Politically, the Democratic Party is the home of progressivism, or liberalism. At least today’s Democratic Party. JFK, a Democrat from fifty years ago, would be politically to the right of many current Republicans. Compared to today’s Democrats, JFK would be in Trump territory.
Conventional wisdom views the media as the public relations arm of the Democratic Party. Commonly referred to as “Democrat party operatives with bylines,” big media trumpets the progressives' message 24-7, from the nation’s major newspapers, network news shows, and most cable outlets, with a few exceptions, such as at Fox News. But where is the mothership of progressivism? The media, or the Democratic Party? Or is it something larger?
Rush Limbaugh, self-described as “the big voice on the right,” recently revisedhis thinking on Democrats and the media. His new view is that, “the Democrats are an arm of the media, not that the media is an arm of the Democrats.” Not just a chicken-and-egg argument, but an actual reversal of the conventional wisdom. “The foundational base of the progressive movement is in the nationwide media,” according to Rush.
This makes sense as politicians are a bit like dogs, cozying up to whoever is offering them a piece of meat. In the case of politicians, the meat is money, position and power. What better way to advance one’s political career than to be booked on friendly Sunday talk shows with Chuck Todd or George Stephanopoulos, or be the subject of a flattering puff piece in the Washington Post? Buck the media and kiss your political career goodbye, at least if you are a Democrat. How many Democrats publicly opposed the progressive Obama agenda, whether on Obamacare, the Iran nuke deal, or his far left judicial nominations?
I would like to take Rush’s idea a bit further. It’s more than just the media running the modern progressive movement, controlling the Democratic Party. As an aside, it’s interesting that “progressive” has replaced “liberal” as a descriptor. While these terms have historic meanings as political philosophies, “liberal” implies tax and spend, big government. Which is the same as progressivism, but the root “progress” sounds much more appealing. Who could be against progress? A bit like “global warming” morphing into “climate change” or “extreme weather,” to make it more palatable to the hoi polloi.
My contention is that the home of the progressive movement is more than the media. I will use a popular acronym, DREAM, to describe this base, not as “DREAMers” who are front and center in President Trump’s immigration policies, but in a new sense. These DREAMers are not looking for a green card. Instead they dream of an overpowering activist government, wealth redistribution based on the whims of those in power, and an administrative state enforcing thediktats of the ruling class.
So who are these DREAMers, at the core of the progressive agenda?
D is for the Deep State, the bureaucratic imbeds throughout government. They don’t need marching orders from the president or agency heads, they already know what to do. It’s in their DNA. Examples include IRS bureaucrats like Lois Lerner weaponizing her agency against political opposition, in this case, Tea Party groups. Intelligence officials, leaking sensitive information to the media as a means of damaging the political opposition. EPA employees refusing to carry out administration directives.
Look at political contributions from the deep state. Ninety-seven percent of political contributions from Department of Justice employees went to Hillary Clinton. Looking at the larger world of 14 different federal agencies, 95 percent of political contributions were for Clinton. Deep State for Dems.
R is for Republican #NeverTrumpers. Aside from the well-known Trump detractors at the Weekly Standard and National Review, numerous members of Congress were against Trump, some quite vehemently. Many still are, hypocritically enjoying their electoral majority but despising the man who is partly responsible for their majority and the current leader of their party.
These #NeverTrumpers, while not members of the Democratic Party, share much of the progressive agenda - big government, globalism, open borders, cheap labor, and taxes and regulations. The progressive wing of the GOP.
E is for the entertainment industry. The endless parade of actors, actresses and singers wearing “I’m With Her” T-shirts while campaigning for Hillary Clinton, cutting commercials, making robocalls, performing concerts and holding fundraisers. Not only for Hillary. Samuel L. Jackson made a radio ad to “Stop Donald Trump” by voting Democrat in the recent Georgia special election.
A is for academia. University professors are overwhelmingly liberal. Only 14 percent identify as Republicans. Looking at political contributions for the 2016 election from faculty at major American universities, less than 1 percent of total political contributions went to Donald Trump. Virtually monolithic support from academia for the Democratic Party candidate. And the progressive agenda which they teach and indoctrinate in their classrooms.
M is of course the media. Not much needs to be said here. The Fake Stream Media is well known for their favorable coverage of Democrats, either by omission or commission, and negative coverage of Republicans. Readers ofAmerican Thinker won’t need convincing. Although I’ll back this up with one interesting statistic. The Media Research Center reviewed evening news coverage on ABC, CBS and NBC last summer, finding that 91 percent of news stories about Donald Trump were negative. I suspect this number is at least as high, if not higher, since Trump’s election.
Even the few stories critical of Mrs. Clinton had a “respectful tone” rather than the “politics of fear,” “dangerous” and “vulgar misogynistic bully” descriptors reserved for Mr. Trump.
These are the groups behind the modern progressive movement. They think alike and share many of the same goals. They also hold conservatives and conservatism in disdain, preferring George W. Bush's “compassionate conservatism,” a version of progressivism. They also share the common goal of destroying Donald Trump, his agenda and his supporters. Dreaming of impeachment. Dreaming of a more progressive-agenda-friendly president such as Hillary Clinton or Jeb Bush.
The Democratic Party is simply the political arm of this movement, an ineffective one at that, given their electoral losses over the past eight years. But despite those losses, the progressive movement marches on. Just watch the news, or a late-night comedy show, or a concert. Observe the protests. Visit a college campus. Read so-called conservative journalists such as David Brooks of the New York Times or Jennifer Rubin of the Washington Post.
If the core of the progressive movement was in the Democratic Party, it would long be over, soundly defeated as droves of elected Democrats have been sent packing in the last several elections. But elected officials are just a portion of progressivism, the movement core safely ensconced throughout American culture and society. Schumer, Pelosi, Warren and Clinton are an arm of progressivism but not its core.
That distinction is reserved for the new “DREAMers”, the mother ship of the modern progressive agenda. The lesson is that defeating Democrats at the ballot box is a start, but hardly definitive. Like cutting off one of eight arms of an octopus expecting the other seven arms to just fall off. This political battle extends far beyond political campaigns and elections, into the media, academic and entertainment bastions of progressive thought and action.
This is an open letter to Democrats, Republicans, independents, liberals, conservatives and every other ilk of politician who is elected by the votes of Americans.
While I realize that there are two, three or sometimes more sides to a story, and understand the importance of representing the views of the electorate that put you in office, what I simply cannot understand is the partisan intransigence that would prevent grown, mature men and women from showing the molecule of reason it takes to reach decisions based on something other than that the opposing party supports it.
And in your self-righteous zeal to toe the party line, you have completely forgotten about we the people and the welfare of the nation you're supposed to be serving.
It's become a game with you people. You've all turned into tattletales, petulant pubescent third graders, all bent on becoming teacher’s pet and doing anything it takes to garner a few more votes.
You'd rather deprive the nation of a benefit than to let the other party get the credit for passing it. There is no loyalty among you, and you will run away from a colleague who does something unpopular before the ink on the defaming article has even dried.
You'd give citizenship to aardvarks if they could vote and say anything, accuracy and honesty be damned, and kiss a flatulent skunk’s posterior before you'd do or say anything that would make the other party look good.
I sometimes wonder how you see yourselves, as a knight on a white horse saving the nation, or as the rest of us see you, as a poorly-mounted, impotent Don Quixote charging dilapidated windmills in rusty armor.
And I wonder if any of you realize how very out of touch with what’s actually happening in the real world you are and how much that world has changed since you moved into your ivory tower, back when bell bottoms were in style.
I truly believe that when our forefathers designed our political system they never made allowances for career politicians. I believe the system was designed for a citizen politician to serve a term or two and then vacate the seat so somebody who actually knows what's happening in the streets now can come in with a fresh opinion and without 20 or 30 years of partisan political baggage and obligations.
Well, let me tell you something boys and girls, this ain't no game, and you’re treating it like one. Your acid pot shots at your opponents, your blind party loyalty, your seething opposition to anything the other party supports are but a few of the prime factors in the deep divisions we are experiencing and the almost universal distrust the public feels for you.
You play fast and hard with the truth when it suits your purposes; you become chameleons, changing shapes and even nationalities if it gives you any slight edge.
Some of you sink to telling blatant lies, even at the expense of whoever happens to be standing in your way.
You will even carry your folly so far as to shut down the government rather than sitting down like rational human beings and working out your differences.
We send you to office to work together, not to preen for the TV cameras or spend half your term trying to get elected to another term.
If any business in this nation handled their affairs in the way you people do, they would miserably fail, and that's exactly what you people are doing, miserably failing.
You work for we the people, not your political party and you'd d--- well better start acting like it.
America is bleeding, and we don't need you deepening the wound.
What do you think?
Pray for our troops, our police and the peace of Jerusalem.
God Bless America.
Charlie Daniels is a legendary American singer, song writer, guitarist, and fiddler famous for his contributions to country and southern rock music. Daniels has been active as a singer since the early 1950s. He was inducted into the Grand Ole Opry on January 24, 2008.
According to preliminary results of the presidential election in France, the two candidates that came out on top during today’s first round and therefore made it into the second round, to be contested on May 7, are Marine Le Pen, leader of the right-wing anti-euro and anti-EU Front National, and Emmanuel Macron, leader of the centrist, pro-EU movement En Marche, which he founded just last year.
So congratulations to today’s winners.
This is the first time since the beginning of the Fifth Republic in 1958 that no candidate from the major establishment parties made it to the second round, and that neither of the two winning candidates are backed by parties that have ever held the presidency.
This is also the first time in the Fifth Republic that the winner’s party will have zero or practically zero power in Parliament.
According to preliminary results, Macron got 23.7% of the vote, Le Pen 21.9%, conservative François Fillon 19.9%, and far-left firebrand Jean-Luc Mélenchon 19.2%.
As expected, the biggest loser was the political establishment and the entire “political class,” as it’s called in France. At least on the surface.
After François Hollande’s dismal performance as President over the past five years, his Socialists practically disappeared during the campaign and in the election got only 6.3% of the vote. This left as sole representative of the “political class” the conservative and scandal-plagued former Prime Minister Fillon, who now lost too.
Just how frustrated is the public with the political class? Le Pen at the far right and Mélenchon at the far left obtained together 41% of the vote. That’s huge. They campaigned on leaving the Eurozone (the monetary union of 19 member states) and the European Union (28 member states).
The French have long been frustrated by double-digit unemployment. Private enterprise is suffocating and cannot hire. The enormous government-controlled apparatus could grow, funded by taxpayer money, but due to limits on deficit-spending, it cannot grow enough to pull out the economy. Government spending in France accounts for 57.0% of GDP in 2015, just a notch down from the record set in 2014, and the second highest in the EU, behind Finland and ahead of Denmark. Which doesn’t leave much room for thriving private enterprise.
The French have also been confronted by the European refugee crisis, acts of terrorism, and a slew of other issues. And the general skepticism toward the European Union has been growing.
In 2002, Marine’s father Jean-Marie Le Pen, against all expectations, beat the Socialist candidate in the first round and faced off in the second round against political establishment candidate par excellence Jacque Chirac. During the first round, the French electorate expressed it anger with the Socialists. During the second round, Socialists held their noses and united with the conservatives to hand Chirac a massive victory.
This time, there is no such candidate in the second round. So this could get interesting. But already, the political establishment, with the results not even finalized, is calling out to unit behind Macron.
But the winner’s party will have practically no power in Parliament. Currently Le Pen’s party only holds two seats in the Assemblée nationale, the lower house of Parliament, and Macron’s movement has zero seats.
Elections for the National Assembly are scheduled for June 11 and 18. But the French system of representation in Parliament is purposefully stacked against outsiders of the “political class.” Hence the difficulties of the Front National to obtain a significant number of seats over the years.
Le Pen or Macron will be confronted by nothing but opposition parties. The prime minister will be from one of the establishment parties. It will be a very uneasy “cohabitation,” as they call a situation where the President and the Prime Minister are from opposing power blocs.
Presidential power in France is limited. Whatever the new President wishes to undertake – such as Le Pen’s promise to hold a referendum to get France to revert to the franc – would likely need the approval of Parliament. Dealing with immigration, refugees, and other hot-button topics can be tinkered with at the margins by the government, but major changes will likely require changes of existing laws, to be voted on in Parliament.
It seems the French political class, which designed the current rules of power to protect itself, has foreseen such an election decades ago and has done everything it could to maintain its grip on power if it loses the presidency.
Whoever will win in the second round will smack into this system set up by the political class. It might bring five years of uncertainty and political wrangling, and there will be some changes and possibly some financial and currency turmoil, but ultimately the political class, which represents the establishment on both sides of the aisle, will keep its hands on the levers. And if Macron wins, he himself could quickly become the new darling face of the political class.
The American economy has split in two: how averages of wealth and debt obscure the profound risks. Read… So Who Are the Debt Slaves in this Rich Nation?
Trump voters can see that the president has had both successes and failures in the first months in office. That’s normal. The successes have been ignored by the Democrat press, but we inform ourselves by going to our own, more truthful, news sources. There is much to celebrate. When we focus on our side’s accomplishments, this is a happy time for our country.
We know full well President Trump is not perfect, nor is his team, and his first 100 days have brought disappointments, too. Support for Trump is not like the creepy hero-worship that Democrats gave Obama. Conservatives have God to worship. We do not confuse politicians with the Messiah. We do not need to think our president is the most brilliant man in every room, or that all his failures are the fault of others.
The reason we are so happy is that the big picture is astoundingly positive. Perhaps this is why the Democrats have to scream so very loudly and continuously, in their effort to drown it out. There are so many things to celebrate, in a few short months, it is hard to remember them all. Jobless claims are at a seventeen-year low. Illegal border crossings are at a 20-year low. The stock market had the longest winning streak since 1987. Our trade deficit is down and exports are up. Companies are hiring. We are beginning a sane energy policy. Job-crushing government regulations and waste are being rolled back. Four thousand illegal Somalis have been deported, and embassies told to slow down and do their job in vetting. The speed of change to rational, pro-America policies is dazzling.
Foreign policy successes are impressive. There are clearly brilliant strategic thinkers at work, as we were promised with the Mattis and McMaster nominations. Trump is following American interest on the world stage without asking permission from the UN. Our swift, unilateral bombing of Syria’s chemical weapons stores showed President Trump and America can once again be trusted. At the same time, the presdent signaled to China that their dangerous Korean games are over. By coupling threats on trade with a clear demand we expect cooperation on Korea, Trump has accomplished more in getting China to act responsibly than every president before him. We have Israel’s back at the U.N., which has been put on notice that antisemitism is no longer accepted as normal, thanks to Trump’s wonderful pick for ambassador to the U.N., Nikki Haley.
There are things conservatives don’t like so far, but most of them have to do with the pace, not the direction of change.
Trump the fighter is under-performing in key areas. Powerful Obama people are still in place, and likely to remain so for months, even years, at the rate his appointments are going. The remnants are creating havoc with their leaks, and fighting implementation of Trump’s policies.
Odd and disturbing reports tell us that Trump’s national security advisor, Lt. General McMaster, claims that ISIS isn’t Islamic and advised the president not to use the words “radical Islamic terrorism.” It is troubling that both Secretary ofDefense Mattis and Secretary of State Tillerson fought to bring in truly awfulObama appointees -- the people who enacted Obama’s attempt to hand Egypt to the Muslim Brotherhood, his Benghazi lies and the Iran Deal. That’s not good. Trump has picked his Cabinet members for their capabilities, which are impressive, but they seem dangerously comfortable with leftover Obama operatives. We can’t promote Obama policy makers to positions of even greater power. Bannon and Kushner, and even Trump, have had to waste their timefighting these appointments. What is going on?
On several big campaign promises there have been setbacks, but not defeats, and, so far, no broken promises. We don’t like the way Trump and Bannon were outmaneuvered by activist judges on their first two attempts to control Muslim immigration. We expected Obamacare to be repealed by now. We expected more focus on jobs and trade. We were told the Iran Deal would be dead the moment Trump arrived in office. It’s still in force.
Welcome to the real world. Trump hasn’t given up on a single one of these challenges. We were given exaggerated expectations by campaign rhetoric about how fast things happen. We can wait. We understand that setbacks are often a necessary step on the road to success.
That doesn’t mean we won’t have strong criticisms of our President. Trump supporters are the opposite of see-no-evil Clinton supporters. Clinton opened our national security secrets to the whole world on her secret email server, to hide her corrupt dealings selling favors (including strategic uranium reserves) as Secretary of State. Democrats pretended she was neither a felon nor a traitor.
That will never happen on our watch. Conservatives are not loyalists the way Democrats are. We don’t march in lockstep, hedged in by vicious thought police. Our enthusiasm about Trump is tempered by general cynicism about the corruption of power, the DC swamp, and a belief in checks and balances.
Liberals swallowed Obamacare whole and blamed the mess on Republicans. We fought Trump on his backing of Paul Ryan’s Obamacare Lite. We understand that Trump is to the left of his conservative base on healthcare. He has a paternalistic streak of wanting government to take care of people, that has been obvious all along. We intend to remain vigilant.
Despite our own strong principles, we accept that the sausage-making of opposition and compromise is healthy and necessary politics. We are pressing the conservatives in Congress to win us a free market health care system. In the first round on Obamacare, we forced Trump to line up with us. He listened and we’re still with him. Big changes are not accomplished without time, effort and conflict.
Democrats have succeeded in filling the headlines with off-putting and depressing stories – fake news, fake outrage, real violence against Trump supporters. We are fighters, we know what is at stake, we care with all our hearts and souls. We are so happy we finally have someone to lead the fight from the White House.
Conservatives are eager to fight, not just for policies we like, but for our very Constitution, which protects our freedom and the primacy of personal responsibility. (See Daniel Greenfield and Rush Limbaugh for a deep analysis of the unprecedented nature of the Obama Democrats’ civil war against our Constitution.) Trump ran on our ideal: we want to replace Democrat divisiveness with an emphasis on our common national identity.
This fight is the other huge reason we are so happy to have Trump in office, with Jeff Sessions heading the DOJ, and Neil Gorsuch in the Supreme Court. What an amazing team to reassert rule of law under our Constitution.
As the First Hundred Days marker passes, we are rejoicing in President Trump’s positive accomplishments, large and small. Let democracy work.
Slowly, very slowly, prominent Democrats are starting to admit the obvious: that Barack Obama’s presidency has been a disaster for their party, leading it to depths unmatched in the last 90 years. The figure of over 1000 legislative seats lost to the Republicans is but one marker. The absence of a bench, leaving the party’s congressional leadership with an average age in the seventies is a serious problem for a political faction dependent on the youth vote.
The latest Democrat to tell the hard truth while Obama is hiding from public gaze in the South Seas colonial domain of France -- an odd choice for a dedicated anti-colonialist who speaks no French (or any other foreign language for that matter – is Keith Ellison, of all people. He is the deputy party chair of the Democrats, whose responsibilities include the ailing health of the Dems.
Cameron Cawthorne of the Free Beacon reports:
Rep. Keith Ellison (D., Minn.) spoke Wednesday at the University of Minnesota, where he said that former President Barack Obama deserved some of the blame for the Democrats collapsing in 2016.
"Speaking of presidential politics, was President Obama responsible for some of the failures of 2016 and if so, how?" one of the moderators asked.
"Yeah, he was," Ellison said.
Ellison, who serves as the deputy chairman of the Democratic National Committee, said Obama could have been a better party leader.
"I totally voted for many things that he supported … But Barack Obama could have been a better party leader, and I think that the fact that he wasn't has put his legacy in jeopardy," Ellison said.
Ellison said Obama's legacy will not revolve around the building that will be constructed to hold his presidential papers in Chicago.
Of course no Democrat will dwell on the many other failures of Obama’s presidency, including the disastrous Iran deal, Obamacare’s implosion, the stagnant economic growth, and aggravation of racial tensions to their worst levels since the days of segregation, and maybe even since the Civil War. That remains for historians, and it will take a new generation to honestly evaluate his legacy thanks to the utter politicization of academia.
But at least self-interested Democrats are daring to assess some blame for their own problems caused by Obama.
There is no doubt that the Russians, among about 500 other nations, would dearly love to hack elections in the United States. Israel might be one of them -- whoops, it was the Obama administration that actively attempted to unseat Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in 2015.
Before that, in Honduras, the Obama administration had actively supported the return to power of a former president, Manuel Zelaya, who had previously attempted to seize all power for himself. Zelaya had been forcibly removed from office for that, because, “The [Honduran] military, Congress and the Supreme Court in the Central American nation had all opposed...” his power grab.
Obama’s interest in manipulating foreign leaders, by means fair or foul, did not end there. Even our allies were not immune. Obama’s administration spied on German Chancellor Angela Merkel, endangering relations with the most powerful NATO member state in Europe.
It is therefore ironic that it is the Democrats who have suddenly discovered the impropriety of attempts by foreign nations to interfere in our internal affairs. Their outrage over rumors that Russia attempted to influence the outcome of our presidential election, however, is not based on principle, but only on the fact that leaked emails from John Podesta exposed dishonesty in the Clinton campaign. Had Republicans been spied on, would the Democrats be upset about that?
Apparently not, because, the leaked audio of a Trump gaffe concerning misogyny was gleefully celebrated by Democrats, who thought the tape would unhorse his campaign. Also, Obama spied on the Trump transition team, no doubt to undermine the incoming administration.
But the worst is yet to come. For many years now, the Democratic Party has resisted all attempts to ensure the integrity of the American electoral system. While one could not enter the Democratic national convention without photo ID, the Democrats have stonewalled every attempt to employ the same measure at the polling place, even though such a measure would significantly reduce voter fraud. Oh wait, not “even though,” but rather, precisely because it would reduce it.
Worse yet, the huge population of illegal immigrants in the west coast states, their sanctuary cities, and the fact that their state governments are controlled by Democrats -- all of this provides ample and reasonable suspicion of massive voter fraud, virtually none of which is meaningfully investigated by those in power. If ever it comes to light, we will discover that Donald Trump won the popular vote in the 2016 election, and Clinton’s claim to have garnered that much support will be exposed as the fraud it is.
Our presidential election was hacked -- by Democrats. This should be aggressively investigated, litigated and punished, or else, the next time we will lose our country.
By Robert Arvay
For quite some time, I've watched The Factor at 7 pm or later at 10pm. I always found the segments interesting, stimulating and often funny, such as Miller's weekly contribution.
We learned that Fox said "No mas" and O'Reilly is off the air. Put me down as one of those 4 million who isn't happy.
Let me be clear that I don't support sexual harassment or the mistreatment of anyone in the work environment.
I do see a lot of selective indignation, specially when the allegations came from an article in the New York Times. Isn't this the same paper that endorsed Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton and loves Ted Kennedy?
Is Roger Simon right that this is really about Trump? I think that Roger is on to something here:
The real target in the defenestration of Bill was not O'Reilly himself but very obviously Donald Trump. He's the Big Kahuna the obscenely named "Resistance" (hey, you idiots, that was about Auschwitz, not tax reform) is after and Bill was only a stop along the way.
Indeed, several of Bill's accusers, represented by the daughter of Gloria Allred, appear to be people who find Trump particularly loathsome.
And the original story was broken by the New York Times, the literary capital of the "Resistance."
And how all of the advertisers were put together to unite against O'Reilly? It's all too cute and organized for me!
By the way, does anyone at Mercedes Benz, one of the advertisers that pulled out, really think that people will buy more of their cars now because they pulled their ads? Are they checking on the moral character of all of the other places where they advertise?
In a perfect world, men would treat women with respect, ladies would not seek professional or economic sugar daddies, MSNBC would do segments on the women who accused Bill Clinton, the feminists would refuse to support Hillary Clinton because she enabled her husband's misconduct and "the flakes" in Harvard would call for the removal of everything Kennedy from the college because of allegations about their past.
Of course, we don't live in a perfect world. We live in one where the left is out to destroy anyone who they disagree with. In other words, this is not about sexual harassment but rather Fox News. I hope that Mr. Murdoch's sons have figured that out! It won't be long before another effort is made to bring down Sean Hannity or Tucker Carlson because they promote "hate" or challenge guests on global warming.
We have now reached the point where North Korea's insane behavior is unsustainable. In other words, one of those missiles is going to hit a ship, a city or U.S. troops on the border. It's like having a kid walking around with an AK-47 and making the neighborhood rather uncomfortable.
Therefore, it's perfectly reasonable for President Trump to talk so much about the threat, as Claudia Rosett wrote:
Pyongyang, with its totalitarian, dynastic Kim regime, has bedeviled American presidents, both Democratic and Republican, for decades. But after years of Obama’s passive policy of “strategic patience,” the threat posed by North Korea has soared.
Kim’s regime clearly feels free to brag up its prowess in developing deliverable nuclear weapons, threatening strikes on America and advertising its program to develop submarine-launched ballistic missiles -- prototypes of which North Korea this Saturday paraded through the streets of Pyongyang.
Pyongyang is now on the verge of a sixth nuclear test -- four of its five tests to date having been conducted on Obama’s watch (in 2009, 2013 and two tests in 2016)...
All this is part of the Obama legacy: the rising global agglomerate of emboldened tyrannies, with which Trump must now deal.
Call it the Axis of Opportunism.
Call it whatever we want. I'd prefer to call it a problem that has to be fixed.
North Korea used to be that terrible dictatorship that held massive military parades while the people ate grass or whatever they could find.
Well, the people are still starving but the leadership is firing missiles and threatening to hit the U.S.
They used to be crazy but now they are seriously dangerous.
After UC-Irvine students voted to remove the American Flag from the school lobby, the University of California-Davis's student senate has voted to allow the removal of the American flag from its meetings.
Saying "patriotism is different for every individual," the senate voted to make displaying the flag optional.
Any idiot can see where this is headed.
Pete Hegseth pointed out that the senate appeared to say that there would be instances where the flag's presence was inappropriate.
"We've got patriotism triggering people now," Campus Reform reporter Cabot Phillips remarked.
In a statement, Student Senator Jose Antonio Meneses further clarified that the flag was not banned from meetings, but only had its mandated presence lifted.
Phillips said the vote was not an isolated incident, recalling a situation in New Mexico where a student was forced to remove a flag from his dormitory window.
Does anyone doubt that some snowflake will call for the flag's removal? The student senate thought they were being clever in hiding their intent behind sophistry, but if there isn't at least one member of that body who will complain about displaying the flag, I'll be shocked.
The problem isn't so much that one or two people will object to displaying the flag. It's that there will be intimidation to force others to go along with it. That's the true fascism on the loose on college campuses – the forced acceptance of a minority viewpoint through intimidation and threatened ostracizing of anyone who disagrees.
Anyone who feels uncomfortable about a national symbol that has stood as a beacon of liberty and freedom for the truly oppressed people of the world is probably too sensitive to survive outside a university setting. Most of them will be unable to live on their own and will end up living with their parents or marrying someone who will be forced to care for them.
By Rick Moran
“On the first day of the week, very early in the morning, the women took the spices they had prepared and went to the tomb. They found the stone rolled away from the tomb, but when they entered, they did not find the body of the Lord Jesus.” - Luke 24 1:1-3 New International Version of the Holy Bible.
Since Jesus was crucified on a Friday and Shabbat – or the Sabbath – began at sundown, His followers had not been able to carry out the anointing of His body with the fragrant spices and ointments, and it had to be delayed until Sunday morning, after the Jewish religious law forbidding work on the Sabbath was lifted.
Wondering who was going to roll the heavy stone across the entrance of the tomb so they could enter, the women, followers of Jesus, headed for the garden tomb where His body had been laid.
When they got there, not only had the stone been rolled away, but the body of Jesus was gone.
“Why do you seek the living among the dead? He is not here, but is risen!” (Luke 24)
And therein lies the fact that separates Christianity from every other faith, a fact that had been predicted by Old Testament prophets centuries before, a savior who would be "hung on a tree" (Crucified on a cross) taking the sins of mankind upon Himself and rising again from the dead.
The fact that Jesus died on the cross was witnessed and attested to by many, and the fact that He rose from the dead and was seen by at least 500 people after His resurrection is unassailable.
And to His followers, His return to the earth is just as certain. In fact, judging by Bible prophecy, the day of His return could be fast approaching.
And something to consider, if Jesus is but one of any number of different paths to God – as many people today believe – then why was it so important for the Son of God to suffer a flogging so brutal that the skin on his back was ripped to shreds, exposing the bones from His ribs? Why was it necessary that He hang on a cross and suffer a slow and agonizing death? If Jesus is only one of many paths, why did God make Him become the sacrificial lamb to conquer mankind’s sin once and for all?
Why? Because as He said, “I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father, except through me.” (John 14:6)
In all the other religions in the world, there is no god who took on the flesh of a human being, who died and rose from the dead, ascended into the heavens and promises to one day come back and gather His followers and take them to a place of indescribable joy to spend all eternity with Him.
If one element of the prophecy had been missing, if He had died in another manner than being crucified, or if any number of the Old Testament's foretelling about the life and death of Jesus had not been fulfilled, the story could reasonably be doubted.
But as in all things, God fulfilled the birth, life, death and resurrection of His only begotten Son down to the Nth degree, even the fact that he would be "pierced for our transgressions” (Isaiah 53), as He was by a Roman soldier's sword.
All across the world this Easter – or as many believers call it, Resurrection Day – His resurrection will be celebrated by the faithful. And what a wonderful time of year it is, a time of new beginnings, when earth has finished her long winter sleep and new life has sprung forth, the resurrection of dormant plants and seeds and the beauty of God's creation puts on its new garments, each new blossom, each bird’s song, a visible and audible praise to the Creator.
To try to fathom the depth of God's love to send His only begotten Son to earth is impossible, especially in light of the fact that, in His foreknowledge, He knew how so much of the world would not even acknowledge Christ's sacrifice and would deny His deity and turn their backs on the God who created them.
And what kind of love motivated Jesus to hang on that cross for hours, suffocating – the only way to get a good breath was to push against the nails in His feet and pull against the nails in His hands to lift himself up to catch a breath. I can't even imagine the pain.
All of this, when, if He had asked, His Father would have sent down a legion of angels to rescue Him and annihilate the entire Roman army.
But He hung there for something like six hours, slowly dying an agonizing death, forsaken, alone suffering physical agony and mental anguish, until at last he breathed his last and said, "It is finished."
“A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” – John 13:34-35
His enemies thought they had won, however the death of His physical body was not the end but the beginning. Love conquers all.
Christ has risen!
He has risen indeed!
Wishing a happy and blessed Resurrection Day to all.
What do you think?
Pray for our troops, our police and the peace of Jerusalem.
God Bless America
BY: Charlie Daniels
Charlie Daniels is a legendary American singer, song writer, guitarist, and fiddler famous for his contributions to country and southern rock music. Daniels has been active as a singer since the early 1950s. He was inducted into the Grand Ole Opry on January 24, 2008.
Hat-Tip to CNSNews.com for this piece