For those of you who live in North Carolina, scroll down to read the second article on how our Democrat Governor is planning to veto a bill that does not include Medicaid expansion. Nancy
So, it’s come to this: One of America’s major parties is in the grip of a crazy old communist — Bernie Sanders, 77 — and a crazy young communist — Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, 29.
The two of them are driving the Democrats’ green microbus upon which the other presidential wannabes are scrambling to get aboard.
This column is about the crazy old communist — Vermont Sen. Sanders, who just announced his candidacy for the presidency and raised $6 million. He prefers the less scary term Democratic Socialist. But his Marxist economics, Marxist cultural activism and well-documented support for communist causes — such as Fidel Castro’s revolution in Cuba — speak volumes.
Quicker than you can say Joe McCarthy this will be dismissed as another Red Scare. But even though truth is not much of a defense in this fake news era, let’s look at Mr. Sanders‘ background, and you can make up your own mind.
At the University of Chicago, Mr. Sanders was a member of the Young People’s Socialist League. In 1963, he lived in Israel at Kibbutz Sha’ar Ha’amakim (KSH), which was co-founded by Aharon Cohen, who was arrested for spying for the Soviet Union in the 1950s.
According to Discoverthenetworks.org, “the founders of KSH referred to Joseph Stalin as the ‘Sun of the Nations,’ and a red flag was flown at outdoor events held at the kibbutz. Sanders stayed at KSH as a guest of the Zionist-Marxist youth movement Hashomer Hatzair (HH), which pledged its allegiance to the Soviet Union.”
HH founder Ya’akov Hazan lamented Soviet mass murderer Stalin’s death in 1953, saying, “His huge historical achievements will guide generations in their march towards the reign of socialism and communism the world over.”
In 1971, Mr. Sanders joined the Liberty Union Party (LUP), which called for a government takeover of all U.S. banks and private utility companies. In the mid-1970s, Mr. Sanders headed the American People’s History Society, which journalist Paul Sperry describes as “an organ for Marxist propaganda.”
State by state detailed infographics on how much illegals burden you and your state:
A very realistic look at the possibility of a European Army. Europe’s dilemma is to continue the feeding of the socialistic beast (cradle to grave entitlements) or to increase its military so it can defend itself. I highlighted the author’s description of President Trump’s behavior towards the Europeans regarding their military spending (“his diplomacy of rudeness” and his “insolence”). Perhaps the Europeans would prefer that their dependency on the U.S. for military protection not be so rudely and openly discussed. Other presidents have complained (privately) and it got them nowhere with the Europeans. Everyone politely ignored the elephant in the room but not Trump ! He says it like it is !!! Nancy
‘We must protect ourselves with respect to China, Russia, and even the United States,” French President Emmanuel Macron said earlier this month, calling for European strategic autonomy from the U.S. That autonomy would, in Mr. Macron’s words, include a “true European army.” A few days later, German chancellor Angela Merkel echoed the call for a European force. The vision is gaining momentum, propelled in part by Donald Trump’s diplomacy of rudeness against America’s European allies.
Invasion and colonization…All on your dime.On the border in El Paso, the migrants arrive so regularly there’s a housing crunch
Jose Oscar Martinez Cruz of El Salvador, right, holds his 9-month-old son, Carlos, as Orlando Guifaro of Honduras, in red hat, reaches for his son Justin, 5, at an El Paso motel housing Central American families. (Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)While President Trump railed against a migrant caravan wending its way north through Mexico this week, hundreds of Central American immigrant families had already arrived at the border and been released into the U.S. by authorities.
The influx, unrelated to the caravan, has crowded immigration holding areas and detention centers across the Southwest. The Border Patrol has released so many families, advocacy groups in Arizona and Texas have had to house them in churches and motels.
In El Paso, the nonprofit Annunciation House shelter expected to take in 1,200 migrants this week and 1,500 more next week.
“We’re in effect receiving a caravan a month,” said Ruben Garcia, the shelter’s director, after serving pizza to immigrant families staying in 70 hotel rooms his group rented this week at a nightly cost of $3,500.
As he spoke, a Border Patrol agent called and asked Garcia whether he could shelter an additional 80 immigrants on Thursday. Garcia agreed — he had just heard from a church willing to take in up to 90 people, the latest of 16 religious groups in El Paso and nearby Las Cruces, N.M., to volunteer. He appealed to another church late Tuesday to help. His group runs on volunteers and donations.
“As the flow increases, I could say to Border Patrol I can’t accept any more. But I won’t, because I know what those holding cells are like. I want to expand our capacity,” Garcia said late Tuesday as he waited for two Border Patrol buses to arrive with the 80 migrants.
The Border Patrol caught a record 16,658 immigrant family members crossing illegally in September, a White House spokesman said this week. More than 161,000 immigrant family members were caught or turned themselves in during the fiscal year that ended last month, 42% more than in any previous year, the spokesman said.
Bad ideas just won’t die. Ronald Reagan’s goal was to “leave Marxism and Leninism on the ash heap of history.” But they keep coming back, albeit in different forms. Of today’s bad ideas—from net neutrality to open curriculum and living wages—the most dangerous is the universal basic income.
For twisted reasons, Silicon Valley, the embodiment of meritocracy and incentives, thinks universal basic income will be the next great economic force. Facebook co-founder Chris Hughes is helping to fund a UBI pilot program in Stockton, Calif. He even wrote a book about the idea—something about 1%-ers paying money via tax credits—hardly original.
He’s not alone. Barack Obama has recently expressed interest in the idea. So have Bill Gates, Richard Branson, Mark Zuckerberg, Elon Musk, Marc Benioff and others in Silicon Valley. Why? I figure it’s their misplaced guilt about patriarchal dominance over workers displaced by automation. That’s a triple crown of bad excuses.
The enthusiasm seems infectious. In July, Chicago Alderman Ameya Pawar told the Intercept, “We need to start having a conversation about automation and a regulatory framework so that if jobs simply go away, what are we going to do with the workforce?” It wasn’t a long chat. This summer, Mr. Pawar introduced legislation for a pilot program that would give $500 a month to 1,000 families. Think of it as a new version of walking-around money. Never mind that Chicago can’t even afford to fund its public-employee pensions.
Hurricane Michael did terrible damage in Florida last week, and that may include some of the world’s most capable military aircraft left in its path. But why can’t Air Force F-22 jet fighters, of all things, escape a storm? Answer: They lack the parts to be operational and so were stuck in hangars to take a beating.
Air Force Secretary Heather Wilson said Sunday that the damage to an unspecified number of F-22s on Tyndall Air Force Base was “less than we feared.” But maintenance professionals will have to conduct a detailed assessment before the Air Force can say with certainty that the planes will fly again. Press reports estimate that at least a dozen planes were left on the base due to maintenance and safety issues.
Welcome to a fighting force damaged by bad political decisions and misguided priorities. Of the Air Force’s 186 F-22s, only about 80 are “mission capable,” according to a July analysis from the Government Accountability Office. The average across the Air Force in 2017 was that about 7 in 10 planes were mission capable, which is still too low for meeting increasing demands.
Part of the F-22 problem is upkeep on a coating that helps the planes evade radar. Another issue is the supply chain for parts now that the U.S. no longer produces the airplane, and “some original manufacturers no longer make the parts or are completely out of business,” GAO notes. Air Force officials told GAO that a simple wiring harness requires a 30-week lead time for finding a new contractor and producing the part. Ripping out parts from planes that work, or “cannibalizing,” is now common practice in military aviation.
Even before President Trump’s election, hatred had begun to emerge on the American left—counterintuitively, as an assertion of guilelessness and moral superiority. At the Women’s March in Washington the weekend after Mr. Trump’s inauguration, the pop star Madonna said, “I have thought an awful lot of blowing up the White House.” Here hatred was a vanity, a braggadocio meant to signal her innocence of the sort of evil that, in her mind, the White House represented. (She later said the comment was “taken wildly out of context.”)
For many on the left a hateful anti-Americanism has become a self-congratulatory lifestyle. “America was never that great,” New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo recently said. For radical groups like Black Lives Matter, hatred of America is a theme of identity, a display of racial pride.
For other leftists, hate is a license. Conservative speakers can be shouted down, even assaulted, on university campuses. Republican officials can be harassed in restaurants, in the street, in front of their homes. Certain leaders of the left—Rep. Maxine Waters comes to mind—are self-appointed practitioners of hate, urging their followers to think of hatred as power itself.
How did the American left—conceived to bring more compassion and justice to the world—become so given to hate? It began in the 1960s, when America finally accepted that slavery and segregation were profound moral failings. That acceptance changed America forever. It imposed a new moral imperative: America would have to show itself redeemed of these immoralities in order to stand as a legitimate democracy.
The genius of the left in the ’60s was simply to perceive the new moral imperative, and then to identify itself with it. Thus the labor of redeeming the nation from its immoral past would fall on the left. This is how the left put itself in charge of America’s moral legitimacy. The left, not the right—not conservatism—would set the terms of this legitimacy and deliver America from shame to decency.
This bestowed enormous political and cultural power on the American left, and led to the greatest array of government-sponsored social programs in history—at an expense, by some estimates, of more than $22 trillion. But for the left to wield this power, there had to be a great menace to fight against—a tenacious menace that kept America uncertain of its legitimacy, afraid for its good name.
If you continue to watch this video, another talk by Hanson is extremely interesting as he discusses Trump’s win over Hillary and the damaging divisiveness of the Obama presidency Nancy
