Categories
Archives
HELP US KEEP YOU BETTER INFORMED ABOUT THE TRICKS OF THE RADICAL PROGRESSIVE REVOLUTION PLEASE DONATE ANY AMOUNT YOU CAN
target="_top">

Archive for the ‘Evil in the USA’ Category

SOROS’S SMEAR SCRIPTS

A radical group linked to rogue billionaire George Soros has been providing scripts containing anti-Trump talking points for constituents to read aloud during congressional town hall meetings.

One of the scripts distributed by the Revolutionary Love Project encourages town hall participants meeting with their member of Congress to accuse the Trump administration of – wait for it – “xenophobia, racism, and Islamophobia.” Constituents are urged to use those precise words to “forcefully condemn” President Trump’s immigration and border security initiatives, Aaron Klein reports at Breitbart News.

Information about the scripts came as leaked audio from anti-Trump activists associated with the group Indivisible surfaced. Their target was a town hall hosted by Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.). They planned to deploy an “inside team” to occupy as many seats as possible and an “outside team” to “give [the media] the coverage they want.” Activists were urged to “dress like conservatives” and avoid “any signifier that you’re a liberal” so they could dominate the meeting.

“Game plan number one is to fill as many seats as we can, right? If it’s all of us in there and the poor people of Breaux Bridge are sitting behind us, well then tough luck for them,” James Proctor of Indivisible reportedly said.

“If we can arrange it so he doesn’t hear one sympathetic question–great. That only magnifies our impact,” he added.

This is a standard, old-time organizing technique used by followers of Rules for Radicals author Saul Alinsky.

It has another name in politics: astroturfing.

Meanwhile, the Revolutionary Love Project states on its website that its supporters “resist all policies, actions, and rhetoric that put people in harm’s way,” and “fight for justice through the ethic of love — love for others, our opponents, and ourselves.” This language is reminiscent of communist revolutionary Ernesto “Che” Guevara’s famous statement that “the true revolutionary is guided by a great feeling of love.”

Among the leftists who have signed the group’s “declaration” promising “to rise up in Revolutionary Love” are Van Jones, the Rev. Dr. William Barber, Melissa Harris-Perry, Jane Fonda, former Philadelphia mayor Michael Nutter (D), Black Lives Matter co-founder Opal Tometi, Linda Sarsour, and Rabbi Sharon Kleinbaum.

The script, which is titled, “#NoBanNoWallNoRaids Talking Points for Congressional Townhalls,” may be viewed here.

As Klein notes,

The anti-Trump script for activists is meant to aid a project driven by the George Soros-funded MoveOn.org group declaring the week of February 18-26 – the first congressional recess of the 115th Congress – to be “Resistance Recess.”

The project called on activists to show up at “elected officials’ events, town halls, and other public appearances to make it clear to those who represent us in Congress, as well as to the media, that tolerance of the Trump Administration’s hurtful policies is intolerable, that indifference or idleness is not acceptable, that complacency is politically toxic.”

A mass email sent by the Revolutionary Love Project asked supporters to repeat the script’s talking points to “voice your concern” during town hall meetings.

Klein provides an excerpt of the script:

Stage 1: Who You Are. My name is ______ and I’m a resident of _______. Add a description of your connection to the community.

Stage 2: Your Concerns. I am particularly concerned about the Administration’s efforts to target and criminalize immigrants, refugees and people entering our country from Muslim-majority countries. I want you as a representative of our district to understand the impact of Trump’s executive orders and to take action.

At the end of the script, Avideh Moussavian of the National Immigration Law Center and Deepa Iyer of the Center for Social Inclusion are listed as contacts. According to the Foundation Search database both groups are funded by Soros’s philanthropic organs.

The National Immigration Law Center has taken in $4.6 million from Soros since 2004, while the Center for Social Inclusion has received $475,000 since 2012.

The Center for Social Inclusion teaches Democrat members of Congress how to lie about and smear their adversaries.

Then-trainer Maya Wiley, who worked for Soros’s philanthropies and as counsel to New York Mayor Bill de Blasio, instructed lawmakers in using “the issue of race to defend government programs.” Rhetoric used by conservatives and free-market enthusiasts is consciously or unconsciously racially coded, she taught, and needed to be overcome with anger.

“It’s emotional connection, not rational connection that we need,” she said. For example, Wiley offered that former House Speaker Newt Gingrich calling Barack Obama a “food stamp president,” cannot be “a race-neutral statement, even if Newt Gingrich did not intend racism.” In other words, all criticism of the leftist 44th president by definition has to be rooted in racism.

Moussavian acknowledged to Breitbart that his group “contributed” to the script “in response to overwhelming concern and fear stemming from the January 27th executive order that sought to ban the entry of refugees and Muslims and in response to mounting questions from community members about how to express these concerns to policy makers.”

In reality Executive Order 13769, which has been enjoined by the courts, temporarily banned visitors from seven terrorism-plagued Muslim countries while shoddy security screening processes could be reconsidered, and did not exclude Muslims as such from the United States. The president is expected to issue a new, more narrowly tailored executive order, or perhaps multiple executive orders, in coming days.

The National Immigration Law Center is a party to one of the lawsuits filed to block EO 13769.

Asawin Suebsaeng wrote a month ago in the Daily Beast that professional community organizers began putting together the Trump-resistance operation on Nov. 9, the day after the election.

From the moment Trump defeated Hillary Clinton in the general election, they’ve been anticipating and mapping out their battle plans for Trump’s orders on deportations, bans, and detention.

So when you heard about a large crowd at an airport in the past few days yelling catchy slogans like “F–K TRUMP, F–K PENCE, THIS COUNTRY’S BUILT ON IMMIGRANTS,” it was no “spontaneous” outpouring of support. It was the result of a lot of unseen work and man hours.

Groups like Make the Road New York, which has received $1 million from Soros since 2001, generated a 15,000-strong anti-Trump protest in Manhattan the Sunday after the election, he reports. Their message to the president-elect was, “We will not let you tear our families apart.”

After Trump signed the executive order the Left dishonestly calls a “Muslim ban,” Make the Road’s director of civic engagement and research, Daniel Altschuler, went to work arranging demonstrations at a New York airport.

“This is [a] man who actually won on a campaign of hate and xenophobia and sexism … We knew we had to respond rapidly,” Altschuler said. “Folks on our organizing team and communications team were poised to respond rapidly because of what we do … We went out to the airport immediately on Saturday. I was en route to the airport around 11:30 a.m.… We were on the phone with other groups, saying, ‘Bring your people to JFK, bring your friends to JFK.’”

Suebsaeng lists other groups involved in protesting Trump, like the New York Immigration Coalition, which has received $550,000 in Soros grants since 1999, and Asian Americans Advancing Justice, which received $1.2 million in Soros grants since 2012.

New York Communities for Change has also been involved in resisting the Trump administration, including the actions at JFK Airport.

There was “a domino effect of rapid mobilization,” said Renata Pumarol, NYCC’s communications director. “And going forward, we have our plans in place to resist Trump … and pressuring corporate Dems to resist every appointment, every aspect of Trump’s agenda.”

NYCC is, of course, a direct successor group to the now-defunct and disgraced Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), which Soros funded. Until fairly recently, NYCC had office space in ACORN’s old headquarters in Brooklyn.

President Trump called out his predecessor for meddling this week. Accusing Obama of being “behind” the town hall protests and maybe the leaks coming out of the White House, too. A New York Times article from yesterday stated that in the dying days of the Obama administration officials “spread information” about the alleged Russian tampering in the election and supposed ties between that country and Trump associates “across the government.”

Obama’s huge, well-funded agitation outfit, Organizing for Action, has been on the front lines attacking Trump in order to defend the Obama administration’s awful legacy. Both Organizing for Action and Soros-funded MoveOn have been leading the way in packing town hall meetings with unruly protesters.

Obama has rented a $5.3 million, 8,200-square-foot, walled mansion in Washington’s Embassy Row that he is using to command his community organizing cadres in the war against President Trump. Obama’s alter ego, Valerie Jarrett, has reportedly moved into the house to help out. Jarrett also resided in the White House when Obama was president.

Former Attorney General Eric Holder said this week that the former president will soon return to the national spotlight. “It’s coming. He’s coming,” the nearly-impeached former cabinet member said. “And he’s ready to roll.”

Indeed he is.

George Soros Eyes Internet Takeover?

by Tad Cronn
George Soros’ ambitions still know no bounds.

You’ve probably heard that amid the several failures that compose the President Obama legacy is a plan to have the United States completely surrender control of the Internet.
George Soros’ ambitions still know no bounds.

You’ve probably heard that amid the several failures that compose the President Obama legacy is a plan to have the United States completely surrender control of the Internet.

The United States built and controlled the thing for enough years, leading a global communications revolution so pervasive that it allows a housewife in Tucson to harangue a blogger in Pakistan about which breed of kitten is cuter, or allows a car designer in Tokyo to file his latest work with the New York office.

Americans have had their fun, improving the planet. Now it’s time to let some anonymous somebodies screw it all up.

President Obama promised that the United Nations would not take over the Internet, but like everything else he says, that was a lie, according to documents obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request, which is the only way Americans ever get the truth out of this Administration, usually much delayed.

UN control will be the most likely result when the United States gives up stewardship of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, or Icann, on September 30.

If you’ve ever set up a website, you’re probably at least peripherally aware of Icann, which oversees the whole catalog of sites in the Worldwide Web and makes sure the connections framework is functioning. The reason Icann can legally control the whole web is because it functions as a monopoly sanctioned by our own Commerce Department.

Once we surrender control, in order to keep working legally, Icann will need to be controlled by another recognized government authority. Enter the United Nations, many of whose members are salivating at the idea of being able to censor what does or does not appear on your home browser.

And guess who is working behind the scenes, knee deep in plans to regulate what’s on the Internet and, more importantly, what’s not allowed on the Internet?

Soros, the former Nazi employee who once compared himself to a mad god.

More specifically, his Open Society Justice Initiative is handling the takeover maneuvers. Old Gyorgy Schwartz (his birth name) never gets his own hands dirty. He has people to do that for him.

The Open Society Justice Initiative is an arm of Soros’ Open Society Foundations, his globe-girdling cabal, er, network of “charitable” foundations that spread his money around to the sorts of people who can maneuver, manipulate or simply destroy whatever Soros wants.

A leaked document, one of about 2,500 that have made their way onto the Internet thanks to hackers, describes OSJI proposals and calls for international regulation of “what information is taken off the Internet and what may remain.”

(In fact, Soros may have already been practicing removing information from the Internet, as the site that revealed the documents, DCLeaks, shortly after posting them had its pages on Soros mysteriously disappear — other pages were untouched — and had its Twitter account inexplicably suspended. The web pages are back as of this writing, but they were gone for at least a day.)

And what may remain, under these plans, is “those [sites] most supportive of open society.” Although the paper pretends its proposals are about protecting free speech, they are really about projecting an agenda.

If you’re not familiar with Soros’ “open society” concept, it’s pretty simple: global progressivism. While advocates of the open society claim to oppose collectivism, in practice, it leans socialist because it destroys traditional social structures and fuels chaos through groups like Black Lives Matter and other radicals, and pushes representative government toward mob rule. At least, that’s how Soros has always played it.

Soros’ open society schemes are the mad, raging fire at the heart of Progressivism, and the billionaire has always been more than happy to stoke the flames.

Political types often talk about an “October Surprise” in presidential campaigns. But with Obama ready to pass off control of the Internet on October 1, just before a crucial presidential election, watch for the withered hand of Soros to show itself and once again wreak havoc with our nation before anybody realizes what’s happening.

DIRTY, DIRTY, DIRTY – KERRY’S STATE DEPT. FUNNELED MORE THAN $9 MILLION TO HIS DAUGHTER’S FOUNDATION

We’ve had so many years of this mess! It’s one tiring scandal after the next coming out of the government? So, then – WHY Hillary? Seriously – WHY? Don’t Americans want change?

The Daily Caller reports – More than $9 million of Department of State money has been funneled through the Peace Corps to a nonprofit foundation started and run by Secretary of State John Kerry’s daughter, documents obtained by The Daily Caller News Foundation show.

The Department of State funded a Peace Corps program created by Dr. Vanessa Kerry and officials from both agencies, records show. The Peace Corps then awarded the money without competition to a nonprofit Kerry created for the program.

Initially, the Peace Corps awarded Kerry’s group — now called Seed Global Health — with a three-year contract worth $2 million of State Department money on Sept. 10, 2012, documents show. Her father was then the chairman of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, which oversees both the Department of State and the Peace Corps.

Read More: http://dailycaller.com

KERRY’S DAUGHTER GOT SIX FIGURE SALARY FROM ORG FUNDED BY DADDY

vanessakerry
Some folks are born to wave the flag, others are born to be the daughter of an anti-war traitor senator collecting six figures from an organization funded by the part of government that daddy happens to run.

More than $9 million of Department of State money has been funneled through the Peace Corps to a nonprofit foundation started and run by Secretary of State John Kerry’s daughter, documents obtained by The Daily Caller News Foundation show.

The Department of State funded a Peace Corps program created by Dr. Vanessa Kerry and officials from both agencies, records show. The Peace Corps then awarded the money without competition to a nonprofit Kerry created for the program.

Initially, the Peace Corps awarded Kerry’s group — now called Seed Global Health — with a three-year contract worth $2 million of State Department money on Sept. 10, 2012, documents show. Her father was then the chairman of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, which oversees both the Department of State and the Peace Corps.

Seed secured a four-year extension in September 2015, again without competition. This time, the Peace Corps gave the nonprofit $6.4 million provided by the Department of State while John Kerry was secretary of state.

What did this mean for Vanessa?

Kerry drew a salary from Seed for the first time in 2014. She was the only officer listed on the nonprofit’s 990 tax form to receive compensation — some $140,000 for a reported 30 hours per week.

By this time, daddy was Secretary of State. Which was certainly convenient. It’s also interesting when you have an organization with only one compensated officer.
What does Kerry’s organization do? It exploits student debt to recruit volunteers.

Recognizing that many US health professionals face financial barriers to service, Seed offers the only US loan repayment program for international service. The average US physician graduates from medical school today with more than $170,000 in educational debt; other applicants may have home mortgages or other obligations that would make a GHSP assignment impossible or difficult to accept. Seed believes that debt should not be a barrier to public service and provides up to $30,000 in needs-based assistance for each year served.

You know, debt for people who unlike Vanessa Kerry weren’t born with a silver spoon in their mouths. So they get to do “volunteer” slave labor.

Vanessa Kerry was last in the headlines due to her Iran link.

POLITICS TOP STORY Hillary’s Benghazi Emails To “Diane Reynolds” Released… True Identity Exposed

hcc21

Closer examination of Hillary Clinton’s emails may have yielded plenty of answers, but they’ve also yielded plenty of questions. Why did she need “one device?” Did Russia hack in to her email account? And who the heck is Diane Reynolds?

According to WikiLeaks, what sounds like Debbie Reynolds’ less-talented sister (think the Ashley Simpson of the early 1960s) was actually Hillary’s own daughter, Chelsea Clinton.

No less than 67 emails were exchanged between Secretary Clinton and Ms. Reynolds, who happened to be her own daughter.
While a lot of these were harmless, some of them had to do with sensitive political situations like the Sept. 11, 2012, attack on an American diplomatic mission and nearby CIA annex in Benghazi, Libya — an attack that Clinton clearly knew that day was not the result of random protests over an anti-Islam video that got out of hand.

“Two of our officers were killed in Benghazi by an Al Queda-like group: The Ambassador, whom I handpicked and a young communications officer on temporary duty w a wife and two young children,” Clinton wrote to “Reynolds” in one email. “Very hard day and I fear more of the same tomorrow.”

She also mentioned the chaos in Haiti following the 2010 earthquake there.POLITICS TOP STORY
Hillary’s Benghazi Emails To “Diane Reynolds” Released… True Identity Exposed
Share on Facebook Tweet Email Print
Advertisement – story continues below

Closer examination of Hillary Clinton’s emails may have yielded plenty of answers, but they’ve also yielded plenty of questions. Why did she need “one device?” Did Russia hack in to her email account? And who the heck is Diane Reynolds?

According to WikiLeaks, what sounds like Debbie Reynolds’ less-talented sister (think the Ashley Simpson of the early 1960s) was actually Hillary’s own daughter, Chelsea Clinton.

No less than 67 emails were exchanged between Secretary Clinton and Ms. Reynolds, who happened to be her own daughter.

Trump Makes Incredible Gesture When Mom Shares Story of Son Killed by Illegal
WATCH: Did Trump Advisor Just Spill the Beans on Dirty Hillary Affair?
Look At The Blue States That Trump Could Win… Hillary Will Lose Sleep Over This
While a lot of these were harmless, some of them had to do with sensitive political situations like the Sept. 11, 2012, attack on an American diplomatic mission and nearby CIA annex in Benghazi, Libya — an attack that Clinton clearly knew that day was not the result of random protests over an anti-Islam video that got out of hand.

“Two of our officers were killed in Benghazi by an Al Queda-like group: The Ambassador, whom I handpicked and a young communications officer on temporary duty w a wife and two young children,” Clinton wrote to “Reynolds” in one email. “Very hard day and I fear more of the same tomorrow.”

She also mentioned the chaos in Haiti following the 2010 earthquake there.

Advertisement – story continues below
25 Shocking Pics Of Politicians They Don’t Want Out
OtherBuzz
New “Limitless-Smart Pill” – Most Powerful Brain Enhancer in the World?
Daily Brain Tips
50 Lost Recipes From The Pioneers-What They Cooked In Their Journeys
The Lost Ways
Ads by Revcontent
Firstly: “Diane Reynolds?” What, were Johnny Ross and Carlotta Valdez already taken?

Secondly, Hillary Clinton has maintained strenuously that she believed her personal email server was impregnable. However, at the same time, her daughter used a fake name on it. In other words, either she or her daughter knew full well the risk that she was taking by having her emails being delivered by an unsecured server.

Thirdly, let’s point out that this isn’t the first time Clinton has told her daughter things that the American people weren’t privileged to — things that would have changed votes.

Take Benghazi. It’s already been proven that Hillary told Chelsea — oops, sorry, Diane — that the attack was a coordinated terrorist strike. And she did it via email, the same medium your parents usually use to tell you that your retired dad finally completed that tiny birdhouse that he’s worked on for years and has now moved on to cataloging the Houston Oilers games he recorded on VHS back in the 1980s.
The problems with this should be self-evident to our media, except they’re not — which is the reason why Hillary Clinton is the Democrat nominee.

Let’s hope we stop this wannabe familial dynasty in its tracks this year. Otherwise, in another decade or so we’ll be voting for Diane Reynolds.

Please like and share on Facebook and Twitter if you agree that Diane Reynolds’ mom needs to go back to Arkansas.

SOROS PAID AL GORE MILLIONS TO PUSH GLOBAL WARMING FEARS IN US

Dirty, Dirty, Dirty

shutterstock_7771426-1000x641
LOOKS LIKE THERE’S MORE TENTACLES ON GEORGE SOROS HEAD THAN THERE WERE SNAKES ON MEDUSA’S. IGNORANCE IS THE CURRENCY OF THE LEFT AND AL GORE IS THE FEDERAL CHAIRMAN. SOROS IS FUNDING BOGUS CLIMATE CHANGE, BOGUS BLM, BOGUS IMMIGRANTS, THE DEMOCRAT PARTY, HILLARY CLINTON, AND BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA. JUST HAPPENS TO BE ALL THINGS THAT ARE AIMED AT ONE GOAL, THE DESTRUCTION OF THE AMERICAN WAY OF LIFE.

Daily Caller:

Liberal billionaire George Soros gave former Vice President Al Gore’s environmental group millions of dollars over three years to create a “political space for aggressive U.S. action” on global warming, according to leaked documents.

A document published by DC Leaks shows Soros, a Hungarian-born liberal financier, wanted his nonprofit Open Society Institute (OSI) to do more to support global warming policies in the U.S. That included budgeting $10 million in annual support to Gore’s climate group over three years.

“U.S. Programs Global Warming Grants U.S. Programs became engaged on the global warming issue about four years ago, at George Soros’s suggestion,” reads a leaked OSI memo.

“There has been a budget of $11 million for global warming grants in the U.S. Programs budget for the last several years,” the memo reads. “This budget item captures George Soros’s commitment of $10 million per year for three years to Al Gore’s Alliance for Climate Protection, which conducts public education on the climate issue in pursuit of creating political space for aggressive U.S. action in line with what scientists say is necessary to put our nation on a path to reducing its outsize carbon dioxide emissions.

Liberal billionaire George Soros gave former Vice President Al Gore’s environmental group millions of dollars over three years to create a “political space for aggressive U.S. action” on global warming, according to leaked documents.

A document published by DC Leaks shows Soros, a Hungarian-born liberal financier, wanted his nonprofit Open Society Institute (OSI) to do more to support global warming policies in the U.S. That included budgeting $10 million in annual support to Gore’s climate group over three years.

“U.S. Programs Global Warming Grants U.S. Programs became engaged on the global warming issue about four years ago, at George Soros’s suggestion,” reads a leaked OSI memo.

Do You Think Al Gore Cares More About Saving The Planet Or Making Money?
Making Money

It’s unclear what year the memo was sent, but the Gore co-founded Alliance for Climate Protection (ACP) was established in 2006 and lasted until it became The Climate Reality Project in July 2011. In 2008, the Alliance launched a $300 million campaign to encourage “Americans to push for aggressive reductions in greenhouse gas emissions,” The Washington Post reported.

ACP got $10 million from the Open Society Institute (OSI) in 2008, according to the nonprofit’s tax filings. OSI handed over another $5 million to ACP in 2009, according to tax filings. The investigative reporting group ProPublica keeps a database that has OSI tax returns from 2000 to 2013. TheDCNF could not find other years where OSI gave money to ACP.

OSI is primarily a grant-making nonprofit that hands out millions of dollars every year to mostly left-wing causes. Now called the Open Society Foundations, Soros’s nonprofit has handed out more than $13 billion over the last three decades.

OSI didn’t only plan to fund Gore’s climate group to promote global warming policies in the U.S., OSI also planned on giving millions of dollars to spur the “youth climate movement.”

“This budget item also allows for the renewal of U.S. Programs’ long-standing support of the Energy Action Coalition, which is the lead organizer of the youth climate movement in the U.S., the memo reads.

“We are also including a placeholder for an additional $2 million, pending discussion about and development of OSI’s global warming agenda,” the memo reads. “There is a memo from Nancy Youman in the strategic plans binder that recommends pathways forward for OSI on the climate issue – in the U.S., as well as in other parts of the Open Society Network.”

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/08/17/soros-paid-al-gore-millions-to-push-aggressive-us-action-on-global-warming/#ixzz4HiK4vPBV

Hillary’s Goon Squad

eb5c5ede-62ca-4374-986f-0f08361c7d81
If there’s one thing at which progressives always have excelled it is intimidation.

For all the talk against “bullying,” the political left has engaged in coercion since its inception. Under every left-wing despot from Stalin and Hitler to Mao and Chavez, those who dared differ with state-approved orthodoxy were threatened, beaten or simply killed. American progressives aren’t quite to the “murder” stage just yet, but given the escalating hatred they’re stirring up, that mile marker can’t be far over the horizon.

Think what you will of Donald Trump and the things he’s said … he’s only said things. Yet whenever he gathers with supporters to say things, an organized and well-funded progressive mob gathers outside to intimidate and attack people who simply want to hear the man speak. Their shirts may be all colors of the rainbow, but their actions are decidedly brown.

The Sturmabteilung, more commonly known as “Brownshirts,” were the fanatical enforcement wing of the Nazi Party during its rise to power. The Brownshirts intimidated opponents of Hitler into submission through threats and violence. Ultimately they were simply “useful idiots,” discarded (read: purged) after their usefulness had run its course. But the concept of a fanatical, violent mob to silence opposition lives on in the progressive movement.

That mob currently is being organized against Trump, not for policy inconsistencies or even substantive policy differences, but for rejecting political correctness and – the ultimate and only sin in the progressive worldview – existing wrong.

CARTOONS | LISA BENSON
VIEW CARTOON
Donald Trump is not politically correct. This is not breaking news. This is, perhaps, his greatest asset. What he lacks in policy specifics or core principles and respect or understanding of the Constitution, he makes up for with bluntness. When it comes to the issues that truly stir emotions – economic stability, growth, and people’s ability to provide for themselves and their family – Trump says the things you’d overhear at a local VFW or union hall anywhere between New York and California.

Despite his silver spoon upbringing and current lifestyle, Trump knows how middle class, hard-working, beer-swilling Americans talk and think. Whether he means it or believes it remains to be seen. He is not like them. He was born incredibly wealthy, always has been the boss and never has consumed alcohol. But that hasn’t mattered so far.

What has mattered is millions of people who’ve been force-fed nonsense by self-proclaimed academics and out-of-touch Harvard elites have rallied to a candidate who isn’t afraid to call out BS as BS without using the initials, just like they do when talking to the people they know.

If you’ve watched politics on any level, you’ve almost certainly heard a politician explaining his stance on something and thought, “I could do a better job than this idiot.” It’s the same mentality that causes baseball fans to turn on batters who miss a 95-mile-per-hour fastball when they couldn’t hit a ball out of the infield off a tee. It’s human nature.

Now the people who generally are mocked by coastal snobs find themselves identifying on an emotional level with a thrice-married billionaire who travels in style on his private jet plane. Leftists have derived power through division and fear – segregating the population by race, gender, etc., trying to convince people there’s a conspiracy to harm them and painting themselves as the great protector.

Trump grates against that mentality, becoming “one of us” who “gets it.” It is a different emotional appeal, and it is trumping the progressive-inspired fear.

Confused and afraid, progressives have gone back to the well to which they always return – the angry mob.

These rioting goons are organized by people who know what they’re doing; they’ve been conditioned to hate anyone “not on their team.” And just like the Sturmabteilung, blind loyalty to their righteous cause crowds out their dignity and basic humanity.

This was easier when the left’s control of a few key media outlets was enough to slow communications and monopolize thought. The press was the almost exclusive domain of Walter Duranty-types who served up the New York Times as Stalin’s personal press shop. Those days are done, thanks to the Internet, and they’re never coming back.

There’s no longer a monopoly for progressive propagandists with press credentials. For all its faults, Twitter destroyed the polemicists’ power. As progressives indulge in their typical tactics, the world is seeing it, unfiltered, for the first time. And people are discovering it’s every bit as ugly as it’s always been.

Do Unions Cause Inequality?

We hear quite a bit about inequality today.  This seems to be the mantra in the waning of the Obama Administration with the President saying, “Income inequality is “the defining challenge of our time.”  This is all code for another of President Obama’s descriptions of the same policy, the need to, “Spread this wealth around,” or in other words “From each according to his ability to each according to his need.”

Let’s spread the wealth around and end inequality.  One of the President’s and the Democrat Party’s most powerful allies in this long march to the promised land of a worker’s paradise where everyone is truly equal are the unions.

At one time it was dangerous to belong to a union in the United States.  They were considered illegal combinations in restraint of trade even though freedom of association has long been considered a right under the First Amendment to the Constitution.  People died organizing and participating in strikes.  Names like the Matewan Massacre, the Haymarket Riot, and the Battle of Blair Mountain convey the very real image of war that was fought for the right to organize.  This was a war that was decisively won by the unions.  This war for the allegiance of American labor was not won through the superior organizing techniques of the union bosses.  From the major battles of the 1800s and the early 1900s the unions were failing.  The workers just didn’t want to join.  Then along came FDR and his New Deal.  He passed pro-union legislation and with the patronage and support of the Federal Government unions not only flourished they triumphed.

According to the Progressives monopolies are terrible.  They benefit few and penalize many.  Never mind that before Rockefeller established his powerful Standard Oil a gallon of kerosene  cost 58 cents and after he had gained 90% of the market the price had fallen to 7 cents.  Or that under Carnegie’s US Steel, which controlled all steel production, the price of steel dropped.  Monopolies in production were universally branded as evil and they were made illegal by the progressives under Teddy Roosevelt “The Trust Buster” as he rigorously enforced the Sherman Antitrust Act and saved the people from the exploitation of efficiency and lower prices.

Monopolies were and are considered universally evil except when it comes to unions.  Unions have been allowed to exercise absolute control of entire industries.  Just ask yourself, how many auto worker unions are there?  How about Electricians, plumbers, carpenters?  How many unions compete with the NEA or SEIU?  These powerful unions have gained strangleholds over entire sectors of our economy.  They exercise coercive authority to allow some to work at their given professions and to deny others the same opportunity.  Through their unlimited power to exact unwilling support from anyone in their grasp they gain billions to support the very politicians who pass laws giving them the power to extort the money.  Through their government granted authority to become the sole negotiators of everyone’s pay, even those who don’t belong to the union, they effectively come to control the employers to a major extent.

Using the government awarded monopolistic and coercive power to drive up wages and benefits they drive up operating costs and prices.  By artificially driving up the wages of their members so that they can then collect bigger dues they distort the market place and artificially force down the wages of non-union workers.  You see unions can force wages above the levels that would be achieved in a free market only by limiting the supply with the threat to withhold labor if their demands aren’t met.

Workers in the private sector have been rejecting the big union cartels for generations.  Their participation rate has fallen from a high of 35% in the 1950s to its present dismal level of 11.1%.  According to the Washington Examiner, “The job sectors with the highest unionization rates in 2015 were in “protective service occupations,” primarily law enforcement, at 36.3 percent and education at 35.5 percent. The lowest rates were for retail sales at 3.3 percent and farming and forestry at 1.9 percent.”

And even this declining state of unionism is only possible because of the heavy hand of government patronage.  Rick Berman, president of the business-backed Center for Union Facts, attributed the stability in the numbers to pro-union policies under President Obama. “Union membership is apparently receiving a boost from an activist National Labor Relations Board. By tilting the scales in favor of labor organizers, the board and the sympathetic Obama administration are propping up Big Labor rather than helping the rank-and-file.”

As private sector employees bailed out of unions every time they had a chance, the employees-for-life in the civil service bureaucracy organized to gain an inordinate level of power over the government.  In 2009, for the first time in American history, government employees accounted for more than half the nation’s union membership.

Even FDR, the patron saint of unions warned about the distortions and disruptions of public sector unions.

In the President’s Aug. 16, 1937 correspondence with Luther C. Steward, the president of the National Federation of Federal Employees he said “meticulous attention should be paid to the special relationships and obligations of public servants to the public itself and to the Government.”

He added, “All Government employees should realize that the process of collective bargaining, as usually understood, cannot be transplanted into the public service.  It has its distinct and insurmountable limitations when applied to public personnel management.”

And, “The very nature and purposes of Government make it impossible for administrative officials to represent fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions with Government employee organizations.”

He continued, “The employer is the whole people, who speak by means of laws enacted by their representatives in Congress. Accordingly, administrative officials and employees alike are governed and guided, and in many instances restricted, by laws which establish policies, procedures, or rules in personnel matters.”

He concluded, “The pay is fixed by Congress and the workmen are represented by the members of Congress in the fixing of Government pay.  In other words, you would not have the representatives of the majority as the sole bargaining agents?  Not in the government, because there is no collective contract.  It is a very different case. There isn’t any bargaining, in other words, with the government; therefore the question does not arise.”

This is in effect a money laundering scheme.  The unions bargain with the politicians who raise the pay of their members which raises the dues collected by the unions who then contribute money to the very politicians who raise their pay.  And even in the public sector when given the choice to remain in unions or leave when given the chance as in Wisconsin they are leaving in droves.

So how do unions cause inequality?  By controlling the labor in major industries they distort the free market by artificially raising the cost of labor over what it should be according to production costs and sales receipts.  This in turn contributes to economic misallocations of resources and malinvestments which sets the stage for the creation of bubbles, booms, and busts.

In America all people are equal before the law and all should have equality of opportunity.  However, it is a fact apparent to anyone who has interacted with anyone else that all people are not equal in talent, motivation, experience, or desires.  Therefore inequality as a result of the varying application of these four attributes will always exist.

Such horror shows as the USSR, Cuba, and Venezuela have tried this through collectivist pipedreams that became the nightmares of their captive people.

If unions are all about the free association of workers go to Chicago or New York and try to start a competing carpenters union.  See how well that goes.  I would suggest that you wear a hard hat.

Dr. Owens teaches History, Political Science, and Religion.  He is the Historian of the Future @ http://drrobertowens.com © 2016 Contact Dr. Owens drrobertowens@hotmail.com  Follow Dr. Robert Owens on Facebook or Twitter @ Drrobertowens / Edited by Dr. Rosalie Owens

 

HUMA ABEDIN: THE SECURITY BREACH HILLARY IS STILL HIDING

Now that Clinton is being investigated, will scrutiny finally fall on her Islamist-linked right-hand woman?

huma_hillary_7_ap_605_605
Editor’s note: Hillary Clinton is finally being investigated for her email server scandal and potential security breaches of sensitive information that may have occurred during her tenure as Secretary of State. During this investigation, will authorities finally look into the security threat at the Clinton State Department that involved Clinton’s longtime confidant and senior aide, Huma Abedin? The question remains: How was an individual with such extensive ties to the Muslim Brotherhood allowed high-level access to the State Department? To understand the extreme menace to national security posed by the Abedin-Clinton partnership, read the in-depth DiscoverTheNetworks profile of Hillary’s right-hand woman below.

Huma Abedin was born in 1976 in Kalamazoo, Michigan. Her father, Syed Abedin (1928-1993), was an Indian-born scholar who had worked as a visiting professor at Saudi Arabia’s King Abdulaziz University in the early Seventies.

Huma’s mother, Saleha Mahmood Abedin, is a sociologist known for her strong advocacy of Sharia Law. A member of the Muslim Sisterhood (i.e., the Muslim Brotherhood’s division for women), Saleha is also a board member of the International Islamic Council for Dawa and Relief. This pro-Hamas entity is part of the Union of Good, which the U.S. government has formally designated as an international terrorist organization led by the Muslim Brotherhood luminary Yusuf al-Qaradawi.

When Huma was two, the Abedin family relocated from Michigan to Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. This move took place when Abdullah Omar Naseef, a major Muslim Brotherhood figure who served as vice president of Abdulaziz University (AU), recruited his former AU colleague, Syed Abedin, to work for the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs (IMMA), a Saudi-based Islamic think tank that Naseef was preparing to launch. A number of years later, Naseef would develop close ties to Osama bin Laden and the terrorist group al Qaeda. Naseef also spent time (beginning in the early 1980s) as secretary-general of the Muslim World League, which, as journalist Andrew C. McCarthy points out, “has long been the Muslim Brotherhood’s principal vehicle for the international propagation of Islamic supremacist ideology.”

It is vital to note that IMMA’s “Muslim Minority Affairs” agenda was, and remains to this day, a calculated foreign policy of the Saudi Ministry of Religious Affairs, designed, as Andrew C. McCarthy explains, “to grow an unassimilated, aggressive population of Islamic supremacists who will gradually but dramatically alter the character of the West.” For details about this agenda, click here.

At age 18, Huma Abedin returned to the U.S. to attend George Washington University. In 1996 she began working as an intern in the Bill Clinton White House, where she was assigned to then-First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton. Abedin was eventually hired as an aide to Mrs. Clinton and has worked for her ever since, through Clinton’s successful Senate runs (in 2000 and 2006) and her failed presidential bid in 2008.

From 1997 until sometime before early 1999, Abedin, while still interning at the White House, was an executive board member of George Washington University’s (GWU) Muslim Students Association (MSA), heading the organization’s “Social Committee.”

It is noteworthy that in 2001-02, soon after Abedin left that executive board, the chaplain and “spritual guide” of GWU’s MSA was Anwar al-Awlaki, the al Qaeda operative who ministered to some of the men who were among the 9/11 hijackers. Another chaplain at GWU’s MSA (from at least October 1999 through April 2002) was Mohamed Omeish, who headed the International Islamic Relief Organization, which has been tied to the funding of al Qaeda. Omeish’s brother, Esam, headed the Muslim American Society, the Muslim Brotherhood’s quasi-official branch in the United States. Both Omeish brothers were closely associated with Abdurahman Alamoudi, who would later be convicted and incarcerated on terrorism charges.

From 1996-2008, Abedin was employed by the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs(IMMA) as the assistant editor of its in-house publication, the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs (JMMA). At least the first seven of those years overlapped with the al Qaeda-affiliated Abdullah Omar Naseef’s active presence at IMMA. Abedin’s last six years at the Institute (2002-2008) were spent as a JMMA editorial board member; for one of those years, 2003, Naseef and Abedin served together on that board.

Throughout her years with IMMA, Abedin remained a close aide to Hillary Clinton. During Mrs. Clinton’s 2008 presidential primary campaign, a New York Observer profile of Abedin described her as “a trusted advisor to Mrs. Clinton, especially on issues pertaining to the Middle East, according to a number of Clinton associates.” “At meetings on the region,” continued the profile, “… Ms. Abedin’s perspective is always sought out.”

When Mrs. Clinton was appointed as President Barack Obama’s Secretary of State in 2009, Abedin became her deputy chief of staff. At approximately that same point in time, Abedin’s name was removed from the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs’ masthead.

Apart from their working relationship, Abedin and Mrs. Clinton have also developed a close personal bond over their years together, as reflected in Clinton’s 2010 assertion that: “I have one daughter. But if I had a second daughter, it would [be] Huma.” In 2011, Secretary Clinton paid a friendly visit to Abedin’s mother, Saleha, in Saudi Arabia. On that occasion, Mrs. Clinton publicly described her aide’s position as “very important and sensitive.”

On July 10, 2010, Huma Abedin, a practicing Muslim, married then-congressman Anthony Weiner in a ceremony officiated by former president Bill Clinton. A number of analysts have noted that it is extremely rare for Islamic women—particularly those whose families have ties to the Muslim Brotherhood—to marry non-Muslims like Weiner, who is Jewish. Indeed, Dr. Anwar Shoeb, the highest-ranking faculty authority at the prestigious College of Sharia and Islamic Studies in Kuwait, formally declared that Abedin’s marriage to Weiner was “null and void” under the dictates of Sharia Law, which explicitly forbids matrimony between a Muslim woman and an “infidel”; in fact, Shoeb classified the Abedin-Weiner union as a form of “adultery.”

Abedin went on maternity leave after giving birth to a baby boy in early December 2011. When she returned to work in June 2012, the State Department granted her an arrangement that allowed her to do outside consulting work as a “special government employee,” even as she remained a top advisor in the Department. Abedin did not disclose on her financial report either the arrangement or the $135,000 she earned from it, in violation of a law mandating that public officials disclose significant sources of income. Abedin’s outside clients includedthe U.S. State Department, Hillary Clinton, the William Jefferson Clinton Foundation, and Teneo (a firm co-founded by Doug Band, a former counselor for Bill Clinton). Good-government groups warned of the potential conflict-of-interest inherent in an arangement where a government employee maintains private clients.

In June 2012, five Republican lawmakers (most prominently, Michele Bachmann) sent lettersto the inspectors general at the Departments of Homeland Security, Justice, and State, asking that they investigate whether the Muslim Brotherhood was gaining undue influence over U.S. government officials. One letter, noting that Huma Abedin’s position with Hillary Clinton “affords her routine access to the secretary [of state] and to policymaking,” expressed concern over the fact that Abedin “has three family members—her late father, mother and her brother—connected to Muslim Brotherhood operatives and/or organizations.” Some other prominent Republicans such as John McCain and John Boehner disavowed the concerns articulated in the letters.

On February 1, 2013—Hillary Clinton’s final day as Secretary of State—Abedin resigned her post as Mrs. Clinton’s deputy chief of staff. Yet she would continue to serve as a close aide to Clinton.

On March 1, 2013, Abedin was tapped to run Clinton’s post-State Department transition team, comprised of a six-person “transition office” located in Washington.

In early March 2015, it was reported that throughout her entire four-year tenure as Secretary of State (SOS), Hillary Clinton had never acquired or used a government email account, and instead had transmitted — in violation of government regulations — all of her official government correspondences via a personal email account that was housed on a private server. In addition, Abedin and Mrs. Clinton’s chief of staff, Cheryl Mills, also had email addresses on the secret server while employed at the State Department.

After Hillary Clinton announced in the spring of 2015 that she was running for president (2016), Abedin was named vice chair of the Clinton campaign.

Huma Abedin’s brother, Hassan Abedin, has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and is currently an associate editor with the JMMA. Hassan was once a fellow at the Oxford Center for Islamic Studies, at a time when the Center’s board included such Brotherhood-affiliated figures as Yusuf al-Qaradawi and Abdullah Omar Naseef.

Huma’s sister, Heba Abedin (formerly known as “Heba A. Khaled”), is an assistant editor with JMMA, where she served alongside Huma prior to the latter’s departure.

Eliminating Public Sector Unions Will Eliminate the Power of The Left…

110317_wisconsin_woman_ap_328
“The real lesson of Wisconsin is that the Republican Party is at its strongest and greatest when it acts as a revolutionary liberation movement, breaking apart the power relationships of the Democratic Party that stifle people’s personal, economic and religious lives.

The Democratic Party has made it its mandate to politicize and collectivize the personal. It has done this to militarize every area of life, to transform all human activities into a battlefield and to bring every area of life under the aegis of its power relationships. These power relationships form its infrastructure, fusing together governmental and non-governmental organizations, to form the true ruling class.

These power relationships act as dams, walling up human energy into organizational structures, they create the mandates that provide power and money to the organizations, which are fed throughout the infrastructure to create a massive cage of bureaucrats, activists and think-tanks that set the agenda, which becomes law, and is then enforced by governments at every level.

The base activity of the left is organizational. Organizing a group dams it up. The organizers harvest its energy and use it to power their infrastructure. The purpose of a group is to draw money and power into the organization from outside and inside. Money and power are drawn from the inside through dues and member obedience. Money and power are drawn from the outside through leverage exercised by making demands on behalf of the group.”

HERE’S YOUR SIGN

Smart-power-600-LA

HELP US KEEP YOU BETTER INFORMED ABOUT THE TRICKS OF THE RADICAL PROGRESSIVE REVOLUTION PLEASE DONATE ANY AMOUNT YOU CAN