wnd--2020-08-11--Congress members demand abortionists give millions of dollars back to government

Dozens of Congress members have written a letter urging the administrator of the U.S. Small Business Administration to retrieve the tens of millions of dollars Planned Parenthood received through the congressionally approved Paycheck Protection Program .
`` These loans are intended for struggling small businesses , and PPFA clearly exceeds the affiliation rules and size standards , '' the members of Congress said in their letter to the SBA 's Jovita Carranza .
`` We are encouraged by SBA ’ s letter dated May 19 , 2020 , to PPFA ’ s affiliate , Planned Parenthood of Metropolitan Washington , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the organization that it is ineligible for these PPP funds , '' they continued .
`` We wholeheartedly support the decision to block funding to this PPFA affiliate , but we also encourage the SBA to apply the same standards to all PPFA affiliates . ''
TRENDING : Lindsey Graham : 'Somebody needs to go to jail for this' The letter was posted online by Rep. Doug Collins , R-Ga. , who was joined by dozens of other Congress members , including Reps. Jodey Arrington , Mike Johnson , Matt Gaetz , John @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Jim Banks , Ralph Norman , Andy Harris , William Timmons , Bill Flores , Neal Dunn , Carol Miller , Ted Budd , Steve King , Bill Huizenga , Jody Hice , Darin LaHood , Ted Yoho and Barry Loudermilk .
The letter said members `` made sure that Planned Parenthood affiliates would be ineligible to receive PPP dollars when it established the program in the Coronavirus Aid , Relief , and Economic Security Act ( CARES Act ) , which states that nonprofits with 500 or fewer employees are eligible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Planned Parenthood has a staff of 16,000 employees , they still applied and accepted these taxpayer dollars .
`` We noted that PPFA affiliates applied for more than $ 80 million in PPP loans .
Additionally , in the PPP funding data released by the SBA on July 6 , 2020 , on the organizations that received more than $ 150,000 , over 40 PPFA organizations are listed as being approved for loans for as much as $ 151 million of the PPP dollars . ''
The Congress members want to be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for PPFA affiliates have , in fact , been disbursed , per the list released on July 6 , 2020 . ''
`` We also request an update on if the SBA has already asked for these funds to be returned and if and when the SBA has or will receive the returned funds . ''
Other signatures came from Reps. Jim Jordan , Steve Chabot , Gus Bilirakis , Michael Waltz , Glenn Grothman , John Rose , Christopher Smith , Doug Collins , H. Morgan Griffith , Rick Allen , Brad @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , K. Mixchael Conaway , Mike Kelly , Steve Wakins , Debbie Lesko , Russ Fulcher , Alex Mooney , Kelly Armstrong , Blaine Kuetkemeyer , Jason Smith , Ralph Abraham , Andy Biggs and Tom Cole .

Dozens of Congress members have written a letter urging the administrator of the U.S. Small Business Administration to retrieve the tens of millions of dollars Planned Parenthood received through the congressionally approved Paycheck Protection Program.
"These loans are intended for struggling small businesses, and PPFA clearly exceeds the affiliation rules and size standards," the members of Congress said in their letter to the SBA's Jovita Carranza.
"We are encouraged by SBA’s letter dated May 19, 2020, to PPFA’s affiliate, Planned Parenthood of Metropolitan Washington, Inc., in which SBA has notified the organization that it is ineligible for these PPP funds," they continued. "We wholeheartedly support the decision to block funding to this PPFA affiliate, but we also encourage the SBA to apply the same standards to all PPFA affiliates."
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
The letter was posted online by Rep. Doug Collins, R-Ga., who was joined by dozens of other Congress members, including Reps. Jodey Arrington, Mike Johnson, Matt Gaetz, John Joyce, Chuck Fleischmann, Virginia Foxx, Jim Banks, Ralph Norman, Andy Harris, William Timmons, Bill Flores, Neal Dunn, Carol Miller, Ted Budd, Steve King, Bill Huizenga, Jody Hice, Darin LaHood, Ted Yoho and Barry Loudermilk.
The letter said members "made sure that Planned Parenthood affiliates would be ineligible to receive PPP dollars when it established the program in the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act), which states that nonprofits with 500 or fewer employees are eligible for these loans. Despite the fact that Planned Parenthood has a staff of 16,000 employees, they still applied and accepted these taxpayer dollars.
"We noted that PPFA affiliates applied for more than $80 million in PPP loans. Additionally, in the PPP funding data released by the SBA on July 6, 2020, on the organizations that received more than $150,000, over 40 PPFA organizations are listed as being approved for loans for as much as $151 million of the PPP dollars."
The Congress members want to be "informed whether the PPP funds approved for PPFA affiliates have, in fact, been disbursed, per the list released on July 6, 2020."
"We also request an update on if the SBA has already asked for these funds to be returned and if and when the SBA has or will receive the returned funds."
Other signatures came from Reps. Jim Jordan, Steve Chabot, Gus Bilirakis, Michael Waltz, Glenn Grothman, John Rose, Christopher Smith, Doug Collins, H. Morgan Griffith, Rick Allen, Brad Wenstrup, Kevin Hern, David Kustoff, K. Mixchael Conaway, Mike Kelly, Steve Wakins, Debbie Lesko, Russ Fulcher, Alex Mooney, Kelly Armstrong, Blaine Kuetkemeyer, Jason Smith, Ralph Abraham, Andy Biggs and Tom Cole.


wnd--2020-08-11--Federal elections chief warns of 'substantial chance' of no results on Election Night

Americans might not know the winner of major races by the end of Election Day , Federal Elections Commission Commissioner Ellen Weintraub said Monday .
“ Let me just tell everybody , we ’ re all going to need to take a deep breath and be patient this year because there ’ s a substantial chance we are not going to know on election night what the results are , ” Weintraub said Monday on CNN ’ s “ New Day.
” “ Possibly for the presidency but maybe for many other races that are important to people , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a little bit longer to count all the votes accurately , that 's what we need to do in order to ensure that everyone 's vote counts , ” she said .
TRENDING : Lindsey Graham : 'Somebody needs to go to jail for this' '' Wisconsin ’ s election in April , in many ways a fiasco , offers a positive lesson in how to deal with a long count .
It took six days for election officials to tally up the 1.1 million absentee ballots cast ( a state-record-shattering 72 percent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ wrote in May in an Op-Ed for The New York Times along with Kevin Kruse , a professor of history at Princeton University .
In the Op-Ed , the writers said any time change happens , what used to be routine takes longer .
`` Switching over to a substantially mail-based voting system in a matter of months will almost certainly bring delays in counting those many new millions of absentee ballots , particularly if administrators are not empowered to start tallying them until the end of Election Day .
So we ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and Kruse wrote .
`` Fortunately , time is built into the system , even for the presidential race .
There ’ s no requirement that a presidential race be called on election night , or even in November .
This year , federal law sets Dec. 8 as the deadline to determine which presidential candidate has won each state , 35 days after Election Day , '' they wrote .
During Monday 's interview , Weintraub , who has been FEC commissioner since 2002 , said there is no difference to those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ballots and the mass mail-in voting that President Donald Trump has opposed .
She said there “ absolutely ” can be an honest election with mail-in voting .
Weintraub also insisted that Congress needs to appropriate more than the $ 400 million already being spent in order to help states manage the election .
Mike Baker , a Fox News commentator and former CIA operative , questioned the wisdom of mail-in voting on a mass scale during a recent appearance on the Joe Rogan show .
`` The realities are -- you got @ @ @ @ @ @ @ go all , you know , mail ballots or whatever , hey , just be aware of the fact that you could have a lot of problems , '' Baker said .
Those problems could include `` disqualified ballots , because of a variety of reasons , a lot of lost ballots , and so , if what you want to do is sow chaos , and dissent and further this divide , then yeah , that 's a pretty good way to do it , '' he said .
Weintraub has been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about fraud in mail-in voting , so much so that last fall , Caroline Hunter , a Republican member of the FEC , took her to task in an Op-Ed on Politico .
`` Unfortunately , while Weintraub ’ s tweets and interviews might make for good soundbites and clickbait , they are harming the legitimacy of the institution she purports to serve , '' Hunter wrote .
`` Commissioners are meant to be independent and neutral arbiters of campaign finance law .
Yet Weintraub ’ s statements indicate that she has prematurely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ FEC , and that she radically rejects any legal perspective other than her own .
`` Not only that , she risks misleading the public about what the FEC does and what campaign finance law really says .
Not surprisingly , Weintraub ’ s activities are causing consternation and confusion in several quarters , including on Capitol Hill , and people are starting to ask questions , including about her possible misuse of government resources for ideological and political purposes . ''
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal .

Americans might not know the winner of major races by the end of Election Day, Federal Elections Commission Commissioner Ellen Weintraub said Monday.
“Let me just tell everybody, we’re all going to need to take a deep breath and be patient this year because there’s a substantial chance we are not going to know on election night what the results are,” Weintraub said Monday on CNN’s “New Day.”
“Possibly for the presidency but maybe for many other races that are important to people, and that's OK. If it takes a little bit longer to count all the votes accurately, that's what we need to do in order to ensure that everyone's vote counts,” she said.
There’s “a substantial chance” that the results won’t be out on election night, says Federal Election Commission’s Ellen Weintraub. “If it takes a little bit longer to count all the votes accurately, that’s what we need to do in order to ensure that everyone’s vote counts.” pic.twitter.com/mNdwuzjvyt — New Day (@NewDay) August 10, 2020
The reason: mail-in ballots.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
"Wisconsin’s election in April, in many ways a fiasco, offers a positive lesson in how to deal with a long count. It took six days for election officials to tally up the 1.1 million absentee ballots cast (a state-record-shattering 72 percent of all ballots)," Weintraub wrote in May in an Op-Ed for The New York Times along with Kevin Kruse, a professor of history at Princeton University.
In the Op-Ed, the writers said any time change happens, what used to be routine takes longer.
"Switching over to a substantially mail-based voting system in a matter of months will almost certainly bring delays in counting those many new millions of absentee ballots, particularly if administrators are not empowered to start tallying them until the end of Election Day. So we’ll have to wait," Weintraub and Kruse wrote.
"Fortunately, time is built into the system, even for the presidential race. There’s no requirement that a presidential race be called on election night, or even in November. This year, federal law sets Dec. 8 as the deadline to determine which presidential candidate has won each state, 35 days after Election Day," they wrote.
During Monday's interview, Weintraub, who has been FEC commissioner since 2002, said there is no difference to those she called "experts" between absentee ballots and the mass mail-in voting that President Donald Trump has opposed.
She said there “absolutely” can be an honest election with mail-in voting.
Weintraub also insisted that Congress needs to appropriate more than the $400 million already being spent in order to help states manage the election.
Mike Baker, a Fox News commentator and former CIA operative, questioned the wisdom of mail-in voting on a mass scale during a recent appearance on the Joe Rogan show.
"The realities are -- you got to be pragmatic -- you want to go all, you know, mail ballots or whatever, hey, just be aware of the fact that you could have a lot of problems," Baker said.
Those problems could include "disqualified ballots, because of a variety of reasons, a lot of lost ballots, and so, if what you want to do is sow chaos, and dissent and further this divide, then yeah, that's a pretty good way to do it," he said.
Weintraub has been a staunch critic of Trump's warnings about fraud in mail-in voting, so much so that last fall, Caroline Hunter, a Republican member of the FEC, took her to task in an Op-Ed on Politico.
"Unfortunately, while Weintraub’s tweets and interviews might make for good soundbites and clickbait, they are harming the legitimacy of the institution she purports to serve," Hunter wrote. "Commissioners are meant to be independent and neutral arbiters of campaign finance law. Yet Weintraub’s statements indicate that she has prematurely judged matters that could come before the FEC, and that she radically rejects any legal perspective other than her own.
"Not only that, she risks misleading the public about what the FEC does and what campaign finance law really says. Not surprisingly, Weintraub’s activities are causing consternation and confusion in several quarters, including on Capitol Hill, and people are starting to ask questions, including about her possible misuse of government resources for ideological and political purposes."
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.


wnd--2020-08-11--Mulvaney: White House has 'done their homework' on coronavirus relief orders

President Trump 's controversial executive orders over the weekend extending coronavirus relief appear to be legally solid , according to former acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney .
Mulvaney told `` Mornings with Maria '' on Fox Business on Monday that he reviewed the four orders and found it `` fascinating '' to see how the White House `` structured these things . ''
`` It looks like a lot of it comes out of money that was already appropriated in the CARES Act and then run through the Department of Homeland Security [ DHS ] through the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ powerful piece of legislation that when Congress passed many years ago gave every administration a great deal of authority and great deal of discretion , '' Mulvaney said .
The extensions to the unemployment benefits , for example , come from the CARES Act , he said .
TRENDING : Lindsey Graham : 'Somebody needs to go to jail for this' Trump issued the orders after the White House failed to reach an agreement with Congress on a new relief bill .
Critics have raised legal questions about some of the orders , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to control federal spending .
Trump said the orders would extend enhanced unemployment benefits of $ 400 a week .
That figure is lower than the $ 600 benefit that expired at the end of last month .
The White House says it 's intent is to provide needed assistance while avoiding creating an incentive to not return to work .
Trump also ordered an extension of a moratorium on evictions and the suspension of student loan repayments .
And , fulfilling a longtime objective , he deferred payroll tax collection for those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Mulvaney noted the CARES Act appropriated about $ 150 billion to DHS , and less than half of it has been spent .
`` And what it looks like the president ’ s trying to do is go in there and say , 'OK , I 'll redirect this money that Congress has already appropriated , ' '' he said .
Mulvaney , formerly Trump 's director of the Office of Management and Budget , told Fox Business it `` looks like [ the orders ] could be fairly well backed up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` had the chance to do the cross-references and so forth . ''
`` But it 's the type of thing that the Office of Management and Budget used to work on all the time so my guess is they ’ ve done their homework on this and can probably make most of it stick , ” he said .
Filling in for Maria Bartiromo , Fox Business ' Dagen McDowell pointed out to Mulvaney that Democratic governors need to `` get on-board '' with the $ 400 weekly payment because Trump 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ must be funded by the states .
New York Democratic Gov .
Andrew Cuomo said Sunday in a conference call with reporters that it 's `` laughable '' to expect New York to fund the program .
Mulvaney acknowledged that Cuomo `` has the right not to participate . ''
But he said it would be difficult for Cuomo to maintain that stance and `` stay on the sidelines '' if Republican governors decide to participate and it `` starts working in those states . ''

President Trump's controversial executive orders over the weekend extending coronavirus relief appear to be legally solid, according to former acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney.
Mulvaney told "Mornings with Maria" on Fox Business on Monday that he reviewed the four orders and found it "fascinating" to see how the White House "structured these things."
"It looks like a lot of it comes out of money that was already appropriated in the CARES Act and then run through the Department of Homeland Security [DHS] through the Stafford Act -- that's a very powerful piece of legislation that when Congress passed many years ago gave every administration a great deal of authority and great deal of discretion," Mulvaney said.
The extensions to the unemployment benefits, for example, come from the CARES Act, he said.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
Trump issued the orders after the White House failed to reach an agreement with Congress on a new relief bill. Critics have raised legal questions about some of the orders, because the Constitution gives Congress the power to control federal spending. Trump said the orders would extend enhanced unemployment benefits of $400 a week. That figure is lower than the $600 benefit that expired at the end of last month. The White House says it's intent is to provide needed assistance while avoiding creating an incentive to not return to work.
Trump also ordered an extension of a moratorium on evictions and the suspension of student loan repayments. And, fulfilling a longtime objective, he deferred payroll tax collection for those earning less than $100,000 a year.
Mulvaney noted the CARES Act appropriated about $150 billion to DHS, and less than half of it has been spent.
"And what it looks like the president’s trying to do is go in there and say, 'OK, I'll redirect this money that Congress has already appropriated,'" he said.
Mulvaney, formerly Trump's director of the Office of Management and Budget, told Fox Business it "looks like [the orders] could be fairly well backed up legally," although he has not "had the chance to do the cross-references and so forth."
"But it's the type of thing that the Office of Management and Budget used to work on all the time so my guess is they’ve done their homework on this and can probably make most of it stick,” he said.
Filling in for Maria Bartiromo, Fox Business' Dagen McDowell pointed out to Mulvaney that Democratic governors need to "get on-board" with the $400 weekly payment because Trump's order requires that 25% of it must be funded by the states.
New York Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo said Sunday in a conference call with reporters that it's "laughable" to expect New York to fund the program.
Mulvaney acknowledged that Cuomo "has the right not to participate."
But he said it would be difficult for Cuomo to maintain that stance and "stay on the sidelines" if Republican governors decide to participate and it "starts working in those states."


wnd--2020-08-11--Teacher frets 'conservative' parents will hear his radical online indoctrination

A public schoolteacher in Philadelphia is fretting that `` conservative parents '' may be able to listen in on his virtual classes .
The Washington Examiner reported the concerns were from Matthew Kay , an instructor who worried that his `` what happens here stays here '' philosophy may be violated .
`` So , this fall , virtual class discussion will have many potential spectators – parents , siblings , etc .
– in the same room .
We ’ ll never be quite sure who is overhearing the discourse .
What does this do for our equity/inclusion work @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much have students depended on the ( somewhat ) secure barriers of our physical classrooms to encourage vulnerability ?
How many of us have installed some version of ‘ what happens here stays here ’ to help this ? ''
he wondered .
TRENDING : Lindsey Graham : 'Somebody needs to go to jail for this' Kay is an English instructor at the Science Leadership Academy , a public school .
He said he now fears the potential `` damage '' from parents who overhear his lessons to their children on `` gender @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Matt Walsh called it `` one of the creepiest yet most revealing Twitter threads ever to be posted on the platform . ''
Kay worried that `` conservative parents '' somehow would be able to interfere with the `` messy work '' of indoctrinating children .
Kay said he was concerned aboug never being quite sure `` who is overhearing '' the lessons .
`` While conversation about race are in my wheelhouse , and remain a concern in this no-walls environment — I am most intrigued by the damage that 'helicopter/snowplow ' @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about gender/sexuality .
And while 'conservative ' parents are my chief concern — I know that the damage can come from the left too .
If we are engaged in the messy work of destabilizing a kid ’ s racism or homophobia or transphobia — how much do we want their classmates ’ parents piling on ? ''
Kay wrote .
Walsh pointed out that other teachers began sharing their own strategies for `` brainwashing during a pandemic . ''
One said she would ask students about their preferred pronouns .
Another complained @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a Zoom class and filed a complaint , which the teacher was going to be `` an issue . ''
A ninth grade teacher said participation in class was `` stunted '' since `` outsiders , '' mostly the children 's parents , were listening .
Walsh said classrooms are not `` safe '' places for children , because public shool workers say `` bullying is a major problem for today ’ s youth and many of them are driven to self-destruction because of it . ''
`` So , which is it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ open and genuine dialogue , where children can safely express their truest feelings and beliefs , or is it a place rife with bullying and mockery , where rigid conformity is demanded and those who fail to meet the demands are severely punished ?
It certainly can ’ t be both , '' Walsh said .
Further , an adult keeping a secret with a child , and `` helping the child conceal that secret from his parent – especially when the secret has anything to do with sexuality – is acting in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ predatory , '' Walsh wrote .
Finally , he argued , teachers are supposed to teach .
`` A child ’ s actual parents only come to be viewed as 'dangerous ' interlopers and intrusive 'outsiders ' when teachers begin to view themselves and the school system as the true guardians and conservators of the children that are temporarily in their care . ''

A public schoolteacher in Philadelphia is fretting that "conservative parents" may be able to listen in on his virtual classes.
The Washington Examiner reported the concerns were from Matthew Kay, an instructor who worried that his "what happens here stays here" philosophy may be violated.
"So, this fall, virtual class discussion will have many potential spectators – parents, siblings, etc. – in the same room. We’ll never be quite sure who is overhearing the discourse. What does this do for our equity/inclusion work?" Kay tweeted.
"How much have students depended on the (somewhat) secure barriers of our physical classrooms to encourage vulnerability? How many of us have installed some version of ‘what happens here stays here’ to help this?" he wondered.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
Kay is an English instructor at the Science Leadership Academy, a public school.
He said he now fears the potential "damage" from parents who overhear his lessons to their children on "gender and sexuality."
Daily Wire columnist Matt Walsh called it "one of the creepiest yet most revealing Twitter threads ever to be posted on the platform."
Kay worried that "conservative parents" somehow would be able to interfere with the "messy work" of indoctrinating children.
Kay said he was concerned aboug never being quite sure "who is overhearing" the lessons.
"While conversation about race are in my wheelhouse, and remain a concern in this no-walls environment — I am most intrigued by the damage that 'helicopter/snowplow' parents can do in the host conversations about gender/sexuality. And while 'conservative' parents are my chief concern — I know that the damage can come from the left too. If we are engaged in the messy work of destabilizing a kid’s racism or homophobia or transphobia — how much do we want their classmates’ parents piling on?" Kay wrote.
Walsh pointed out that other teachers began sharing their own strategies for "brainwashing during a pandemic."
One said she would ask students about their preferred pronouns.
Another complained that a "white parent" recorded a Zoom class and filed a complaint, which the teacher was going to be "an issue."
A ninth grade teacher said participation in class was "stunted" since "outsiders," mostly the children's parents, were listening.
Walsh said classrooms are not "safe" places for children, because public shool workers say "bullying is a major problem for today’s youth and many of them are driven to self-destruction because of it."
"So, which is it? Is the classroom a place for open and genuine dialogue, where children can safely express their truest feelings and beliefs, or is it a place rife with bullying and mockery, where rigid conformity is demanded and those who fail to meet the demands are severely punished? It certainly can’t be both," Walsh said.
Further, an adult keeping a secret with a child, and "helping the child conceal that secret from his parent – especially when the secret has anything to do with sexuality – is acting in a way that is nothing short of predatory," Walsh wrote.
Finally, he argued, teachers are supposed to teach.
"A child’s actual parents only come to be viewed as 'dangerous' interlopers and intrusive 'outsiders' when teachers begin to view themselves and the school system as the true guardians and conservators of the children that are temporarily in their care."


wnd--2020-08-11--Putin says country has approved coronavirus vaccine

( JUST THE NEWS ) -- Russian President Vladimir Putin on Tuesday announced the approval of a coronavirus vaccine , @ @ @ @ @ first vaccine available to treat the novel virus .
There is , however , ongoing @ @ @ @ @ efficacy of the Russian vaccine .
`` A vaccine against coronavirus has been registered for @ @ @ @ @ world this morning .
I know that it works quite effectively , it forms a @ @ @ @ @ said on state TV Aug. 11 .
The vaccine , called Sputnik-V -- a reference @ @ @ @ @ of the world 's first satellite by the Soviet Union -- was developed by the @ @ @ @ @ Moscow .

(JUST THE NEWS) -- Russian President Vladimir Putin on Tuesday announced the approval of a coronavirus vaccine, making it the world's first vaccine available to treat the novel virus. There is, however, ongoing concern over the safety and efficacy of the Russian vaccine.
"A vaccine against coronavirus has been registered for the first time in the world this morning. I know that it works quite effectively, it forms a stable immunity," Putin said on state TV Aug. 11.
The vaccine, called Sputnik-V -- a reference to the 1957 surprise launch of the world's first satellite by the Soviet Union -- was developed by the Gamaleya Institute, based in Moscow.
Read the full story ›


wnd--2020-08-11--Left erupts when Trump adviser calls guy a 'guy'

( JUST THE NEWS ) -- Trump campaign senior legal advisor Jenna Ellis is facing criticism for referring to the @ @ @ @ @ Rachel Levine , a biological male who identifies as female , as a `` guy @ @ @ @ @ her description of Levine , pushing back against criticism from the Human Rights Campaign which @ @ @ @ @ bigot '' and criticism from Pennsylvania Gov .
Tom Wolf who characterized her behavior as @ @ @ @ @ Ellis has asserted that will not apologize for the comment .

(JUST THE NEWS) -- Trump campaign senior legal advisor Jenna Ellis is facing criticism for referring to the transgender Pennsylvania Health Secretary Dr. Rachel Levine, a biological male who identifies as female, as a "guy."
Ellis has defended her description of Levine, pushing back against criticism from the Human Rights Campaign which described her as "a bigot" and criticism from Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf who characterized her behavior as "hate speech."
Ellis has asserted that will not apologize for the comment.
Read the full story ›


wnd--2020-08-11--Why America is in real danger

Why America is in real danger

Americans have long been proud of the fact that , unlike European countries , America never went the route of totalitarianism as embodied in communism , fascism and Nazism .
This achievement may be coming to an end .
In order to understand why , it is first necessary to understand why European countries embraced – or fell victim to – totalitarian doctrines .
Until World War I , the primary beliefs that gave life meaning , both on a national and personal level , were Judeo-Christian religions and patriotism ( love of one 's nation ) .
What gave @ @ @ @ @ @ @ For most Europeans of the younger generation , World War I , with its seemingly senseless slaughter of millions , ended belief in Christianity and , in many cases , ended the people 's faith in their nations .
God was deemed absent ; religion was deemed unnecessary ; and national identity was widely seen as a cause of the war .
TRENDING : Lindsey Graham : 'Somebody needs to go to jail for this' That left a void that was almost immediately filled by communism , fascism and Nazism .
In Russia @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Russian Revolution .
Even before the war ended , in 1917 , the czar was overthrown , and later that year , the Bolsheviks ( the Russian communists ) took over .
As awful as the czar was , there was far more freedom under him than there was in the Soviet Union until the fall of communism 72 years later , not to mention the murder of more people – 20 to 40 million – under the Soviet regime .
In Italy , the rise of fascism followed World War I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ came to power just 15 years after the end of the Great War .
Nazism conquered most of the European continent during WWII , and after Germany 's defeat in 1945 , the Soviets imposed communism over all of Eastern Europe .
Though there were communists , communist fellow travelers , Nazi sympathizers , racists and anti-Semites in the United States , neither communism nor fascism nor Nazism took root here .
The primary reason was that , unlike most Europeans , Americans did not lose their faith in Judeo-Christian religions and values @ @ @ @ @ @ @ America remained so religious that , in 1954 , the words `` under God '' were inserted into the Pledge of Allegiance recited daily in American schools .
However , by the 1950s , faith in America , Christianity and what we call bourgeois middle-class values was largely limited to older Americans .
The post-World War II baby-boomer generation was already being indoctrinated in secularism and anti-Americanism .
As early as 1962 , the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that school prayer was unconstitutional .
By the late 1960s , vast numbers of baby @ @ @ @ @ @ @ much against America – routinely characterized as an imperialist and colonialist aggressor country with an evil military – as they were against the war in Vietnam .
It was not uncommon to see America spelled `` Amerikkka '' or `` Amerika '' at protests and in graffiti .
When I was in graduate school at Columbia University in the early 1970s , I was taught that men and women are not inherently different from one another and that the Cold War was between two superpowers ( equally at fault ) , not between @ @ @ @ @ @ @ passed , and the post-Christian , left-wing baby boomers have come close to achieving complete success .
The mainstream print and electronic media , universities , high schools and elementary schools , the arts and now sports have all been conquered by the left .
Except for sports , from the beginning of the 20th century , they were almost all liberal , but now they are left .
We now have the answer to the question : What will happen to America if Americans lose faith in God and country as the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ What will happen to America when Christianity dies as it did in Europe after World War I ?
The way things now look , America may have its bout with some totalitarian doctrine – almost surely some form of leftism .
Liberty has never been a left-wing value .
From Lenin on , wherever the left has come to power , it has suppressed liberty , beginning with free speech .
Already , despite a Republican president and a Republican Senate , America has less free speech than at any time in its @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I testified before a Senate subcommittee and wrote an op-ed piece for The Wall Street Journal about YouTube ( owned by Google ) placing more than 100 Prager University , or PragerU , videos on its restricted list .
And things have gotten much worse .
Last week , PragerU was locked out of its Twitter account for retweeting a press conference of eight physicians in Washington , D.C. , which had already received 17 million views , and Facebook has just informed us that if we even cite studies that show possible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the early stages of a patient with COVID-19 , we will lose our Facebook account .
And then there is the `` cancel culture '' – which is merely a euphemism for leftist suppression of dissent .
People are booted from internet platforms , fired from their jobs or have their reputations smeared and their businesses ruined for differing with the left – on anything .
We are also undergoing a nonviolent ( as of now ) version of Mao Zedong 's Cultural Revolution , with individuals forced to issue humiliating public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sessions ( we do n't yet have reeducation camps , but they should not be ruled out as a possibility if the left is in control ) .
Another communist norm taking root in America is the rewriting of the American past .
We are living a famous Soviet dissident joke : `` In the Soviet Union , the future is known ; it is the past that is always changing . ''
On almost all social issues and many economic ones , the American left is more radical than the left in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are more wary of ideological fanaticism because of the vast scale of death and suffering that resulted from communism , fascism and Nazism .
One might say that Europe was inoculated against fanaticism .
Europeans are more preoccupied with working less , traveling more and being taken care of than with ideological movements .
But America , which has not suffered under fanatical , irrational , liberty-depriving ideologies , has not been inoculated .
Without such a vaccination , what replaced Christianity in Europe may well do the same in America .

Americans have long been proud of the fact that, unlike European countries, America never went the route of totalitarianism as embodied in communism, fascism and Nazism.
This achievement may be coming to an end.
In order to understand why, it is first necessary to understand why European countries embraced – or fell victim to – totalitarian doctrines.
Until World War I, the primary beliefs that gave life meaning, both on a national and personal level, were Judeo-Christian religions and patriotism (love of one's nation). What gave people moral guidance were Judeo-Christian values.
For most Europeans of the younger generation, World War I, with its seemingly senseless slaughter of millions, ended belief in Christianity and, in many cases, ended the people's faith in their nations. God was deemed absent; religion was deemed unnecessary; and national identity was widely seen as a cause of the war.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
That left a void that was almost immediately filled by communism, fascism and Nazism.
In Russia, World War I led directly to the Russian Revolution. Even before the war ended, in 1917, the czar was overthrown, and later that year, the Bolsheviks (the Russian communists) took over. As awful as the czar was, there was far more freedom under him than there was in the Soviet Union until the fall of communism 72 years later, not to mention the murder of more people – 20 to 40 million – under the Soviet regime.
In Italy, the rise of fascism followed World War I. And in Germany, the Nazis came to power just 15 years after the end of the Great War. Nazism conquered most of the European continent during WWII, and after Germany's defeat in 1945, the Soviets imposed communism over all of Eastern Europe.
Though there were communists, communist fellow travelers, Nazi sympathizers, racists and anti-Semites in the United States, neither communism nor fascism nor Nazism took root here. The primary reason was that, unlike most Europeans, Americans did not lose their faith in Judeo-Christian religions and values or in America after World War I. America remained so religious that, in 1954, the words "under God" were inserted into the Pledge of Allegiance recited daily in American schools.
However, by the 1950s, faith in America, Christianity and what we call bourgeois middle-class values was largely limited to older Americans. The post-World War II baby-boomer generation was already being indoctrinated in secularism and anti-Americanism. As early as 1962, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that school prayer was unconstitutional.
By the late 1960s, vast numbers of baby boomers were attending demonstrations that were as much against America – routinely characterized as an imperialist and colonialist aggressor country with an evil military – as they were against the war in Vietnam. It was not uncommon to see America spelled "Amerikkka" or "Amerika" at protests and in graffiti.
When I was in graduate school at Columbia University in the early 1970s, I was taught that men and women are not inherently different from one another and that the Cold War was between two superpowers (equally at fault), not between freedom and tyranny.
Another generation has passed, and the post-Christian, left-wing baby boomers have come close to achieving complete success. The mainstream print and electronic media, universities, high schools and elementary schools, the arts and now sports have all been conquered by the left. Except for sports, from the beginning of the 20th century, they were almost all liberal, but now they are left.
We now have the answer to the question: What will happen to America if Americans lose faith in God and country as the Europeans did after World War I? What will happen to America when Christianity dies as it did in Europe after World War I?
The way things now look, America may have its bout with some totalitarian doctrine – almost surely some form of leftism. Liberty has never been a left-wing value. From Lenin on, wherever the left has come to power, it has suppressed liberty, beginning with free speech. Already, despite a Republican president and a Republican Senate, America has less free speech than at any time in its history. Exactly one year ago, I testified before a Senate subcommittee and wrote an op-ed piece for The Wall Street Journal about YouTube (owned by Google) placing more than 100 Prager University, or PragerU, videos on its restricted list.
And things have gotten much worse. Last week, PragerU was locked out of its Twitter account for retweeting a press conference of eight physicians in Washington, D.C., which had already received 17 million views, and Facebook has just informed us that if we even cite studies that show possible benefits of hydroxychloroquine (with zinc) in the early stages of a patient with COVID-19, we will lose our Facebook account.
And then there is the "cancel culture" – which is merely a euphemism for leftist suppression of dissent. People are booted from internet platforms, fired from their jobs or have their reputations smeared and their businesses ruined for differing with the left – on anything.
We are also undergoing a nonviolent (as of now) version of Mao Zedong's Cultural Revolution, with individuals forced to issue humiliating public recantations of their beliefs and attend reeducation sessions (we don't yet have reeducation camps, but they should not be ruled out as a possibility if the left is in control).
Another communist norm taking root in America is the rewriting of the American past. We are living a famous Soviet dissident joke: "In the Soviet Union, the future is known; it is the past that is always changing."
On almost all social issues and many economic ones, the American left is more radical than the left in Europe. Europeans across the political spectrum are more wary of ideological fanaticism because of the vast scale of death and suffering that resulted from communism, fascism and Nazism.
One might say that Europe was inoculated against fanaticism. Europeans are more preoccupied with working less, traveling more and being taken care of than with ideological movements. But America, which has not suffered under fanatical, irrational, liberty-depriving ideologies, has not been inoculated.
Without such a vaccination, what replaced Christianity in Europe may well do the same in America.


wnd--2020-08-12--Councilman who voted to defund cops scrambles to deny records showing he called them 8 times

The modern Democratic politician has an incredibly difficult job .
From constant electoral pressure to appease the social-justice left at every turn to the threat of vandalism and personal attack should you fail to go far enough , it is no easy task to both serve and suffer the merciless onslaught of the mob .
Last week , it was revealed that Los Angeles City Councilman Mike Bonin has not been walking that tightrope very well .
According to public records recently made available by the Los Angeles Police Department , Bonin seems to have privately broken with progressive left @ @ @ @ @ @ @ calls for service to local law enforcement since April .
( Naughty , naughty ) The longtime Democrat and 2008 Obama campaign field organizer has been outspoken in support of recent efforts to defund and abolish the police , voting in favor of a $ 150 million LAPD budget reduction despite recent crime surges , according to KABC-TV .
Yet the records revealed on July 28 indicate Bonin had no qualms making use of LAPD and its substantial resources during recent pandemic lockdowns and riots , calling the department for general information twice @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or police response on six other occasions .
Of course , knowing just how damning this hypocritical demand for police protection will look to both law-and-order conservatives and left-wing cop haters , Bonin denied ever making such calls for service .
`` I have NEVER asked LAPD for patrols at my house , '' Bonin wrote on Twitter , seeming to attack KTTV-TV reporter Bill Melugin , who found and circulated the records release .
( I thought Democrats liked media whistleblowers . )
`` When there have been protesters at my house @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Stay at Home orders , and the BLM movement , I specifically asked LAPD NOT to send anyone , '' Bonin continued .
`` When protests occurred at the homes of other elected officials and LAPD offered to send patrols to my home as a precaution , I specifically asked for no patrols at my home . ''
`` Seven of the eight calls you cite were apparently generated by LAPD themselves , sending patrols without my request and often without my knowledge , '' he claimed .
`` This is a cute @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a public official who is standing up to the police union .
It ain ’ t working . ''
Of course , this claim was reportedly refuted later on by multiple anonymous LAPD sources , one of whom told KTTV , `` This was definitely a call for service by Bonin or a member of his staff . ''
`` From time to time we are called from high up to respond to city council member 's residences , but do n't usually generate a call ourselves , '' the source said .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ by the resident or someone reporting something happening at that address . ''
And who would have believed Bonin 's half-baked response anyway ?
This is a weak , weak lie .
It 's dog-ate-my-homework , hand-in-the-cookie-jar weak .
Do I believe that , on rare occasions , the brass phones down the chain of command to ask that officers be conducting an extra patrol at the property of a potentially endangered public official without explicit request ?
Do I believe , however , that it happens every two weeks for roughly four @ @ @ @ @ @ @ major spike in both shootings and homicides ?
Well , I may be young and green -- but I certainly was n't born yesterday .
We are not talking about the president of the United States here , who needs round-the-clock security .
This is a small-potatoes L.A. city councilman with a very public opinion that our law enforcement officers make poor first responders and only serve to scare the communities they serve .
That in mind , it is highly doubtful that LAPD officers and their leaders are lining up in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ patrol adjacent to the Bonin residence .
In fact , you can bet those law enforcement officers are sitting in precinct having a good long laugh every time Bonin steps down from his sanctimonious anti-cop high horse to make a private call for extra protection .
Such a shame those calls are public record .
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal .

The modern Democratic politician has an incredibly difficult job.
From constant electoral pressure to appease the social-justice left at every turn to the threat of vandalism and personal attack should you fail to go far enough, it is no easy task to both serve and suffer the merciless onslaught of the mob.
Last week, it was revealed that Los Angeles City Councilman Mike Bonin has not been walking that tightrope very well.
According to public records recently made available by the Los Angeles Police Department, Bonin seems to have privately broken with progressive left orthodoxy in recent months, issuing eight calls for service to local law enforcement since April. (Naughty, naughty)
A public records request reveals that LA city councilman Mike Bonin, who voted to defund LAPD by $150 million, has called LAPD to his home 8 times since 4/4/20, including to provide extra patrols and protection from peaceful protesters at his house. https://t.co/Z6yhJ8XKM4 — Bill Melugin (@BillFOXLA) August 8, 2020
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
The longtime Democrat and 2008 Obama campaign field organizer has been outspoken in support of recent efforts to defund and abolish the police, voting in favor of a $150 million LAPD budget reduction despite recent crime surges, according to KABC-TV.
Yet the records revealed on July 28 indicate Bonin had no qualms making use of LAPD and its substantial resources during recent pandemic lockdowns and riots, calling the department for general information twice and requesting or receiving special safety patrols or police response on six other occasions.
Of course, knowing just how damning this hypocritical demand for police protection will look to both law-and-order conservatives and left-wing cop haters, Bonin denied ever making such calls for service.
"I have NEVER asked LAPD for patrols at my house," Bonin wrote on Twitter, seeming to attack KTTV-TV reporter Bill Melugin, who found and circulated the records release. (I thought Democrats liked media whistleblowers.)
When there have been protesters at my house opposing homeless housing, rent control, Stay at Home orders, and the BLM movement, I specifically asked LAPD NOT to send anyone. — Mike Bonin (@mikebonin) August 8, 2020
Seven of the eight calls you cite were apparently generated by LAPD themselves, sending patrols without my request and often without my knowledge. — Mike Bonin (@mikebonin) August 8, 2020
"When there have been protesters at my house opposing homeless housing, rent control, Stay at Home orders, and the BLM movement, I specifically asked LAPD NOT to send anyone," Bonin continued. "When protests occurred at the homes of other elected officials and LAPD offered to send patrols to my home as a precaution, I specifically asked for no patrols at my home."
"Seven of the eight calls you cite were apparently generated by LAPD themselves, sending patrols without my request and often without my knowledge," he claimed.
"This is a cute tactic to try to silence or intimidate a public official who is standing up to the police union. It ain’t working."
This is a cute tactic to try to silence or intimidate a public official who is standing up to the police union. It ain’t working. — Mike Bonin (@mikebonin) August 8, 2020
Of course, this claim was reportedly refuted later on by multiple anonymous LAPD sources, one of whom told KTTV, "This was definitely a call for service by Bonin or a member of his staff."
"From time to time we are called from high up to respond to city council member's residences, but don't usually generate a call ourselves," the source said. "The call would have been placed by the resident or someone reporting something happening at that address."
And who would have believed Bonin's half-baked response anyway?
This is a weak, weak lie. It's dog-ate-my-homework, hand-in-the-cookie-jar weak.
Do I believe that, on rare occasions, the brass phones down the chain of command to ask that officers be conducting an extra patrol at the property of a potentially endangered public official without explicit request?
Of course.
Do I believe, however, that it happens every two weeks for roughly four months in a city gripped by a major spike in both shootings and homicides?
Well, I may be young and green -- but I certainly wasn't born yesterday.
Councilman Bonin denies calling ever LAPD to his home in this thread. https://t.co/BwJKH35ZOd
Multiple LAPD sources say they would not generate their own calls for a simple patrol. High level LAPD source texted me the following in response to Bonin’s claims. https://t.co/Q8I9mwezyl pic.twitter.com/HxozplLoc0 — Bill Melugin (@BillFOXLA) August 8, 2020
We are not talking about the president of the United States here, who needs round-the-clock security.
This is a small-potatoes L.A. city councilman with a very public opinion that our law enforcement officers make poor first responders and only serve to scare the communities they serve.
That in mind, it is highly doubtful that LAPD officers and their leaders are lining up in the wings to voluntarily conduct an extra safety patrol adjacent to the Bonin residence.
In fact, you can bet those law enforcement officers are sitting in precinct having a good long laugh every time Bonin steps down from his sanctimonious anti-cop high horse to make a private call for extra protection.
Such a shame those calls are public record.
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.


wnd--2020-08-12--How Barack Obama is 'wrong' about the filibuster

[ Editor 's note : This story originally was published by Real Clear Politics . ]
When former President Barack Obama eulogized Rep. John Lewis , he made an impassioned plea for a litany of voting rights measures , such as enacting automatic voter registration , ending partisan gerrymandering , and establishing statehood for Washington , D.C. , and Puerto Rico .
And he added , “ If all this takes eliminating the filibuster — another Jim Crow relic — in order to secure the God-given rights of every American , then that ’ s what we should do.
” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ democracy , but to achieve them by eliminating the legislative filibuster would destroy it .
Obama ’ s logic is reasonable and supported by many frustrated Democrats : The right to vote is fundamental tenet of our democracy , and it is untenable to allow one party to deny anyone that right .
Fully enfranchising all Americans is more important than maximizing the power of the Senate minority through a musty procedural tool .
Yet for Democrats to change voting laws on a narrow party-line vote , after eliminating the legislative filibuster by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on a narrow party line , would invalidate their moral authority .
What could be argued is a noble commitment to democracy would get portrayed as an underhanded partisan power grab .
Republicans would charge Democrats , fairly or unfairly , as disingenuously changing the voting laws to help themselves at the ballot box .
And when Republicans return to power , as they eventually would , they would have every incentive to changes whatever rules they could to maximize their power .
You think partisan gerrymandering is bad ?
Just wait until @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the score after the partisan admission of Washington , D.C. , and Puerto Rico to the union .
Such an arms race in the weaponization of rules is literally how democracies bring about their own demise , as explained by Harvard professors Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt , who co-authored the book “ How Democracies Die.
” `` The erosion of mutual toleration may motivate politicians to deploy their institutional powers as broadly as they can get away with , '' they wrote .
`` Acts of constitutional hardball may then in turn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that our rivals pose a dangerous threat .
The result is politics without guardrails . ''
Obama portrays the filibuster as inherently illegitimate by deeming it a “ Jim Crow relic.
” But the filibuster was not created in the Jim Crow era , nor was it ever the sole province of white supremacists .
Before there was any codification of the filibuster , in 1790 Southern senators tried to prevent Congress from moving to Philadelphia through extended debate .
As one senator in favor of the move recounted , their strategy was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so that we could not get the bill passed.
” A Brookings Institution account places the first filibuster in 1837 , when Whigs ’ extended debate to try to stop the expunging of Andrew Jackson ’ s censure from the congressional record .
A Stanford Law Review paper says the first was in 1841 , when Democrats tried to prevent the Whigs from firing the publishers of the congressional record .
And a six-decade-old analysis of the filibuster in Political Science Quarterly found that the Senate ’ s 1856 rejection of a proposed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to “ the question under debate ” is what began “ a century of virtually unlimited debate.
” Even when racist senators eagerly wielded the filibuster during the Jim Crow era , so did other factions .
An 1893 filibuster united silver-standard supporters from both major parties in an unsuccessful attempt to stop repeal of a silver purchasing law .
In 1908 , progressive populist Sen. Robert La Follette , in an attempt to derail a currency bill he believed favored the wealthy , filibustered for 18 hours , during which someone tried @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ( He became ill but kept going for another six hours . )
All of these historical examples show that the filibuster was not created by racists for racist purposes .
It has been used for racist purposes , but also for legitimate ones .
Still , the filibuster is not in the Constitution .
It wasn ’ t codified in the original Senate rules .
If the filibuster was not created by the Founders , and is not inherent to our system of government , doesn ’ t that argue we should @ @ @ @ @ @ @ What the Founders did create is a republican system of government designed to avoid , in the words of John Adams , a “ tyranny of the majority.
” To turn the Senate into a strictly majoritarian body would undermine that intent .
Of course , one could still argue the filibuster needlessly thwarts the popular will .
What is the benefit gained from allowing the political minority to prevent the political majority from passing legislation ?
Specifically , if Democrats overwhelmingly win this year ’ s election , why shouldn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ problems as they see fit ?
Sure , without the legislative filibuster , Democrats would find it easier to pass laws .
But as soon as Republican regain congressional majorities , without the legislative filibuster they would find it easier to repeal those laws .
Consider the short life of the carbon tax in Australia .
That nation 's parliamentary government has no filibuster .
So when the Labor Party enacted a carbon tax in 2012 , the opposition Liberal Party fiercely opposed it .
Thanks to popular backlash against the tax , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2013 and repealed it in 2014 .
Getting rid of the filibuster won ’ t help Democrats solve problems if their solutions don ’ t stay on the books .
And our entire government will lack stability if no one can be sure if laws and programs will carry over from one Congress to the next .
Abuse of the filibuster , paralyzing our government , should not be tolerated .
But in that circumstance , the challenge for Democrats is to pursue policies that galvanize the public , so the filibusterers pay @ @ @ @ @ @ @ further gridlock .
Sometimes , when you fight fire with fire , you burn the whole house down .

[Editor's note: This story originally was published by Real Clear Politics.]
By Bill Scher
Real Clear Politics
When former President Barack Obama eulogized Rep. John Lewis, he made an impassioned plea for a litany of voting rights measures, such as enacting automatic voter registration, ending partisan gerrymandering, and establishing statehood for Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico. And he added, “If all this takes eliminating the filibuster — another Jim Crow relic — in order to secure the God-given rights of every American, then that’s what we should do.”
These proposals are meant to strengthen our democracy, but to achieve them by eliminating the legislative filibuster would destroy it.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
Obama’s logic is reasonable and supported by many frustrated Democrats: The right to vote is fundamental tenet of our democracy, and it is untenable to allow one party to deny anyone that right. Fully enfranchising all Americans is more important than maximizing the power of the Senate minority through a musty procedural tool.
Yet for Democrats to change voting laws on a narrow party-line vote, after eliminating the legislative filibuster by exploiting a loophole in the Senate rules on a narrow party line, would invalidate their moral authority. What could be argued is a noble commitment to democracy would get portrayed as an underhanded partisan power grab. Republicans would charge Democrats, fairly or unfairly, as disingenuously changing the voting laws to help themselves at the ballot box.
And when Republicans return to power, as they eventually would, they would have every incentive to changes whatever rules they could to maximize their power. You think partisan gerrymandering is bad? Just wait until Republicans start carving up states to even the score after the partisan admission of Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico to the union.
Such an arms race in the weaponization of rules is literally how democracies bring about their own demise, as explained by Harvard professors Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt, who co-authored the book “How Democracies Die.” "The erosion of mutual toleration may motivate politicians to deploy their institutional powers as broadly as they can get away with," they wrote. "Acts of constitutional hardball may then in turn further undermine mutual toleration, reinforcing beliefs that our rivals pose a dangerous threat. The result is politics without guardrails."
Obama portrays the filibuster as inherently illegitimate by deeming it a “Jim Crow relic.” But the filibuster was not created in the Jim Crow era, nor was it ever the sole province of white supremacists.
Before there was any codification of the filibuster, in 1790 Southern senators tried to prevent Congress from moving to Philadelphia through extended debate. As one senator in favor of the move recounted, their strategy was to “talk away the time, so that we could not get the bill passed.”
A Brookings Institution account places the first filibuster in 1837, when Whigs’ extended debate to try to stop the expunging of Andrew Jackson’s censure from the congressional record. A Stanford Law Review paper says the first was in 1841, when Democrats tried to prevent the Whigs from firing the publishers of the congressional record. And a six-decade-old analysis of the filibuster in Political Science Quarterly found that the Senate’s 1856 rejection of a proposed rule to “confine” floor remarks to “the question under debate” is what began “a century of virtually unlimited debate.”
Even when racist senators eagerly wielded the filibuster during the Jim Crow era, so did other factions. An 1893 filibuster united silver-standard supporters from both major parties in an unsuccessful attempt to stop repeal of a silver purchasing law. In 1908, progressive populist Sen. Robert La Follette, in an attempt to derail a currency bill he believed favored the wealthy, filibustered for 18 hours, during which someone tried to kill him with poisoned eggnog. (He became ill but kept going for another six hours.)
All of these historical examples show that the filibuster was not created by racists for racist purposes. It has been used for racist purposes, but also for legitimate ones.
Still, the filibuster is not in the Constitution. It wasn’t codified in the original Senate rules. If the filibuster was not created by the Founders, and is not inherent to our system of government, doesn’t that argue we should have no qualms about ditching it?
What the Founders did create is a republican system of government designed to avoid, in the words of John Adams, a “tyranny of the majority.” To turn the Senate into a strictly majoritarian body would undermine that intent.
Of course, one could still argue the filibuster needlessly thwarts the popular will. What is the benefit gained from allowing the political minority to prevent the political majority from passing legislation? Specifically, if Democrats overwhelmingly win this year’s election, why shouldn’t they have the power to tackle urgent problems as they see fit?
Sure, without the legislative filibuster, Democrats would find it easier to pass laws. But as soon as Republican regain congressional majorities, without the legislative filibuster they would find it easier to repeal those laws.
Consider the short life of the carbon tax in Australia. That nation's parliamentary government has no filibuster. So when the Labor Party enacted a carbon tax in 2012, the opposition Liberal Party fiercely opposed it. Thanks to popular backlash against the tax, the Liberals won the federal elections in 2013 and repealed it in 2014.
Getting rid of the filibuster won’t help Democrats solve problems if their solutions don’t stay on the books. And our entire government will lack stability if no one can be sure if laws and programs will carry over from one Congress to the next.
Abuse of the filibuster, paralyzing our government, should not be tolerated. But in that circumstance, the challenge for Democrats is to pursue policies that galvanize the public, so the filibusterers pay a political price and lack incentive for further gridlock. Sometimes, when you fight fire with fire, you burn the whole house down.


wnd--2020-08-12--2 fixes that physicians say are needed to improve U.S. health care

[ Editor 's note : This story originally was published by Real Clear Health . ]
The phrase , “ the doctor will see you now ” has taken on a whole new meaning during the Coronavirus pandemic .
Millions of Americans who were receiving care during an office visit are suddenly doing so through video conferences , text messages , and apps .
Nearly 200 physicians—including over 60 past presidents of major medical societies , and representation from 100 % of the top 20 Hospitals identified by US News and World Report—sent a letter to Congressional leadership earlier this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ improve our health care system .
An opportunity grounded in expanding digital health and “ leveraging the latest medical knowledge with the advancing power of technology.
” If America is to avoid a another ‘ COVID-19 ’ type of crisis in our future , policymakers must adopt two policy reforms that will immediately expand our ability to deliver better health care to more people at a lower cost : • A permanent extension allowing doctors to use telehealth tools to evaluate , counsel , and monitor patients .
• A nationwide reciprocity of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to access the health care they need .
As the Congressional letter makes clear , “ These two related reforms are straightforward and common sense , leveraging the latest medical knowledge with the advancing power of technology .
They would also help accelerate the overdue transformation of American health care , which must quickly adapt in significant ways to overcome the current pandemic and better prepare for future challenges.
” Digital health—collecting , sharing , and using information about our health to improve well-being or treat disease—was used inconsistently until the Coronavirus hit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Cardiac Surgeon-in-Chief , Mount Sinai Health Systems tells RealClearHealth : “ One of the big lessons this pandemic has taught us is the power of telemedicine to safely deliver quality care to millions of patients .
In a sense , it is restoring our ability to provide house calls and democratizing access to medical expertise , no matter where a patient lives .
In just a few months , telemedicine has transformed the delivery of individualized patient care , particularly to some of our most vulnerable populations.
” The reforms stressed by this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the overdue transformation of American health care , which must quickly adapt in significant ways to overcome the current pandemic and better prepare for future challenges.
” RealClearHealth recognizes that by necessity we are replacing or combining digital services and products with traditional face-to-face care .
We can not go backwards .
Twenty-first Century medicine demands the permanent extension of telehealth tools and the reciprocity of medical licensing .
Indeed , digital health has been more a talking point or a slogan .
Now that a vast number of Americans have benefitted from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ using it as a solution .
Now is the time to act .
[ Editor 's note : This story originally was published by Real Clear Health . ]

[Editor's note: This story originally was published by Real Clear Health.]
The Editors
Real Clear Health
The phrase, “the doctor will see you now” has taken on a whole new meaning during the Coronavirus pandemic. Millions of Americans who were receiving care during an office visit are suddenly doing so through video conferences, text messages, and apps.
Nearly 200 physicians—including over 60 past presidents of major medical societies, and representation from 100% of the top 20 Hospitals identified by US News and World Report—sent a letter to Congressional leadership earlier this week to emphasize a tremendous opportunity to improve our health care system. An opportunity grounded in expanding digital health and “leveraging the latest medical knowledge with the advancing power of technology.”
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
If America is to avoid a another ‘COVID-19’ type of crisis in our future, policymakers must adopt two policy reforms that will immediately expand our ability to deliver better health care to more people at a lower cost:
A permanent extension allowing doctors to use telehealth tools to evaluate, counsel, and monitor patients.
A nationwide reciprocity of medical licensing, to enable Americans everywhere to access the health care they need.
As the Congressional letter makes clear, “These two related reforms are straightforward and common sense, leveraging the latest medical knowledge with the advancing power of technology. They would also help accelerate the overdue transformation of American health care, which must quickly adapt in significant ways to overcome the current pandemic and better prepare for future challenges.”
Digital health—collecting, sharing, and using information about our health to improve well-being or treat disease—was used inconsistently until the Coronavirus hit our shores. Dr. David Adams, Cardiac Surgeon-in-Chief, Mount Sinai Health Systems tells RealClearHealth:
“One of the big lessons this pandemic has taught us is the power of telemedicine to safely deliver quality care to millions of patients. In a sense, it is restoring our ability to provide house calls and democratizing access to medical expertise, no matter where a patient lives. In just a few months, telemedicine has transformed the delivery of individualized patient care, particularly to some of our most vulnerable populations.”
The reforms stressed by this robust group of physicians will “accelerate the overdue transformation of American health care, which must quickly adapt in significant ways to overcome the current pandemic and better prepare for future challenges.”
RealClearHealth recognizes that by necessity we are replacing or combining digital services and products with traditional face-to-face care. We cannot go backwards. Twenty-first Century medicine demands the permanent extension of telehealth tools and the reciprocity of medical licensing. Indeed, digital health has been more a talking point or a slogan. Now that a vast number of Americans have benefitted from digital health, consumers are more comfortable using it as a solution.
Now is the time to act.
[Editor's note: This story originally was published by Real Clear Health.]


wnd--2020-08-11--'This is a revolution': Black protester gets arrested, wants reparations

A black protester in the riot-stricken city of Portland , Oregon , who was arrested for disorderly conduct and interfering with a police officer wo n't be charged , authorities say .
Demetria Hester , 46 , who was booked on the two charges over the weekend , said at a news conference that she would keep protesting and announced her support for a fundraiser to send black mothers to Washington , D.C. , reported KATU-TV in Portland .
`` I was born and bred to do this .
This is a dream come true .
This is a revolution @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 're taking it to D.C. , baby ! ''
she said .
After Hester was charged , the Multnomah County district attorney 's office said she would not be prosecuted .
She became an activist in the Black Lives Matter movement several years ago when she was assaulted by a white supremacist who later was sentenced to life in prison for murder .
The report said Hester and 15 others were arrested over the weekend when a group of about 200 demonstrators gathered in a park and then marched to the police union @ @ @ @ @ @ @ building and others fired fireworks at officers , injuring two .
The report noted President Trump said Portland was `` out of control '' and urged the governor to call the National Guard for help .
They said the city is the flashpoint for what they claim is a civil rights battle .
`` The struggle here in Portland has become almost ground zero because what we ’ ve seen under this administration is the kind of flexing that we haven ’ t really seen in our generation , ever , '' said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Matter Toronto .
`` People only protest when politicians and policies and police have failed to protect them .
That is the only time that people protest , risking life and limb . ''
KATU reported Hester became known in 2017 as the victim of an assault by Jeremy Christian .
He later stabbed two men to death , injured a third and was convicted and given two life sentences without the possibility of parole .

A black protester in the riot-stricken city of Portland, Oregon, who was arrested for disorderly conduct and interfering with a police officer won't be charged, authorities say.
Demetria Hester, 46, who was booked on the two charges over the weekend, said at a news conference that she would keep protesting and announced her support for a fundraiser to send black mothers to Washington, D.C., reported KATU-TV in Portland.
"I was born and bred to do this. This is a dream come true. This is a revolution and we're getting reparations. We're taking it to D.C., baby!" she said.
After Hester was charged, the Multnomah County district attorney's office said she would not be prosecuted.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
She became an activist in the Black Lives Matter movement several years ago when she was assaulted by a white supremacist who later was sentenced to life in prison for murder.
The report said Hester and 15 others were arrested over the weekend when a group of about 200 demonstrators gathered in a park and then marched to the police union headquarters.
Some set fires outside the building and others fired fireworks at officers, injuring two.
A short time later, police declared the event a riot.
The report noted President Trump said Portland was "out of control" and urged the governor to call the National Guard for help.
Civil rights groups and others condemned Hester's arrest.
They said the city is the flashpoint for what they claim is a civil rights battle.
"The struggle here in Portland has become almost ground zero because what we’ve seen under this administration is the kind of flexing that we haven’t really seen in our generation, ever," said Janaya Khan, co-founder of Black Lives Matter Toronto. "People only protest when politicians and policies and police have failed to protect them. That is the only time that people protest, risking life and limb."
KATU reported Hester became known in 2017 as the victim of an assault by Jeremy Christian. He later stabbed two men to death, injured a third and was convicted and given two life sentences without the possibility of parole.


wnd--2020-08-11--Unnerving: 'Occupy' radicals now plan 'White House siege'

The activist group behind the Occupy Wall Street protest nine years ago , Adbusters , is planning a 50-day `` White House Siege '' next month .
`` Drawing wind from # MeToo , # BLM , # ExtinctionRebellion and protests against Trump ’ s lethal bungling of coronavirus , we ’ ll inspire a global movement of systemic change — a Global Spring — a cultural heave towards a new world order , the activists say in a `` Tactical Briefing '' posted by Adbusters magazine .
The Adbusters Media Foundation is a Canadian-based anti-capitalist , enviromentalist group founded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ occupation '' of Wall Street in 2011 saying that had `` one simple demand — a presidential commission to separate money from politics '' that would `` start setting the agenda for a new America . ''
The activists say the launch date of the `` seige , '' Sept. 17 , is the Occupy anniversary , making it `` the perfect day to trigger another global big-bang moment — a massive collective action of the sweetest kind of disobedience . ''
They complain that in the nine years since Occupy Wall Street @ @ @ @ @ @ @ under Democratic President Barack Obama — `` the shadows have only grown longer . ''
`` Inequality has soared .
Not a single Wall Street CEO spent a night in jail for his role in the 2008 financial meltdown .
Politicians and corporate criminals continue to savage the public trust with impunity , '' the write .
`` And all the while , this howling void of a president , his sins too many to name , sits smugly atop a corona death-toll that may surpass two-hundred thousand Americans by Christmas . ''
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ thousands of our fellow citizens will stream into Lafayette Square , in Washington .
D.C. '' '' We will lay siege to the White House .
And we will sustain it for exactly fifty days , '' they vow .
`` This is the # WhiteHouseSiege . ''
Their `` one demand '' is `` to collaborate with you — brainstorm tactics with you — spark a revolution with you . ''
`` We need your voice of wisdom and expertise to pull off a radically democratic toneshift in our politics . ''
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ protesters were forced out of New York City 's Zuccotti Park after nearly two months .
The protesters then turned to occupying banks , corporate headquarters , board meetings , foreclosed homes , and college and university campuses .

The activist group behind the Occupy Wall Street protest nine years ago, Adbusters, is planning a 50-day "White House Siege" next month.
"Drawing wind from #MeToo, #BLM, #ExtinctionRebellion and protests against Trump’s lethal bungling of coronavirus, we’ll inspire a global movement of systemic change — a Global Spring — a cultural heave towards a new world order, the activists say in a "Tactical Briefing" posted by Adbusters magazine.
The Adbusters Media Foundation is a Canadian-based anti-capitalist, enviromentalist group founded in 1989. Adbusters prompted the "occupation" of Wall Street in 2011 saying that had "one simple demand — a presidential commission to separate money from politics" that would "start setting the agenda for a new America."
The activists say the launch date of the "seige," Sept. 17, is the Occupy anniversary, making it "the perfect day to trigger another global big-bang moment — a massive collective action of the sweetest kind of disobedience."
They complain that in the nine years since Occupy Wall Street -- more than five of which were under Democratic President Barack Obama — "the shadows have only grown longer."
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
"Inequality has soared. Not a single Wall Street CEO spent a night in jail for his role in the 2008 financial meltdown. Politicians and corporate criminals continue to savage the public trust with impunity," the write. "And all the while, this howling void of a president, his sins too many to name, sits smugly atop a corona death-toll that may surpass two-hundred thousand Americans by Christmas."
They're hoping that "tens of thousands of our fellow citizens will stream into Lafayette Square, in Washington. D.C."
"We will lay siege to the White House. And we will sustain it for exactly fifty days," they vow. "This is the #WhiteHouseSiege."
Their "one demand" is "to collaborate with you — brainstorm tactics with you — spark a revolution with you."
Do you support the 'White House Siege'? Yes No Completing this poll entitles you to WND news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use You're logged in to Facebook. Click here to log out. 1% (8 Votes) 99% (934 Votes)
"We need your voice of wisdom and expertise to pull off a radically democratic toneshift in our politics."
In 2011, the Occupy Wall Street protesters were forced out of New York City's Zuccotti Park after nearly two months. The protesters then turned to occupying banks, corporate headquarters, board meetings, foreclosed homes, and college and university campuses.


wnd--2020-08-11--'The way they bow to China, it's a disgrace': Trump hammers the NBA's anti-American political hypocr

'The way they bow to China, it's a disgrace': Trump hammers the NBA's anti-American political hypocrisy

The president of the United States has never been known to hold his tongue , especially when it comes to athletes disrespecting the American flag and national anthem .
On Tuesday morning , during an interview on `` Outkick the Coverage '' with Fox Sports Radio host Clay Travis , Trump called out the NBA for its political hypocrisy .
While the league almost universally condemns the perceived inequality that supposedly runs rampant in America 's institutions , the majority of players , coaches and league officials have remained silent when it comes to the very real and provable human @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of China , one of the league 's most lucrative partners .
When asked about anthem kneeling , Trump argued that the NBA 's poor ratings have been directly caused by players disrespecting the flag and the country .
`` I think it 's been horrible for basketball .
Look at the basketball ratings , they 're down to very low numbers , very , very low numbers .
People are angry about it , '' Trump said .
`` They have enough politics with guys like me , they do n't need @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` And there was a nastiness about the NBA the way it was done , too .
`` So , I think that the NBA 's in trouble , I think it 's in big trouble , bigger trouble than they understand . ''
Travis then brought up the NBA 's hypocrisy .
While NBA coaches , players and officials are more than happy to fire back at Trump and criticize so-called `` systemic racism '' in America , they wo n't do the same to the Chinese Communist Party .
`` The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ China .
There are all sorts of human rights violations going on in China right now and none of the players and none of the coaches will say a word about that , '' Travis said .
`` Does it feel hypocritical that they will rip the United States , they wo n't stand for the anthem , they 'll rip you as the president , but they wo n't say a negative word about China at all ? ''
`` The way they cater to China , the way they bow to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ frankly and they make a lot more money here than they do from China , but we have a system that allows you to disrespect your system and that 's too bad for them , '' he said .
`` They do n't appreciate what they have here . ''
Not only has the NBA ignored the many crimes committed by the communist Chinese government , a recent report also suggest that the league may , in fact , be complicit .
According to an ESPN report published late last month , young @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's China academies .
The report also alleged that coaches had repeatedly warned league officials about the abuse , yet nothing was done to stop it .
One American coach went as far as to describe the project as `` a sweat camp for athletes . ''
Another coach described the atmosphere as akin to “ World War II Germany.
” Nonetheless , the NBA and its players have remained largely silent on China , instead opting to criticize a country that has offered more freedoms to more people than any other nation @ @ @ @ @ @ @ On of the most vocal NBA players when it comes to criticizing America is none other than Lakers superstar LeBron James .
At the end of his interview with Trump , Travis asked the president to answer the one debate that has captured the minds of basketball fans for years -- who is the better all-time player : Michael Jordan or James ?
`` Michael Jordan .
Well , I 've seen them both .
Michael Jordan is .
Plus he was n't political so people like him better , '' Trump said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Western Journal .

The president of the United States has never been known to hold his tongue, especially when it comes to athletes disrespecting the American flag and national anthem.
On Tuesday morning, during an interview on "Outkick the Coverage" with Fox Sports Radio host Clay Travis, Trump called out the NBA for its political hypocrisy.
While the league almost universally condemns the perceived inequality that supposedly runs rampant in America's institutions, the majority of players, coaches and league officials have remained silent when it comes to the very real and provable human rights abuses being perpetrated by the country of China, one of the league's most lucrative partners.
When asked about anthem kneeling, Trump argued that the NBA's poor ratings have been directly caused by players disrespecting the flag and the country.
"I think it's been horrible for basketball. Look at the basketball ratings, they're down to very low numbers, very, very low numbers. People are angry about it," Trump said.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
"They have enough politics with guys like me, they don't need more," the president continued. "And there was a nastiness about the NBA the way it was done, too.
"So, I think that the NBA's in trouble, I think it's in big trouble, bigger trouble than they understand."
Travis then brought up the NBA's hypocrisy. While NBA coaches, players and officials are more than happy to fire back at Trump and criticize so-called "systemic racism" in America, they won't do the same to the Chinese Communist Party.
"The NBA is taking billions of dollars from China. There are all sorts of human rights violations going on in China right now and none of the players and none of the coaches will say a word about that," Travis said.
"Does it feel hypocritical that they will rip the United States, they won't stand for the anthem, they'll rip you as the president, but they won't say a negative word about China at all?"
Trump didn't hold back in his response.
"The way they cater to China, the way they bow to China, it's a disgrace, frankly and they make a lot more money here than they do from China, but we have a system that allows you to disrespect your system and that's too bad for them," he said.
"They don't appreciate what they have here."
Not only has the NBA ignored the many crimes committed by the communist Chinese government, a recent report also suggest that the league may, in fact, be complicit.
According to an ESPN report published late last month, young players are being abused in the NBA's China academies. The report also alleged that coaches had repeatedly warned league officials about the abuse, yet nothing was done to stop it.
One American coach went as far as to describe the project as "a sweat camp for athletes." Another coach described the atmosphere as akin to “World War II Germany.”
Nonetheless, the NBA and its players have remained largely silent on China, instead opting to criticize a country that has offered more freedoms to more people than any other nation in the history of the planet.
On of the most vocal NBA players when it comes to criticizing America is none other than Lakers superstar LeBron James.
At the end of his interview with Trump, Travis asked the president to answer the one debate that has captured the minds of basketball fans for years -- who is the better all-time player: Michael Jordan or James?
The president answered without skipping a beat.
"Michael Jordan. Well, I've seen them both. Michael Jordan is. Plus he wasn't political so people like him better," Trump said.
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.


wnd--2020-08-11--Democrats turn the civil rights movement on its head

By the time you read this , Joe Biden may have already announced selection of his vice presidential running mate .
From everything we read , it is certain that it will be a woman , and a good chance that woman will be black .
But why , when so much of what dominates our national discussion today is the alleged importance of elimination of racism and sexism , is there open and unabashed talk about how sexism and racism must be the basis for choosing the candidate for the nation 's second-highest office ?
Can anyone imagine what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to announce that his running mate must be a white male ?
That , of course , would never happen .
Because we reject racism and sexism ?
No .
Because white male , certainly in Democratic Party circles , is politically incorrect , and black female is politically correct .
Is this because selecting a black female implies more morality , fairness and justice ?
Anyone who believes that turns what the civil rights movement was allegedly about on its head .
The civil rights movement was about freedom .
We are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anniversary of Dr. Martin Luther King 's most famous speech , the `` I Have a Dream '' speech , delivered in Washington , D.C. , on Aug. 28 , 1963 .
In that speech , King defined the ideals of the movement he led .
He embraced the ideals of America .
His criticism was that the nation was not living up to those ideals , not that those were the wrong ideals for us to strive for .
The promise of America , said King , was that `` all men @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as white men – would be guaranteed the 'unalienable rights ' of 'life , liberty and the pursuit of happiness . '
'' `` Now is the time to make justice a reality for all of God 's children , '' he said .
How can I not bring up the most quoted line of that speech ?
`` I have a dream today that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the civil rights movement , stated clearly by its leader that summer day in 1963 , was that qualified candidates for the office of vice president of the United States would not be denied because they are a woman or because they are black .
The dream , and the purpose , was not that an individual would be chosen for that job , or any job , because he or she is a woman or is black .
The ideals of America and the civil rights movement , that every American is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's children live freely under the same God-given eternal truths , have been lost by the Democratic Party .
Why has it happened ?
Why have the Democratic Party and the liberals who populate it and vote for its candidates buried the ideals of the civil rights movement ?
Because those ideals – one free nation under God – imply a deal they do n't want to make .
First , it means faith in God and God 's word – the Bible .
Second , it means every individual takes personal responsibility @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Liberals do n't want it .
They do n't want eternal truths that apply equally to all .
And they certainly do n't want personal responsibility to be the hallmark of individual behavior in a free country .
They want a politicized nation where politicians gain power by making huge promises paid for by other people 's money .
And they want to make sure that if someone 's life is not working , they can blame it on someone else .
This may be the formula for electing a Democratic president today @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for destroying our country and certainly all the dreams black Americans strived for in the civil rights movement .

By the time you read this, Joe Biden may have already announced selection of his vice presidential running mate.
From everything we read, it is certain that it will be a woman, and a good chance that woman will be black.
But why, when so much of what dominates our national discussion today is the alleged importance of elimination of racism and sexism, is there open and unabashed talk about how sexism and racism must be the basis for choosing the candidate for the nation's second-highest office?
Can anyone imagine what would happen if a presidential candidate were to announce that his running mate must be a white male?
That, of course, would never happen. Because we reject racism and sexism? No. Because white male, certainly in Democratic Party circles, is politically incorrect, and black female is politically correct.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
Is this because selecting a black female implies more morality, fairness and justice?
Anyone who believes that turns what the civil rights movement was allegedly about on its head.
The civil rights movement was about freedom.
We are just a few weeks from the 57th anniversary of Dr. Martin Luther King's most famous speech, the "I Have a Dream" speech, delivered in Washington, D.C., on Aug. 28, 1963.
In that speech, King defined the ideals of the movement he led.
He embraced the ideals of America. His criticism was that the nation was not living up to those ideals, not that those were the wrong ideals for us to strive for.
The promise of America, said King, was that "all men – yes, black men as well as white men – would be guaranteed the 'unalienable rights' of 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.'"
"Now is the time to make justice a reality for all of God's children," he said.
How can I not bring up the most quoted line of that speech?
"I have a dream today that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."
The purpose of the civil rights movement, stated clearly by its leader that summer day in 1963, was that qualified candidates for the office of vice president of the United States would not be denied because they are a woman or because they are black.
The dream, and the purpose, was not that an individual would be chosen for that job, or any job, because he or she is a woman or is black.
The ideals of America and the civil rights movement, that every American is a child of God and all God's children live freely under the same God-given eternal truths, have been lost by the Democratic Party.
Why has it happened? Why have the Democratic Party and the liberals who populate it and vote for its candidates buried the ideals of the civil rights movement?
Because those ideals – one free nation under God – imply a deal they don't want to make.
First, it means faith in God and God's word – the Bible. Second, it means every individual takes personal responsibility for his or her own life.
Liberals don't want it. They don't want eternal truths that apply equally to all. And they certainly don't want personal responsibility to be the hallmark of individual behavior in a free country.
They want a politicized nation where politicians gain power by making huge promises paid for by other people's money. And they want to make sure that if someone's life is not working, they can blame it on someone else.
This may be the formula for electing a Democratic president today – but it is also the formula for destroying our country and certainly all the dreams black Americans strived for in the civil rights movement.