An outstanding superb article explaining the truthful importance of the 'Mid-terms'! Vote - vote right!

 

The Deep Midterms

Rarely in American history have the two parties been so far apart or the choice between them so stark.

Victor Davis Hanson Columnist@VDHanson patriotpost.us 10-22-26

There are two ways of looking at the midterms, now less than three weeks away.

One is as a simple referendum on the issues and politicians of the day. The other involves a far deeper conflict of visions (as Thomas Sowell puts it): socialism versus capitalism, intrusive versus limited government, and the destruction of time-honored institutions and traditions versus their preservation and renewal.

Rarely in American history have the two parties been so far apart or the choice between them so stark. In brief, Islamist-sympathizing socialism is on the ballot against free-market capitalism and American exceptionalism.

The new Islamist-allied socialist Democratic Party is confident, largely because the party holding the White House has increased its share of House seats in a midterm election only three times since 1900. Each of those exceptions arose under unusual circumstances.

In 1934, FDR was still riding the wave of his New Deal promises to end the Depression.

In 1998, Bill Clinton enjoyed backlash support after the Republicans’ unpopular impeachment inquiry, at a time when the economy was robust, and the budget was finally being balanced.

In 2002, George W. Bush had united the nation after 9/11 and had not yet begun what proved to be an unpopular Iraq War.

In other words, the party in the White House has gained House seats in only about 10 percent of the 31 midterms over the past 126 years. Pundits also point to Trump’s approval rating, now below 40% in most polls, and the persistently high price of regular gasoline ($4.33). Uncertainty over the 33-week Iran war, they argue, makes it difficult for Trump to preserve his majorities in either the House or the Senate.

Those are the issues ostensibly at stake. But the choice goes much further than that: voters face a “deep” midterm election that will help determine the very future existence of the nation.

The new Democratic agenda is not about lowering gas prices. Americans are being asked to hand Congress to what has become the most radical major party in U.S. history, as socialists and neo-communists believe they can finally win statewide races across the country. What would that entail?

Lawfare

The Democrats have not outlined any agenda other than “Trump! Trump! And more Trump!”

If they win the House, Democrats plan to spend the next two years impeaching, investigating, and hounding Trump, his administration, and his family. Their aim is to block new Republican legislation and paralyze the remainder of his presidency.

The Iran War

The Left condemns the effort to denuclearize Iran as a lost war, even though the United States has nearly destroyed the Iranian theocratic apparatus along with much of the country’s nuclear, military, industrial, and economic infrastructure — at a relatively low cost in blood and treasure by historical standards.

An enfeebled Iran, stripped of its military and economic dominance and facing an uncertain future, would no longer be able to blackmail or threaten Europe and North America as a nuclear-armed theocracy. Its terrorist clients would also lose funding, weapons, and leadership, with profound consequences for the Middle East.

When the war ends — as it soon will — and gas prices return to previous levels, policies already in place, including tax cuts, deregulation, foreign investment, energy development, and advances in AI, should help fuel an economic boom.

But the Democrats’ plan is simply to withdraw from Iran, count on the goodwill of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps to guarantee free passage in the Strait of Hormuz, allow Iran to resume full oil production, and accept the Iranian regime’s word that it will no longer threaten the Gulf states or Israel and cease its decades-long support for the terrorist proxies — Hezbollah, Hamas, and, more recently, the Houthis.

Energy

The party that has repeatedly blocked federal oil and gas leases, canceled the construction or reconstruction of dozens of pipelines, and spent billions of dollars to subsidize unreliable, costly, and inefficient solar and wind power is now promising to lower the price of fossil fuels? Who really believes that?

Instead, the Left has vowed to end the production of natural gas, diesel, and gasoline as quickly as possible. Voters need only look at the once robust British and German economies, now struggling after years of restrictions on oil and natural gas exploration and development, as well as Germany’s elimination of nuclear power.

We should recall Obama’s energy secretary Steven Chu. He infamously let slip that his goal was to keep American energy prices at European levels. In the UK and Germany, gasoline is currently around $9 a gallon — a great thing for Democratic Socialists who see high fuel prices as the best way to cool the planet and remain in power.

Gasoline in the United States now averages only $4.33 despite Iranian oil being off the market, attacks in the Gulf, and Iran’s attempted blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. The reason is that Democrats were prevented from blocking new fossil fuel leases, pipelines, refineries, and fracking between 2017 and 2021 and again from 2025 onward.

Immigration

Almost none of the current Democratic candidates — at least until the eve of the 2024 election — criticized the Biden administration’s destruction of the southern border, much less the open-armed embrace with which it welcomed some 10-12 million illegal aliens, including 500,000 criminals.

The Left wants to dismantle border enforcement and the wall and to ensure that the current near-zero level of illegal immigration expands to the Biden administration’s peak of 10,000-plus illegal entries per day. Voters may be disturbed by ICE detentions, but they should remember a high-profile ICE presence was only necessary because the border was effectively eliminated by Biden.

By contrast, it is almost impossible now to find Biden’s millions of illegal aliens who were deliberately dispersed by the Left throughout the country — and particularly into Democratic sanctuary-city states. The Left will never close the border. Nor will it ever allow immigration to become entirely legal, meritocratic, diverse, and manageable, because to do so would cut off the Left’s supply of future constituents.

Fraud

Some estimates put aggregate current federal-program fraud at nearly $500 billion annually.

There is also widespread welfare and social services fraud concentrated in blue states like California, Illinois, Massachusetts, Minnesota, and New York.

In these states, welfare and social services are generous and, by design, subject to little scrutiny. Fraud is treated as a minor problem in what Democrats regard as a successful effort to attract voters with federal and state dollars. Few major Democratic officeholders sincerely denounce such fraud, since doing so could cost them votes.

DEI

The idea that race, outward appearance, gender, and sexual preference are essential rather than incidental to one’s identity is a central doctrine of the contemporary Left.

Should the Left regain power, expect de facto nullification of the bans against racial tribalism found in federal law and Supreme Court rulings. Race-based hiring, admissions, dorms, and graduations would return and proliferate.

The demands for reparations would likely regain traction, as they already are doing in California, a state with no history of slavery and 27 percent of the resident population born outside the United States.

The Left believes that people who were never slaves are owed billions of dollars by a government already $40 trillion in debt — and that people who never owned slaves must atone for an institution abolished 161 years ago. Slaveowners accounted for about 1.4% of the nation, almost all in the South. That some 700,000 Americans died in a civil war that ended slavery seems to be of absolutely zero importance to the Left.

Islamism

Only a quarter-century after 9/11, Islamism is somehow on the ballot. After October 7, the Democratic Party embraced the philo-Islamist/socialist view that sees radical Islam as not so radical after all. For them, theocratic Islamism is a legitimate and indeed preferable alternative to democratic Israel and increasingly a legitimate alternative to Western values and laws.

There is not a single truly democratic state in the Islamic Middle East, where women, gays, and non-Muslims are de facto second-class citizens. And yet we are told by many on the new Left that there is no real difference between Iran and Israel and that the terrorist organization Hamas is Israel’s innocent victim.

The apparently new leftist-Islamist alliance is actually not so new. We see its dividends now in a burning Paris. Decades earlier, that political partnership destroyed the Shah’s regime and ushered in nearly 50 years of Iranian theocratic tyranny.

Opposition to radical Islam and illegal immigration, along with justifiable anger toward a class of elites who seem openly to hate Western civilization, explains why reform and remigration parties are gaining traction all over Europe. Indeed, in the continent’s eleventh hour, Europeans are starting to fight open borders, unassimilated immigration from the Middle East, radical green ideologies, and disarmament. Why would we vote into power what the Europeans are now desperately trying to eject from office?

We already know what will happen when the new Democrats take power. After all, they are only promising to do to America what socialists have already done to now-floundering Europe, Canada, and California.

Before the election, voters should also ask themselves why more than two million Americans each year are fleeing the blue-state socialist model.

The answer? On taxes, regulations, cost of living, housing affordability, crime, and state budgets, red and purple states consistently outperform blue states. Americans already vote with their feet; they should remember those differences when they cast their ballots.

Finally, voters should also ask themselves why the current crop of Islamist-adjacent socialists always needs to cleanse their social media accounts. Why must they retract their prior bombast? Why do they attack questioners rather than answer questions about their past?

Why do we all know that what they say and do after being elected will be exactly what they said and did before they ran for office?

By contrast, are conservatives, Republicans, or independents serially trashing the United States in the manner of Democratic Socialists like Hasan Piker, who said that the United States is worse than al-Qaeda?

Is there a Republican counterpart to James Talarico, who scrambles to retract remarks describing capitalism as an “oppressive system” that needs to be “dismantled” or suggesting that “white skin” confers immunity to the “virus of racism”?

Or is there anyone among the conservatives remotely resembling Representative Ilhan Omar, who declared that America is “one of the worst countries”? Or like Darializa Avila Chevalier, who called the United States “a f-king disgrace”?

Are they demonizing the majority of the American people in the manner of Zohran Mamdani’s housing czar, Cea Weaver, who declared that homeownership is “a weapon of white supremacy”? Or like Melat Kiros, who argues that “We were never really going to be able to tackle white supremacy in the way that we need to without reparations”?

Could anyone imagine Republican or conservative candidates apologizing for terrorism in the manner of marquee Senate candidate Abdul El-Sayed, who responded to a cowardly Islamist attack on a synagogue with “Hurt people do hurt people”?

In short, treat this midterm election as the deep choice that it is.

 

"Marxism sucks, and socialism is the creed of ignorance, the philosophy of failure and the gospel of envy". An absolute true statement!

 

The Political Shapeshifters

This coming Halloween, the biggest ghouls, goblins, and scary specters are the political shapeshifters of the Marxist left in America.

Allen West Columnist@AllenWest patriotpost.us 10-21-26

In Texas, early voting has begun for this critical midterm election cycle. Now, let’s all be honest here: Republicans are not the best at messaging and can often be counted upon to steal defeat from the jaws of victory. We have addressed the issue of “affordability” on these pages and the absurdity that Marxists would claim to own such a narrative. But what is more telling about these leftists is their shape-shifting nature, which has been on full display recently. I remember how Tim Russert of Meet the Press, when it was credible, would ask a politician a question. If they would seek to shape-shift on Russert, he would simply challenge them by playing a video of them contradicting themselves. That formula of exposing deceit seems to not be part of the current Meet the Press style of journalistic integrity. Or, for that matter, what we witnessed from CNN last week during a town hall event with Texas State Representative James Talarico.

I must admit, Talarico must have attended the Barack Hussein Obama course for misdirection. I was truly shocked at his “unity” message attempt. It reminded me of Obama’s famous “there are no Blue states or Red states, just the United States of America.” Mind you, this was the same charlatan, original shapeshifter, who would later assert that “we are five days away from fundamentally transforming the United States.” With State Rep. Talarico, it was quite offensive for him to believe that no one had paid any attention to his voting record. Well, the useful idiots, mindless lemmings, and low-hanging fruit voters who make up the Marxist base do not. But to the mindful individual, it was laughable to see and hear Talarico’s shape-shifting endeavor to remake himself as some “moderate” leftist. All of a sudden, Rep. Talarico sought to make us believe he is some type of border security hawk, when his voting record and rhetoric say the opposite.

And to dismiss his words on trans Texans, including children, and other issues as just being provocative is rather disingenuous. Let’s not forget Hasan Piker’s recent visit to the University of Texas, where he basically stated that Talarico can say whatever he wants, but if elected, he will do the bidding of the Marxists of the DSA.

This is not a new phenomenon with the Marxist left in America. As stated, Barack Obama, or Barry Soetoro, was an adept shapeshifter, as well as Joe Biden. They are experiencing the same thing in the Commonwealth of Virginia with their governor, Abigail Spanberger. At least we have the semblance of honor with the avowed and overt Marxists of the DSA who tell you exactly who they are and what they want. And no, Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, this is not about Woke 1.0; it is the desired ideological agenda to destroy our Constitutional Republic.

Then there is the cheeky fellow running for U.S. Senate in Michigan, Abdul El-Sayed. Here is a political shapeshifter who is abjectly angry that he is being exposed. Well, not so much by Kristen Welker of Meet the Press. Oh boy, do we miss Tim Russert! Just to set the record straight, Mr. El-Sayed penned a letter of support for the Muslim Brotherhood president of Egypt, Mohamed Morsi. However, fear not, he is in good company with Barack Hussein Obama, who also supported Morsi’s coming to power. And it was Obama who invited Muslim Brotherhood members to attend his June 2009 speech at the University of Cairo. So, let’s not be fooled: El-Sayed is not the MB’s first foray into American political candidacy. As well, it was just this past Labor Day weekend when El-Sayed spoke at the 63rd annual conference of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) in Detroit, Michigan. ISNA is listed as the #1 organization in the Muslim Brotherhood’s 1991 Strategic Memorandum for North America.

But hey, pay no attention to the facts. El-Sayed says he loves everyone, including Jews. Yet, in a debate with his opponent, former Congressman Mike Rogers, he could not answer a simple question: who is a bigger enemy to America, Israel or Iran? And his insidious response of “hurt people hurt people” to somehow give justification to Islamic jihadism is repulsive.

The political shapeshifters abound in the Marxist leftist political party that we once knew as the Democratic Party. It is not about the rhetoric, but the actions. After all, if the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act was intended to make healthcare in America affordable, it certainly failed. And that deceit is right up there with the Inflation Reduction Act. Yeah, remember, inflation under the Biden administration hit a 40-year high of 9.1%. Another political shapeshifter, Jimmy Carter of the Marxist left, held the previous record.

Nope, Republicans can’t put together a coherent message to articulate their efforts. And yes, they let America down by not passing the SAVE America Act. Gasoline prices are indeed high, but it is because we have finally taken on the number-one state sponsor of Islamic terrorism. Leftists want the gas prices high to force you into their insidious world of electric vehicles, which are expensive.

Marxism sucks, and socialism is the creed of ignorance, the philosophy of failure and the gospel of envy. That is why leftists always promise a utopia of free stuff, which ends up being an equal sharing of misery. Now, they cannot rightly just admit to that. This is why this coming Halloween, the biggest ghouls, goblins, and scary specters are the political shapeshifters of the Marxist left in America. They promise treats, but you always end up getting tricked!

Steadfast and Loyal. Republished from ACRU Action. More by Allen West →

 

"The creation of city and state sanctuaries was supposedly intended to protect illegal immigrants from unfair treatment. It’s a scam. In fact, they harm the American citizens those states and cities are bound to protect".

 

The Great Sanctuary Scam

State and city sanctuaries supposedly protect illegals from unfair treatment, but they in fact harm the American citizens they should be protecting.

Jack DeVine Contributor patriotpost.us 10-21-26

I have no idea who chose the label “sanctuary” for either the concept or its practical execution of the Left’s aggressive opposition to enforcement of our nation’s immigration laws. Regardless, it was a politically brilliant choice — and at the same time, immeasurably harmful.

The word sanctuary evokes feelings of safety, security, and shelter. In church, the sanctuary is a sacred space, often near the altar, where one communes with the Almighty. In the outdoors, bird and animal sanctuaries protect endangered species from predators.

And now we have political sanctuaries — by the Justice Department’s count, 11 states, the District of Columbia, 18 cities, and three counties — that have adopted and implemented various ways to block the federal government’s efforts to detain and deport illegal immigrants, particularly those engaged in violent criminal actions.

So, let’s be very clear. The first responsibility of our government at every level — federal, state, and local — is to protect its citizens. The deliberate choice by state and local law enforcement not to support — and in some cases to actively obstruct — federal efforts to do so has exactly the opposite effect. Rather than protecting our citizens, sanctuary policies and practices expose them to serious risk. The all-too-common consequence is grievous, sometimes fatal harm to our own citizens. Lives are destroyed; people die.

The designation and details of sanctuary practices vary from place to place, but all are in Democrat-led jurisdictions and are largely motivated by political disagreement with federal efforts to deal with the consequences of years of uncontrolled illegal entry into our nation by unknown, unvetted migrants, and particularly the flood of illegals during the Biden administration.

Of course, not all illegal migrants are violent criminals. But too many are. Some are affiliated with known criminal gangs, some have violent backgrounds, and some obviously come to the U.S. with the intent of continuing their violent activities. We know that the illegal immigrants number in the millions (perhaps north of 20 million), but in most cases, we don’t know who they are, where they live, and which ones pose danger to Americans.

Crime statistics usually don’t classify immigration status, so we don’t know, precisely, what fractions of those crimes were committed by illegal aliens. But here’s what we know for sure:

• Every one of those heinous crimes — murder, rape, assault, drug distribution, human trafficking — found to have been committed by illegal immigrants would have been prevented had our border been closed (as it is now).

• Even with the millions of unvetted illegal immigrants now here, a significant fraction of the violent crimes committed by the criminals among them would have been prevented if federal immigration agents (primarily ICE) and local judicial and law enforcement personnel had cooperated in prompt removal of those engaged in criminal activity as soon as they were identified. In sanctuary jurisdictions, the opposite is currently the rule.

Last week, DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin reported that New York City judicial and law enforcement authorities have chosen to take no action on thousands of detainer orders on illegal immigrants in their custody. Instead, in each instance, a known or suspected violent criminal was released from their custody into the population at large, effectively saying to ICE, Good luck with finding and nabbing this character before he or she hurts someone else.

It has become painfully obvious that local entities’ deliberate noncooperation with federal authorities is grossly improper. As one example, does it make any sense at all for federal agents attempting to apprehend dangerous criminals to simultaneously control automobile traffic in the area? That’s not just just senseless; it’s insane — and exactly what happens in sanctuary cities, where local police are directed to stand back and watch from the sidelines as the chairs unfold. The inevitable result? As we saw in Minneapolis, somebody dies.

Note that when the above reality is mentioned, apologists are always quick to point out that illegal immigrants are statistically no more dangerous than American citizens — an argument that is both highly questionable (see the above comment about statistics) and certainly irrelevant. Let your head play for a minute with the notion that we should not be overly concerned about illegal immigrant monsters in our midst because we already have a proportionally similar number of American-born monsters.

Seriously? Try consoling the mother whose daughter was raped and murdered by an illegal alien — someone we’d neglected to remove from our society — by assuring her that her daughter’s heinous assault could just as easily have happened at the hands of an American-born assailant.

I believe that sanctuary policies and practices are inherently unconstitutional, and in fact there are numerous lawsuits working their way through the legal system challenging the legality of such policies and practices. But I’ve lost all patience with the tedious and seemingly endless legalistic debates over the subtle conflict between the federal government’s authority to enforce the law and the right of states and cities to demonstrate their objection to it.

I propose a simpler solution: Let’s skip that part altogether. If our two political sides would simply recall their common responsibility, stop arguing, and instead commit to working together constructively in service to the people they’ve sworn to protect, the entire debate would evaporate. Poof — job done, lawsuits tossed in the circular file, lives saved.

In their politically opportunistic fight with ICE’s supposed reign of terror, sanctuary cities and states make the jobs of federal agents (who work for us) immeasurably more dangerous, and they simultaneously expose their own citizens to both the danger posed by violent criminals in their neighborhoods and the very real dangers that come with unhelpful, aggressive opposition.

The creation of city and state sanctuaries was supposedly intended to protect illegal immigrants from unfair treatment. It’s a scam. In fact, they harm the American citizens those states and cities are bound to protect.