Democrats - Real Racist Rabblerousers

 

The Party of Enduring Racism, Bias, and Prejudice

10/18/2020 - Jeff Davidson Townhall.com

For three years, and without evidence, The New York Times falsely claimed that Donald Trump's presidential campaign colluded with Russia to steal the 2016 election. Thereafter, their hopelessly biased executive editor, Dean Baquet, decided to switch gears. After the Mueller report imploded, at Baquet's direction, the Times would shift its focus of its coverage from the 'Trump-Russia affair' to the president's 'alleged racism.'

"We built our newsroom to cover one story, and we did it truly well," Baquet said, apparently unaware of the historically profound idiocy of his statement. "Now we have to regroup, and shift resources and emphasis to take on a different story.” Through daily bogus reporting, the ‘newspaper of record’ would now seek to expose ‘the racism’ of Donald Trump and America in general. 

A Myth for All Time

From 93% to 96% of American media is controlled by leftists, considering book and magazine publishing, major newspapers, Internet tech giants, television, etc. The Left dominates in our schools, Hollywood, and popular culture. The only domains in which the Right has dominance are radio, and perhaps YouTube and blogging.

An enduring Democrat myth propagated for decades, and ramped up since Donald Trump became president, is that the Republican Party is racist. Democrats are able to maintain this myth in part because they dominate public discourse and because most Americans, daily, are concerned with making a living and caring for their families, not with scrutinizing history. Joe Biden tells the Charlottesville “fine people” lie at every appearance, despite video footage to the contrary and Trump’s 20+ denunciation of white supremacist groups. 

Even a cursory review of American history, however, starting with Abraham Lincoln, and the Emancipation Proclamation, reveals that it is the Democrat Party that has practiced and still exhibits fiery racist behavior.

Who formed the Confederate States of America? Was it Republicans? No, it was Southern Democrats. President Lincoln, the 16^th in U.S. history, was shot and killed while watching a play, “Our American Cousin,” at Ford's Theater in Washington DC, on April 14th, 1865 by John Wilkes Booth. 

Lincoln was 56 years old, had just been re-elected to his 2^nd term and, along with millions of other Americans, was celebrating the end of the U.S. Civil War, which occurred on April 9. Wilkes, a leading actor of that era, was not a Democrat, but was sympathetic to the Democrats and their opposition to Lincoln.

The Dawn Civil Rights            

Who murdered John F. Kennedy, the 36^th president of the U.S., in Dallas, on November 22nd 1963? Unquestionably Lee Harvey Oswald, acting alone, shot and killed JFK. This is explained in intricate detail by Gerald Posner in his landmark book Case Closed (1993). Mr. Posner dislodged every conceivable stone in reaching his conclusion. After illuminating Posner’s work in a 25-page feature in its publication, U.S. News & World Report declared it would never review another book on the topic because the case was closed. Oswald was a Leftist, who viewed communism favorably and espoused Marxist theory. 

Hesitatingly, JFK championed civil rights. “He ordered his attorney general to submit friends of the court briefs on behalf of civil rights litigants.” He appointed African Americans to positions within his administration. He selected Thurgood Marshall for the Second Circuit Court of Appeals in New York. He backed voter registration drives. In a second term, JFK, influenced by Martin Luther King, Jr., was contemplating civil rights legislation. 

Who murdered Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.? On April 4, 1968, James Earl Ray, a southern segregationist, assassinated MLK in Memphis, TN. Ray, who fled to England, was subsequently captured.

In summary, the murderers of Lincoln, Kennedy, and King, were politically Left, and certainly not Republicans. Lincoln, Kennedy, and King, each of whom had great potential for expanding the rights and acceptance of African Americans, were cut down in their prime.

A Sordid History

Prior to the Civil War and for 27 months past the signing of the Emancipation Proclamation, who owned slaves? Democrats. Republicans, with a few exceptions, did not own slaves. 

Who lynched at least 5,400 blacks, from 1882 to 1968, primarily throughout the South, with the annual peak occurring in the late 1800s, when one party acted to enforce white supremacy? In a word, Democrats.

Who created the Ku Klux Klan? Politifacts says: “Back in the mid-19th century, various Klans in the South acted as a ‘strong arm’ for many local Democratic politicians...” A Confederate general, “believed to be the KKK’s first Grand Dragon even spoke at the 1868 Democratic National Convention.” Democrats didn’t launch the KKK, but they played along. 

Who blocked and delayed women's suffrage, for some 79 years? At the critical times, it was Democrats. 

Who upheld segregation throughout the early 1900s, during World War II, and into the 1950s and 1960s? Democrats. Who posted signs that said, "Colored drinking fountain," or, "Colored bathroom?" Democrats.  

Who stood at the doorway of high schools and institutions of higher learning and said to African-Americans you may not attend? Democrats.

Who interned Japanese American citizens during World War II, for three years? President Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat.

The Part of Racism, Bias, and Prejudice

Malcolm X once noted, “Both parties are racist, and the Democratic Party is more racist than the Republican Party.” What would prompt this learned man, with vast experience in politics and racial prejudice, to make such a statement?

For 200+ years, Democrats have revealed their racism, bias, and prejudice. Yet, with a Democrat-controlled mainstream media, which party is cast as being racist and biased? Which presidents and politicians are deemed racist? Republicans. 

Throughout time, Republicans have not always acted as saints, but they can’t hold a candle in our society to the Democrat party when it comes to racism, bias, and prejudice.

 

Judge Amy Coney Barrett -- Impeccable Credentials -- Must be Confirmed

 

 

Amy Coney Barrett Will Defend America’s Borders and Laws

10/12/2020 - Dale Wilcox Townhall.com

With the disgraceful spectacle of the Kavanaugh hearings still fresh in many people’s memories, America is about to witness another Supreme Court confirmation process, one that may make the last one look dignified by comparison. That would be a shame, because Judge Amy Coney Barrett is a sterling nominee who has shown a reverence for America’s laws and sovereignty.

In her Rose Garden introduction as the nominee to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Judge Barrett threw down the gauntlet. “I love the United States and I love the United States Constitution,” she said. While that may sound admirable to most people, those are fighting words to those on the left. She then doubled down when referring to her mentor, the late Justice Antonin Scalia. “His judicial philosophy is mine, too,” she added. “A judge must apply the law as written.”

To the Democrat members of the Senate Judiciary Committee and their supporters, this is tantamount to a declaration of war. They revile Scalia’s originalist outlook and abidance to judicial restraint. The idea of a Scalia protégé sitting on the Court for a generation is enough to make them revert to their Kavanaugh hearing levels of cutthroat skulduggery.

What has Judge Barrett done to merit this kind of enmity? A review of her time on the Seventh Circuit shows a rational judge committed to the preservation of America and adherence to its laws.

On one of the most consequential issues that comes before the Supreme Court today, immigration, her interpretation of the law has been solid. In Cook County v. Wolf, she dissented in a ruling that temporarily halted the public charge rule. This is a critical issue in the immigration debate. At stake is whether the United States will require immigrants to be self-sufficient or allow them to become public charges dependent on government assistance. Immigration policy has been steadily drifting towards the latter, and the result will be an America bankrupted by the obligations of being the welfare state for the world.

In Alverange-Flores v. Sessions, Judge Barrett sided with an immigration judge who didn’t find a Salvadoran citizen’s petition for protection in the U.S. to be credible. Anti-borders legal groups are exploiting our asylum laws and using them as a gateway to allow untold foreign nationals into our country based on fraudulent premises. This practice will only continue, and cases on it will continue to land at the Supreme Court. We need justices who will consider the impact of such fraud on the health of our country, not just how it affects those perpetrating the deception.

This is not to say, as critics already have, that Judge Barrett was nominated to serve as a rubber stamp for any and all Trump administration policies. In Mesa Morales v. Barr she ruled against the Trump administration and then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions when they sought to restrict administrative closure, which allows immigration judges to postpone deportation hearings for those who have applied for immigration benefits with another agency.

In other words, Barrett is a judge with a deeply-held judicial philosophy who is also willing to consider the facts of a particular case and make an independent decision based on those facts. Would anyone argue the notion that this is the exact kind of temperament we should seek in a Supreme Court Justice?

As the Barrett hearings approach, the hyper-partisan, leftist propaganda machine is gearing up to frame her as some sort of religious zealot who is unable to rule on cases with a fair and open mind. That caricature is completely at odds with her actual track record as a jurist. That record, combined with her love of country, impressive achievements, and life of integrity make her a worthy successor to Justice Ginsburg.

Dale L. Wilcox is executive director and general counsel at the Immigration Reform Law Institute, a public interest law firm working to defend the rights and interests of the American people from the negative effects of mass migration.

 

General Election November 3, 2020 A Vote For Light or Darkness!

 

Joe Biden Has Spent 47 Years in Washington With Almost Nothing to Show For It

9/10/2020 - Madgie Nicolas Townhall.com

Democrat nominee Joe Biden’s career has been well defined by his consistent betrayal of American workers in the name of globalism. Instead of putting America first, Biden spent almost half a century backing trade deals that decimated family-sustaining manufacturing jobs across the country.

The truth is — a Biden-Harris Administration would be welcome news to Communist China. Just recently, the intelligence community released an election threat assessment saying, “we assess that China prefers that President Trump – whom Beijing sees as unpredictable – does not win reelection.” That blunt statement from U.S. intelligence is directly in line with Biden’s career on China.

Biden has a decades-long record of enabling China at the expense of America. In 2000, Biden voted for Permanent Normal Trade Relations with China. At the time, he claimed that normalizing trade relations would encourage the communist country to become, “a productive, responsive member of the world community.” In the two decades since, it’s very clear Biden’s claim did not come to fruition. China did not assimilate into the global community as a fair-trade partner. Instead, China engaged in severely unfair trade practices that went completely unaddressed until President Trump took office. Thankfully, President Trump and his administration took bold action, making clear that such behavior, previously greenlighted by spineless politicians like Joe Biden, would no longer be tolerated.

However, this critical progress could be all for naught if Joe Biden and Kamala Harris emerge victorious in November.

The threat that Joe Biden and Kamala Harris pose extends well beyond China policy. Simply stated, a Biden-Harris administration would seek to undo almost every major accomplishment made by President Trump. I call such damage to our communities "Burden, Yup Joe Burden" We can't afford this ticket.

For example, Biden has proudly said, “First thing I’d do is repeal those Trump tax cuts.” Of course, his campaign, under the complete control of the radical-left, is trying to tell voters that this would be a step in the right direction for America. In reality, under Biden’s tax plan, over 80 percent of Americans would see their taxes increase – a move that would eliminate 585,000 jobs nationwide. At a time when our economy is just beginning to recover from the artificial interruption posed by the coronavirus – Biden wants to cripple it with the largest tax increase in American history. Middle-class families, small businesses, and seniors will all bear the brunt of these Biden tax hikes.

The Biden-Harris tone-deaf economic plan to crush the Great American Comeback launched by President Trump shouldn’t come as a shock to Americans who have been following the pair’s record in Washington over the years.

In 1993, then-Senator Joe Biden stated that workers had “legitimate concerns” over losing their jobs due to NAFTA. So, instead of addressing the concerns of the blue-collar backbone of America, Joe Biden just went ahead and voted for the disastrous trade deal that led to the loss of 850,000 jobs.

The running mate Biden’s handlers chose for him could be an even bigger threat to working-class citizens. Kamala Harris is one of only 10 Senators who voted against the USMCA trade deal in favor of keeping the failed NAFTA deal in place. My biggest concerns are about the Black community, to see to their conscience by demanding CHANGE. It's a different time now. We no longer vote on "Color or Gender." We vote on values. "WOKE" is not just a sentiment. The Awakening is real under the Trump Administration. 

Joe Biden talks with inferiority towards the Black community. He talks about roaches, kids climbing on his lap, and tells us if we don't vote for him, #YouAintBlack. It's insulting to our intelligence. Our skin color is all he needs and then he will drop us after the election. You have Harris who is another Biden, flip-flopping on subjects to make you emotional meanwhile, she has a record of incarcerating Black Americans. Yes, a record of breaking families apart. 

As a Haitian-American, I want to advise my community to choose Policies vs Politics. The next 64 Days should be about creating a bridge to aid development that would help Haiti to “retool to a sustainable economy."

Now, it’s time to organize yourselves, be selfish, make this election all about you, your communities, and chose the right path. I know Haitians are not Democrats. We are all Haitian-American with conservative values who decide on God, families, freedom, and the free market. Imagine what sort of country you would leave for your children by voting for Biden-Harris. I implore you to learn about the president. He will preserve our families, our jobs, our Nation. I know because I have met him numerous times.

President Trump is a great listener, he understands the needs of every walks of life. He is a man of his words, he has made promises and kept them, and even completed the promises he didn't make that were unprecedented. I know how considerate and pragmatic Mr. Trump is. He has a great heart no matter what the media may say. It's not about color or gender. It's a vote for our values.

The American people have a clear choice in front of them this fall – four more years of America First progress led by President Trump, or a return to the failed globalist status quo under Joe Biden and Kamala Harris.

 

 

RAISE Act = Answer to Proper Effective Immigration

 

The Left Doesn’t Just Oppose Merit-Based Immigration, They Openly Embrace Failure

10/3/2020 - Ira Mehlman Townhall.com

The idea of a merit-based immigration policy originated on the political left. It was first proposed by a blue ribbon panel, chaired by a civil rights movement icon, Barbara Jordan, in the 1990s. The commission’s recommendations for an immigration overhaul were immediately endorsed by President Bill Clinton and other leading Democrats and Republicans of the day and then, just as quickly, mothballed due to objections from ethnic interest advocacy groups and powerful cheap labor business interests.

Twenty-five years later, legislation aimed at implementing the recommendations of the Jordan Commission, most notably shifting to a legal immigration policy that selects newcomers based on an objective assessment of their education, job skills and likelihood of success in the United States, remains stalled in Congress. The Reforming American Immigration for a Strong Economy (RAISE) Act, sponsored by Senators Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) and David Perdue (R-Ga.), supported by President Trump, cannot even get a vote in the Republican-controlled Senate.

In 2020, the obstacles to enacting a merit-based immigration policy include a new impediment: Fierce opposition on the far left to the very concept of merit. In the name of achieving “equity” and “social justice” the far left now believes that it is failure that is deserving of reward. Today, we seem to have moved well beyond President Obama’s much derided 2012 “You didn’t build that” quip, minimizing the accomplishments of people who have created successful businesses. It is now leftist dogma that anybody who succeeds in America does so only because of some unfair advantage they have had over everyone else.

The left’s longstanding unwillingness to adopt merit as a basis of our immigration policies has morphed into a full-scale attack on merit in other areas of American life. For example, Virginia has recently followed New York City’s lead in attempting to do away with public high schools for high-achieving kids based on the assertion that academically advanced youngsters have not achieved that status based on innate ability and diligent study, but rather through a form of cheating.

Speaking in support of ending merit-based, colorblind admissions to Alexandria’s elite Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology, Virginia’s Secretary of Education Atif Qarni compared students who benefit from tutoring that helps them excel academically to athletes who use “performance enhancement drugs.”  Jefferson’s student body is 73 percent Asian – mostly immigrant or first generation Americans. New York City’s Stuyvesant High School, the Harvard of American public high schools, has an identical percentage of children of Asian immigrants. If these kids are the beneficiaries of outside tutoring it entails significant financial sacrifice on the part of families who have decided to invest in their children’s futures, and kids who put in the extra work. These are not the children of entitled elitists who bribed their way into elite schools.

As Asra Nomani and Max Eden observed in the City Journal, the objective of the race-obsessed left, is not to achieve equity by “just lifting the bottom up, but also tearing the top down.” When it comes to immigration policy they are spared the effort of tearing the top down – our current merit-blind family chain migration system has already taken care of that for them. What the left aims to ensure is that the only way that the bottom is lifted is through socialist wealth redistribution schemes – a prospect that would be greatly enhanced by an ever-growing poor and socially alienated immigrant population. And that means doing whatever it takes to prevent adoption of a merit-based immigration policy.

A merit-based immigration system that results in the admission of people who build things (yes, by taking full advantage of existing infrastructures and systems built by others) will not advance the goals of the radical left – the ideological tail that seems to be wagging the Democratic dog nowadays. Immigrants selected for their likelihood to succeed will likely succeed and help the rest of us succeed as well. They will also, very likely, reject the far left’s inclination to reward failure and penalize success.

The RAISE Act should have been brought to the floor by Majority Leader Mitch McConnell for a vote long ago, if only to force those on the other side of the aisle to defend an immigration policy that both promotes failure and exacerbates the very inequity that those on the far left pretend to abhor. He needs to act fast because there is no assurance that he will be in a position to do so come 2021.

Ira Mehlman is media director at the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR).