Archive for the ‘Donald Trump’ category

Let My People Go: How Trump and Cruz Deliver the GOP

April 7, 2016

Let My People Go: How Trump and Cruz Deliver the GOP, American ThinkerMark S. Hanna, April 7, 2016

The only way to stop their contested convention madness is for Ted to suspend his campaign and unite with Trump — like Aaron alongside Moses — and spend the next seven months working with him, not necessarily as his VP (which is probably not be the best ticket to defeat Hillary) but for the sake of the country, regardless of any deal or position promises.  

**********************

“I am more and more convinced that our campaign is going to earn the 1,237 delegates needed to win,” said Cruz after winning by a landslide in Wisconsin. But what he didn’t say is that to do that before the nominating convention, he has to amass nearly 82% of all remaining delegates — a virtual impossibility.

Cruz knows only a miracle can get him to the coveted 1237 delegates needed prior to Cleveland. “I’m encouraged by seeing Republicans coming together and uniting behind our campaign,” Cruz recently said, arguing that old rivals rallying to him is “proof miracles can happen.”

The parting of the Red Sea is a better proof that miracles happen. But apart from divine intervention, it’s mathematically clear that the waves of Republican delegates will not be blown over to Ted’s side for a win before the GOP gathering this summer.

What can be counted on, however, is that the hard-hearted establishment cronies and elites will continue to unleash their full arsenal of sorceries, like Pharaoh against Moses, to thwart the people from actually choosing their leader prior to the convention — even if it means political plague, pestilence and destruction ultimately descend upon their Republican kingdom.

Hell bent on #NeverTrump, the elites have formulated a trifecta of spells to keep both Trump and Cruz from securing the nomination. The first divination channeled through one of their old high priests, the failed Pharaoh-in-Chief Mitt Romney, was to split the vote by backing whoever might win a particular state’s primary delegates. Their endgame: conjure up a contested convention and thereby stop the exodus.

Magical Mitt demonstrated the effectiveness of this craft in the Ohio primary by campaigning aggressively for Kasich, only to stab him in the back a week later by sending out robocalls throughout Utah and Arizona in support of Cruz and calling a vote for Kasich a vote for Trump.

In addition to splitting the vote, the pharaoh class simultaneously began to woo and recruit delegates (or appoint those that can be co-opted by the party bosses) that would abandon Trump if he didn’t receive the necessary 1237 votes at the convention on the first ballot.

The New York Times described this hexing as a deliberate plan of attack to “derail Donald Trump”, noting the pharaoh class will step up their campaign for the next 100 days “with a delegate-by-delegate lobbying effort that would cast Mr. Trump as a calamitous choice for the general election.”

Which leads to their third hocus-pocus: change the rules that the candidates have counted on and adhered to throughout this primary cycle. Pharaohs are notorious for agreeing to something, and then at the last minute going back on their word.

“It’s still important to them that the perception is that the process is fair,” says Peter Feaman, a Republican National Committeeman from Florida. Never mind the reality.

The major stumbling block for the establishment Egyptians is Rule 40(b) which states that if a candidate doesn’t get a majority of delegates in at least eight states, he can’t be nominated on any ballot — whether the first or twenty-first.

North Dakota National Committeeman Curly Haugland, a member of the RNC Rules Committee, told the Daily Caller that to get around this little inconvenience, he would propose an amendment to the GOP convention rules this summer that will allow any Republican candidate with at least one delegate to be “deemed” nominated on the first ballot. By doing that, abracadabra! It’s no longer a race between Trump and Cruz, but the top eight finishers including Kasich and a resurrected Bush. Primaries and caucuses be damned.

To power-protecting fat cat pharaohs, the only rule that matters is their rule.

Along with Trump, Ted Cruz was initially the object of their disdain and derision. Now he’s their last hope to force a contested convention. No surprise they are rushing to his corner. Mitt’s magical robocalls, Graham’s voodoo fundraiser and Bush’s enticing endorsement are only the beginnings of their duplicitous efforts.

Shockingly, Ted seems to be falling for their manipulations.

“It won’t be Washington deal makers sending in some white knight who wasn’t on the ballot,” says Cruz. “It will be a fight between me and Donald and I think if we get to that, we win that fight, we’ll earn the support of the delegates that were elected by the people.” Sure.  Because pharaohs can be trusted.

“(I)t strikes me that (Cruz) should not be out there suggesting that the only two people who will be able to receive votes at the Republican National Convention are he and Trump by virtue of the fact that they have the majority of delegates from eight states or more. This is disingenuous,” corrects Lord Rove who is looking for a “fresh face” to nominate.

A more likely scenario is the pharaohs will continue to charm Trusting Ted, only to rain down their wrath on him and Trump once the convention convenes. Trump calls this the taskmasters’ Trojan horse maneuver. It’s the last remaining scheme that can halt the people’s exodus out of their decayed and dying Republocrat system of cronyism, corruption, kickbacks, and contempt for the Constitution.

Americans want to live in constitutional America, not some globalist empire that funds itself and expands its power through the enslaving of everyday brick makers, the cooked books of bailout dependent mega-corps, money printing central bank wizards, tax and spend overlords, open border bureaucrats, and institutionalized thieves that steal from one group in the name of compassion, but then use guilt and manipulation to shame those that have been stolen from.

This is the Washington cartel Ted has railed against, the same pharaoh class that is now gushing over him. Don’t forget how quickly Mitt stabbed Kasich in the back.

Only Trump can reach the 1237 before the convention. And therefore, it is only Trump that can lead the exodus out of their enslavement.

But without Cruz, the exodus will fail. Only Cruz can now ensure that the cabal’s conspiracies are negated and the party’s freedom from the pharaoh class is secured for generations to come.

How? First, Cruz must publicly acknowledge — in spite of the Wisconsin win — that he cannot and will not reach the needed 1237 delegates before the convention. Secondly, he has to come to grips with the overlords’ depraved lust for power and act accordingly.

Cruz is not suddenly the elites’ darling now that the slate of their candidates has been devoured. On the contrary, the pharaohs will unhesitatingly offer him up as a final oblation in order to nominate one of their own. If they fail here, any means is justified in their minds to ensure that their reign continues — including destroying the convention and thereby electing Hillary.

The only way to stop their contested convention madness is for Ted to suspend his campaign and unite with Trump — like Aaron alongside Moses — and spend the next seven months working with him, not necessarily as his VP (which is probably not be the best ticket to defeat Hillary) but for the sake of the country, regardless of any deal or position promises.

By unifying and jointly building a freed and reformed Republican Party, the two can ensure the drowning of the pharaohs and their armies and lead the party into a promise land of limited constitutional government, low taxes, unmanipulated free trade, sound money, Judeo-Christian values, secured borders and a strong national defense.

True glory is found in sacrifice, and greater love has no one than this: that he lay down his life –- or in this case, his campaign — for his friends.

 

‘The Chalkening’ Continues: DePaul Accuses ‘Trump 2016’ Conservatives of Hate Crime

April 7, 2016

‘The Chalkening’ Continues: DePaul Accuses ‘Trump 2016’ Conservatives of Hate Crime, Truth RevoltMark Tapson, April 6, 2016

depaul

The College Republicans group apparently chalked the praises of conservative values, the nation of Israel, all candidates in the GOP primary, and the pro-law enforcement Blue Lives Matter movement.

******************

It’s becoming too cumbersome to list all the schools across the country at which students have recently had panic attacks over pro-Trump chalkings on campus. Let’s just say that the left considers these domestic terror attacks — now known as #TheChalkening — to be an epidemic.

DePaul College is the latest school to be victimized, and a Republican group responsible has been accused of a hate crime, according to Hypeline.

The College Republicans group apparently chalked the praises of conservative values, the nation of Israel, all candidates in the GOP primary, and the pro-law enforcement Blue Lives Matter movement. Outraged students who felt “attacked” want the group to be held responsible, and the Black Student Union at DePaul accused the Republican group of a hate crime. They released this statement:

DePaul statement

“I’m disgusted but not surprised, because these thing happen all the time on campus,” said a student involved with the Black Student Union. He added: “Trump’s racist comments do not need to be included in the conversation and have no place on campus.”

“It’s sad that even at a school as diverse and accepting as DePaul, I still feel attacked,” wrote another student in a DePaul Facebook group. “Diverse and accepting,” that is, except for unacceptable ideas, and we can’t have those at our institutions of higher indoctrination.

College Republicans President Nicole Been said that she met with the administration, which told her that the name “Trump” triggers people, to which she responded:

“So you want to censor a word that is everywhere, who is the last name of the Republican frontrunner? You can’t do that.”

About the chalkings constituting a hate crime, Been said:

“I would just say that nothing we wrote was out of guidelines with University policy. Also, any [College Republican] chapter member, member of conservative group, or frankly any one right of center would most likely write something extremely similar. We just wrote in support of all Republican candidates and basic conservative values. If conservative/ Republican values are hate crimes then we have a much bigger issue in this country than students using sidewalk chalk to voice their opinion.”

Sounds like she’s too smart for this school. How did DePaul even let her in?

Been told Hypeline what she would tell others facing a similar leftist backlash:

“The conservative people in your club, school, local community, family, friends, have your back. They will fight with and for you. You are not in the wrong as long as you are following the rules, people are hypocrites. Don’t back down, don’t let it get to you, and don’t let it silence you. You know you’re doing something right when the far left is speaking out against you.”

According to the University, chalking is allowed on campus. Until it’s not.

Moonies for Cruz

April 7, 2016

Moonies for Cruz, Ann Coulter.com, Ann Coulter, April 6, 2016

Congratulations to Ted Cruz for winning his fourth primary! Usually Donald Trump wins the primaries — where you go and vote, like in a real election. Cruz wins the caucuses — run by the state parties, favored by political operators and cheaters.

Until now, the only primaries Cruz has won are in Texas (his home state), Oklahoma (basically the same state) and Idaho (where Trump never campaigned).

So now, Cruz has finally won an honest-to-goodness primary. This is great news for him, provided: (1) the general election is a caucus, and (2) the national media universally denounce Cruz’s Democratic opponent the same way the Wisconsin media denounced Trump.

In that case, Cruz should do fine.

The Cruz-bots don’t care. They don’t care that they’re being used as a cat’s-paw by the Never Trump crowd, and that a brokered Republican convention is more likely to end with Bernie as the nominee than Cruz.

The Cruz cultists don’t even care about plain honesty, which I always thought was a conservative value. Republicans used to be appalled by guttersnipe, lying political operators like the Clintons. Now they are guttersnipe, lying political operators like the Clintons.

It’s all hands on deck to stop the only presidential candidate who wants to save America from the cheap labor plutocrats.

Cruz has flipped to Trump’s side on every important political issue of this campaign — which only ARE issues because of Trump. These are:

— Quadrupling the number of foreign guest workers to help ranchers and farmers get cheap labor: Cruz was for it, and now is against it.

— Legalizing illegal aliens: Cruz was for it, and now is against it.

— The Trans-Pacific Partnership deal: Cruz was for it, and now is against it.

— Building a wall: Cruz was against it, and now is for it.

These are all positions Cruz has changed since being a senator — most of them he’s flipped on only in the last year. I’m supposed to believe that U.S. senators can sincerely change their minds about policies it was their job to know about, but a New York developer can never change his mind about pop-offs he made more than a decade ago.

Back in 1999 — 17 years ago — when Donald Trump was considering a presidential run on the Reform Party ticket, he said this when asked about abortion by Tim Russert on “Meet the Press”: “Well, look, I’m very pro-choice. I hate the concept of abortion. I hate it. I hate everything it stands for. I cringe when I listen to people debating the subject. But you still — I just believe in choice.”

Russert then asked him specifically if he’d ban partial-birth abortion. Trump said, “No. I am pro-choice in every respect and as far as it goes, but I just hate it.”

A year later, Trump wrote in his book “The America We Deserve”: “When Tim Russert asked me on ‘Meet the Press’ if I would ban partial-birth abortion, my pro-choice instincts led me to say no. After the show, I consulted two doctors I respect and, upon learning more about this procedure, I have concluded that I would indeed support a ban.”

Sometime in the intervening 16 years, Trump became fully pro-life.

You can say you don’t believe him — just as you might say you don’t believe Cruz has truly changed his mind on amnesty, the wall, or the Trans-Pacific Partnership, etc. But to claim Trump is pro-choice today — present tense — is what’s known as a “lie.”

But that’s what Cruz says over and over again, including in a campaign ad — and not one of those “super PAC” ads that count even less than a retweet. A Cruz ad plays the clip from that 1999 interview where Trump says, “I am pro-choice in every respect,” repeats it three times, and then cuts to a narrator proclaiming: “For partial-birth abortion, not a conservative.”

These are the kinds of lies that used to drive conservatives crazy when the Clintons did it. Not anymore. All’s fair in smearing Trump.

Trump has said a million times that he’d scrap Obamacare and replace it with a free market system (which, by the way, he explains a lot more clearly than Washington policy wonks with their think-tank lingo). Merely for Trump saying that we’re “not going to let people die, sitting in the middle of a street in any city in this country,” Cruz accuses him of supporting “Bernie Sanders-style medicine.”

Yes, because Trump is against people dying in the streets, Cruz says that Trump thinks “Obamacare didn’t go far enough and we need to expand it to put the government in charge of our health care, in charge of our relationship with our doctors.” Over and over again, Cruz has repeated this insane lie, telling Fox’s Megyn Kelly: “If you want to see Bernie Sanders-style socialized medicine, Donald Trump is your guy.”

Trump’s alleged support for the kind of national health care they have in Scotland and Canada is another big fat lie. Trump was issuing his usual effusive praise before he drops the hammer — “It actually works incredibly well in Scotland. Some people think it really works in Canada.” Then he continued, in the very same sentence: “I don’t think it would work as well here. What has to happen — I like the concept of private enterprise coming in. … You have to create competition.”

Cruz and his cult-like followers lie about Trump wanting a health care system akin to Canada’s and Scotland’s. They lie about his supporting Obamacare. They lie about his supporting partial-birth abortion. They lie about his ever having been a Democrat. They lie about his campaign manager assaulting a female reporter.

I tried being nice after Florida, when it became clear that Trump was the choice of a majority of Republican voters, nearly choking on a column praising Cruz for his admirable flip-flops to Trump’s positions on immigration and trade. I censored loads of anti-Cruz retweets. But — as with the Clintons — you offer these Cruz-bots an olive branch and they bite off your hand.

The next thing I knew, the Cruz cult was accusing Trump’s campaign manager Corey Lewandowski of criminal battery for brushing past a female reporter. Anyone who claims this video shows a “battery” is as big a liar as the liberals who lined up to say Clinton did not commit perjury when he denied having “sexual relations” with Monica Lewinsky.

If James Carville and Paul Begala had a baby, it would be a Cruz supporter.

They lie about my own tweaking of Trump — I didn’t like the Heidi retweet! — amid a tidal wave of support. Trump is the only presidential candidate in my lifetime who will build a wall, deport illegals and pause the importation of Muslims. He’s the only one who cares more about ordinary Americans than he does about globalist plutocrats. Does anyone really think I’m “tiring” of him because of a retweet?

Apparently, for slavishly devoted Cruz-bots, a normal human making a small criticism of her preferred candidate is unfathomable! That fact alone proves how dishonest they are about their own candidate.

I was under the misimpression that I was dealing with adults and not swine like Carville and Begala, willing to twist someone’s words to win a momentary political advantage. Mostly, I was under the misimpression that honesty was still a conservative value.

A Muslim view of radical Islam

April 5, 2016

A Muslim view of radical Islam, Washington Times, Mark Christian, April 4, 2016

(Nothing really new or exceptional here beyond that the article is by a former Muslim imam and appeared in a more of less “mainstream” newspaper. — DM)

Eye on IslamIllustration on the core problem with Islam by Alexander Hunter/The Washington Times

Few issues divide the Republican and Democratic presidential candidates as starkly as their view of Islam. Republican front-runner Donald Trump claims flatly that “Islam hates us” while Sen. Ted Cruz, suggests we should begin patrolling Muslim neighborhoods in search of terrorist plots birthed by “radicalized” Muslims.

Meanwhile, President Obama and Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton spend an inordinate amount of their time praising Muslim-Americans, citing the enormous contributions they’ve made to our country and way of life. Mrs. Clinton argues that what Mr. Trump and Mr. Cruz have said and propose are offensive and “dangerous,” while Mr. Obama refuses to admit that today’s terrorists are in any way motivated by their religion.

At the same time, the Muslim community is deafeningly silent, and the radicals among them couldn’t be happier. Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton are, in essence, enabling their cause by encouraging us to embrace Islam uncritically while turning a blind eye to the radical jihadists within its ranks. They are helping those who wish to lull us into complacency in the face of the threat they pose.

They reject Mr. Trump’s claim that there is something about Islam that “hates us” without asking whether it might be true, why it might be true and what can be done about it if it is. The Council on American-Islamic Relations says it is because we are Islamophobic, profiling Muslims and discriminating against them socially, politically and economically. These “reasons” play to the leftist sense of guilt, but the question remains: Why the repeated Muslim attacks? Is it because the “radicalized” Muslims are feeling disenfranchised and frustrated by a lack of opportunity? Paris attacker Najim Laachraoui had an engineering degree and the San Bernardino shooter, Syed Farook, held a good job in environmental health. The Chattanooga shooter who, last year, killed five U.S. servicemen, had a degree in electrical engineering. These men didn’t turn to terror because they couldn’t find work or were economically disadvantaged.

It’s time to end the argument about whether some Muslims have hijacked and perverted their faith. That is for the Muslims to work out among themselves. The fact is, these acts are being committed in the name of Allah and unless we understand that, we will never be able to deal with it.

Judeo-Christianity requires us to forgive and to accept responsibility, as we did for the Crusades and the Inquisition. Our inclination is to own up to our past mistakes rather than blame others.

Contrast that with Islam, and what the Koran and the Hadiths teach. When Allah calls on his followers to kill those who will not submit to Islam, does he sound like the God of the Judeo-Christian tradition? When Allah then tells them that killing themselves in acts of murderous barbarity against the infidel is the only path to redemption from the condemnation of sin, does he sound like the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob? When Allah demands all of this to ensure his kingdom can be established on earth, does this sound like the God who taught us to “love our enemies”?

Christians and Muslim follow very different religions, and we must not equate one with the other. The men who blew up the airport terminal in Belgium were pictured calmly pushing their bombs through the terminal. They didn’t look particularly evil or nervous. They were devout Muslims, earning redemption in the only way possible.

We are dealing with a dangerous religious and sociopolitical system that won’t vanish just because we pretend it doesn’t exist. Muslims who want to live in peace with their neighbors must deal with their problems through a heartfelt reformation of a religion hostile to non-believers. Jihad is the core element of the Islamic mindset and we are living through a true clash of civilizations.

We will not win if we don’t open our eyes to the reality of who we are facing. While we blame ourselves for what is happening, Muslims are continuing to protect their own, even those who have committed terroristic acts they would never dream of committing themselves. They protect and enable those who are living out their faith according to the Koran. I know because I was once one of them until I walked away from my faith years ago. If I ever return to my native Egypt, I would be killed as an apostate by the followers of this religion of peace.

Muslims hid Osama bin Laden for nearly 10 years. One of the Paris jihadists, Salah Abdeslam, escaped to his home in Brussels where, hiding in plain sight, he eluded arrest for four months. His neighbors had to know he was there, but no one blew his cover.

We are dealing with something more sinister, more devious and much more destructive than restless young men who are treated unfairly; we are dealing with jihadists who are protected by non-militants who believe in their hearts the jihadists are right.

We may not like it, but we have to face the ugly truth: Islam hates us — because Allah tells his followers they must.

Mark Christian is the president and executive director of the Global Faith Institute. A former Muslim Sunni imam, he converted from Islam to Christianity.

Cartoons of the Day

April 4, 2016

H/t Vermont Loon Watch

clown-show

H/t Joopklepzeiker

CfIX3LRWIAARvs_

Will Reality Trump Fantasy Regarding Muslim Immigration?

April 4, 2016

Will Reality Trump Fantasy Regarding Muslim Immigration? Front Page MagazineRaymond Ibrahim, April 4, 2016

(But if we simply close our minds and ignore the problem, won’t it go away? — DM)

screen_shot_2016-04-03_at_10.05.10_pm

Are U.S. presidents charged with protecting American lives or protecting American vanity—especially when the two clash?  Put differently, what’s more important: our security or our ability to “feel good” about ourselves?

Consider the two leading presidential candidates’ positions on Muslim immigration after the Brussels terror attack.

Donald Trump continues “calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on.”

Conversely, Hillary Clinton continues to offer fine platitudes without practical solutions:  “I know that Americans have every reason to be frightened by what they see, we’ve got to work this through, consistent with our values,” she said after Brussels.

Clinton is correct that it’s an American value not to discriminate by religion.  However, a troubling implication arises when this value is scrutinized in the context of Islam:  Even if most Muslim migrants will not engage in jihadi terrorism and other subversive acts, some most certainly will.  This is an established fact, one that Clinton knows: ISIS operatives are passing for refugees and “non-ISIS” refugees are committing acts of violence and rape across Western nations.  And both ISIS and its millions of likeminded supporters are motivated by Islamic teachings.

Nor does it matter if only a teeny tiny percentage of Muslim migrants harbor such animus.  If only 1% of a beverage is poisoned and you ingest it, will it matter that 99% of it was clean?  No, you will still suffer.  The only sure way to preserve your health is not to put it into your body in the first place.

Of course, the liberal elite will never take such logic into account.  After all, they are the ones most shielded from the consequences of their own starry-eyed ideals.  Instead, no name, no face Americans—statistics, like the 14 killed in San Bernardino in part by a Muslim refugee—will continue paying the price for politicians, celebrities, and other media talking heads to grandstand about “our values.”

What of Trump’s proposed ban on Muslims entering America “until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on?”  While antithetical to the lofty and utopic platitudes offered by most politicians, it would actually work.  A “total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States” would prevent Muslim wolves in refugee clothing from entering into America.

Put differently, the only sure way of not dying from Russian Roulette is—don’t play Russian Roulette.

Does this mean that America has no obligation towards true refugees?  No.  It means that there are far superior alternatives, for all concerned.  Remember, this refugee crisis was supposedly precipitated by the Islamic State.   Rather than passively accepting what ISIS sends to America—some of which is tainted and will be harmful to its body—the U.S. should annihilate the genocidal terror state.  Instead of playing ISIS’ game, the U.S. should end the game, quickly and decisively.

Then, instead of having to start anew in some foreign land, true, displaced refugees would happily return to their homes and families, in peace and safety.  Such would be a win-win for all—except for the savages who deserve no mercy.

Two Clashes of Civilizations

April 4, 2016

Two Clashes of Civilizations, Dan Miller’s Blog, April 3, 2016

(The views expressed in this article are mine and do not necessarily reflect those of Warsclerotic or its other editors. — DM)

One clash involves those who would make America more corrupt, more violent, more drug addicted and poorer. The other involves those who would make Islam dominant, bringing us Sharia law along with the violence and social unrest now seen in Europe. 

Illegal immigration from South of the Border

Is she right or wrong?

Corruption in the United States mainly (but not exclusively) enriches the political class. In the Latin Amerian countries my wife and I explored during our seven years of sailing in the Caribbean, we saw corruption in most countries. However, rather than being mainly at the top, it was accepted and relied upon by all levels of society. Venezuela under Chavez was the worst. The more illegal immigrants from Latin America who enter America, the more corruption we will have at all levels.

Our southern border is not a sieve; it is wide open to all who can get to it, with no significant efforts to restrict entry or to deport the many who get across illegally.

Perhaps that’s among the reasons why the U.S. Border Patrol agents’ union broke with its policy of endorsing no presidential candidate to support Donald Trump.

“We need a person in the White House who doesn’t fear the media, who doesn’t embrace political correctness, who doesn’t need the money, who is familiar with success, who won’t bow to foreign dictators, who is pro-military and values law enforcement, and who is angry for America and NOT subservient to the interests of other nations. Donald Trump is such a man,” the union said.

Trump had scheduled a tour of the border with agents from a local chapter of the union, but that tour was canceled due to pressure from the group’s national headquarters. Yet the endorsement, which Trump’s campaign touted Wednesday, came from the national union.

The results of our open border are felt well beyond border states. In St. Louis, Missouri for example, a substantial spike in violent crime has been traced to cheap heroin and Mexican cartels. Ditto Chicago, Baltimore, Milwaukee and Philadelphia.

“The gangs have to have a lot of customers because the heroin is so cheap,” said Gary Tuggle, the Drug Enforcement Administration’s chief in Philadelphia, who observed the same phenomenon while overseeing the agency’s Baltimore office. ”What we are seeing is these crews becoming more violent as they look to expand their turf.”

To attract customers, the cartels — usually through a local surrogate — instruct gangs to sell the drug at prices as low as $5 for each button (about one-tenth of a gram of powdered heroin, which could last a novice user an entire day). At times, the gangs distribute free samples, according to agents with the Drug Enforcement Administration.

Drugs are one part of the illegal immigration problem, but far from the only part. On March 16th, an article by Victor Davis Hanson was posted at PJ Media. It was titled The Weirdness of Illegal Immigration. Hanson’s basic thesis is that illegal immigration begets disregard for the law and hence additional lawlessness.

[C]ontemplate what happens in a social, cultural, and economic context when several million immigrants arrive from one of the poorest areas in the world (e.g., Oaxaca) to one of the most affluent (e.g., California). For guidance, think not of Jorge Ramos, but of the premodern/postmodern collision that is occurring in Germany, Austria, and Denmark.

The first casualty is the law. I am not referring to the collapse of federal immigration enforcement, but rather the ripples that must follow from it. When someone ignores a federal statute, then it is naturally easy to flout more. In Los Angeles, half the traffic accidents are hit-and-run collisions. I can attest first-hand that running from an accident or abandoning a wrecked vehicle is certainly a common occurrence in rural California. Last night on a rural road, a driver behind me (intoxicated? Malicious? Crazy?) apparently tried to rear-end me, then turned off his lights, sped up, and at the next stop sign pulled over swearing out the window in Spanish. In this age and in these environs, why would one call a sheriff for a minor everyday occurrence like that? The point is simply that when there is no federal law, no one has any idea how several million arrive in the U.S., much less what exactly they were doing before their illegal arrival. [Emphasis added.]

. . . .

Out here almost all laws concerning the licensing and vaccination of dogs seem to have simply disappeared. No one can walk or ride a bicycle along these rural roads without being attacked by hounds that are unlicensed and not vaccinated—and that have no ID or indeed owners that step forward to claim ownership once the victim is bleeding. The Bloomberg Rule reigns (i.e., if you can’t keep snow off the street, deplore global warming or cosmic war): we talk of dreamers because we have not a clue how to ensure that hundreds of thousands of pets are registered and given rabies shots. No one suggests that once one breaks the law of his adopted home, and continues to do so through false affidavits, aliases, and fraudulent documents, then the law itself become an abstraction, useful as a shelter, expendable if an inconvenience. Again, one assumes that if a citizen were to do that, he would face a felony indictment.

. . . .

An indigent Oaxacan immigrant is reminded more often by his host that his poverty is not the result of his own wild gamble to leave his home and enter illegally an entirely foreign universe, but due to the racism, nativism, and xenophobia of his clueless host—pathologies that can be ameliorated by plenty of advocates whose own careers are predicated on open borders and slow if any assimilation.

Yesterday, I saw this story of a walkout from a local high school, five miles away: Among the many racialized complaints was a strange one that that were not enough Latino school board members (that might apparently ensure interpreters at board meeting). “We feel oppressed and underrepresented. When we try to speak up, they don’t listen,” said student Monica Velazquez. “When the majority of the school board is white and male, I don’t see us being represented. And [Laton High School] is just a small piece of that problem.” In our world of victimology, being oppressed and underrepresented are quirky assertions (e.g., ethnic chauvinism mean that coveted spots must reflect ethnic percentages of the population, while ethnic disproportion in unmentionable activities is left unsaid).

Where does all this lead? I suggest we open our eyes and watch it in progress. Mass flight either out of state, or to coastal enclaves, where liberalism and abstract progressive utopianism can be indulged safety without worries over the concrete ramifications that follow from one’s own idealism. If deeds trump words, then the real racists or exclusionists are those in the mostly affluent coastal enclaves who suddenly want no part of the California that they have helped to create.

The final tragedy? If the border were to be closed, if immigration laws were enforced, if there were some reduction in legal immigration, if entry were to be meritocratic, if we reverted to the melting-pot ideal of assimilation, if we cut –studies courses and jettisoned therapy and ideology for hard science, math, and English language, in just two decades one’s particular ancestry would become irrelevant — the image of Oaxaca would be analogous to having a grandfather from Palermo or cousin from the Azores. In other words, things would work out fine.

Please read the entire article. It’s one of VDH’s best.

Sanctuary cities? An article titled Terrorism, Enclaves and Sanctuary Cities compares sanctuary cities to “no-go zones”in Europe.

While there are no actual “No Go Zones” in the United States, there are neighborhoods scattered around the United States, where the concentration of ethnic immigrant minorities is so great that police find themselves unable to make the sort of inroads that they should be able to make in order to effectively police these communities. Adding to the high density of these aliens in these communities is the issue of foreign languages often being the prevalent language in such “ghettos.” This gives new meaning to the term “Language Barrier.”

. . . .

Not unlike the “No Go Zones” of European countries, these communities in the Unites States also tend to shield foreign nationals who may be fugitives from justice both inside the United States and in other countries. Terrorists and their supporters are able to go about their daily lives- undetected by law enforcement agencies.

Implementation of sanctuary policies in such cities greatly exacerbates the threats posed to national security and public safety- turning those cities into magnets that attract still more radicals and fugitives and terrorists who need to “fly under the radar.”

Any community that provides safe haven for illegal aliens willfully endangers the lives of it residents.

Even as concerns about increased threats of terror attacks are the topic of a succession of Congressional hearings, so-called “Sanctuary Cities” continue to flourish- with the tacit approval of the administration even though they are clearly operating in violation of federal law.

Islamic immigration, legal and illegal

Europe

Much of Europe has been overrun with Islamic “immigrants” and “refugees.” In consequence, Sweden, Germany and other nations are faring poorly. It is virtually impossible to determine who they are (use of forged passports and other identity documents is rampant), where they come from or whether they are seeking refuge from violence in their home countries or ways to bring it to Europe on behalf of Allah “the all merciful.” Perhaps national suicide is a “merciful” way to go. Unfortunately, few in Europe’s political class acknowledge the nature of the predicament their constituents face.

Despite the series of horrific attacks perpetrated by Muslim terrorists in the name of their religion, Europe is not taking the appropriate steps to suppress the phenomenon. Very few mosques in which clerics preach for war against the infidels have been closed down; public order has not been restored to the lawless suburbs in large cities; there is no real oversight of textbooks used in Muslim schools and mosques; very few radical imams have been deported; no significant countermeasures have been taken against Muslims expressing extremist views; and the burka ban has not been implemented.

These are just several of the signs pointing to Europe’s lack of comprehension that some of the Muslims living among them want the continent to fall under Muslim sovereignty, whether by way of the Islamic State approach of violent jihad or by the Muslim Brotherhood approach of population growth and Islamic preaching.

There are many excuses: Misconceptions that violent Muslims are that way simply because they are poor and unloved, a misperceived need to expand the workforce by importing those unwilling and/or unable to participate in that workforce are parts of the problem. So is Europe’s “original sin” of colonialism, for which all of Europe must atone. Another is a fear that if they are not appeased Muslims will become more violent.

Rooting out militant Islam will require taking police action in Muslim-controlled areas. We have already seen the humiliating footage of police officers fleeing under a hail of rocks and Molotov cocktails, hurled at them by crowds of incensed Muslims. Another contributing factor is the dependency of political leaders, primarily from the Left, on the Muslim vote (French President Francois Hollande owes his election victory to the Muslims).

Turkish Muslims living in Germany are on the move. Are they “refugees” (from where) or economic “immigrants” just seeking a better life?

Turkish Muslims living in Germany threaten Germany Shouting “With Allah’s (and Merkel’s?) help, we shall conquer you,” Turkish Muslims take to the streets of Germany, carrying Turkish flags and using the ‘Grey Wolves’ salute, the Turkish equivalent of a National Socialist (NAZI) salute. Just think, Angela Merkel has just signed an agreement to allow Turkish Muslims into Germany without having to get a visa.

Don’t they seem grateful for their new opportunities to prosper? Oh well. Swedish women and girls gotta “love” them, like it or not.

Some “ordinary” Europeans are getting fed with up mass immigration and support anti-immigrant politicians. The left objects.

“You are not the people, you are the past,” was the message to German critics of mass immigration on Germany’s public broadcaster ZDF’s NEO MAGAZIN ROYALE television programme.

The message was delivered in a video featuring a multi-ethnic crowd of disabled, gay and transgender people, as well as a Muslim woman wearing a face veil and a man wearing traditional Saudi headgear, all telling a crowd of Germans that they are “not Germany”.

The video opens with a crowd of angry-looking white Germans hitting against the windows of a bus to intimidate a frightened Arab child and his father, a policeman dragging the child out and hurling him to the ground. Led by the German comedian and television presenter’Jan Böhmermann, brightly dressed people rise from graves, forming a crowd to combat the beige-clad Germans who are wielding Donald Trump placards and signs reading “Refugees not welcome.”

Condemning the German crowd as “authoritarian nationalist dorks” and telling them “you are not the people, you are the past,” Böhmermann cautions that “true Germans are coming for you, you’d better run fast.”

Warning the beige-clad Germans that “10 million bicycle helmets are in sight” Böhmermann describes the lifestyle of “true Germans” to be one of cycling, recycling and eating kebab and muesli. In what is perhaps a jab at protests from senior members of Merkel’s Christian Democratic Union against pork being “quietly removed from menus” of public canteens, Böhmermann also declares that the “true Germans” eat vegan sausages.

Obama’s America

A relatively small, but significant, number of Muslims now live in America.

In 2005, more people from Islamic countries became legal permanent United States residents—nearly 96,000—than there had been in any other year in the previous two decades.[13][14] In 2009, more than 115,000 Muslims became legal residents of the United States.[15]

That’s just those who are legally present. Those present illegally? The powers-that-be haven’t a clue as to who they are, where they are, how they got here, where they came from or what they want. We experienced the gifts bestowed upon us by some legally present in Obama’s America during the Boston marathon as well as in Fort Hood, San Bernardino and elsewhere.

Obama has already brought in more than 76,000 “Syrian refugees.”  More seem to be on the way.

President Barack Obama has been quietly pushing new plans to bring thousands of additional Syrian refugees into the country, despite the concerns of state and county officials and the outrages committed by welfare-dependent migrants in Europe.

Obama’s special assistant to the president for immigration policy, Felicia Escobar, recently announced plans to increase America’s intake of migrants, according to the Washington Examiner.

“We want to make sure that we can increase our numbers of refugees that are able to settle here,” Escobar said. “The need globally is so, so, so massive right now, given all the displacement and conflict around the world, but we also know that we have to do it in a way that’s smart.”

Federal law already allows the administration to bring in 10,000 Syrian refugees a year, but many states and local county administrations have complained that once the Obama administration places refugees among them, few resources are available to deal with them.

The influx is very unpopular, according to polls. Also, nearly all immigrants from the Middle East are dependent on welfare. Some migrant and some second-generation Muslim Americans also embrace jihad.

During his March 2016 visit to a mosque, Obama praised Muslims living in America.

In rebuke to politicians like Donald Trump, Obama presented Islam as an essential part of the nation’s heritage, going back to Muslim slaves brought to the British colonies and running through Thomas Jefferson’s Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom up to Fazlur Rahman Khan, who designed two of Chicago’s tallest skyscrapers. And he spoke emotionally about mail he received from Muslim American children and parents who felt persecuted and unsafe.

“We’re one American family. And when any part of our family starts to feel separate or second-class or targeted, it tears at the very fabric of our nation,” he said.

. . . .

On Wednesday he responded to critics—especially Republican contenders to replace him in the White House—who complain that he won’t label Islamic terrorism as such, saying demands to label by religion only play into extremist propaganda.

“I often hear it said that we need moral clarity in this fight. And the suggestion is somehow that if I would simply say, ‘These are all Islamic terrorists,’ then we would actually have solved the problem by now, apparently,” he said. “Let’s have some moral clarity: Groups like ISIS are desperate for legitimacy…. We must never give them that legitimacy. They’re not defending Islam. They’re not defending Muslims.”

Implicitly responding to tiresome calls for the “moderate Muslims” to speak out against terrorism, Obama said that they are speaking—but not enough people are listening. He vowed to work to amplify their voices. [Emphasis added.|

There are, in fact, Muslims who want to reform Islam; Obama pays them scant attention. Instead, He consorts with CAIR and it’s co-conspirators to keep Islam just the way it is. Here’s a video of some reform-minded Muslims. Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a former Muslim, produced and directed it as well as others in the Honor Diaries series.

And here’s a video of some who think Islam is just fine the way it is.

As I noted here,

Along with the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), Azeezah Kanji — the featured speaker in the above video — has been very active in disparaging Honor Diaries. Like CAIR, she has ties to the Obama White House and was named a “Champion of Change” by the White House in 2011. What changes in Islam does Ms. Kanji champion? None, apparently, of those intrinsic to it.

In Heretic, Hirsi Ali argued,

There is probably no realistic chance that Muslims in countries such as Pakistan will agree to dispense with sharia. However, we in the West must insist that Muslims living in our societies abide by our rule of law. We must demand that Muslim citizens abjure sharia practices and punishments that conflict with fundamental human rights and Western legal codes. Moreover, under no circumstances should Western countries allow Muslims to form self-governing enclaves in which women and other supposedly second-class citizens can be treated in ways that belong in the seventh century. [Emphasis added.]

Yet there are Islamic enclaves in America where Sharia is practiced. According to The Clarion Project, there are at least twenty-two.

Jamaat ul-Fuqra, a Pakistani militant group that has rebranded itself as Muslims of the Americas, says it has 22 “Islamic villages” in the U.S. Its “Islamberg” headquarters in New York is the most well-known.

The Clarion Project identified one village in Texas in 2014 and the group mentioned others, including one in Alaska during a frivolous lawsuit it filed against a prominent critic.

Fuqra’s 1994 book, Target Islam: Exposing the Malicious Conspiracy of the Zionists Against the World of Islam and Prominent Muslim Leaders,explains that its establishment of “villages” in the U.S. since 1980 is part of a jihad against a Satanic-Jewish-Communist conspiracy that puppeteers the U.S. government.

They have a cultish devotion to their extremist leader in Pakistan, Sheikh Gilani, who they believe is in constant contact with Allah and the Prophet Mohammed and a miracle worker chosen by Allah to lead Islam to victory.

. . . .

“The Jammatul Fuqra has been able to establish justice according to Islamic Law, not only in the United States, but wherever Muslims are living under un-Islamic laws. According to the Holy Q’uran, a Muslim is not allowed to follow laws other than the law of the Holy Qu’ran…This so-called ‘freedom’ is actually enslavement by the kufaar [non-Muslims] and Shaitan [Satan]…”

It continues:

“On these sites where Islamic Law is enforced as much as possible, anyone who commits a crime against the Law of Allah is punished according to Ta’azerat….Here you see one person receiving twenty lashes in one [Sharia] court in South America. He was found guilty of violating the honor of a Muslim lady, a crime for which he received a hard punishment with patience and faith.”

The article says that the hudud punishments, such as execution and severing of hands and feet, cannot be enforced in kuffar (infidel) lands like the U.S. Notice that this isn’t a stand against sharia‘s brutal hudud punishments; just that they aren’t implementable at this time.

With freedoms of speech and religion lacking in Islamic countries, America could become the birthplace of Islamic reform. With Obama in office? Not a chance.

Conclusions

People from some foreign cultures have integrated and become productive American citizens. Many who have come illegally have not and live on welfare payments and other government subsidies. Since the current administration welcomes them and seeks more, we get (some) cheap labor, plentiful cheap heroin and substantial welfare costs. We also get drug gang-related violence, lawlessness metastasizing into areas beyond immigration itself and corruption.

Our Islamic “refugees” and “immigrants” bring us some similar and some different bounties, just a bit less thus far. They bring us the gift of jihad and Sharia law while enjoying welfare-based lives and complaining that anyone who complains is racist and “Islamophobic.”

There is little that any of us, individually, can do to halt or even slow the Haspanification and Islamification of America. We need to vote for leaders who will undertake — seriously and not merely with pleasing slogans — the legislative and legitimate executive steps needed for that purpose.

Trump leaves the conservative establishment arrogant and unmoored

April 3, 2016

Trump leaves the conservative establishment arrogant and unmoored, Washington PostJoe Scarborough, April 2, 2016

When members of Manhattan’s media elite come to Mark Halperin’s home for dinner, Halperin likes to ask his guests whether they have spent more time in Paris or Staten Island. More often than not, his guests select the destination that does not offer regular ferry service from Battery Park.

Halperin’s dinner quiz provides a glimpse into what conservatives have long mocked as the cloistered existence of liberal elites who report on a nation they don’t understand. Republican critics have long complained that these media elites are schooled, spend their summers and live most of their lives in urbane enclaves that provide little insight into how the rest of America lives.

But in 2016, conservative commentators are sounding as cocooned from their own political party as any liberal writing social commentary for The New Yorker or providing political analysis for ABC News. Even after the passing of Antonin Scalia and the Paris and San Bernadino attacks, many right-leaning pundits are spending their days scolding readers and declaring that no true conservative or God-fearing Christian could support Donald Trump. This simmering rage has now risen to such a level that many conservative opinion shapers are spending their waking hours coping with a festering Zapruder-like obsession over video frames of the Corey Lewandowski-Michelle Fields confrontation while obsessing over the GOP frontrunner’s latest embarrassing gaffe.

Even as the Manhattan billionaire is enduring his most dreadful period of the campaign, attacks against Donald Trump have reached new heights, with commentators focusing their withering criticism on supporters, ignoring the fact that many of those same voters helped make Ronald Reagan president, Newt Gingrich Speaker of the House and Marco Rubio a United States senator.

But now these voters formerly called common-sense conservatives are now considered drug-addled losers who are too stupid to determine what is in their best interest. The left-wing’s “What’s the Matter With Kansas?” is now the GOP establishment’s “What The Hell’s Up With Upstate New York?

The March 28th edition of National Review ran a column that described Donald Trump as a “Father-Fuhrer” for poor white men raised without a strong male figure. “It is easy to imagine a generation of young men being raised without fathers and looking out the window like a kid waiting for Daddy to come home,” National Review’s Kevin Williamson wrote, “waiting for the Father-Fuhrer figure they have spent their lives imagining.”

Williamson concluded that white working class men victimized by globalization were not actually victims at all, but rather losers whose own poor choices have led them down a path of “welfare dependency, drug and alcohol addiction, and family anarchy.”

It is not quite as rosy a lens as what conservative writers once used to focus on these same Reagan Democrats.  “The white American underclass is in thrall to a vicious, selfish culture whose main products are misery and used heroin needles,” wrote Williamson.

“Donald Trump’s speeches make them feel good. So does OxyContin.”

Wow.

Imagine the reaction from William F. Buckley if such an article were written about the same voters who helped propel candidates like Reagan, Gingrich and Bush 43 to power.

Williamson, of whom I am an admirer, is not alone in launching such blistering broadsides against GOP voters. My friend Erick Erickson provided an equally rough assessment of white working-class Trump followers in an April 1, 2016 tweet.

A lot of Trump voters have failed at life and blame others for their own poor decisions. They’re using Trump as a vehicle for revenge.

Stephen Miller Amazing Speech Racine Wisconsin Senior Policy Adviser for Donald Trump

April 3, 2016

Stephen Miller Amazing Speech Racine Wisconsin Senior Policy Adviser for Donald Trump via You Tube, April 2, 2016

(Mr. Miller is a senior policy advisor to Donald Trump and “a trusted aide to Sen. Jeff Sessions of Alabama.” Senator Sessions endorsed Trump on February 28th. — DM)

California mayor bans Trump from campaigning in her city

April 2, 2016

California mayor bans Trump from campaigning in her city, Washington ExaminerGanny Morrongiello, April 1, 2016

Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump may want to avoid West Hollywood when he campaigns in California ahead of the state’s potentially decisive June 7 primary.

Lindsey Horvath, the mayor of West Hollywood, Calif., which is located in the heart of Los Angeles County and home to a sizable population of gay men, penned a letter to Trump this week explaining that he is unwelcome in her city.

“With the primary making its way to California, as West Hollywood’s Mayor, I want to make very clear that your campaign of violence and intimidation is not welcome in our City,” she wrote in the letter.

“From mocking people living with disabilities to classifying entire ethnicities as violent criminals to persecuting specific religious communities, Trump has pursued headlines in this election season with reckless abandon,” Horvath later explained in an op-ed for the Advocate.

Horvath, an outspoken LGBT activist and West Hollywood’s youngest elected mayor, described herself as “deeply disturbed” by Trump, who she claimed has “gone beyond [his] right to express a political point of view or policy differences.”

“As Mayor of West Hollywood, it is my primary responsibility to keep our community safe,” she wrote in an email to the Washington Examiner.

According to Horvath, West Hollywood was previously welcomed politicians from both parties to hold campaign events in the city. “[But] those same Horvath courtesies will not be extended to the Trump campaign,” she claims.

The 34-year-old mayor has already instructed City staff that they are able to refuse to issue special events permits to Trump should he attempt to schedule a rally in the Los Angeles County city, and “such actions are well with [their] right[s],” Horvath told the Examiner.

With a little over two months left to go until Trump competes in California’s Republican primary, Horvath has also called on the other 87 mayors in Los Angeles County to follow suit and block the billionaire from campaigning in their cities.