence that the designated hitter damages its authenticity. The designated hitter is 46 years old. It's already created a string of exciting moments for fans and extended the careers of a number of great players. The DH itself has evolved, from a spot typically reserved for aging or rotund sluggers to one that is utilized by managers to create more-balanced lineups.
Moreover, can anyone seriously argue that the New York Yankees or the Boston Red Sox or Cleveland Indians or Detroit Tigers have less claim to the rituals and traditions of baseball than do the Arizona Diamondbacks or the Colorado Rockies, neither of which even existed when the DH was first implemented? The designated hitter has been around longer than the wild-card format. It is only four years older than the lowered mound.
The latter change was imposed by the athletic evolution of the game. As is the designated hitter. The DH rule doesn't prohibit pitcher hitting -- and perhaps there will be a day baseball will be teeming with Ohtanis, and the designated hitter won't matter anymore.
That day is not today.


wnd--2020-06-26--The biggest monument to racism is still standing

As the nation watches in disgust as benign and harmless statues are being torn down , it is easy to trace the pattern of destruction .
When the Marxist protestors first began their reign of terror , pretending it was because of the horrific and tragic murder of George Floyd , many gave them `` room to destroy . ''
The nation was horrified by the specter of a man being brutally murdered by people we have all been taught are `` here to help . ''
For as many who are calling to defund the police , there are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ensure this type of brutality is neither condoned nor ignored .
When the first statues were targeted , they all represented the Confederate government that had seceded from the union in order to uphold what they determined to be their state 's right to keep slavery alive .
Those who support the outcome of the Civil War – Republicans , abolitionists , anti-racists – were only concerned that history was being destroyed .
They said the citizens and elected officials should get a say in how these monuments should be removed or replaced @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tear them down and never raised a voice in protest .
It is totally understandable , because these statues represent their party – the party of slavery , oppression , dehumanization and violence .
I 'd want to get rid of those reminders of an evil past too if I were a Democrat .
The Democrats preferred to fight a war and remake the country in their image , rather than free their slaves .
Nothing has change in 160 years .
The same party that justified its support of slavery by claiming @ @ @ @ @ @ @ really worthy of life , is the party that makes the same claim today about the unborn .
They are just blobs of inconvenience that women should have a right to destroy , sort of like their position on slavery .
She should have a right to own a human being and determine its destiny … life or death .
Democrats have now morphed into the Socialist/Communist Party and no amount of fairy dust is going to undo that unholy alliance .
The only hope for Democrats who see this insanity unfolding before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ defend whatever bit of liberty and freedom they can hold on to .
It 's been done before .
The Southern Strategy was the Republicans ' plan to expose and destroy the Democrats ' virtual plantation they erected shortly after losing the Civil War .
TRENDING : N.Y. Times : Biden arrived at his 20-person event with 'such little fanfare ' he was n't even noticed All the governors in the south , just prior to the Civil Rights Movement , were Democrats .
They were closing public schools instead of allowing them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ businesses from allowing integration even if that was the desire of the business owner .
They had laws against mixed neighborhoods , mixed marriages , mixed swimming pools – just about everything was forbidden to be integrated by the Democrats .
How did the Democratic Party that lost a war gain so much power over the Republican Party that fought and won the war to liberate slaves ?
They gained momentum in the mid-1860s with the terrorist arm of their party , known as the Ku Klux Klan .
The modern extension of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like Black Lives Matter , Antifa , Occupy and other Marxist organizations .
Their path of destruction , oppression , violence and mayhem today is exactly what it was before , during and after the Civil War .
Even the Democratic governor and mayor of New York City are standing silent as non-Confederate statues are being ripped down across their cities , saying protest is `` healthy '' and protected speech .
However , destruction of public and private property do n't fall into those categories .
The Democratic elected officials in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not protect the `` Emancipation statue '' from being torn down , funded by contributions from former slaves .
Are they that clueless about what the word `` emancipation '' even means and what this statue represents ?
After the Civil War , the Democrats ignored the truce agreements they signed with the United States government and immediately began making life miserable for the liberated slaves .
And , of course , the job of reconstruction was now in the hands of the Democratic president , Andrew Johnson .
In addition to founding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Jim Crow laws to keep blacks from voting , from owning homes , from moving into certain areas and from earning a living .
Their virtual plantation was up and running almost immediately and has continued to this day .
Which brings us to the last monument to racism that , if these radical protestors were serious about destroying all remnants of that stain on history , they would dismantle immediately .
When Nancy Pelosi `` bravely '' removed four inanimate objects in the shape of portraits of Confederate speakers of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were all Democrats .
Every citizen of the Confederacy was a Democrat .
The Democratic Party has a long history of oppressing people because of the color of their skin , and it is alive and well today .
It 's ironic that Pelosi would say , `` There is no room in the hallowed halls of Congress or in any place of honor for memorializing men who embody the violent bigotry and grotesque racism of the Confederacy . ''
Nancy , that was the creation of your party .
Joe Biden insults @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that if he does n't vote for him , `` he ai n't black . ''
This is the same Joe that congratulated Obama for being a `` clean '' black man , as though shocked by the concept .
Joe and Hillary have this embarrassing ability to mock blacks when speaking to them by using a black-face version of a dialect to tell their audience , `` They gon na put y'all back in chains , '' and whatever it was Hillary tried to say – `` I ai n't no ways @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pronunciation .
The problem with that is , it was YOUR party , Joe and Hillary that had blacks in chains before Republicans liberated them .
Your party fought a war to keep them that way .
And suggesting someone is n't black if they do n't vote for a Democrat is another example of how nothing has changed in the party , but now , the chains are philosophical and political .
Ask any black Republican to tell you how they are treated and referred to by Democrats … black and white @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , '' `` Aunt Jemima , '' `` Oreo , '' mocked and ridiculed – and in the case of Candace Owens , was actually called a white supremacist .
So , when talking about tearing down monuments to racism , why are n't these activists protesting outside the headquarters of the DNC ?
The Democratic Party is a living , breathing , radical , oppressive , socialist statue that wants to put everyone in the chains of government control , and on the plantation of radical extremism that would control speech , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ turn everyone into a slave of the state .
Wow… does that sound familiar or what ?
As the protesters are violently destroying American history , they are becoming a pure reflection and continuation of the same Democratic Party they are representing .
And the party 's elected officials are applauding their destruction and revision of history , probably because they are embarrassed by it , but mainly because it serves their purposes of once again : oppressing innocent people .
So , until the Democratic Party is deconstructed , torn from its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ moral values or absolutes , these protestors are basically telling the world they support racism on every level .
Their party has always been a racist , pro-slavery , anti-liberty , anti-life party , and now it has proven it to the world by embracing and morphing into one of the most oppressive , destructive , violent forms of government … socialism/communism .
They are changing labels , but the MO is still the same : Oppress , destroy , ridicule , marginalize , terrorize , humiliate and dominate .
People still belonging @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are telling the world they are racists , anti-free speech and expression , anti-Constitution and anti-democracy .
They support and embrace collectivism and want to fight another civil war in this country , one in which they could finally achieve their goal of total domination .
That is the real monument that should be destroyed .
Nina May is a writer , producer and director of TV shows and movies , including `` Emancipation Revelation Revolution '' and the sequel , `` Reparations : Who Should Pay ? ''
Her latest feature , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ '' released in theaters just before the COVID lockdown … and is still there .

By Nina May
As the nation watches in disgust as benign and harmless statues are being torn down, it is easy to trace the pattern of destruction. When the Marxist protestors first began their reign of terror, pretending it was because of the horrific and tragic murder of George Floyd, many gave them "room to destroy." The nation was horrified by the specter of a man being brutally murdered by people we have all been taught are "here to help." For as many who are calling to defund the police, there are more calling to reform the system to ensure this type of brutality is neither condoned nor ignored.
When the first statues were targeted, they all represented the Confederate government that had seceded from the union in order to uphold what they determined to be their state's right to keep slavery alive. Those who support the outcome of the Civil War – Republicans, abolitionists, anti-racists – were only concerned that history was being destroyed. They said the citizens and elected officials should get a say in how these monuments should be removed or replaced. But the Democrats seemed anxious to tear them down and never raised a voice in protest. It is totally understandable, because these statues represent their party – the party of slavery, oppression, dehumanization and violence. I'd want to get rid of those reminders of an evil past too if I were a Democrat.
The Democrats preferred to fight a war and remake the country in their image, rather than free their slaves. Nothing has change in 160 years. The same party that justified its support of slavery by claiming blacks were less than human, not really worthy of life, is the party that makes the same claim today about the unborn. They are just blobs of inconvenience that women should have a right to destroy, sort of like their position on slavery. She should have a right to own a human being and determine its destiny … life or death.
Democrats have now morphed into the Socialist/Communist Party and no amount of fairy dust is going to undo that unholy alliance. The only hope for Democrats who see this insanity unfolding before their eyes is to switch parties and defend whatever bit of liberty and freedom they can hold on to. It's been done before. The Southern Strategy was the Republicans' plan to expose and destroy the Democrats' virtual plantation they erected shortly after losing the Civil War.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
All the governors in the south, just prior to the Civil Rights Movement, were Democrats. They were closing public schools instead of allowing them to be integrated. They were preventing businesses from allowing integration even if that was the desire of the business owner. They had laws against mixed neighborhoods, mixed marriages, mixed swimming pools – just about everything was forbidden to be integrated by the Democrats.
How did the Democratic Party that lost a war gain so much power over the Republican Party that fought and won the war to liberate slaves? They gained momentum in the mid-1860s with the terrorist arm of their party, known as the Ku Klux Klan. The modern extension of their reign of terror is in groups like Black Lives Matter, Antifa, Occupy and other Marxist organizations. Their path of destruction, oppression, violence and mayhem today is exactly what it was before, during and after the Civil War.
Even the Democratic governor and mayor of New York City are standing silent as non-Confederate statues are being ripped down across their cities, saying protest is "healthy" and protected speech. However, destruction of public and private property don't fall into those categories. The Democratic elected officials in the District of Columbia have said they will not protect the "Emancipation statue" from being torn down, funded by contributions from former slaves. Are they that clueless about what the word "emancipation" even means and what this statue represents?
After the Civil War, the Democrats ignored the truce agreements they signed with the United States government and immediately began making life miserable for the liberated slaves. And, of course, the job of reconstruction was now in the hands of the Democratic president, Andrew Johnson. In addition to founding the KKK, the Democrats wrote all the Jim Crow laws to keep blacks from voting, from owning homes, from moving into certain areas and from earning a living. Their virtual plantation was up and running almost immediately and has continued to this day. Which brings us to the last monument to racism that, if these radical protestors were serious about destroying all remnants of that stain on history, they would dismantle immediately.
When Nancy Pelosi "bravely" removed four inanimate objects in the shape of portraits of Confederate speakers of the House, everyone failed to mention they were all Democrats. Every citizen of the Confederacy was a Democrat.
The Democratic Party has a long history of oppressing people because of the color of their skin, and it is alive and well today. It's ironic that Pelosi would say, "There is no room in the hallowed halls of Congress or in any place of honor for memorializing men who embody the violent bigotry and grotesque racism of the Confederacy." Nancy, that was the creation of your party. Joe Biden insults a black, on-air personality by suggesting that if he doesn't vote for him, "he ain't black." This is the same Joe that congratulated Obama for being a "clean" black man, as though shocked by the concept.
Joe and Hillary have this embarrassing ability to mock blacks when speaking to them by using a black-face version of a dialect to tell their audience, "They gonna put y'all back in chains," and whatever it was Hillary tried to say – "I ain't no ways feelin' tired" – with condescending pronunciation.
The problem with that is, it was YOUR party, Joe and Hillary that had blacks in chains before Republicans liberated them. Your party fought a war to keep them that way. And suggesting someone isn't black if they don't vote for a Democrat is another example of how nothing has changed in the party, but now, the chains are philosophical and political.
Ask any black Republican to tell you how they are treated and referred to by Democrats … black and white. They are called "Uncle Tom," "Aunt Jemima," "Oreo," mocked and ridiculed – and in the case of Candace Owens, was actually called a white supremacist.
So, when talking about tearing down monuments to racism, why aren't these activists protesting outside the headquarters of the DNC? The Democratic Party is a living, breathing, radical, oppressive, socialist statue that wants to put everyone in the chains of government control, and on the plantation of radical extremism that would control speech, eradicate religion, punish opposition and basically turn everyone into a slave of the state. Wow… does that sound familiar or what?
As the protesters are violently destroying American history, they are becoming a pure reflection and continuation of the same Democratic Party they are representing. And the party's elected officials are applauding their destruction and revision of history, probably because they are embarrassed by it, but mainly because it serves their purposes of once again: oppressing innocent people.
So, until the Democratic Party is deconstructed, torn from its pedestal of dehumanizing tactics and lack of moral values or absolutes, these protestors are basically telling the world they support racism on every level. Their party has always been a racist, pro-slavery, anti-liberty, anti-life party, and now it has proven it to the world by embracing and morphing into one of the most oppressive, destructive, violent forms of government … socialism/communism. They are changing labels, but the MO is still the same: Oppress, destroy, ridicule, marginalize, terrorize, humiliate and dominate.
People still belonging to and believing in the Democratic Party are telling the world they are racists, anti-free speech and expression, anti-Constitution and anti-democracy. They support and embrace collectivism and want to fight another civil war in this country, one in which they could finally achieve their goal of total domination. That is the real monument that should be destroyed.
Nina May is a writer, producer and director of TV shows and movies, including "Emancipation Revelation Revolution" and the sequel, "Reparations: Who Should Pay?" Her latest feature, the romantic comedy "First Lady," released in theaters just before the COVID lockdown … and is still there.


wnd--2020-06-26--Omaha mayor calls for investigation after Black Lives Matter threats prompt restaurant to close

Black Lives Matter activists forced the closure of a popular restaurant in Omaha , Nebraska , after a spat over a Facebook post and a breakfast item named after a Civil War general .
The 11-Worth Cafe , located at the intersection of South 25th Street and Leavenworth Street in the city , was a staple of its neighborhood for 44 years , but it is now permanently closed .
The Omaha World-Herald reported police and city officials are investigating what caused the closure of the cafe , which was targeted over a breakfast item named after Confederate Gen. Robert @ @ @ @ @ @ @ over the menu item blocked traffic and banged on the restaurant ’ s business for two days earlier this month .
The Black Lives Matter activists also reportedly were incensed over a Facebook post by the owner ’ s son , Tony Caniglia Jr. , that called for lethal force to be used by police against rioters in other cities .
The now-deleted Facebook post stated , “ Get rid of the rubber bullets and it ’ s time to go lethal , ” according to the World-Herald .
BLM protester David Mitchell @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Tony Caniglia , and demanded a public apology from his son and a change in the menu .
But the meetings were not productive .
Mitchell later told the newspaper : “ There is no longer a negotiation .
We want that place shut down.
” Caniglia closed the business last week following days of threats , protests -- and an alleged extortion attempt by the activists .
WOWT-TV reported the activists demanded a donation of between $ 500 and $ 1,000 to a black organization .
Caniglia reportedly agreed to do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Black Lives Matter group allegedly demanded a six-figure payout in order to allow him to operate in peace .
Omaha Mayor Jean Stothert is trying to get to the bottom of why one of her city ’ s oldest restaurants was forced out of business by demonstrators .
`` That would be a felony .
So we just wanted to make sure , we talked them through everything they did ... everything they said they saw during each incident so with that it will aid [ Omaha Police Chief Todd Schmaderer ] in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Republican mayor said , according to WOWT .
Stothert said she did not want to see the 11-Worth Cafe leave Omaha .
“ The message I wanted to give to them -- and I wanted them to hear it from me -- is we don ’ t want them to go out of business .
We don ’ t want them to close , ” she said , according to the World-Herald .
Caniglia has not ruled out the possibility of reopening his restaurant in a new location .
This article appeared originally @ @ @ @ @

Black Lives Matter activists forced the closure of a popular restaurant in Omaha, Nebraska, after a spat over a Facebook post and a breakfast item named after a Civil War general.
The 11-Worth Cafe, located at the intersection of South 25th Street and Leavenworth Street in the city, was a staple of its neighborhood for 44 years, but it is now permanently closed.
The Omaha World-Herald reported police and city officials are investigating what caused the closure of the cafe, which was targeted over a breakfast item named after Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee.
Roughly 75 activists enraged over the menu item blocked traffic and banged on the restaurant’s business for two days earlier this month.
A second day of protests are taking place at 11-worth cafe. I’ve spoke with a couple organizers who say they’re still negotiating demands w the owner. pic.twitter.com/GYktGOAtO6 — Sydney Gray (@Sydney_GTV) June 14, 2020
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
The Black Lives Matter activists also reportedly were incensed over a Facebook post by the owner’s son, Tony Caniglia Jr., that called for lethal force to be used by police against rioters in other cities.
The now-deleted Facebook post stated, “Get rid of the rubber bullets and it’s time to go lethal,” according to the World-Herald.
BLM protester David Mitchell met with the 11-Worth Cafe's owner, Tony Caniglia, and demanded a public apology from his son and a change in the menu.
But the meetings were not productive.
Mitchell later told the newspaper: “There is no longer a negotiation. We want that place shut down.”
Caniglia closed the business last week following days of threats, protests -- and an alleged extortion attempt by the activists.
The closing letter from 11-Worth cafe. pic.twitter.com/dlPVmNjVYo — Mike'l Severe (@MikelSevere) June 17, 2020
WOWT-TV reported the activists demanded a donation of between $500 and $1,000 to a black organization.
Caniglia reportedly agreed to do so, but then someone with the Black Lives Matter group allegedly demanded a six-figure payout in order to allow him to operate in peace.
Omaha Mayor Jean Stothert is trying to get to the bottom of why one of her city’s oldest restaurants was forced out of business by demonstrators.
Stothert commented on the alleged extortion attempt.
"That would be a felony. So we just wanted to make sure, we talked them through everything they did ... everything they said they saw during each incident so with that it will aid [Omaha Police Chief Todd Schmaderer] in doing the internal investigation," the Republican mayor said, according to WOWT.
That investigation is underway.
Stothert said she did not want to see the 11-Worth Cafe leave Omaha.
“The message I wanted to give to them -- and I wanted them to hear it from me -- is we don’t want them to go out of business. We don’t want them to close,” she said, according to the World-Herald.
Caniglia has not ruled out the possibility of reopening his restaurant in a new location.
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.


wnd--2020-06-26--House Democrats block resolution condemning rioting and looting

House Democrats made it clear on Thursday whose side they ’ re really on -- and the American people need to remember it in November .
A resolution introduced by Republican Rep. Greg Steube of Florida that went down in defeat on Thursday condemned the rioting and looting that followed the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis in May and failed to attract a single Democratic vote in support , according to the Washington Free Beacon .
Considering this is the same House majority that was unable to find the moral strength to condemn anti-Semitism in 2019 , the development @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it shouldn ’ t be forgotten .
And the fact that Democrats were apparently motivated by a portion of the resolution that condemned efforts to “ defund ” police departments around the country -- the latest fad among the radical left -- only makes the point more urgent .
The resolution from Steube begins with the words “ Calling for justice for George Floyd and others , and condemning violence and rioting.
” That would seem to be something literally all Americans could get on board with -- who ’ s against justice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and rioting ?
That ’ s followed by a lengthy list of “ whereases , ” ranging from the facts of Floyd ’ s death to the degeneration of the protests that followed into “ looting , destruction of business and personal property , and additional loss of life , including the deliberate targeting of law enforcement officers , ” to the current liberal mania of defunding police that would increase the “ risk of violent crime to the communities of the United States , especially vulnerable communities.
” Granted , that last @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Democratic conference – no one would expect Rep. Ilhan Omar or her fellow traveler Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to sign onto the idea that defunding cops increases the risk of crime .
( It ’ s too blatantly true , for starters . )
But Americans could surely expect at least some Democratic members of Congress to sign on .
While it ’ s true that the looting and rioting that the country experienced in early June left huge swaths of the country untouched , it ’ s also true that Americans everywhere saw @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to wonder if their community could be next .
The drama of Seattle ’ s Capitol Hill Organized Protest -- the CHOP-formerly-known-as-CHAZ commune where lawlessness ruled at night ( and resulted in one killing ) -- likely wasn ’ t lost on many either .
But not one Democrat could break party ranks to take a stand for law and order .
According to Townhall , Democrats used a procedural maneuver to keep the measure from coming to the floor for a vote .
That might have kept individual House Democrats from having @ @ @ @ @ @ @ party where they stood , but it also sent the message to the American people loud and clear whose side the party itself is on .
Nestled in the document 's legalese , the resolution merely points out what sane people already know .
As Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio said on the House floor , peaceful protests are not what the country has been witnessing .
`` What happened in Minneapolis we all know was a tragedy .
Never should have happened .
Wrong as wrong could be and [ Floyd ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Jordan said , according to Fox News .
“ There is a big difference between peaceful protest and rioting .
There is a big difference between peaceful protests and violence .
There is a big difference between peaceful protest and attacking police officers .
And there is certainly a big difference between peaceful protest and forming CHAZ or CHOP or any type of autonomous zone.
” The resolution , Jordan noted , “ strongly opposes what I think is one of the craziest public policy proposals I have ever seen : This idea @ @ @ @ @ @ @ police . ''
That may have been the deal-breaker for Speaker Nancy Pelosi ’ s party -- one that has set itself firmly on the side of lawlessness in what ’ s supposed to be a nation of laws .
As is routinely the case these days , the social media reaction to the House Democrats ’ embarrassing decision was swamped by liberals attacking the very idea of attacking the “ mostly peaceful protesters ” who wreaked such havoc on American streets .
Again , this is the party that last year allowed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anti-Semitism a richly deserved condemnation to be watered down to a weak statement that condemned hatred generally .
It ’ s the party that , with less than a handul of exceptions , voted in the House to impeach President Donald Trump on the most spurious of charges .
But every one of those Democrats is going to be up for re-election this fall .
And the ones who won election in 2018 by presenting themselves as some kind of responsible alternative to the # Resistance-crazed progressives who flooded the streets in response @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are going to have to face their own voters as representatives of a party that ca n't bring itself to condemn riots .
Every voter who has been awake for the past month , watching rampant looting in the country ’ s great cities , watching mobs tear down statues of national heroes , and listening to an endless drumbeat of liberal politicians and the mainstream media paint American police officers as some sort of hostile occupation force needs to keep this in mind .
Democrats showed whose side they ’ re on @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in November .
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal .

House Democrats made it clear on Thursday whose side they’re really on -- and the American people need to remember it in November.
A resolution introduced by Republican Rep. Greg Steube of Florida that went down in defeat on Thursday condemned the rioting and looting that followed the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis in May and failed to attract a single Democratic vote in support, according to the Washington Free Beacon.
FLOOR ALERT: @HouseDemocrats just refused to allow a vote on a resolution calling for justice for George Floyd, condemning violence & rioting & urging peace. @RepGregSteube’s resolution also denounces the misguided & dangerous demands to defund the police. pic.twitter.com/2prPzi2Awd — House Rules Republicans (@RulesReps) June 25, 2020
Considering this is the same House majority that was unable to find the moral strength to condemn anti-Semitism in 2019, the development might not be too surprising. But it shouldn’t be forgotten.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
And the fact that Democrats were apparently motivated by a portion of the resolution that condemned efforts to “defund” police departments around the country -- the latest fad among the radical left -- only makes the point more urgent.
The resolution from Steube begins with the words “Calling for justice for George Floyd and others, and condemning violence and rioting.”
That would seem to be something literally all Americans could get on board with -- who’s against justice for victims and in favor of violence and rioting?
That’s followed by a lengthy list of “whereases,” ranging from the facts of Floyd’s death to the degeneration of the protests that followed into “looting, destruction of business and personal property, and additional loss of life, including the deliberate targeting of law enforcement officers,” to the current liberal mania of defunding police that would increase the “risk of violent crime to the communities of the United States, especially vulnerable communities.”
Granted, that last part might alienate the leftiest among the Democratic conference – no one would expect Rep. Ilhan Omar or her fellow traveler Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to sign onto the idea that defunding cops increases the risk of crime. (It’s too blatantly true, for starters.)
But Americans could surely expect at least some Democratic members of Congress to sign on.
While it’s true that the looting and rioting that the country experienced in early June left huge swaths of the country untouched, it’s also true that Americans everywhere saw the destruction on television, and had to wonder if their community could be next.
The drama of Seattle’s Capitol Hill Organized Protest -- the CHOP-formerly-known-as-CHAZ commune where lawlessness ruled at night (and resulted in one killing) -- likely wasn’t lost on many either.
But not one Democrat could break party ranks to take a stand for law and order.
According to Townhall, Democrats used a procedural maneuver to keep the measure from coming to the floor for a vote. That might have kept individual House Democrats from having to declare openly to voters and their party where they stood, but it also sent the message to the American people loud and clear whose side the party itself is on.
Nestled in the document's legalese, the resolution merely points out what sane people already know. As Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio said on the House floor, peaceful protests are not what the country has been witnessing.
"What happened in Minneapolis we all know was a tragedy. Never should have happened. Wrong as wrong could be and [Floyd’s] family deserves justice,” Jordan said, according to Fox News.
“There is a big difference between peaceful protest and rioting. There is a big difference between peaceful protests and violence. There is a big difference between peaceful protest and attacking police officers. And there is certainly a big difference between peaceful protest and forming CHAZ or CHOP or any type of autonomous zone.”
The resolution, Jordan noted, “strongly opposes what I think is one of the craziest public policy proposals I have ever seen: This idea that we're going to defund the police."
That may have been the deal-breaker for Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s party -- one that has set itself firmly on the side of lawlessness in what’s supposed to be a nation of laws.
As is routinely the case these days, the social media reaction to the House Democrats’ embarrassing decision was swamped by liberals attacking the very idea of attacking the “mostly peaceful protesters” who wreaked such havoc on American streets.
Fortunately, many Americans have clearer vision.
This is your Democratic Party. Embarrassing, and I am being as nice as possible. House Dems Unanimously Block Resolution Condemning Violence and Rioting https://t.co/KIDLuLWoMf — catgal (@ladycatgal) June 25, 2020
Well @TheDemocrats: Can you explain what is so wrong with this? "The resolution called for justice for George Floyd; condemned violence, rioting & looting; and called for Congress to unequivocally oppose autonomous zones & efforts to defund the police.”https://t.co/910teAIZ3z — America First (@AmericaFirstPAC) June 25, 2020
This is damning evidence that congressional demorroids WANT violence & destruction in America to continue. Demorroids only vote to pad their own pockets. #FDems House Dems Unanimously Block Resolution Condemning Violence and Rioting https://t.co/0sOWDdl0OU — kroncker (@kroncker2) June 25, 2020
Again, this is the party that last year allowed a resolution giving the ancient evil of anti-Semitism a richly deserved condemnation to be watered down to a weak statement that condemned hatred generally.
It’s the party that, with less than a handul of exceptions, voted in the House to impeach President Donald Trump on the most spurious of charges.
But every one of those Democrats is going to be up for re-election this fall.
And the ones who won election in 2018 by presenting themselves as some kind of responsible alternative to the #Resistance-crazed progressives who flooded the streets in response to Trump’s election in 2016 are going to have to face their own voters as representatives of a party that can't bring itself to condemn riots.
Every voter who has been awake for the past month, watching rampant looting in the country’s great cities, watching mobs tear down statues of national heroes, and listening to an endless drumbeat of liberal politicians and the mainstream media paint American police officers as some sort of hostile occupation force needs to keep this in mind.
Democrats showed whose side they’re on Thursday. Voters need to remember that in November.
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.


wnd--2020-06-26--Leftist suggests 'Star-Spangled Banner' be replaced by Lennon's Marxist 'Imagine'

It should come as no shock that the left hates our national anthem .
We know that they hate our nation 's history .
We know they hate the freedom that our flag symbolizes .
So naturally , they hate `` The Star-Spangled Banner '' as well .
That 's why it 's not surprising that Yahoo Entertainment published an opinion piece Wednesday by Lyndsey Parker , editor-in-chief of Yahoo Music , suggesting that it may be time to `` replace 'The Star-Spangled Banner ' with a new national anthem . ''
And Kevin Powell , a liberal activist quoted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the most annoying songs ever recorded -- John Lennon 's `` Imagine '' -- be the one to take its place .
In `` Imagine , '' Lennon dreams of a Marxist , one-world government , famously singing of a world with `` no countries , '' `` no religion '' and `` no possessions . ''
Parker argued that the U.S. should possibly consider replacing `` The Star-Spangled Banner '' because its author , Francis Scott Key , was a known slaveholder who called African-Americans a `` distinct and inferior race of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Parker quoted Daniel E. Walker , the author of `` No More , No More : Slavery and Cultural Resistance in Havana and New Orleans '' and producer of the documentary `` How Sweet the Sound : Gospel in Los Angeles . ''
“ And so , I do side with the people who say that we should rethink this as the national anthem , because this is about the deep-seated legacy of slavery and white supremacy in America , where we do things over and over and over again that are a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ color and women , '' Walker said .
“ People just do n't know history , and everybody 's guilty of this , '' he added .
In reality , it 's Walker who sounds ignorant of history .
When iconoclastic movements attempt to erase a country 's history , both good and ill , it consistently forebodes the rise of dangerous totalitarianism .
What leftists want is a kind of `` Year Zero '' -- the idea that an existing society 's culture or history can be completely destroyed or erased .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the Khmer Rouge regime in Cambodia , and the lyrics to `` Imagine '' lyrics fit right in with the communist hell-hole Pol Pot created there .
Yet according to Powell , who suggested to Parker that `` Imagine '' become America 's new national anthem , the song is `` the most beautiful , unifying , all-people , all-backgrounds-together kind of song you could have.
” Unless you are a person of faith , of course .
As Zachary Faria pointed out at the Washington Examiner , `` A song that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ play well for the roughly 80 % of religious people in the United States . ''
Perhaps Powell does not know any religious people or does not think people of faith matter in his leftist notion of `` unifying . ''
The Star-Spangled Banner must stay .
Let tone-deaf leftist celebrities sing `` Imagine '' instead .
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal .

It should come as no shock that the left hates our national anthem.
We know that they hate our nation's history. We know they hate the freedom that our flag symbolizes.
So naturally, they hate "The Star-Spangled Banner" as well.
That's why it's not surprising that Yahoo Entertainment published an opinion piece Wednesday by Lyndsey Parker, editor-in-chief of Yahoo Music, suggesting that it may be time to "replace 'The Star-Spangled Banner' with a new national anthem."
And Kevin Powell, a liberal activist quoted in her story, suggested one of the most annoying songs ever recorded -- John Lennon's "Imagine" -- be the one to take its place.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
In "Imagine," Lennon dreams of a Marxist, one-world government, famously singing of a world with "no countries," "no religion" and "no possessions."
Parker argued that the U.S. should possibly consider replacing "The Star-Spangled Banner" because its author, Francis Scott Key, was a known slaveholder who called African-Americans a "distinct and inferior race of people."
In her piece, Parker quoted Daniel E. Walker, the author of "No More, No More: Slavery and Cultural Resistance in Havana and New Orleans" and producer of the documentary "How Sweet the Sound: Gospel in Los Angeles."
“And so, I do side with the people who say that we should rethink this as the national anthem, because this is about the deep-seated legacy of slavery and white supremacy in America, where we do things over and over and over again that are a slap in the face of people of color and women," Walker said.
“People just don't know history, and everybody's guilty of this," he added.
In reality, it's Walker who sounds ignorant of history. When iconoclastic movements attempt to erase a country's history, both good and ill, it consistently forebodes the rise of dangerous totalitarianism.
What leftists want is a kind of "Year Zero" -- the idea that an existing society's culture or history can be completely destroyed or erased.
This concept was famously put into practice by the Khmer Rouge regime in Cambodia, and the lyrics to "Imagine" lyrics fit right in with the communist hell-hole Pol Pot created there.
Yet according to Powell, who suggested to Parker that "Imagine" become America's new national anthem, the song is "the most beautiful, unifying, all-people, all-backgrounds-together kind of song you could have.”
Unless you are a person of faith, of course. As Zachary Faria pointed out at the Washington Examiner, "A song that calls for 'no religion too' should play well for the roughly 80% of religious people in the United States."
Perhaps Powell does not know any religious people or does not think people of faith matter in his leftist notion of "unifying."
The Star-Spangled Banner must stay. Let tone-deaf leftist celebrities sing "Imagine" instead.
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.


wnd--2020-06-25--The last racist on the planet

The last racist on the planet

I have often said that if you look for racism or sexism you will find it .
The noose in the garage of NASCAR driver Bubba Wallace at Talladega proves my point .
The FBI sent a team to investigate and discovered it was simply a pulldown rope that was long and had been fashioned into a noose at the end , which was used as a handle to open the garage door .
It had been that way since last year , long before the garage assignments for the last race .
However , the initial discovery sent shockwaves @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on proving that systemic racism exists in this country despite a civil war , the Thirteenth , Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the Constitution ; the Civil Rights Acts of 1866 , 1870 , 1871 , 1875 , 1957 , 1960 , 1964 , 1968 and 1991 ; the Voting Rights Acts of 1965 , and the amendments in 1970 , 1975 and 1982 ; the Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987 ; the Fair Housing Act Amendments of 1988 ; the Civil Rights Act of 1991 and the Voting Rights Act of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on earth has done more than ours to create equal opportunity and justice for all .
It should be a source of pride for all Americans .
That is why this country is one of the most desirable places to live in all the world .
That is why so many immigrate here , legally and illegally .
I do not know Darrell `` Bubba '' Wallace , Jr .
I 'm quite sure he is a nice person and a great representative of Richard Petty Motorsports .
It has been many years @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I have the distinction of being the first woman admitted to the garage and pit areas of NASCAR , which had been a male bastion .
Once admitted , I found the people in NASCAR to be among the nicest and most accepting of all the sports I was privileged to cover .
Recently , Wallace led a campaign to ban the use of the Confederate battle flag on anything at NASCAR events .
The stars and bars as it was called had long been a symbol of the South .
It was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the region and was displayed at NASCAR events , thought to be a fitting symbol for a sport that was Southern grown .
As someone who grew up near Atlanta I can tell you that , to many , it stood for all that is good about that region .
Surveys in 2015 and 2000 showed that the majority of Americans thought the flag to be a symbol of Southern pride rather than racism , 57 % and 59 % respectively .
However , in survey results from only the South , 75 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , while 75 % of blacks thought it represented racism .
In short , it represents many things to many people , but it is just a symbol and design .
What thinking person would willingly offend another over a design on a piece of cloth ?
It would surprise most people today to learn that only a very small percentage of soldiers who fought and died in the Civil War owned slaves , though slavery and its economic impact on the South certainly had much to do with it .
Nevertheless , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were told it was about states ' rights , just as many who have becoming willing pawns for the leftist group Black Lives Matter were told it is about equal justice .
It is curious that this whole summer of demonstrations and rioting stemmed from the tragic death of George Floyd at the hands of a veteran police officer .
I ’ ve not met or heard of anyone who thought that the officer who caused his death should not be prosecuted .
There was no debate about that .
Unfortunately bad things @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the police .
Most police officers are kind , decent , selfless people and they deserve our support .
Bad cops exist , but I haven ’ t heard anything from the mainstream media , which has become a tool of the left , talk about the reason they do .
Police unions , in most cases , wo n't allow them to be fired and the Democratic Party is in bed with the unions .
Try as we may , we will never rid the earth of discrimination .
However , those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , lacking any real accomplishments , want to feel superior to someone else .
They are little people and should be ignored .
Meanwhile , the rest of us need to get on with life , go back to work and love our neighbors .

I have often said that if you look for racism or sexism you will find it. The noose in the garage of NASCAR driver Bubba Wallace at Talladega proves my point.
The FBI sent a team to investigate and discovered it was simply a pulldown rope that was long and had been fashioned into a noose at the end, which was used as a handle to open the garage door. It had been that way since last year, long before the garage assignments for the last race.
However, the initial discovery sent shockwaves throughout the mainstream media which seems intent on proving that systemic racism exists in this country despite a civil war, the Thirteenth, Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments to the Constitution; the Civil Rights Acts of 1866, 1870, 1871, 1875, 1957, 1960, 1964, 1968 and 1991; the Voting Rights Acts of 1965, and the amendments in 1970, 1975 and 1982; the Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987; the Fair Housing Act Amendments of 1988; the Civil Rights Act of 1991 and the Voting Rights Act of 2006.
Though imperfect, no country on earth has done more than ours to create equal opportunity and justice for all. It should be a source of pride for all Americans. That is why this country is one of the most desirable places to live in all the world. That is why so many immigrate here, legally and illegally.
I do not know Darrell "Bubba" Wallace, Jr. I'm quite sure he is a nice person and a great representative of Richard Petty Motorsports. It has been many years since I have covered NASCAR, but I have the distinction of being the first woman admitted to the garage and pit areas of NASCAR, which had been a male bastion.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
Once admitted, I found the people in NASCAR to be among the nicest and most accepting of all the sports I was privileged to cover.
Recently, Wallace led a campaign to ban the use of the Confederate battle flag on anything at NASCAR events. The stars and bars as it was called had long been a symbol of the South. It was a part of many state flags in the region and was displayed at NASCAR events, thought to be a fitting symbol for a sport that was Southern grown. As someone who grew up near Atlanta I can tell you that, to many, it stood for all that is good about that region.
Surveys in 2015 and 2000 showed that the majority of Americans thought the flag to be a symbol of Southern pride rather than racism, 57% and 59% respectively. However, in survey results from only the South, 75% of whites thought it represented pride, while 75% of blacks thought it represented racism. In short, it represents many things to many people, but it is just a symbol and design. What thinking person would willingly offend another over a design on a piece of cloth?
It would surprise most people today to learn that only a very small percentage of soldiers who fought and died in the Civil War owned slaves, though slavery and its economic impact on the South certainly had much to do with it. Nevertheless, the young men who fought that war were told it was about states' rights, just as many who have becoming willing pawns for the leftist group Black Lives Matter were told it is about equal justice.
It is curious that this whole summer of demonstrations and rioting stemmed from the tragic death of George Floyd at the hands of a veteran police officer. I’ve not met or heard of anyone who thought that the officer who caused his death should not be prosecuted. There was no debate about that. Unfortunately bad things happen. That's why we need the police.
Most police officers are kind, decent, selfless people and they deserve our support. Bad cops exist, but I haven’t heard anything from the mainstream media, which has become a tool of the left, talk about the reason they do. Police unions, in most cases, won't allow them to be fired and the Democratic Party is in bed with the unions.
Try as we may, we will never rid the earth of discrimination. However, those who discriminate are little people, who, lacking any real accomplishments, want to feel superior to someone else. They are little people and should be ignored.
Meanwhile, the rest of us need to get on with life, go back to work and love our neighbors.


wnd--2020-06-25--Anti-Trump protesters: COVID-19 not from China, Trump knew about the disease in November

According to some anti-Trump protesters , the president 's dishonesty about COVID-19 resulted in an excess of deaths from the virus .
Among the claims made by protesters Tuesday in Phoenix were that President Donald Trump repeatedly lied about the coronavirus , China was not the source of the outbreak and Trump was warned of the severity of the disease as early as November of 2019 .
Demonstrating outside the Dream City Church , where the president was speaking at a Students for Trump rally , the protesters spoke with The Western Journal about Trump 's handling of the COVID-19 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sign that read `` Trump lies , America dies . ''
`` I think especially egregious right now in this moment is the whole COVID lies that started back in January or February .
Do we even really know when ? ''
the woman told The Western Journal .
When pressed about what exactly Trump has lied about , the protester claimed that studies show the coronavirus did not originate in China .
`` He 's lied about knowing about it .
He 's actually lying to the people about it being from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shown that it 's not , and he continues to make racial slang that causes hate . ''
Another protester voiced similar sentiments about the president and his COVID-19 response .
`` He lied about not being notified about the danger of the coronavirus .
He was warned as early as November of 2019 , '' the man told The Western Journal .
`` He was warned in December of 2019 .
January , February , March of 2020 .
And he was -- he not only discounted the warnings , he lied @ @ @ @ @ @ @ When asked whether the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the World Health Organization were also responsible for not jumping on the coronavirus back in November , the protester responded by saying , `` Yeah , I do . ''
The evidence surrounding the novel coronavirus and its origins do not support those claims .
ABC News did report in April that the Trump administration was warned about the virus in November 2019 by a National Center for Medical Intelligence report , according to some unnamed sources .
However , the director @ @ @ @ @ @ @ statement to make it known that no such report existed .
“ As a matter of practice , the National Center for Medical Intelligence does not comment publicly on specific intelligence matters , ” said Col. R. Shane Day , who is a medical doctor .
“ However , in the interest of transparency during this current public health crisis , we can confirm that media reporting about the existence/release of a National Center for Medical Intelligence Coronavirus-related product/assessment in November of 2019 is not correct .
No such NCMI product exists.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that China knew about the virus very early on and actively tried to cover it up .
China 's first confirmed COVID-19 case has been traced back to Nov. 17 , as reported by the South China Morning Post .
Additional evidence from a Harvard Medical School study tracking satellite data in the area of Wuhan suggests that the coronavirus outbreak may have begun in China as far back as October .
A study conducted by the U.K. 's University of Southampton determined that if China had acted sooner , the virus ' @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as much as 95 percent .
As for whether the president was too slow to respond to the outbreak , in fact , his travel ban from China on Jan. 31 was met with harsh criticism .
Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden called the move another example of Trump 's `` record of hysteria , xenophobia and fear-mongering , '' according to Fox News .
In March , Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders joined in on the criticism .
After declaring he would not restrict the U.S. border to prevent COVID-19 's spread @ @ @ @ @ @ @ xenophobia .
Even the WHO was critical of the president 's move at the time .
On Feb. 3 , WHO chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus claimed the travel ban would `` unnecessarily interfere with international travel and trade , '' according to Reuters .
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal .

According to some anti-Trump protesters, the president's dishonesty about COVID-19 resulted in an excess of deaths from the virus.
Among the claims made by protesters Tuesday in Phoenix were that President Donald Trump repeatedly lied about the coronavirus, China was not the source of the outbreak and Trump was warned of the severity of the disease as early as November of 2019.
Demonstrating outside the Dream City Church, where the president was speaking at a Students for Trump rally, the protesters spoke with The Western Journal about Trump's handling of the COVID-19 pandemic.
One protester held up a sign that read "Trump lies, America dies."
"I think especially egregious right now in this moment is the whole COVID lies that started back in January or February. Do we even really know when?" the woman told The Western Journal.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
When pressed about what exactly Trump has lied about, the protester claimed that studies show the coronavirus did not originate in China.
"He's lied about knowing about it. He's actually lying to the people about it being from China. Studies again and again have shown that it's not, and he continues to make racial slang that causes hate."
Another protester voiced similar sentiments about the president and his COVID-19 response.
"He lied about not being notified about the danger of the coronavirus. He was warned as early as November of 2019," the man told The Western Journal.
"He was warned in December of 2019. January, February, March of 2020. And he was -- he not only discounted the warnings, he lied about ever hearing that information."
When asked whether the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the World Health Organization were also responsible for not jumping on the coronavirus back in November, the protester responded by saying, "Yeah, I do."
The evidence surrounding the novel coronavirus and its origins do not support those claims.
ABC News did report in April that the Trump administration was warned about the virus in November 2019 by a National Center for Medical Intelligence report, according to some unnamed sources.
However, the director of the NCMI issued a rare public statement to make it known that no such report existed.
“As a matter of practice, the National Center for Medical Intelligence does not comment publicly on specific intelligence matters,” said Col. R. Shane Day, who is a medical doctor. “However, in the interest of transparency during this current public health crisis, we can confirm that media reporting about the existence/release of a National Center for Medical Intelligence Coronavirus-related product/assessment in November of 2019 is not correct. No such NCMI product exists.”
What is clear, however, is that China knew about the virus very early on and actively tried to cover it up.
China's first confirmed COVID-19 case has been traced back to Nov. 17, as reported by the South China Morning Post.
Additional evidence from a Harvard Medical School study tracking satellite data in the area of Wuhan suggests that the coronavirus outbreak may have begun in China as far back as October.
A study conducted by the U.K.'s University of Southampton determined that if China had acted sooner, the virus' worldwide spread could have been reduced by as much as 95 percent.
As for whether the president was too slow to respond to the outbreak, in fact, his travel ban from China on Jan. 31 was met with harsh criticism.
Presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden called the move another example of Trump's "record of hysteria, xenophobia and fear-mongering," according to Fox News.
In March, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders joined in on the criticism. After declaring he would not restrict the U.S. border to prevent COVID-19's spread, Sanders condemned the president's alleged xenophobia.
Even the WHO was critical of the president's move at the time. On Feb. 3, WHO chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus claimed the travel ban would "unnecessarily interfere with international travel and trade," according to Reuters.
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.


wnd--2020-06-25--D.C. police union boss: 70% of members are considering quitting the force

If you want to defund the police and you live in Washington , D.C. , do n't worry .
You soon might not be paying the salaries of quite as many of them .
In an appearance Wednesday on `` Fox & Friends First , '' D.C. Police Union President Greggory Pemberton said a recent survey found seven in 10 police officers were considering quitting the job in the nation 's capital .
This is unfortunate timing , as the nation 's capital -- and other major metropolitan areas -- are seeing an upswing in crime .
“ We recently @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and we found that over 70 percent of them were considering leaving the police department , and the vast majority were considering leaving law enforcement altogether , ” Pemberton told Fox News .
The number is actually 71 percent , according to WTTG-TV .
The D.C. Police Union , which represents members of the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department , conducted the survey last week among 600 of its 3,600 members .
That was n't the only alarming number they found .
The survey revealed 93 percent of officers believed discipline against officers would @ @ @ @ @ @ @ percent believed it would go up .
A whopping 98.7 concurred with MPD Chief Peter Newsham when he said the city council had `` completely abandoned them . ''
Perhaps most importantly , 88 percent believed officer safety would decrease .
Not only would that likely lead to more police officers leaving the force , it would also probably result in fewer recruits .
Granted , this was a survey conducted by the D.C. Police Union of its own members , which is n't entirely scientific .
As a glance at the state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ moment , however , it 's both useful and telling .
You may remember the `` Ferguson effect , '' where the backlash against law enforcement in the wake of the Michael Brown shooting in Ferguson , Missouri , in 2014 made police overcautious .
“ What we saw after that was police officers got the impression nationwide that citizens and governments alike did not want them doing any proactive policing , they didn ’ t want them going out and patrolling their neighborhoods , '' Pemberton said '' Those officers still responded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was about all they did.
” That could return with a vengeance , Pemberton fears .
“ My concerns are that what ’ s going on right now makes what happened in 2015 look like child ’ s play , '' he said .
`` And I think rather than seeing police officers sit on their hands or fail to be more apprehensive about doing police work , I think you ’ re actually going to see people leaving law enforcement.
” “ When people realize that they have to put their lives @ @ @ @ @ @ @ jeopardy they ’ re going to start looking at other careers , '' he added .
`` I think that if things keep going the way they 're going , I think you ’ re going to see a lot of police officers leave law enforcement , and that ’ s going to leave us in a really bad place.
” Whether or not this exodus materializes once this crisis passes is another thing entirely , but our nation 's law enforcement officers wo n't soon forget the spring of 2020 and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ first sent to enforce the lockdown orders which blanketed the nation .
This they sometimes did overzealously , yes -- but they did so at the behest of politicians who , at that moment in time , found rigid , draconian policing both necessary and virtuous .
And then those politicians did n't .
With the death of George Floyd on May 25 , they began preaching the gospel of Shaun King in unison from the soapboxes of their news conferences .
This did n't mean that they needed the police any less @ @ @ @ @ @ @ peaceful of protests needs some law enforcement present in case things take a turn for the problematic .
As it turns out , the protests often did go south , and to the extent that they could , first responders were still needed to intervene .
Simultaneously , politicians began echoing the calls to defund the same police they were leaning on .
Nowhere was the hypocrisy more rank than Southern California , where few politicians not enmeshed in this moment would have the audacity Democratic Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti showed .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ he was considering cutting up to $ 150 million from the Los Angeles Police Department 's budget to divert to a proposed $ 250 million slate of social programs .
These , according to the Los Angeles Times , included `` youth jobs , health initiatives and 'peace centers ' to heal trauma . ''
Meanwhile , over at the LAPD , almost all of the nearly 10,000-strong force had been working seven days a week during the worst of the protests .
That meant the city could n't pay all of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
All overtime past June 7 would instead be remunerated in time off , time which the officers could presumably spend at any number of `` peace centers '' if Mayor Garcetti gets his way .
It 's not just the protests liberal politicians need police for .
Pemberton said that the homicide rate in the District was up 10 percent from the year before .
That 's actually a modest increase compared to New York City , where homicides in May were up 79 percent from 2019 .
Shootings were up 64 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the Big Apple .
“ We are not going to allow gun violence to continue to grow in this city .
We ’ re not going to go back to the days when there was so much violence pervading our communities , ” New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio told WCBS-TV on Monday .
“ We ’ re going to use new strategies and approaches in policing , new strategies and approaches at the community level .
We ’ re going to do whatever it takes to fight back gun violence.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ that , and you need police officers who believe city hall has their back .
In New York , Washington , D.C. , and so many of our nation 's other great metropolises , it 's an open question whether you 're going to get that .
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal .

If you want to defund the police and you live in Washington, D.C., don't worry. You soon might not be paying the salaries of quite as many of them.
In an appearance Wednesday on "Fox & Friends First," D.C. Police Union President Greggory Pemberton said a recent survey found seven in 10 police officers were considering quitting the job in the nation's capital.
This is unfortunate timing, as the nation's capital -- and other major metropolitan areas -- are seeing an upswing in crime.
“We recently did a study of our own members and we found that over 70 percent of them were considering leaving the police department, and the vast majority were considering leaving law enforcement altogether,” Pemberton told Fox News.
President Trump pledges “serious force” against protestors attempting to set up an ‘autonomous zone’ outside the White House. D.C. Police Union President, Greggory Pemberton, says the zone would cause crime and lawlessness.https://t.co/pXLrlN1dDs — Fox & Friends First (@FoxFriendsFirst) June 24, 2020
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
The number is actually 71 percent, according to WTTG-TV. The D.C. Police Union, which represents members of the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department, conducted the survey last week among 600 of its 3,600 members.
That wasn't the only alarming number they found.
The survey revealed 93 percent of officers believed discipline against officers would increase. As for crime, 96 percent believed it would go up. A whopping 98.7 concurred with MPD Chief Peter Newsham when he said the city council had "completely abandoned them."
Perhaps most importantly, 88 percent believed officer safety would decrease. Not only would that likely lead to more police officers leaving the force, it would also probably result in fewer recruits.
Granted, this was a survey conducted by the D.C. Police Union of its own members, which isn't entirely scientific. As a glance at the state of mind of law enforcement at the moment, however, it's both useful and telling.
You may remember the "Ferguson effect," where the backlash against law enforcement in the wake of the Michael Brown shooting in Ferguson, Missouri, in 2014 made police overcautious.
“What we saw after that was police officers got the impression nationwide that citizens and governments alike did not want them doing any proactive policing, they didn’t want them going out and patrolling their neighborhoods," Pemberton said
"Those officers still responded to … 911 calls, but that was about all they did.”
That could return with a vengeance, Pemberton fears.
“My concerns are that what’s going on right now makes what happened in 2015 look like child’s play," he said. "And I think rather than seeing police officers sit on their hands or fail to be more apprehensive about doing police work, I think you’re actually going to see people leaving law enforcement.”
“When people realize that they have to put their lives and their freedom and their families in jeopardy they’re going to start looking at other careers," he added. "I think that if things keep going the way they're going, I think you’re going to see a lot of police officers leave law enforcement, and that’s going to leave us in a really bad place.”
Whether or not this exodus materializes once this crisis passes is another thing entirely, but our nation's law enforcement officers won't soon forget the spring of 2020 and the ignominious treatment they received.
They were first sent to enforce the lockdown orders which blanketed the nation. This they sometimes did overzealously, yes -- but they did so at the behest of politicians who, at that moment in time, found rigid, draconian policing both necessary and virtuous.
And then those politicians didn't. With the death of George Floyd on May 25, they began preaching the gospel of Shaun King in unison from the soapboxes of their news conferences.
This didn't mean that they needed the police any less, mind you. Even the most peaceful of protests needs some law enforcement present in case things take a turn for the problematic. As it turns out, the protests often did go south, and to the extent that they could, first responders were still needed to intervene.
Simultaneously, politicians began echoing the calls to defund the same police they were leaning on.
Nowhere was the hypocrisy more rank than Southern California, where few politicians not enmeshed in this moment would have the audacity Democratic Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti showed. Amid the protests, Garcetti proudly announced he was considering cutting up to $150 million from the Los Angeles Police Department's budget to divert to a proposed $250 million slate of social programs. These, according to the Los Angeles Times, included "youth jobs, health initiatives and 'peace centers' to heal trauma."
Meanwhile, over at the LAPD, almost all of the nearly 10,000-strong force had been working seven days a week during the worst of the protests. That meant the city couldn't pay all of the $40 million overtime bill they amassed. All overtime past June 7 would instead be remunerated in time off, time which the officers could presumably spend at any number of "peace centers" if Mayor Garcetti gets his way.
It's not just the protests liberal politicians need police for.
Pemberton said that the homicide rate in the District was up 10 percent from the year before. That's actually a modest increase compared to New York City, where homicides in May were up 79 percent from 2019. Shootings were up 64 percent and burglaries were up 34 percent in the Big Apple.
“We are not going to allow gun violence to continue to grow in this city. We’re not going to go back to the days when there was so much violence pervading our communities,” New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio told WCBS-TV on Monday.
“We’re going to use new strategies and approaches in policing, new strategies and approaches at the community level. We’re going to do whatever it takes to fight back gun violence.”
But you need police officers for that, and you need police officers who believe city hall has their back.
In New York, Washington, D.C., and so many of our nation's other great metropolises, it's an open question whether you're going to get that.
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.