Democrat candidates are falling all over each other to see who can offer more”free stuff”. The truly serious problem of Islam and Sharia Law subverting our country is not even mentioned. Nancy
AmilImani is an Iranian-born American and pro-democracy activist. His biography at CFP states he is “a columnist, literary translator, novelist and an essayist who has been writing and speaking out for the struggling people of his native land, Iran.
There is not a day that goes by that I read comments from all over the social media on major issues that threaten this land of the free. Many Americans know what the problems are, but they are helpless in solving them alone. Why? Because we are a representative republic and expect our elected representatives to know the problems and solve them. Americans love courageous leaders like President Trump and Senator Ted Cruz and despise weak politicians whose only art is playing with nonsocial words.
When was the last time you witnessed a courageous and knowledgeable representative stand up in the U.S. Congress to address the vital issue of Islam’s stealth jihad or Islamic subversion currently exploiting all aspects of American life? I do not remember.
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.
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.
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 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.
EXCERPT FROM THIS ARTICLE: The problem is worldwide and growing by the day. The thinking that defeating ISIS will resolve the issue is naive. ISIS Is merely the “flavor of the day.” Yesterday (and perhaps again tomorrow) it was al Qaeda. Before that, it was Islamic Jihad. The Muslim Brotherhood and its ally Hamas dates to the thirties and is stronger now than ever. Boko Haram in Africa and Abu Sayef in the Philipines remind us the problem is not restricted to any particular region.Fundamentalist Islam is a world power and it has declared war on the world.
There were many losers in the election. Hillary would seem to be the biggest but in the great scheme of things she is not. She may turn out to be a bit player, after all.
The Democrats and liberals, in general, were set back exponentially and now control less of the government than at any time since the 1920s or perhaps even in the history of their party founded in 1828. They lost not only the Presidency, The House, and the Senate but will soon see the Supreme Court transformed into a bastion of Constitutionalism for at least a generation to come. The GOP will hold governorships in 33 states, the most innearly a century. Some are predicting the end of a liberalism that threatened the very nature of the Republic. It may take decades to realize the full impact of what has happened, but America has been put back on the “right” path after decades sliding into a moral and economic abyss.
The Media lost “bigly”, especially CNN and the New York Times as did many others who did all within their power to ensure Trump never entered the White House. They are now hopingtheywill see the inside of the White House in days to come.
At the stroke of midnight on September 30, 2016, America said good-bye to its long-time oversight of the internet, and along with it, the certainty of internet freedom.
EXCERPT FROM THIS ARTICLE: Those who understand the importance of internet oversight and believe that America should remain the stewards of internet freedom are not done fighting to keep its control out of the hands of questionable entities. Even though the DoC and ICANN have promised not to transfer oversight authority to dictatorial regimes, ICANN has already capitulated to OIC (Organization of Islamic Cooperation) demands and ceded additional control to governments including authoritarian regimes. Furthermore, once America relinquishes control, she will never get it back. Transparency and accountability, though promised, can’t be guaranteed. And, down the road, yet another transfer could conceivably occur. America would have no power to prevent it.
Champions of freedom[3]are exploring ways to take back internet oversight, but the possibilities look bleak. One possibility is to appeal the Texas Court’s decision denying the motion made by the Republican Attorneys General. The other is to proceed to court in a full-fledged trial. Still another option is to pass legislation to try to take back control of the internet (since technically, it has already passed as of October 1, 2016). In the meantime, ICANN is trying to implement the transfer as quickly as possible, seeking completion prior to the U.S. Presidential election in November of 2016, just in case the new President disagrees with Obama’s view regarding America’s role in internet oversight.
At the stroke of midnight on September 30, 2016, in furtherance of Obama’s anti-exceptional, post-American, global agenda, the certainty of the internet’s security, stability, and freedom has vanished into thin air, only to be replaced by one big global question mark.
(Please click on the link to read the entire article)
This election is unlike any other in our nation’s history. Like many other voters, I have struggled to determine the right course of action in this general election.
In Cleveland, I urged voters, “please, don’t stay home in November. Stand, and speak, and vote your conscience, vote for candidates up and down the ticket whom you trust to defend our freedom and to be faithful to the Constitution.”
After many months of careful consideration, of prayer and searching my own conscience, I have decided that on Election Day, I will vote for the Republican nominee, Donald Trump.
I’ve made this decision for two reasons. First, last year, I promised to support the Republican nominee. And I intend to keep my word.
Second, even though I have had areas of significant disagreement with our nominee, by any measure Hillary Clinton is wholly unacceptable — that’s why I have always been #NeverHillary.
Six key policy differences inform my decision. First, and most important, the Supreme Court. For anyone concerned about the Bill of Rights — free speech, religious liberty, the Second Amendment — the Court hangs in the balance. I have spent my professional career fighting before the Court to defend the Constitution. We are only one justice away from losing our most basic rights, and the next president will appoint as many as four new justices. We know, without a doubt, that every Clinton appointee would be a left-wing ideologue. Trump, in contrast, has promised to appoint justices “in the mold of Scalia.”
For some time, I have been seeking greater specificity on this issue, and today the Trump campaign provided that, releasing a very strong list of potential Supreme Court nominees — including Sen. Mike Lee, who would make an extraordinary justice — and making an explicit commitment to nominate only from that list. This commitment matters, and it provides a serious reason for voters to choose to support Trump.
Second, Obamacare. The failed healthcare law is hurting millions of Americans. If Republicans hold Congress, leadership has committed to passing legislation repealing Obamacare. Clinton, we know beyond a shadow of doubt, would veto that legislation. Trump has said he would sign it.
[caption id="attachment_17661" align="alignnone" width="448"] Laura Ingraham ********** www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqNhDVcvrsg (She definitely brought down the house with this one ! )
Illinois Senator Dick Durbin has now admitted he was the one who ordered the FBI to remove words he deemed “offensive” to Muslims that were found in the Bureau’s training documents all at the behest of Muslim advocacy groups claiming to be offended by words such as “jihad” and other words linked to incessant Muslim terrorism.
Senator Durbin, the Democrats’ Senate Minority Whip, admitted he ordered the purge of nearly 900 pages of FBI training manuals because they contained the “offensive” words.
“I asked for it, because there were provisions in the training manual which were flat-out wrong and embarrassing and they didn’t characterize the threat to America properly and after the FBI re-visited the manual, they changed it and I’m glad they did,” Durbin told The Daily Caller.
Durbin also lambasted Texas Senator Ted Cruz for “badgering” a witness for what Cruz said was the government’s “lack of emphasis of radical Islam in combating terrorism.” The witness was testifying recently at a Senate Judiciary Subcommittee hearing.
Cruz maintained that the training document purge of words offensive to Muslims made America weaker by gutting the real-world reasons for terrorism in FBI terror training. But Farhana Khera, president and executive director of Muslim Advocates, disagreed saying that using “inflammatory” words in FBI training documents “makes us less safe.”
The latest controversy is how to respond to the ISIS threat. Obama today criticized Ted Cruz for suggesting we carpet bomb insisting that it was inhumane. Well, look at the photo below and think about how concerned the Russians are with collateral damage. Totally destroy your enemy – this is how the Russians wage war ! By the way, I was in Cologne, Germany in 1968 (over 20 years after WWII ) and there was still considerable damage from British and American bombings all around the Cologne Cathedral (which was left intact). We won that war, didn’t we ! Nancy
Russian Air Strikes in Syria Kill Over 400 Civilians, Say Monitoring Groups
The Moscow Times
Nov. 23 2015
Foreign and Commonwealth Office / FlickrAt least 100,000 people have fled Aleppo as a result of Russian air strikes.
More than 400 Syrian civilians have been killed by Russian air strikes since the air campaign began on Sept. 30, monitoring groups reported.
The Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR) reported on Friday that 403 civilians — including 69 women and 97 children — have been killed as a result of Russian air strikes.
Aerial bombardment carried out by Syrian President Bashar Assad’s Syrian regime has resulted in the deaths of 6,889 civilians — including 969 women and 1,436 children — and the wounding of 35,000 civilians, the SOHR reported.
Ted Cruz had a plausible election strategy, until Donald Trump stole it.
By
Daniel Henninger
Updated Feb. 25, 2016
EXCERPT FROM THIS ARTICLE:
Donald Trump is properly understood as running an independent candidacy from inside the formal structure of the Republican Party, as Mike Bloomberg did to run for mayor of New York City. Nothing remotely resembling a political party is associated with Mr. Trump. If he loses the nomination or the general election, he will walk away from his Republican supporters by dawn. The GOP will look like a forest shredded by a tornado.
In the wake of his third-place finish in Nevada, Mr. Cruz’s case for himself is: Don’t forget Iowa. He has come a long way.
In the fall of 2013, the freshman Texas senator rolled the dice so boldly that the biggest congressional Texan of all time, Lyndon Johnson, would have been agog. Sen. Cruz, with the whole Republican Party raging at him, pulled off a shutdown of the U.S. government. He publicized the shutdown with a 21-hour speech on the Senate floor, attacking other Republicans for not joining his Pickett’s charge against ObamaCare, then a federal law.
Ted Cruz knew amid this GOP chaos that he was going to run for president in 2016. He had the game plan in hand.
The plan was to make a household name for himself as the Republican Party’s best-known outsider. A narrative back then held that a deep wave of anger at the party’s leadership was building in the heartland. Ted Cruz was going to personally deepen the anger and then ride it.
It would surface with a victory in Iowa, which he got, build in South Carolina, and then surge through Super Tuesday and especially Texas with an unstoppable number of Cruz delegates fished from this angry Republican sea of outsiders—tea partiers, anti-immigrant voters, pro-Snowden libertarians, evangelicals and anyone foaming mad at Barack Obama. The mad-as-hell vote.
It was a plausible primary strategy, elegant even in its mathematical inevitability, despite the crushed-glass content.