Day: January 9, 2018

GOP Tax Bill Will Actually Help Small-Business America


It’s cool to hate Trump.  It’s cool to hate the GOP.  In fact, these days it’s pretty cool to hate America.  The mainstream media have given birth to these ideas, and they continue to hammer them home, no matter the cost.

Most recently, it’s the new GOP tax plan (which is actually two separate yet similar proposals in the House and Senate) that’s caught the attention of the liberal media.  Reporters, left-wing pundits, and Democratic politicians have plucked little pieces of the plan out and examined them in isolation – thus losing context – and made outrageous claims.  Read a handful of articles from the left, and you’d think the country were coming to an end.

While the plan is far from perfect – something many people on both sides of the party line have publicly spoken out about – the extreme animosity is a little puzzling.  Yes, big businesses and wealthy individuals get some pretty nice breaks, but so do the rest of us.

Most confusing of all, perhaps, is the idea that the GOP tax bill is going to hurt America’s middle class and harm small business-owners.  If you step out of the echo chamber the media firestorm has created and actually read through some of the bill, you’ll realize that it’s highly beneficial to small businesses.

GOP Tax Bill: Helping Small Business-Owners Everywhere

Meet entrepreneur Mary Schiavoni.  She’s a pediatric speech pathologist and the founder of a series of treatment tools known as “Chewy Tubes,” as well as a line of baby teethers, made in the United States.

In a recent piece for the Washington Examiner, Schiavoni expressed her bewilderment that nobody is really talking about the 20-percent small business deduction that’s included in Congress’s new plan.  For a business that earns $200,000 annually, that means that $40,000 is totally tax-free.  For businesses that are currently burdened by taxes, this is a huge relief.

“I currently employ five people,” Schiavoni explains.  “This tax cut would allow me to provide bonuses for current employees, hire more employees, expand my workspace, and purchase inventory.”

“To prevent this provision from being a tool of wealthy small businesses, like investment and accounting firms, it is … available [only] to those making less than $315,000 a year.  The overwhelming majority of small businesses earn below this threshold, meaning [that] the overwhelming majority would benefit” Schiavoni rightly states.  “For small business[-]owners who are responsible for nearly two[] thirds of new job growth in this country, that’s a big win.”

The Senate’s tax bill is even more generous, proposing a 23-percent deduction.  Again, the benefit for small business is clear.

“The ability to protect nearly one[] quarter of my business income from taxes will give me the ability to expand my drive-in movie theater operations, hire more employees, and give my existing employees raises,” explains Susan Kochevar, CEO of 88 Drive-In Theatre.  In fact, she believes that this massive deduction would level the playing field and allow her to compete with larger cinemas that can afford skilled accountants who are paid to find tax code loopholes.

Once again, this tax deduction is limited.  In the case of the Senate’s proposed bill, only small businesses earning $500,000 or less have the right to claim the 23-percent deduction.

“That’s why I’m confused about the media characterization of the bill as a gift to the wealthy at the expense of the middle class,” Kochevar says.  “As this small[] business provision demonstrates, this narrative is backwards.”

When small businesses have the freedom to reinvest in themselves, they’re also going to reinvest in the economy as a whole.  A small business-owner who is doing well financially is much more likely to take out a personal loan to perform a home renovation, as he’s confident in his ability to pay it back.  A small business-owner who is more profitable in his business dealings will have a few thousand dollars more in his pocket each year to take a vacation and inject money into other cities and states.  A small business employee who gets a bonus as the result of the deduction is more likely to buy a couple of extra Christmas presents for his kids, which helps other small businesses.

It’s a cycle that feeds itself.  The left fails to see this.  All the leftists see is “corporate greed.”

Helping Big Business Help Small Business

Will the proposed GOP tax bill help big businesses?  Absolutely – there’s no questioning this fact.  But why is it such a bad thing to give American companies tax breaks?  What few on the left realize is that giving big companies a boost actually helps the rest of us, small businesses included.

“My most profitable clients are big companies,” small business-owner Gene Marks admits.  “Many of my small clients rely on corporate customers for their growth and income.  Big companies hire small businesses to do all sorts of things – from construction to maintenance to landscaping to computer repairs to providing temporary workers.  Big companies also employ people who – when times are good and their salaries are increasing – go home and buy pizzas, hire landscapers, shop for clothes[,] and shower the small businesses in their community with the fruits of their disposable corporate incomes.”

It’s Up to Businesses to Respond

If you actually read the proposed tax bills and do your research, independent of the biased influence that the mainstream media push in their glorified echo chamber, you’ll clearly see that they’re good for business.  Big business, small business – everyone benefits.

When you look at the top-line numbers, it’s easy to say greedy big businesses are the winners and small businesses are the losers, but that’s simply not true.  The top-line figures don’t matter.  You have to look at it practically and proportionally.  If you view the tax plan through these lenses, it’s clear who the real winners are.

In the end, it’s up to businesses to respond.  When they get these tax breaks, are they going to hoard their money?  Or will they use it to increase wages, spark innovation, and stimulate the economy?  Lawmakers are doing their job – it’ll be up to business-owners to pull their weight after the bill is passed.

It’s cool to hate Trump.  It’s cool to hate the GOP.  In fact, these days it’s pretty cool to hate America.  The mainstream media have given birth to these ideas, and they continue to hammer them home, no matter the cost.

Most recently, it’s the new GOP tax plan (which is actually two separate yet similar proposals in the House and Senate) that’s caught the attention of the liberal media.  Reporters, left-wing pundits, and Democratic politicians have plucked little pieces of the plan out and examined them in isolation – thus losing context – and made outrageous claims.  Read a handful of articles from the left, and you’d think the country were coming to an end.

While the plan is far from perfect – something many people on both sides of the party line have publicly spoken out about – the extreme animosity is a little puzzling.  Yes, big businesses and wealthy individuals get some pretty nice breaks, but so do the rest of us.

Most confusing of all, perhaps, is the idea that the GOP tax bill is going to hurt America’s middle class and harm small business-owners.  If you step out of the echo chamber the media firestorm has created and actually read through some of the bill, you’ll realize that it’s highly beneficial to small businesses.

GOP Tax Bill: Helping Small Business-Owners Everywhere

Meet entrepreneur Mary Schiavoni.  She’s a pediatric speech pathologist and the founder of a series of treatment tools known as “Chewy Tubes,” as well as a line of baby teethers, made in the United States.

In a recent piece for the Washington Examiner, Schiavoni expressed her bewilderment that nobody is really talking about the 20-percent small business deduction that’s included in Congress’s new plan.  For a business that earns $200,000 annually, that means that $40,000 is totally tax-free.  For businesses that are currently burdened by taxes, this is a huge relief.

“I currently employ five people,” Schiavoni explains.  “This tax cut would allow me to provide bonuses for current employees, hire more employees, expand my workspace, and purchase inventory.”

“To prevent this provision from being a tool of wealthy small businesses, like investment and accounting firms, it is … available [only] to those making less than $315,000 a year.  The overwhelming majority of small businesses earn below this threshold, meaning [that] the overwhelming majority would benefit” Schiavoni rightly states.  “For small business[-]owners who are responsible for nearly two[] thirds of new job growth in this country, that’s a big win.”

The Senate’s tax bill is even more generous, proposing a 23-percent deduction.  Again, the benefit for small business is clear.

“The ability to protect nearly one[] quarter of my business income from taxes will give me the ability to expand my drive-in movie theater operations, hire more employees, and give my existing employees raises,” explains Susan Kochevar, CEO of 88 Drive-In Theatre.  In fact, she believes that this massive deduction would level the playing field and allow her to compete with larger cinemas that can afford skilled accountants who are paid to find tax code loopholes.

Once again, this tax deduction is limited.  In the case of the Senate’s proposed bill, only small businesses earning $500,000 or less have the right to claim the 23-percent deduction.

“That’s why I’m confused about the media characterization of the bill as a gift to the wealthy at the expense of the middle class,” Kochevar says.  “As this small[] business provision demonstrates, this narrative is backwards.”

When small businesses have the freedom to reinvest in themselves, they’re also going to reinvest in the economy as a whole.  A small business-owner who is doing well financially is much more likely to take out a personal loan to perform a home renovation, as he’s confident in his ability to pay it back.  A small business-owner who is more profitable in his business dealings will have a few thousand dollars more in his pocket each year to take a vacation and inject money into other cities and states.  A small business employee who gets a bonus as the result of the deduction is more likely to buy a couple of extra Christmas presents for his kids, which helps other small businesses.

It’s a cycle that feeds itself.  The left fails to see this.  All the leftists see is “corporate greed.”

Helping Big Business Help Small Business

Will the proposed GOP tax bill help big businesses?  Absolutely – there’s no questioning this fact.  But why is it such a bad thing to give American companies tax breaks?  What few on the left realize is that giving big companies a boost actually helps the rest of us, small businesses included.

“My most profitable clients are big companies,” small business-owner Gene Marks admits.  “Many of my small clients rely on corporate customers for their growth and income.  Big companies hire small businesses to do all sorts of things – from construction to maintenance to landscaping to computer repairs to providing temporary workers.  Big companies also employ people who – when times are good and their salaries are increasing – go home and buy pizzas, hire landscapers, shop for clothes[,] and shower the small businesses in their community with the fruits of their disposable corporate incomes.”

It’s Up to Businesses to Respond

If you actually read the proposed tax bills and do your research, independent of the biased influence that the mainstream media push in their glorified echo chamber, you’ll clearly see that they’re good for business.  Big business, small business – everyone benefits.

When you look at the top-line numbers, it’s easy to say greedy big businesses are the winners and small businesses are the losers, but that’s simply not true.  The top-line figures don’t matter.  You have to look at it practically and proportionally.  If you view the tax plan through these lenses, it’s clear who the real winners are.

In the end, it’s up to businesses to respond.  When they get these tax breaks, are they going to hoard their money?  Or will they use it to increase wages, spark innovation, and stimulate the economy?  Lawmakers are doing their job – it’ll be up to business-owners to pull their weight after the bill is passed.



Source link

Leftists and Islamists: Strange Bedfellows


The Islamic jihadists have found willing partners in the left for a number of reasons.

  • Particularly in Europe, the left’s traditional voting bloc was the workers or proletariat.  But as communism produced only mass misery and the deaths of millions, those who had invested 20-30 years in left-wing ideology soon found themselves without an identity once the proletariat saw the true nature of communism.
  • Enter Muslim refugees, and the left now sees a new voting base.  The fact that these migrants come from a culture completely at odds with the West does not faze the left, since leftists have never accepted historical facts and, even more telling, now tout a multicultural paradise, notwithstanding the irrevocable differences that an Islamic religious-based system contains.  In essence, the left has found a new base to promote its own identity.
  • That sharia law permits the stoning of gays, endorses gender apartheid, and advocates rape and murder of the infidel seems not to have registered in the leftist mind.  Although the left abhors religion, leftists cannot fathom that their reliance on Islamist partners will not end well.  This was borne out when the communists and Islamists joined to overturn the shah of Iran; the Islamic fundamentalists took the reins, eliminated the communists, and imposed draconian sharia law to maintain control.

As Ayn Rand wrote, “[r]eason is not automatic.  Those who deny it cannot be conquered by it.”  But as Kevin J. Johnston at Freedom Report explains, we need to be informed and realize that what is occurring is not to be denied even when political leaders reject the facts.

How, indeed, can a secularist or atheist even consider siding with a religiously mandated system that absolutely abhors secularism and atheism?  How can leftists who are ostensibly concerned with women’s rights and gay liberation partner with a system that mandates the murder of gays and the dehumanization and killing of women?

What both groups agree upon is a totalitarian society and censorship of ideas that would expose them.  Political correctness hides their deeds.  For example:

  • The so-called Syrian refugees who come to Denmark actually return to their homeland for holiday vacations.  Hansen interviews airline agents who confirm that there is a “peak season to Iraq.”  So much for the dangerous conditions for these so-called refugees.
  • What better way to economically cripple the West than with phony refugee claims?  The number of migrants claiming German welfare benefits soared by 169 percent in 2015.
  • Syrian women who did not come to Europe are left behind to fend for themselves and their children.  Syrian women complain about their abandonment while Syrian men stay in Germany.
  • In 2015, 73% of the migrants were males, resulting in a gender imbalance in Europe often leading to rape by “men of foreign origin.”
  • Although Islam forbids the drinking of alcohol, many Muslim refugees are seen walking around railroad stations with bottles of liquor.
  • Religiously sanctioned gender discrimination is the new norm in Europe.

Much like American mainstream news, European media collude with European leaders and do not report the truth about the onslaught of Muslim refugees.  The editor-in-chief of the Bild Tanit Koch asserts that “the Press Council believes that editorial offices in Germany should ultimately treat their readers like children by depriving them of relevant information.”

Hansen interviews journalists and asks them why there was no coverage of the Cologne rapes during New Year’s Eve 2016.  The responses ranged from “it is often forgotten that there was a suspected terror attack on Munich” to “it’s very complicated – since many journalists were on holiday.”  When asked if a perpetuator’s identity should be cited in the news, one journalist responds, “[I]t depends.”  Thus, efforts by the government to suppress the nature and perpetrators of these attacks receive the blessing of the press.  Why is this important to expose?  Because women need to know that the chance of rape is high among the Muslim male population, whose members have been educated to believe that unveiled women should be raped.

Confirming Hansen’s findings, the Daily Mail reports that “German authorities have been critici[z]ed for waiting almost six months to release pictures of a group of sex attackers – which immediately led to four arrests.”  And “[d]espite the severity of the crime and the thugs being clearly visible on CCTV cameras, the German police did not publish their pictures, with a police chief blaming strict privacy laws.”

Moreover, “[s]uspects in Germany, even those accused of murder, are identified only by their first name[s] and the first letter[s] of their surname[s] because of the country’s strict privacy laws.”  Finally, official German government figures have been revealed that show that “the huge 92% increase in crime and violence in Germany is the direct result of the massive invasion of Muslims pretending to be refugees.”

A report titled the “Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Exploitation in Rotherham (1997-2013)” by Alexis Jay showcases one of the most chilling aspects of Hansen’s documentary.  It is a “scandal involving rape, ethnicity, religion, and the willful failure of Britain’s public authorities to protect thousands of girls from horrific exploitation.”  It took fifteen years to attract the attention of the British political class.  In fact, the “delay was due to a toxic combination of pathologies on the part of the authorities and the British media.  And it all boiled down to a deliberate and even bizarrely principled refusal to speak the truth, no matter the consequences to the innocent.”

Hansen interviewed victims and relatives and was stunned to discover that one child had 36-42 samples of sperm on her.  Let that sickening fact sink in.

The rapists and traffickers were of Pakistani heritage.  Yet the British police state that “nothing can be done” to charge all of the rapists because then “we’ll be seen as racists.”  The report states that “the difficult[y] that prevent[s] this issue being dealt with effectively is the ethnicity of the main perpetrators.”  Additionally, “the police dared not act against Asian youths for fear of allegations of racism.”  Notice the euphemistic use of the word “Asian.”

And then there is the Muslim British woman who sought relief from her husband’s ongoing violence.  Ignored by the police until she “was strangled by steel wire” and “kicked and stomped on her neck to get [her] soul out,” she is another victim of multicultural tolerance.

The European Union and the mainstream media in Europe want to shut down alternative media and censor the internet.  In September 2015, Angela Merkel was caught on a hot mic talking to Mark Zuckerberg concerning censoring people on Facebook about issues she deems “inappropriate.”  

One is reminded of Obama’s “Justice Department warning against social media spread[ing] information considered offensive to Muslims.”  As a die-hard leftist and Muslim sympathizer, Obama had the DOJ working “in earnest to impose Islamic law on American First Amendment rights” (Pamela Geller, Fatwa: Hunted in America, 57).  Then there is the current DNC deputy chair, Muslim Brotherhood congressman Keith Ellison, who endorses the violent leftist Antifa group.

In The Red-Green Axis: Refugees, Immigration and the Agenda to Erase America, author James Simpson describes how lifelong communist Angela Davis celebrates how “the refugee movement is the movement of the 21st [c]entury” as migrants “expect government to … provide better food, health[ ]care[,] and housing[.]”  This kind of thinking, asserts Simpson, “is already poisoning our body politic” and must be strongly resisted.

Nonetheless, Zuckerberg hired 3,000 people to form “Community Operation Teams” to remove so-called hate speech on Facebook.  Moreover, Merkel, who was brought up in communist East Germany, has hired a female former Stasi agent to fight “fake news.”  

Consequently, “the European Union [E.U.] announced a new online speech code to be enforced by four major tech companies, including Facebook and YouTube.”  Facebook deleted the account of Ingrid Carlqvist after she “posted [her] latest video to her Facebook feed – called ‘Sweden’s Migrant Rape Epidemic.'”

The “Swedish government is now officially questioning free speech.  A government agency has declared so-called Swedish ‘new media’ – news outlets that refuse to subscribe to the politically correct orthodoxies of the mainstream media – a possible threat to democracy.”  The government maintains that “the new media … stretch the limits of free speech.”  Thus, Sweden accepts “Islamic intolerance to an astounding degree.”

The poison of censorship has also found refuge in Canada.  Hansen was stopped at the Canadian border and given a difficult time about his documentary.  Moreover, the Ottawa Public Library canceled the screening of Killing Europe and deemed its content not suitable for Canadians.  How ironic.

Thus, the truth is now labeled hate speech.

Everything that occurs in Europe will occur in the United States if we do not maintain intense vigilance.  We already are privy to “condescension, smears, charges about being racists[,] and thinly veiled threats that truth speech about Islam could be prosecuted” (Geller 58).  And sadly, mainstream media coverage is “deceptive and typically mendacious.”

As Hansen points out, being submissive and trying to avoid violence does not result in Islamists backing down.  They have been inculcated with the belief that it “is imperative for them to be dominant.”  Hence, they beat up German children and “kick them for fun.”  One such child was beaten to a pulp for putting pork on his pizza.  The “dominance crimes of the Muslims are aimed at establishing or demonstrating [their] superiority.”

What future do children have if adults cannot protect them?  While President Trump was excoriated for his comments about Swedish no-go zones, they are a fact of life for Swedes.  Chris Tomlinson writes that “Swedish [c]hief [p]rosecutor Lise Tamm has claimed that the Stockholm suburb of Rinkeby is like ‘a war zone.'”  Moreover, nearby areas like Husby and Tensta are some of the “worst no-go zones in Sweden, along with certain areas of the city of Malmö.”  These areas are euphemistically known as “particularly vulnerable areas.”

It behooves everyone to watch Killing Europe.  What Michael Hansen, a Danish expatriate, found was worse than what he had imagined.  It is a clarion call to all who despise the Islamic jihadists and their handmaidens, the leftists, who seek to destroy our way of life.

Eileen can be reached at middlemarch18@gmail.com.

It cannot be repeated enough that the Marxist-anarchist radical left Antifa and Islamic jihadists have joined forces to destroy Western civilization.  Known as the Red-Green Axis, this unlikely alliance of leftists with Islamic groups is actually a means to an end by Islamists.

Inexplicably, left-wing forces do not comprehend that they are merely one of the tools by which Islamists wish to impose a global caliphate.  In his searing documentary Killing Europe, producer Michael Hansen makes the following cogent points.

The Islamic jihadists have found willing partners in the left for a number of reasons.

  • Particularly in Europe, the left’s traditional voting bloc was the workers or proletariat.  But as communism produced only mass misery and the deaths of millions, those who had invested 20-30 years in left-wing ideology soon found themselves without an identity once the proletariat saw the true nature of communism.
  • Enter Muslim refugees, and the left now sees a new voting base.  The fact that these migrants come from a culture completely at odds with the West does not faze the left, since leftists have never accepted historical facts and, even more telling, now tout a multicultural paradise, notwithstanding the irrevocable differences that an Islamic religious-based system contains.  In essence, the left has found a new base to promote its own identity.
  • That sharia law permits the stoning of gays, endorses gender apartheid, and advocates rape and murder of the infidel seems not to have registered in the leftist mind.  Although the left abhors religion, leftists cannot fathom that their reliance on Islamist partners will not end well.  This was borne out when the communists and Islamists joined to overturn the shah of Iran; the Islamic fundamentalists took the reins, eliminated the communists, and imposed draconian sharia law to maintain control.

As Ayn Rand wrote, “[r]eason is not automatic.  Those who deny it cannot be conquered by it.”  But as Kevin J. Johnston at Freedom Report explains, we need to be informed and realize that what is occurring is not to be denied even when political leaders reject the facts.

How, indeed, can a secularist or atheist even consider siding with a religiously mandated system that absolutely abhors secularism and atheism?  How can leftists who are ostensibly concerned with women’s rights and gay liberation partner with a system that mandates the murder of gays and the dehumanization and killing of women?

What both groups agree upon is a totalitarian society and censorship of ideas that would expose them.  Political correctness hides their deeds.  For example:

  • The so-called Syrian refugees who come to Denmark actually return to their homeland for holiday vacations.  Hansen interviews airline agents who confirm that there is a “peak season to Iraq.”  So much for the dangerous conditions for these so-called refugees.
  • What better way to economically cripple the West than with phony refugee claims?  The number of migrants claiming German welfare benefits soared by 169 percent in 2015.
  • Syrian women who did not come to Europe are left behind to fend for themselves and their children.  Syrian women complain about their abandonment while Syrian men stay in Germany.
  • In 2015, 73% of the migrants were males, resulting in a gender imbalance in Europe often leading to rape by “men of foreign origin.”
  • Although Islam forbids the drinking of alcohol, many Muslim refugees are seen walking around railroad stations with bottles of liquor.
  • Religiously sanctioned gender discrimination is the new norm in Europe.

Much like American mainstream news, European media collude with European leaders and do not report the truth about the onslaught of Muslim refugees.  The editor-in-chief of the Bild Tanit Koch asserts that “the Press Council believes that editorial offices in Germany should ultimately treat their readers like children by depriving them of relevant information.”

Hansen interviews journalists and asks them why there was no coverage of the Cologne rapes during New Year’s Eve 2016.  The responses ranged from “it is often forgotten that there was a suspected terror attack on Munich” to “it’s very complicated – since many journalists were on holiday.”  When asked if a perpetuator’s identity should be cited in the news, one journalist responds, “[I]t depends.”  Thus, efforts by the government to suppress the nature and perpetrators of these attacks receive the blessing of the press.  Why is this important to expose?  Because women need to know that the chance of rape is high among the Muslim male population, whose members have been educated to believe that unveiled women should be raped.

Confirming Hansen’s findings, the Daily Mail reports that “German authorities have been critici[z]ed for waiting almost six months to release pictures of a group of sex attackers – which immediately led to four arrests.”  And “[d]espite the severity of the crime and the thugs being clearly visible on CCTV cameras, the German police did not publish their pictures, with a police chief blaming strict privacy laws.”

Moreover, “[s]uspects in Germany, even those accused of murder, are identified only by their first name[s] and the first letter[s] of their surname[s] because of the country’s strict privacy laws.”  Finally, official German government figures have been revealed that show that “the huge 92% increase in crime and violence in Germany is the direct result of the massive invasion of Muslims pretending to be refugees.”

A report titled the “Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Exploitation in Rotherham (1997-2013)” by Alexis Jay showcases one of the most chilling aspects of Hansen’s documentary.  It is a “scandal involving rape, ethnicity, religion, and the willful failure of Britain’s public authorities to protect thousands of girls from horrific exploitation.”  It took fifteen years to attract the attention of the British political class.  In fact, the “delay was due to a toxic combination of pathologies on the part of the authorities and the British media.  And it all boiled down to a deliberate and even bizarrely principled refusal to speak the truth, no matter the consequences to the innocent.”

Hansen interviewed victims and relatives and was stunned to discover that one child had 36-42 samples of sperm on her.  Let that sickening fact sink in.

The rapists and traffickers were of Pakistani heritage.  Yet the British police state that “nothing can be done” to charge all of the rapists because then “we’ll be seen as racists.”  The report states that “the difficult[y] that prevent[s] this issue being dealt with effectively is the ethnicity of the main perpetrators.”  Additionally, “the police dared not act against Asian youths for fear of allegations of racism.”  Notice the euphemistic use of the word “Asian.”

And then there is the Muslim British woman who sought relief from her husband’s ongoing violence.  Ignored by the police until she “was strangled by steel wire” and “kicked and stomped on her neck to get [her] soul out,” she is another victim of multicultural tolerance.

The European Union and the mainstream media in Europe want to shut down alternative media and censor the internet.  In September 2015, Angela Merkel was caught on a hot mic talking to Mark Zuckerberg concerning censoring people on Facebook about issues she deems “inappropriate.”  

One is reminded of Obama’s “Justice Department warning against social media spread[ing] information considered offensive to Muslims.”  As a die-hard leftist and Muslim sympathizer, Obama had the DOJ working “in earnest to impose Islamic law on American First Amendment rights” (Pamela Geller, Fatwa: Hunted in America, 57).  Then there is the current DNC deputy chair, Muslim Brotherhood congressman Keith Ellison, who endorses the violent leftist Antifa group.

In The Red-Green Axis: Refugees, Immigration and the Agenda to Erase America, author James Simpson describes how lifelong communist Angela Davis celebrates how “the refugee movement is the movement of the 21st [c]entury” as migrants “expect government to … provide better food, health[ ]care[,] and housing[.]”  This kind of thinking, asserts Simpson, “is already poisoning our body politic” and must be strongly resisted.

Nonetheless, Zuckerberg hired 3,000 people to form “Community Operation Teams” to remove so-called hate speech on Facebook.  Moreover, Merkel, who was brought up in communist East Germany, has hired a female former Stasi agent to fight “fake news.”  

Consequently, “the European Union [E.U.] announced a new online speech code to be enforced by four major tech companies, including Facebook and YouTube.”  Facebook deleted the account of Ingrid Carlqvist after she “posted [her] latest video to her Facebook feed – called ‘Sweden’s Migrant Rape Epidemic.'”

The “Swedish government is now officially questioning free speech.  A government agency has declared so-called Swedish ‘new media’ – news outlets that refuse to subscribe to the politically correct orthodoxies of the mainstream media – a possible threat to democracy.”  The government maintains that “the new media … stretch the limits of free speech.”  Thus, Sweden accepts “Islamic intolerance to an astounding degree.”

The poison of censorship has also found refuge in Canada.  Hansen was stopped at the Canadian border and given a difficult time about his documentary.  Moreover, the Ottawa Public Library canceled the screening of Killing Europe and deemed its content not suitable for Canadians.  How ironic.

Thus, the truth is now labeled hate speech.

Everything that occurs in Europe will occur in the United States if we do not maintain intense vigilance.  We already are privy to “condescension, smears, charges about being racists[,] and thinly veiled threats that truth speech about Islam could be prosecuted” (Geller 58).  And sadly, mainstream media coverage is “deceptive and typically mendacious.”

As Hansen points out, being submissive and trying to avoid violence does not result in Islamists backing down.  They have been inculcated with the belief that it “is imperative for them to be dominant.”  Hence, they beat up German children and “kick them for fun.”  One such child was beaten to a pulp for putting pork on his pizza.  The “dominance crimes of the Muslims are aimed at establishing or demonstrating [their] superiority.”

What future do children have if adults cannot protect them?  While President Trump was excoriated for his comments about Swedish no-go zones, they are a fact of life for Swedes.  Chris Tomlinson writes that “Swedish [c]hief [p]rosecutor Lise Tamm has claimed that the Stockholm suburb of Rinkeby is like ‘a war zone.'”  Moreover, nearby areas like Husby and Tensta are some of the “worst no-go zones in Sweden, along with certain areas of the city of Malmö.”  These areas are euphemistically known as “particularly vulnerable areas.”

It behooves everyone to watch Killing Europe.  What Michael Hansen, a Danish expatriate, found was worse than what he had imagined.  It is a clarion call to all who despise the Islamic jihadists and their handmaidens, the leftists, who seek to destroy our way of life.

Eileen can be reached at middlemarch18@gmail.com.



Source link

Drill, Trump, Drill!



It doesn't make sense to worry about the occasional oily duck and ignore domestic resources while we expend blood and treasure protecting oil supplies in the Middle East. 



Source link

How Does the GOP Win Back Blue States?


My man Kevin D. Williamson is worried that the Republican Party has nothing to say to blue states like California and New York and that the party feels pretty good about it.  But such an approach leads to disaster, he says:

Writing off half of the country as a lost cause is bad for the Republican soul.  It also will prove bad for Republican electoral prospects, in time.

Well, yes.  On a tactical level, it is important to have something to say to the blue cities and not to write them off as Deplorables.  But that is to miss the wood for the trees.

The reason why California and New York are blue bastions is simple.  On the one hand, all the upper-income residents went to secular seminary and either learned to believe what they were taught or pretend they did.  On the other hand, the immigration policy of 1965 has filled the cities with people that are just off the farm.  They think and act as peasants and serfs, just as the Irish and the Italians did in the late 19th century.

If we want to revive GOP fortunes in the great cities, we are going to do it not by catering to upper-class conceits or lower-class tribalism.  That will only put off the Day of Judgment.  What we need to do get the upper class recoiling in revulsion from lefty culture.  And we need to slowly and incrementally reform the welfare state so that it guides the New Immigrants into the middle-class culture of work and marriage and responsibility.

I do not see how this can be done without a full-on culture war to tu rn the elites from their cowardly kowtow to the left’s cultural mandarins. We need to create an America where everyone knows in his bones that the only “haters” in sight are lefty activists.

As for the New Immigrants, I refer you to the welfare reform of 1996.  Liberals said it would be the end of the world; instead, the welfare recipients calmly went out and got jobs.

But how do we make cultural war on the elites and cure them of their conceit?  Perfectly simple: We declare war on the culture of “activism.”

I admit to being something of a dull dog about this for most of my life until the day a liberal friend told me she had always wanted “to get into activism.”

Lefty “activism” is the central Problem of Our Time, that Good Little Girls from good families are raised and educated to think that marchin’ and protestin’ are the means to bend the arc of history toward justice.  Too many Good Little Boys think that, too.  Little girls and boys are carefully taught that, but for wage and hour laws, civil rights laws, and social insurance, ordinary people would be living in grinding poverty subject to ruthless industrial discipline and racist and patriarchal oppression.  Thus, upper-class kids are doing the “peaceful protest” thing on campus, complete with bullhorns and signs and chants, as the new normal carefully taught by our lefty teachers and administrators.

The Good Little Boys had a point 170 years ago.  Of course, the new capitalists would replace the feudal lords; of course, the proletarians would replace the feudal serfs as helpless victims.  Everybody knew that.  That’s how the dance of power works, according to ancient wisdom and according to Good Little Boy Marx and Good Little Boy Engels.

Only they were wrong. That’s because the capitalists were not that interested in power.  Oil guy Rockefeller retired at age 50 and invented modern philanthropy.  Steel guy Carnegie built libraries and a peace foundation.  Imagine regular politicians like Chuck and Nancy doing that!

In my view, the story of the last two hundred years is that “power” is a dead end, and the horrors of everything from communism to Bolivarianism prove it.  “Price” and “markets” are much better; they get people to peacefully work for each other’s benefit.  But, as with any great transformation, there are those who are desperate to prove that nothing has changed and that only with power can the human race be saved.  Only through activism, the activists tell us, will we save the lost souls, workers, minorities, women, immigrants, Muslims!  Because white privilege.

Lefties make a big deal of railing at militarism, imperialism, and colonialism.  Good point, and the long 19th century was a global experiment to prove that militarism, imperialism, and colonialism were a waste of time and money – and lives.

I have a better idea: that “activism” is a disaster that creates violence and misery wherever it is tried.

It is up to us to teach the educated elite, and every silly peaceful protester, that “activism” is a vile superstition.  Only then will they all instinctively rush to identify with the Republican Party.

Christopher Chantrill (@chrischantrill) runs the go-to site on U.S. government finances, usgovernmentspending.com.  Also get his American Manifesto and his Road to the Middle Class.

My man Kevin D. Williamson is worried that the Republican Party has nothing to say to blue states like California and New York and that the party feels pretty good about it.  But such an approach leads to disaster, he says:

Writing off half of the country as a lost cause is bad for the Republican soul.  It also will prove bad for Republican electoral prospects, in time.

Well, yes.  On a tactical level, it is important to have something to say to the blue cities and not to write them off as Deplorables.  But that is to miss the wood for the trees.

The reason why California and New York are blue bastions is simple.  On the one hand, all the upper-income residents went to secular seminary and either learned to believe what they were taught or pretend they did.  On the other hand, the immigration policy of 1965 has filled the cities with people that are just off the farm.  They think and act as peasants and serfs, just as the Irish and the Italians did in the late 19th century.

If we want to revive GOP fortunes in the great cities, we are going to do it not by catering to upper-class conceits or lower-class tribalism.  That will only put off the Day of Judgment.  What we need to do get the upper class recoiling in revulsion from lefty culture.  And we need to slowly and incrementally reform the welfare state so that it guides the New Immigrants into the middle-class culture of work and marriage and responsibility.

I do not see how this can be done without a full-on culture war to tu rn the elites from their cowardly kowtow to the left’s cultural mandarins. We need to create an America where everyone knows in his bones that the only “haters” in sight are lefty activists.

As for the New Immigrants, I refer you to the welfare reform of 1996.  Liberals said it would be the end of the world; instead, the welfare recipients calmly went out and got jobs.

But how do we make cultural war on the elites and cure them of their conceit?  Perfectly simple: We declare war on the culture of “activism.”

I admit to being something of a dull dog about this for most of my life until the day a liberal friend told me she had always wanted “to get into activism.”

Lefty “activism” is the central Problem of Our Time, that Good Little Girls from good families are raised and educated to think that marchin’ and protestin’ are the means to bend the arc of history toward justice.  Too many Good Little Boys think that, too.  Little girls and boys are carefully taught that, but for wage and hour laws, civil rights laws, and social insurance, ordinary people would be living in grinding poverty subject to ruthless industrial discipline and racist and patriarchal oppression.  Thus, upper-class kids are doing the “peaceful protest” thing on campus, complete with bullhorns and signs and chants, as the new normal carefully taught by our lefty teachers and administrators.

The Good Little Boys had a point 170 years ago.  Of course, the new capitalists would replace the feudal lords; of course, the proletarians would replace the feudal serfs as helpless victims.  Everybody knew that.  That’s how the dance of power works, according to ancient wisdom and according to Good Little Boy Marx and Good Little Boy Engels.

Only they were wrong. That’s because the capitalists were not that interested in power.  Oil guy Rockefeller retired at age 50 and invented modern philanthropy.  Steel guy Carnegie built libraries and a peace foundation.  Imagine regular politicians like Chuck and Nancy doing that!

In my view, the story of the last two hundred years is that “power” is a dead end, and the horrors of everything from communism to Bolivarianism prove it.  “Price” and “markets” are much better; they get people to peacefully work for each other’s benefit.  But, as with any great transformation, there are those who are desperate to prove that nothing has changed and that only with power can the human race be saved.  Only through activism, the activists tell us, will we save the lost souls, workers, minorities, women, immigrants, Muslims!  Because white privilege.

Lefties make a big deal of railing at militarism, imperialism, and colonialism.  Good point, and the long 19th century was a global experiment to prove that militarism, imperialism, and colonialism were a waste of time and money – and lives.

I have a better idea: that “activism” is a disaster that creates violence and misery wherever it is tried.

It is up to us to teach the educated elite, and every silly peaceful protester, that “activism” is a vile superstition.  Only then will they all instinctively rush to identify with the Republican Party.

Christopher Chantrill (@chrischantrill) runs the go-to site on U.S. government finances, usgovernmentspending.com.  Also get his American Manifesto and his Road to the Middle Class.



Source link