VIDEO LIBERAL PROFESSOR WARNS: Google Manipulating Voters ‘on a Massive Scale’

July 21st, 2019

 

As American voters we should all be very alarmed  about how Google has been manipulating votes.  I stopped using the google search engine last year and now use www.bing.com  or www.duckduckgo.com
Google does not need to know what our searches concern.   We are entering an era of lack of privacy and we need to protect ourselves.  
Nancy
VIDEO

Liberal Professor Warns: Google Manipulating Voters ‘on a Massive Scale’

BREITBART NEWS

Published on Jul 17, 2019

Dr. Robert Epstein told Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) on Tuesday that Google can manipulate votes by using tools that they have at their disposal exclusively, and that no one can counteract them. Epstein warned the senator of big tech election meddling during his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing on “Google and Censorship through Search Engines” on Tuesday.
Share

ISLAMOMORIA – THE OPPOSITE OF ISLAMOPHOBIA

July 20th, 2019

 

It has been amazingly easy to make the public  accept that homosexuality is normal and that Islam is peaceful by accusing people of being homophobic or Islamophobic.  This article tells you how it was so easily done.    Nancy   

Islamomoria — Countering the Charge of “Islamophobia”

JUL 18, 2019   9:00 AM  BY MATEEN ELASS35 COMMENTS

EXCERPT FROM THIS ARTICLE:  Islamomoria, then, would describe the pollyannish assessment of Islam as a religion or worldview which ignores the jihad mandate, hatred for the disbeliever, sex slavery, inherent gender inequality, and imposition of Shari’a law upon all (including execution of homosexuals and apostates, and dhimmitude for all non-Muslims allowed to live by the global caliphate.) Those preaching or under the spell of such a misguided, positive assessment of Islam would be known as Islamomorons. Perhaps the pejorative sense inherent in this term would serve as a wake-up call to those who listen mindlessly to pseudo-scholarly Islamophiles, while at the same time shaming and silencing the latter from further propaganda. It is the perfect word to describe “useful idiots” so eager to welcome Islam into Western life without realizing they are sowing the seeds of their own society’s destruction.

When words are weaponized and skillfully wielded in the moral battles of a society, they can change the debate landscape in short order — a few decades at most. Witness, for example, a word freshly minted in the early 1980s, when attitudes toward homosexuality were by and large negative. Gay activists coined the term “homophobia” and applied it not only to those holding an “irrational fear” of homosexuality/homosexuals (which is what the term literally meant) but also to those opposed to the practice or lifestyle for moral, medical, sociological or theological reasons. They successfully beguiled a dull-witted society into swallowing uncritically the judgment that anyone opposed to homosexuality as an equally acceptable lifestyle as that of heterosexuality must be intolerant and bigoted, and consequently should be ostracized and shamed into silence until all opposition to the homosexual activist agenda was squelched, and indeed a negative cultural perception was transformed into a positive one.

Muslim activists in the West were quick to learn from this. In the 1990s, leaders from the Muslim Brotherhood in America and sister organizations, all committed to the ascendancy of Islam and its ultimate conquest of the USA in pursuit of a global caliphate, gathered to strategize a long-term plan for the advancement of Islam in American culture. Key to their vision was the makeover of the negative image of Islam in the West. To accomplish this the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT) coined the term “Islamophobia,” and the 29 Muslim Brotherhood-related organizations began to wield it as a verbal weapon to shame and silence anyone critical of Islamic doctrine and practice.

One of the then members of the IIIT who later renounced his Islamic radicalism and left the organization, Abdur Rahman Muhammad, revealed the intent behind the coining of “Islamophobia”:

“This loathsome term is nothing more than a thought-terminating cliche conceived in the bowels of Muslim think tanks for the purpose of beating down critics…. Islamophobia” was a term designed as a weapon to advance a totalitarian cause by stigmatizing critics and silencing them. This plan was an outgrowth of the Muslim Brotherhood’s deceptive ‘General Strategic Goal for North America.’” [To see that document in Arabic, followed by an English translation, click here.]

Read the rest of this entry »

Share

WHAT IS CAUSING THE VIOLENCE ? CULTURAL MARXISM

July 20th, 2019

 

Today’s decay of our traditional values  is causing all this violence and  is the direct result of Cultural Marxism whose main goal is to undermine and weaken our country.  This is a great article by Walter Williams on how our values and traditions used to be and how today’s behavior would be unthinkable to our past generations.    Nancy

Things Haven’t Always Been This Way

Walter E. Williams @WE_Williams /  July 17, 2019

Here’s a suggestion. How about setting up some high school rifle clubs? Students would bring their own rifles to school, store them with the team coach and, after classes, collect them for practice.

You say: “Williams, you must be crazy! To prevent gun violence, we must do all we can to keep guns out of the hands of kids.”

There’s a problem with this reasoning. Prior to the 1960s, many public high schools had shooting clubs.

In New York City, shooting clubs were started at Boys, Curtis, Commercial, Manual Training, and Stuyvesant high schools. Students carried their rifles to school on the subway and turned them over to their homeroom or gym teacher. Rifles were retrieved after school for target practice.

The liberal Left continue to push their radical agenda against American values. The good news is there is a solution. Find out more >>

In some rural areas across the nation, there was a long tradition of high school students hunting before classes and storing their rifles in the trunks of their cars, parked on school grounds, during the school day.

Today, any school principal permitting rifles clubs or allowing rifles on school grounds would be fired, possibly imprisoned.

Here’s my question: Have .30-30 caliber Winchesters and .22 caliber rifles changed to become more violent? If indeed rifles have become more violent, what can be done to pacify them? Will rifle psychiatric counseling help to stop these weapons from committing gun violence?

You say: “Williams, that’s lunacy! Guns are inanimate objects and as such cannot act.”

You’re right. Only people can act. That means that we ought to abandon the phrase “gun violence” because guns cannot act and hence cannot be violent.

If guns haven’t changed, it must be that people, and what’s considered acceptable behavior, have changed. Violence with guns is just a tiny example.

What explains a lot of what we see today is growing cultural deviancy.

Read the rest of this entry »

Share

J’ACCUSE – DERSHOWITZ – THE LEFT IS TRYING TO SILENCE ME

July 18th, 2019

 

This is an incredible article written by Alan Dershowitz of the attempts by the Left to silence and smear  him because he has been supportive of President Trump, Prime Minister Netanyahu  and the state of Israel.    Nancy

J’accuse — The New Yorker Is Trying to Silence Me

by Alan M. Dershowitz
July 18, 2019 at 4:00 am

I recently learned, from a source close to The New Yorker magazine, that its editor, David Remnick, has commissioned a hit piece against me for the explicit purpose of silencing my defense of President Trump, Prime Minister Netanyahu, and the State of Israel. Remnick despises Trump and Netanyahu, and is well known for his strong anti-Israel bias. Remnick explicitly told people that I must be silenced because mine has been the most persuasive voice in favor of what Remnick feels pose dangers to values he holds dear, and that he will use the credibility of The New Yorker to accomplish this goal.

The New Yorker used to be a great literary magazine. I read it for its short stories, profiles of literary figures, film and drama reviews, humorous vignettes, and clever cartoons. But since David Remnick took over as editor, left wing politics have trumped non-partisan literature. Profiles have become personal attacks on Remnick’s political enemies and hagiographies of his political friends.

Among Remnick’s most persistent enemies are Benjamin Netanyahu and Donald Trump. Ad hominem attacks on the Israeli Prime Minister include mocking his name (“Netanyahoo”) and calling him a “mendacious mouse.” Remnick consistently singles out Israel for condemnation, while ignoring real violations of human rights.

An op-ed in the Jerusalem Post observed that “under Remnick’s reign, The New Yorker, and particularly Remnick himself, repeatedly and obsessively focuses on what Remnick perceives to be the failings of the state of Israel,” accusing it of “medievalism,” “apartheid” and “xenophobia.” Its one-sided views have been “posted prominently on the website of “Intifada – The Voice of Palestine.”

The Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America has characterized Remnick’s writings as “almost frantic agitation” against the Netanyahu government. Israel and/or its leaders are scorned for being “bigoted,” “arrogant” and “stubborn,” and for displaying “ineptitude” and a penchant for “fantasy.” The Palestinian leaders, on the other hand, are “moderate and constructive.” Remnick’s attacks on President Trump are even more ad hominem, calling him “unhinged,” “chaotic,” “corrupt,” “infantile” and comparing him to Nero.

The New Yorker’s reputation for objectivity, fairness and scrupulous fact checking has been replaced by a growing awareness that nothing it publishes should be taken as true without rigorous independent checking, especially when it comes to Israel, Netanyahu, and Trump. The same is true when it comes to public figures Remnick believes are supporters of his sworn enemies. I know, because Remnick has arranged for a like-minded attack journalist named Connie Bruck to target me in a mendacious hit piece designed to still my voice on Israel, Netanyahu, and Trump.

Read the rest of this entry »

Share

VIDEO CNN TRIES TO GET 8 WOMEN TO CALL TRUMP A RACIST

July 17th, 2019

 

When you click on the link, please scroll down past all the advertisements to get to the video of these 8 really great women.  It is my opinion that these 8 women speak for the majority of Americans.   So tired of the Dems  using the racist card  to attack those who disagree with their ideology !         Nancy

WATCH: CNN Tries Getting 8 Women to Admit Trump Is Racist, But It Goes Horribly Wrong

Share

RUSH LIMBAUGH: TRUMP THREATENS WORLD ELITES

July 15th, 2019

 

The elites of Europe remind me of our own elites in Washington.  In their own elitist world, they  talk and criticize a lot but never fix any problem that they themselves  caused.   Nancy

The lead-in from friend next under is to below transcript of Rush Limbaugh talking about the leaked memos of U.K. Ambassador to U.S. bashing POTUS Trump and his Administration……

There are too many good quotes here, you’ll just have to read the whole thing. The bottom line is that Trump wants to stop America from being the piggy bank to the rest of the world, and they don’t like it!  Royal Brown
—————-

EXCERPT FROM THIS ARTICLE:They’re scared to death, folks. They’re scared to death because Trump literally poses a threat to their way of life, the threat to their cushy, establishment existence which does not require performance to survive, does not require being good at what they do to survive, does not require accomplishment to survive. It maintains a pecking order based on membership. And Trump is threatening every one of them throughout the entire western alliance. Gotta love it……… All of these, ongoing, never ending diplomatic problems that never solve because they’re not designed to, bureaucracies exist to exist. The worst thing that can happen to a bureaucracy is solve a problem. These people have evolved a system for permanent existence, making it look like they’re the only ones qualified to deal with something, they never fix it, never solve it. Somebody comes along and does represents a threat. 

RUSH: Now, I mentioned earlier in the program that a British diplomat, the ambassador to the United States, had written some scathing memos for British diplomats to read sharing his observations of Trump and the Trump administration. Somebody leaked them to the U.K. Daily Mail. The U.K. Daily Mail ran a gigantic story on this, and the Brits have since apologized for this.
But I want to break down some of the things the guy wrote, because it is a teachable moment. But the U.K. today said that it will formally apologize to the White House after leaked confidential memos revealed its ambassador to the U.S. described the Trump administration as inept and dysfunctional.
A spokesman for the Prime Minister Theresa May told reporters: “Contact has been made with the Trump administration, setting out our view that we believe the leak is unacceptable. It is, of course, a matter of regret that this has happened.”
The trade minister, Liam Fox, said he’s gonna apologize directly to Trump’s daughter Ivanka, whom he is expected to meet while he is in Washington. He told the BBC radio, “I will be apologizing for the fact that either our civil service or elements of our political class have not lived up to the expectations that either we have or the United States has about their behavior, which in this particular case has lapsed in a most extraordinary and unacceptable way.”
We’re talking about Sir Kim Darroch. And Britain has launched an investigation into who leaked the emails from this guy that he had sent to others. Liam Fox said, “I hope if we can identify the individual, either the full force of internal discipline — or if necessary the law — will be brought to bear because this sort of behavior has no place in public life.”
Share

CAN ILHAN OMAR OVERCOME HER PREJUDICE ?

July 13th, 2019

 

This is one of the best articles I have ever read.  Ayaan Hirsi Ali is an incredibly perceptive woman and she writes beautifully .   Nancy
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

Can Ilhan Omar Overcome Her Prejudice?

I was born in Somalia and grew up amid pervasive Muslim anti-Semitism. Hate is hard to unlearn without coming to terms with how you learned it.

July 12, 2019 6:24 pm ET

Excerpt from this article: The problem of Muslim anti-Semitism is much bigger than Ilhan Omar. Condemning her, expelling her from the House Foreign Affairs Committee, or defeating her in 2020 won’t make the problem go away.

Islamists have understood well how to couple Muslim anti-Semitism with the American left’s vague notion of “social justice.” They have succeeded in couching their agenda in the progressive framework of the oppressed versus the oppressor. Identity politics and victimhood culture also provide Islamists with the vocabulary to deflect their critics with accusations of “Islamophobia,” “white privilege” and “insensitivity.” A perfect illustration was the way Ms. Omar and her allies were able to turn a House resolution condemning her anti-Semitism into a garbled “intersectional” rant in which Muslims emerged as the most vulnerable minority in the league table of victimhood.

I once opened a speech by confessing to a crowd of Jews that I used to hate them. It was 2006 and I was a young native of Somalia who’d been elected to the Dutch Parliament. The American Jewish Committee was giving me its Moral Courage Award. I felt honored and humbled, but a little dishonest if I didn’t own up to my anti-Semitic past. So I told them how I’d learned to blame the Jews for everything.

Fast-forward to 2019. A freshman congresswoman from Minnesota has been infuriating the Jewish community and discomfiting the Democratic leadership with her expressions of anti-Semitism. Like me, Ilhan Omar was born in Somalia and exposed at an early age to Muslim anti-Semitism.

Some of the members of my 2006 AJC audience have asked me to explain and respond to Ms. Omar’s comments, including her equivocal apologies. Their main question is whether it is possible for Ms. Omar to unlearn her evident hatred of Jews—and if so, how to help.

In my experience it is difficult, perhaps impossible, to unlearn hate without coming to terms with how you learned to hate. Most Americans are familiar with the classic Western flavors of anti-Semitism: the Christian, European, white-supremacist and Communist types. But little attention has been paid to the special case of Muslim anti-Semitism. That is a pity because today it is anti-Semitism’s most zealous, most potent and most underestimated form.

I never heard the term “anti-Semitism” until I moved to the Netherlands in my 20s. But I had firsthand familiarity with its Muslim variety. As a child in Somalia, I was a passive consumer of anti-Semitism. Things would break, conflicts would arise, shortages would occur—and adults would blame it all on the Jews.

When I was a little girl, my mom often lost her temper with my brother, with the grocer or with a neighbor. She would scream or curse under her breath “Yahud!” followed by a description of the hostility, ignominy or despicable behavior of the subject of her wrath. It wasn’t just my mother; grown-ups around me exclaimed “Yahud!”the way Americans use the F-word. I was made to understand that Jews—Yahud—were all bad. No one took any trouble to build a rational framework around the idea—hardly necessary, since there were no Jews around. But it set the necessary foundation for the next phase of my development.

At 15 I became an Islamist by joining the Muslim Brotherhood. I began attending religious and civil-society events, where I received an education in the depth and breadth of Jewish villainy. This was done in two ways.

The first was theological. We were taught that the Jews betrayed our prophet Muhammad. Through Quranic verses (such as 7:166, 2:65 and 5:60), we learned that Allah had eternally condemned them, that they were not human but descendants of pigs and monkeys, that we should aspire to kill them wherever we found them. We were taught to pray: “Dear God, please destroy the Jews, the Zionists, the state of Israel. Amen.”

We were taught that the Jews occupied the Holy Land of Palestine. We were shown pictures of mutilated bodies, dead children, wailing widows and weeping orphans. Standing over them in military uniform were Israeli soldiers with large guns. We were told their killing of Palestinians was wanton, unprovoked and an expression of their hatred for Muslims.

Read the rest of this entry »

Share

CONGRESS IS COMING FOR YOUR IRA

July 13th, 2019

 

 

The Secure Act which is before the U.S. Senate for a vote can impact the taxes of  many of us and our children and grandchildren.   Take the time to look at this information and contact your senators if you would like to comment on how you want them to vote on  this bill.   Nancy
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

Congress Is Coming for Your IRA

The Secure Act would upend 20 years of retirement planning and stick it to the middle class.

By

Philip DeMuth  Mr. DeMuth is author of “The Overtaxed Investor: Slash Your Tax Bill and Be a Tax Alpha Dog.”      July 10, 2019

Like grave robbers opening King Tut’s tomb, Congress can’t wait to get its hands on America’s retirement-account assets. The House passed the Setting Every Community Up for Retirement Enhancement Act, known by the acronym Secure, in May. The vote was 417-3. The Secure Act is widely expected to pass the Senate by unanimous consent. While ostensibly helping Americans save for retirement, the bill would actually reduce the value of all retirement savings plans: individual retirement accounts, 401(k)s, Roth IRAs, the works.

The main problem with the Secure Act is that it eliminates the stretch IRA,the fixed star in the financial-planning firmament since 1999. The stretch IRA lets savers leave their retirement accounts to children, grandchildren or other beneficiaries. Under current rules, the recipients can parcel out the required minimum distributions from the accounts over the course of their actuarial lifetimes. Payouts tend to be relatively small for children but grow in size over the decades until the inherited IRA might comfortably provide for the child’s retirement through the power of tax-deferred compounding. A parent could die with the knowledge that, whatever vicissitudes their children might experience in life, they won’t have to worry about retirement.

Congress wants to kill this. The Secure Act gives nonspouse beneficiaries 10 years to pull out all the money in an IRA. The effect would be to make more of an IRA subject to higher taxes sooner, as distributions are made in supersize chunks. As much as one-third more of an inherited IRA would get gobbled up by taxes than under current rules. When the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act expires in 2025, taxes will rise across the board. If President Trump signs the Secure Act into law, the stage will be set for a taxpocalypse sometime in the next decade.

In exchange for its windfall under the Secure Act, Congress will push back the age at which retirees must take their first required minimum IRA distributions from 70½ to 72. This isn’t the deal American savers were promised when they made contributions to their IRAs the last 20 years. Before, the optimal approach was for savers to leave their IRAs to their children or grandchildren and stretch the payouts over decades.

Share

WHITE HOUSE PETITION – IN SUPPORT OF THE CITIZENSHIP QUESTION BEING ON THE 2020 CENSUS

July 6th, 2019
Please consider signing this petition to the White House in favor of the citizenship question being on the 2020 census.   Please share with your email lists.   Nancy

 

Share

THE 2020 DEMOCRATS LACK HINDSIGHT – PEGGY NOONAN

July 6th, 2019

 

The 2020 Democrats Lack Hindsight

They ignore reality and march in lockstep with their base. Did they learn anything from 2016?

By Peggy Noonan   June 28, 2019

I’ve received tens of thousands of letters and other communications from Trump supporters the past few years, some of which have sparked extended dialogues. Two I got after last week’s column struck me as pertinent to this moment, and they make insufficiently appreciated points.

A gentleman of early middle age in Kansas City wrote to say he’d sat out the 2016 election because he was dissatisfied with both parties. But now he’s for Donald Trump, and the reason “runs deeper than politics.”

America’s elites in politics, media and the academy have grown oblivious to “the average Joe’s intense disgust” at being morally instructed and “preached to.”

“Every day, Americans are told of the endless ways they are falling short. If we don’t show the ‘proper’ level of understanding according to a talking head, then we are surely racist. If we don’t embrace every sanitized PC talking point, then we must be heartless. If we have the audacity to speak our mind, then we are most definitely a bigot.” These accusations are relentless.

“We are jabbed like a boxer with no gloves on to defend us. And we are fed up. We are tired of being told we aren’t good enough.” He believes the American people are by nature kind and generous—“they would give you the shirt off their back if you were in trouble”—and that “in Donald Trump, voters found a massive sledgehammer that pulverizes the ridiculous notion that Americans aren’t good enough.” Mr. Trump doesn’t buy the guilt narrative.

“It’s surely not about the man at this point. It stopped being about Trump long ago. It is about that counter-punch that has been missing from our culture for far too long.”

The culture of accusation, he says, is breaking us apart.

A reader who grew up upper-middle-class in the South writes on the politics of the situation. His second wife, also a Southerner, grew up poor. She is a former waitress and bartender whose politics he characterizes as “pragmatic liberal.” They watched Mr. Trump’s 2015 announcement together, and he said to her, “He doesn’t have a chance.” She looked at him “with complete conviction” and said, “He’s going to win.”

As the campaign progressed, she never wavered. At the end, with the polls saying Hillary, “I asked my wife how she could be so certain Trump was going to win.” He found her response “astute and telling.”

“She told me, ‘He speaks my language, and there’s a lot more of me than there is of you.’ ”

I have to say after a week of reading such letters that emotionally this cycle feels like 2016 all over again. Various facts are changed (no Mrs. Clinton) but the same basic dynamic pertains—the two Americas talking past each other, the social and cultural resentments, the great estrangement. It’s four years later but we’re re-enacting the trauma of 2016.

And the Democrats again appear to be losing the thread.

They’ve spent the past few months giving the impression they are in a kind of passionate lockstep with a part of their base, the progressives, and detached from everyone else.

And in the debates they doubled down. Both nights had fizz. There was a lot of earnestness and different kinds of brightness.

But what Night One did was pick up the entire party and put it down outside the mainstream and apart from the center.

This is what the candidates said:

They are, functionally, in terms of the effects of their stands, for open borders.

They are in complete agreement with the abortion regime—no reservations or qualms, no sense of just or civilized limits.

They’re all in on identity politics. One candidate warned against denying federally funded abortions to “a trans female.”

Two said they would do away with all private health insurance.

Read the rest of this entry »

Share
Search All Posts
Categories