News for social, fiscal & national security conservatives who believe in God, family & the USA. Upholding the rights granted by God & guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution, traditional family values, "republican" principles / ideals, transparent & limited "smaller" government, free markets, lower taxes, due process of law, liberty & individual freedom. All content approval rests with the ARRA News Service Editor. Opinions are those of the authors. While varied positions are reported, beliefs & principles remain fixed. No revenue is generated for or by this site - no paid ads accepted - no payments for articles.Fair Use doctrine is posted & used. Editor/Founder: Bill Smith, Ph.D. [aka: OzarkGuru & 2010 AFP National Blogger of the Year] Follow @arra Contact: firstname.lastname@example.org (Pub. Since July, 2006)Home Page
One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics
is that you end up being governed by your inferiors. -- Plato
Friday, May 06, 2016
Hillary Clinton Eats Crow Over Coal Comments
Hillary Clinton caught heat in West Virginia, where hecklers shouted "Go home, Hillary!" (AP)
Hillary Clinton: Just a Minute!
Editorial, Investor's Business Daily: Election 2016: After vowing to kill coal jobs, Hillary Clinton is now trying to recast herself as Sissy Spacek in “Coal Miner’s Daughter.” But coal workers ain’t buying it, and she’s hearing their wrath while campaigning in West Virginia.
At a CNN town-hall-style forum in March, Clinton asserted: “We’re going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business.”
Coal country hasn’t forgotten the threat from the Democratic front-runner.
A laid-off coal miner earlier this week confronted Clinton over her derogatory statement during a campaign stop in West Virginia, which holds its Democratic primary May 10.
“I just want to know how you can say you’re going to put a lot of coal miners out of jobs, and then come in here and tell us how you’re going to be our friend, because those people out there don’t see you as a friend,” said Bo Copley, his voice breaking.
Nodding sympathetically, Clinton replied, “I know that, Bo.”
She called her earlier remark “a misstatement.”
“I don’t know how to explain it other than what I said was totally out of context from what I meant,” Clinton implored. “Because I have been talking about helping coal country for a very long time.”
Please. What Clinton has been doing for “a very long time” is condemning coal miners and their employers as the world’s worst polluters. And now she expects to win their vote? As Copley later told a reporter: “Supporting her hurts you.”
This takes Clinton’s famed arrogance to new heights.
Now that she needs their vote, suddenly she’s presenting a plan to “help” coal miners — by giving them “clean” solar panel jobs. You mean like all those Solyndra jobs Hillary’s boss failed to create — at taxpayers’ expense?
President Obama’s Solyndra boondoggle cost taxpayers only about half a billion dollars. In the off chance Clinton could even retrain coal miners to make solar panels, the new jobs would be highly subsidized — and they still wouldn’t replace the top wages paid to skilled operators at coal mines.
So this is social engineering at its worst. Hillary might as well be saying: “I’m going to throw you out of work because I don’t like your industry, and I’m going to make you work for a politically correct industry that’s not economically feasible. But who cares, for this is the direction state central planners like me, in our infinite wisdom, decree the nation must go.”
The coal country dust-up reveals a major vulnerability for Democrats as they try to hold on to the White House. They’re clearly no longer popular there.
On Monday, Clinton was met in Ashland, W. Va., by hecklers who shouted “Go home, Hillary!” Later on, hundreds of protesters stood in pouring rain, waved Donald Trump signs and chanted “Kill-ary” as Clinton toured a health center in Williamson, W. Va.
Trump, now the presumptive GOP nominee, pounced on Clinton’s growing weakness in Appalachia.
“I watched her three or four weeks ago when she was talking about the miners as if they were just numbers and she was talking about how she wants the mines closed and she will never let them work again,” Trump said after winning Indiana.
“Let me tell you: The miners in West Virginia and Pennsylvania, which was so great to me last week, and Ohio and all over, they’re going to start to work again, believe me,” he vowed. “You’re going to be proud again to be miners.”
Ohio and Pennsylvania voted for Barack Obama in both the 2008 and 2012 presidential elections. But if miners there scorn Clinton like they are in West Virginia and Kentucky, Democrats could suffer a reversal of fortune in the region that could be the pivotal factor in this election. Tags:Hillary Clinton, West Virginia, anti-coal comments, eats crow, Editorial, Investor's Business DailyTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
by Newt Gingrich: No one imagined three days ago that a month would disappear from the campaign calendar.
The morning of the Indiana primary virtually everyone assumed there would be a fight for the GOP nomination at least to June 7 when California, New Jersey and several other states vote.
Many thought the contest could go on after June 7 because Trump might still be a few delegates short.
Some hoped there would be a contested convention in July.
Suddenly, Tuesday night, Senator Ted Cruz cut either one or two months out of the calendar.
In a very wise, realistic step he suspended his candidacy. This allows him to avoid a month of negativity. It will serve him well. He leaves the race a much bigger, stronger figure than when he entered. He is plausibly a candidate for the Presidency in 2020 if Trump loses. (Actually, Cruz is so young he is plausibly a candidate for President in 2040). He has the name recognition and financial network to become a future governor of our second biggest state. He would be a superb choice to fill the Scalia role on the Supreme Court. He can now take some time to think long and hard about his future.
The Cruz decision had a big effect on both Trump and Ryan.
First, the Trump team was focused on winning the nomination. They were consumed by delegate hunts, future primaries, and winning a convention with a lot of opposition trying to stop them.
Suddenly the Trump team has had to shift direction, focus, and scale.
Trump himself has to move from an enthusiastic gladiator fighting Republican rivals to a national leader seeking to unify both the party and the country. The shift has been huge and sudden. It will take weeks to complete.
Second, Speaker Ryan represents a serious, policy oriented Washington based approach that is somewhere between skeptical and hostile about the Trump candidacy.
On the morning of the Indiana primary the Washington policy Republicans still had hopes of a contested convention. Most thought that, at a minimum, they had six or seven more weeks to negotiate with Trump as he tried to win the last few delegates.
In some ways the Cruz withdrawal was the worst possible world for Washington policy Republicans.
Suddenly, Trump was unchallengeable. He was the nominee. None of the reconciliation and communication process had occurred.
Furthermore, by winning so early and so decisively, the Washington policy Republicans feared there was a very real chance Trump would now wander off into whatever policy inventions and maneuvers he wanted to.
Speaker Ryan was looking for a maneuver to slow down the Trump consolidation of power and force a negotiated dialogue toward some kind of accommodation between two very different set of policy goals.
Ryan’s Thursday statement that he could not yet endorse Trump was dangerous. It was also in some ways a demonstration of fear and weakness.
Faced with an amazing avalanche of personal victories for Trump, Ryan apparently felt he needed a big enough event to get Trump’s attention.
This is a very dangerous game.
Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus is correctly trying to develop party unity now that there is a nominee.
Ryan’s statement may have been given a bigger play because of the same day announcement by the two Bush Presidents and Mitt Romney that they would not endorse Trump or attend the convention.
As someone who supported all three for President it was a bit outrageous to have them suddenly wiser and purer than millions of Republican voters. It is fine to have them skip Cleveland which ought to be focused on the future not the past. It is not acceptable to have them desert the party which made them national figures.
Hopefully Ryan and Trump will work through to an accommodation in the next week or so.
Running for president is hard.
Governing is even harder.
This is just one more bump on a road that Trump has triumphantly been on for a year. There will be a lot more bumps and his ability to solve them will determine if he becomes President.
Ryan also faces the challenge of leading a House GOP which could rapidly split into unmanageable factions.
There is a lot at stake.
---------------------- Newt Gingrich is a former Georgia Congressman and Speaker of the U.S. House. He co-authored and was the chief architect of the "Contract with America" and a major leader in the Republican victory in the 1994 congressional elections. He is noted speaker and writer. The above commentary was shared via Gingrich Productions. Tags:Newt Gingrich, Cruz, Trump, and Ryan: Unimagined Week To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
by Patrick Buchanan: “The two living Republican past presidents, George H. W. Bush and George W. Bush, have no plans to endorse Trump, according to their spokesmen.” So said the lead story in The Washington Post.
Graceless, yes, but not unexpected. The Bushes have many fine qualities. Losing well, however, is not one of them.
And they have to know, whether they concede it or not, that Trump’s triumph is a sweeping repudiation of Bush Republicanism by the same party that nominated them four times for the presidency.
Not only was son and brother, Jeb, humiliated and chased out of the race early, but Trump won his nomination by denouncing as rotten to the core the primary fruits of signature Bush policies.
Twelve million aliens are here illegally, said Trump, because the Bushes failed to secure America’s borders.
America has run up $12 trillion in trade deficits and been displaced as the world’s first manufacturing power by China, said Trump, because of the lousy trade deals backed by Bush Republicans.
The greatest strategic blunder in U.S. history, said Trump, was the Bush II decision to invade Iraq to disarm it of nonexistent weapons of mass destruction.
The war Bush began, says Trump, produced 5,000 American dead, scores of thousands wounded, trillions of dollars wasted, and a Middle East sunk in civil-sectarian war, chaos and fanaticism.
That is a savage indictment of the Bush legacy. And a Republican electorate, in the largest turnout in primary history, nodded, “Amen to that, brother!”
No matter who wins in November, there is no going back for the GOP.
Can anyone think the Republican Party can return to open borders or new free-trade agreements like NAFTA?
Can anyone believe another U.S. Army, like the ones Bush I and Bush II sent into Afghanistan and Iraq, will be mounted up and march to remake another Middle East country in America’s image?
Desert Storm and Operation Iraqi Freedom are history.
What the Trump campaign revealed, as Republicans and even Democrats moved toward him on trade, immigration and foreign policy, is that Bush Republicanism and neoconservatism not only suffered a decisive defeat, they had a sword run right through them.
They are as dead as emperor-worship in Japan.
Trump won the nomination, he won the argument, and he won the debate. The party is now with Trump — on the issues. For GOP elites, there can be no going back to what the grass roots rejected.
What does this suggest for Trump himself?
While he ought to keep an open door to those he defeated, the greatest mistake he could make would be to seek the support of the establishment he crushed by compromising on the issues that brought out his crowds and brought him his victories and nomination.
Given Trump’s negatives, the Beltway punditocracy is writing him off, warning that Trump either comes to terms with the establishment on the issues, or he is gone for good.
History teaches otherwise.
Hubert Humphrey closed a 15-point gap in the Gallup poll on Oct. 1 to reach a 43-43 photo finish with Richard Nixon in 1968.
President Gerald Ford was down 33 points to Jimmy Carter in mid-July 1976, but lost by only 2 points on Election Day.
In February 1980, Ronald Reagan was 29 points behind Jimmy Carter, whom he would crush 51-41 in a 44-state landslide.
Gov. Michael Dukakis left his Atlanta convention 17 points ahead of Vice President George H. W. Bush in 1988. Five weeks later, Labor Day, Bush had an eight-point lead he never lost, and swept 40 states.
What this suggests is extraordinary volatility of the electorate in the modern age. As this year has shown, that has not changed.
How then should Trump proceed?
Unify the party, to the degree he can, by keeping an open door to the defeated and offering a hand in friendship to all who wish to join his ranks, while refusing to compromise the issues that got him where he is. If the Bushes and neocons wish to depart, let them go.
Lest we forget, Congressman John Anderson, who lost to Reagan in the primaries, bolted the party and won 7 percent of the national vote.
Ted Cruz, who won more states and votes than all other Trump rivals put together, should be offered a prime-time speaking slot at Cleveland — in return for endorsing the Trump ticket.
As the vice presidential nominee remains the only drama left, Trump should hold off announcing his choice until closer to Cleveland.
For while that decision will leave one person elated, it will leave scores despondent.
And the longer Trump delays his announcement, the more that those who see themselves as a future vice president will be praising him, or at least holding off from attacking him.
Ultimately, the Great Unifier upon whom the Republican Party may reliably depend is the nominee of the Democratic Party — Director James Comey and his FBI consenting — Hillary Rodham Clinton.
----------- Patrick Buchanan is currently a conservative columnist, political analyst, chairman of The American Cause foundation and an editor of The American Conservative. He has been a senior advisor to three Presidents, a two-time candidate for the Republican presidential nomination, and was the presidential nominee of the Reform Party in 2000. He blogs at the Patrick J. Buchanan. Tags:Patrick Buchanan, conservative, commentary, Bush Republicanism, dead, gone, 2016 election, Donald Trump. GOP,To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
While she called him by his nickname Bibi, "often it was attached to the f-word," he wrote.Obama apparently pushed hard for her to get involved in the peace process. But Hillary Clinton was just doing the Secretary of State thing as prep for another White House run and had little interest in putting herself on the line for a doomed project.Mere days before the speech White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel said to Clinton that Obama's decision not to visit Israel after his Cairo speech may insult Jerusalem, and therefore he asked Clinton who was in Cairo with Obama to go on to Israel "to do damage control."
But Landler quoted a former senior administration official who said "she couldn't, wouldn't and didn't."
Obama's senior advisers were furious at her refusal, according to the book, accusing her of trying to avoid harming her image as a friend of Israel.More likely she didn't want to be seen as the cleanup crew.Obama "chided her, telling her that she needed to travel to the Middle East more often and that she needed to become more personally involved in steering the process" instead of leaving the matter to special Middle East envoy George Mitchell, reveals Landler.
The gap between the two continued as Clinton held doubts over Obama's demand in 2009 that Netanyahu freeze construction in Judea, Samaria and eastern Jerusalem completely, reasoning that doing so would not be an effective way to force more concessions from Netanyahu...
Then a week later, Clinton condemned the "settlements," and said Obama demanded a total freeze, even as talks were ongoing between Mitchell and the Israeli government for a deal allowing construction in the large blocs of Jewish towns in Judea and Samaria, accommodating natural growth only.
According to Landler, Clinton's statements derailed the talks on a deal, angering the Israelis even as Obama's advisers were annoyed that she "plussed up" his position to encompass a complete freeze.Diplomacy. Hillary Clinton isn't very good at it.
-------------- Daniel Greenfield is Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center and a New York writer focusing on radical Islam. David Horowitz is a Contributing Author of the ARRA News Service Tags:Daniel Greenfield, FrontPage Mag, Hillary Clinton, diplomacy, isn't very good, Mark Lander, book, Alter Egos To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Bill WhittleFirewall Video: This time Bill lays out the most egregious examples, so be sure to watch as much as you can bear. From the petty -- such as his buttinsky remarks regarding Britain and the EU, to the tragic -- his failure to support the 2009 Iranian revolution -- Barack Obama and his "Smart Diplomacy" has been an absolute catastrophe to the United States and her allies, and a huge boon to those countries that wish us harm.
Transcript: Hi everybody, I’m Bill Whittle and this is the Firewall.
Well, President Obama has just returned from an overseas visit, trying to convince Britain and Germany to sign his trade deal and generally butting into European politics in a way many had not expected when President Peace Prize descended from heaven to give the world the new, improved, “Smart Diplomacy.”
The latest international disaster occurred in Great Britain, when the President gave a speech urging the UK to remain in the European Union. Despite warnings from many quarters that such intrusion in the idea of the Brexit – the British Exit – would be less than appreciated, President Stupid went and did it anyway, prompting this reporter to ask the following:
((BBC REPORTER “IS THIS ANY OF YOUR BUSINESS?))
That’s from the left, left, left wing BBC, of all people.
London Mayor Boris Johnson called the President’s remarks “ridiculous” and “weird.” Queen Elizabeth apparently asked him not to make the pro-EU speech that he then went on to make, with President Golf Cart telling Britain that if it left the EU it would move “to the back of the Queue” as far as America was concerned.
((OBAMA GOLFING IN BRITAIN))
Well, the important things got done, anyway.
Wouldn’t it be nice if all President Smart Diplomacy had done during his administration was destroy the special relationship between the United States and our best friend in the world, a catastrophe that began during his first days in office when he shipped the British gift of a bust of Winston Churchill back before he had unpacked his bags?
Yes, but that would be simply as Disaster. But President Catastrophe has damaged relations with ALL of our European partners who have said quietly, then not so quietly, that they were astounded at his arrogance and naiveté.
Russia gets more aggressive with us every day: they flew attack jets within 25 feet of a US Navy vessel and awaited the STRONGLY WORDED LETTER in reply.
As a matter of fact, when we were first introduced to the miracle of smart diplomacy, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton presented the Russian Foreign Minister with a gag red button for him to push… a button marked “RESET” but which was mistranslated. When President Failure’s US State Department, on worldwide television, debuted the new Smart Diplomacy, they had one Russian word to translate correctly and they got that one word wrong.
Meanwhile, China is building man-made islands in the South China Sea and warning US and Allied Warships away from their new “territory.”
In Libya, Mummar Khaddafi -- who turned over his nuclear and chemical weapons program the day after US Forces pulled Saddam Hussein from his hiding place -- was overthrown and Libya became such a chaotic bloodbath that US forces found themselves aiding Al Qaeda on the battlefield. After months of begging for additional security, Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans died as Obama and Hillary Clinton watched on TV, ordering the rescue attempt to stand down and then both of them lied to the American people, telling them the Benghazi attack on 9/11 was all the result of a YouTube video.
President Failure backed the overthrow of Pro-American Hosni Mubarak in Eqypt, handing the country to the Muslim Brotherhood. He then stumbled backing over his own Red Line in Syria, allowing the Russians to come to his rescue and, incidentally, achieving major player status in the Middle East overnight, after decades of effective, Non-Smart Diplomacy sidelining.
President Failure could not – or would not – conclude a simple Status of Forces agreement in Iraq, so American troops walked away – they were actually ordered to walk away – from a hard-won victory and allowed the last vestiges of the ravaged and defeated AQI – Al Qaeda in Iraq – to recover enough in the absence of American strength to rename itself ISIS. And now that we have created the Iraq War defeat that President Failure and his Treason Party had promised the American people, we are quietly sending more troops BACK to Iraq. And Syria. And Libya. And Afghanistan… all to try to make up the ground President Failure has not just lost but thrown away.
And of all the things Barack Obama did to damage this country, it’s the one thing he didn’t do that is most heartbreaking: In 2009, the people of Iran rose up against the murderers and fanatics, demanding freedom and democracy. The mullahs teetered on the brink for months. A mere word from the President of the United States would have encouraged them the way President Reagan encouraged Eastern Europe to throw off their communist tyrants. It was the only time during eight catastrophic years that President Obama didn’t have a single thing to say.
So now the sanctions on Iran are lifted. Billions of dollars of funds have been freed for more massacres, and the Iranians have cheated on President Gullible’s treaty before the ink was dry. President Catastrophe has called the Israeli Prime Minister “Chickenshit,” while his and his former secretary of state – currently his likely successor – closest advisors are Iranian. So there’s nothing to deter these Iranian fanatics nuclear ambitions now other than the speed of their centrifuges.
And barking-mad North Korea is reported to have developed a hydrogen bomb and has just launched a ballistic missile from a submarine.
This is Obama and his “Smart Diplomacy,” the Top Secret details of which have been leaked to whomever is curious as the result of the criminal arrogance of Hillary Clinton, former Secretary of State and the Treason Party’s Presidential nominee, who cut and pasted Top Secret and above info onto a server in a bathroom in New York in order to escape Freedom of Information Act requests.
We are going to pay for this. And so are our kids. And so will their kids. Tags:Firewall, video, Bill Whittle, president's failures, Barack Obama, diplomacy, Europe, foreign policy, Iran, Smart DiplomacyTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
by Gary Bauer, Contributing Author: There was an extraordinary exchange yesterday between House Speaker Paul Ryan and presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump that may be the most important exchange of the entire campaign.
It began when Ryan was asked by CNN's Jake Tapper if he would formally endorse Trump. Ryan commended Trump, but added that he wasn't sure of Trump's agenda. Here is some of Ryan's response:"I'm not ready to [endorse] yet at this point. . . I hope to though, and I want to. What's required is that we unify the party. And I think the bulk of the burden of unifying the party will have to come from our presumptive nominee.
"I do not want to underplay what [Trump] accomplished. He needs to be congratulated for an enormous accomplishment. . . But he also inherits something very special, that's very special to a lot of us. This is the party of Lincoln, Reagan and Jack Kemp. . . Conservatives want to know does [Trump] share our values and our principles on limited government, the proper role of the executive, adherence to the Constitution. . .
"I want to be part of this unifying process, I want to help unify this party. We have to unify it, I think, for us to be successful. . ."Trump tweeted in response:"I am not ready to support Speaker Ryan's agenda. Perhaps in the future we can work together and come to an agreement about what is best for the American people. They have been treated so badly for so long that it is about time for politicians to put them first!"Enter RNC Chairman Reince Priebus. He spoke with Donald Trump several times yesterday and is reportedly setting up a meeting between Trump and Speaker Ryan sometime next week.
I have no doubt that both Paul Ryan and Donald Trump understand that if there is a Hillary Clinton landslide, there is no way that the Republican Congress can shield itself from the fallout. Democrats would likely retake the Senate, and Mr. Ryan may find himself handing the speaker's gavel to Nancy Pelosi. It is in Paul Ryan's interest to come to an agreement with Trump.
Nor will America be shielded from the fallout.
Trump is obviously bringing many new people into the party. But there are those who cannot accept his opposition to free trade deals and his immigration views. Some may leave. If Trump can limit the hemorrhaging, he could still win the election given the new people he has brought in.
But if Trump loses Paul Ryan and those who identify with him, winning in November would be extremely difficult. So it is in Trump's interest to do his part to unify the party.
It is vitally important for the country and the GOP that Ryan and Trump come to an accommodation and work together to defeat Hillary Clinton, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi.
As Speaker Ryan also stated in his CNN interview, the stakes couldn't be higher:"I think we sometimes forget just how successful we've been. We had the biggest House majority since 1928. We have 54 Republican Senate seats. We have state legislative majorities and governorships that we haven't seen in years, in decades. . .
"We have one hill to climb, one more mountaintop -- that's the presidency. So please know that we think the stakes are extremely high. They're the highest they've been. The Supreme Court, Congress, the future of America is on the line. And no Republican should ever think about supporting Hillary Clinton. Let's make that clear."------------- Gary Bauer is a conservative family values advocate and serves as president of American Values and chairman of the Campaign for Working Families Tags:Gary Bauer, Campaign for Working Families Pal Ryan, Donald Trump, GOP. To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
The current partisan composition of the federal courts including district and circuit courts of appeals is 54 percent to 46 percent in favor of Democrats.
Now, of the 165 oldest judges currently on the courts born on or before 1946, 113 of them were appointed by Republicans. Meaning, if those 165 die or retire in pretty much that order — Democrats would yield a net gain of about 113 judges.
Meaning, a potential President Clinton might replace 53 Democrat judges and 113 Republican judges by 2020, bringing the number of judges appointed by Democrats to 575.
That would bring the partisan composition of federal courts to 67 percent Democrat. Two out of every three judges will have been appointed by Democrats, and who knows what might happen on the Supreme Court?
And that’s just in her first four years in office.
That should be a sobering assessment even for the most ardent #NeverTrump whiner. Are they certifiably insane?
Contrast that with a Republican win in November by presumptive nominee Donald Trump, who some party members now suggest they cannot support. He might only get a net gain of 53 judges, bringing the Republican total to 445, or 52 percent of the total, since Trump would mostly be replacing Republican judges.
Going forward, if one assumes Clinton actually wins two terms, the Republican judicial outlook looks even bleaker. In her second term, if you take the next 176 oldest judges born on or before 1951, 101 of them were appointed by Republicans, too.
A second Clinton term might net another 101 judges for Democrats, bringing their federal judge total to 676 — or 79 percent of the total.
Just to keep balance, then, means Republicans really, really need the White House for about the next 8 years.
Now, the death and retirement rates will certainly vary, but the key point is that since 1952, the partisan composition of the federal judiciary has been somewhat balanced in accordance with the composition of the White House. It went from 8 years Republican (1953-1960) to 8 years Democrat (1961-1968) to 8 years Republican (1969-1976) to 4 years Democrat (1977-1980) to 12 years Republican (1981-1992) to 8 years Democrat (1993-2000) to 8 years Republican (2001-2008) to 8 years Democrat (2009-2016).
So, it tends to go back and forth. But throw more than two terms in a row for one side or the other, and the balance of the courts will shift dramatically almost overnight.
Which, if the only thing one cared about was ensuring that the judiciary not become overly partisan, then a Clinton presidency would be nothing short of a generational catastrophe.
Has #NeverTrump considered the true, judicial consequences of a Clinton presidency?
What does one suppose might happen to the Second Amendment individual right to keep and bear arms, upheld in the Heller 5-4 decision? Or the First Amendment right to say what you like during elections, upheld in the Citizens United 5-4 decision?
The answer is that with the Supreme Court’s current composition at 4 to 4 with the death of Justice Antonin Scalia, the risk for the American people is that the First and Second Amendments might be summarily reinterpreted if Clinton wins. Throw in subsequent applications of those decisions at the district and circuit level with scores of new liberal judges, and who knows how bad it might get?
If Republicans cared about nothing else than who appoints judges to uphold a constitutional, limited government with strongly interpreted Bill of Rights protections, then they cannot allow Clinton to win under any circumstances. There is too much at stake.
We suspect cooler heads will prevail, and the madness of #NeverTrump will end shortly. No less so than because the very Constitution hangs in the balance, and Republicans — and the country as a whole — cannot afford to wait another four years for conservatives to begin restoring their ranks on the federal judiciary. Time’s up.
---------------- Robert Romano is the Senior Editor of Americans for Limited Government. His article was first shared on the ALG's NetRight Daily blog. Tags:Robert Romano, Americans For Limited Government, #NeverTrump, Hillary Clinton, would increase, 67%, democrats, Federal Judiciary, editorial cartoon, AF BrancoTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
by Kerby Anderson, Contributing Author: You have probably heard someone say that “if you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth.” It is attributed to Joseph Goebbels but we have all seen it in action. Say something long enough, and people start to believe it is true.
I thought of that when I read the latest issue of Imprimis, which is published by Hillsdale College. It was a summary of a speech by former Sports Illustrated editor, Charles Leerhsen about the false stories about Ty Cobb.
Ty Cobb holds all sorts of baseball records, including a .366 lifetime batting average and the fact that he stole home 54 times. He was an amazing baseball player, but he was also slandered by a book published after his death. Stories about him beating up black men and sharpening his spikes to injure fielders are all false but they were repeated so often that most people assumed they were true.
Robert Knight is a recent column in the Washington Times uses these lies about Ty Cobb to point to similar examples today. The Black Lives Matter slogan “hands up, don’t shoot,” comes from the false narrative of the shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri. The claims that voter ID laws are merely being used to suppress minority vote is another example. Never mind that many of the legislators sponsoring these bills are African-American.
Consider how the media covers the undercover videos of Planned Parenthood. Usually they ignore them. When they do talk about the videos, they nearly always use the phrase “heavily edited videos.” Anyone who looks at the entire unedited videos (available online) can see that this description is inaccurate and unwarranted.
Whether in baseball or politics, we can see the sad reality that repetition can often turn a lie into the truth.
----------- Kerby Anderson is a radio talk show host heard on numerous stations via the Point of View Network endorsed by Dr. Bill Smith, Editor, ARRA News Service Tags:Kerby Anderson, Viewpoints, Point of View, Ty Cobb, The TruthTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Rassmussen Reports: Rasmussen Reports’ final weekly Trump Change survey finds perceptions among Republicans and all voters that Donald Trump is the likely GOP presidential nominee at all time highs. The survey was begun before Ted Cruz and John Kasich quit the race.
Ninety-three percent (93%) of Likely Republican Voters now believe Trump is likely to win their party’s nomination, with 78% who say it’s Very Likely. That’s up from previous highs of 89% and 67% respectively a week ago. . . .
Eighty-two percent (82%) of all likely voters agree that Trump is the likely Republican nominee, with 64% who say it’s Very Likely. This is up from 80% and 55% respectively last week and also represents new highs for both findings.
Rasmussen Reports began the Trump Change survey last August when the billionaire businessman’s unlikely candidacy began to catch fire. At that time, 25% of Republicans – and 17% of all voters – said he was Very Likely to be the nominee. When Trump jumped into the race two months earlier, just nine percent (9%) of GOP voters said he was Very Likely to win their nomination.
This will be the Final Trump Change: ‘The Donald''s Nomination for the Republican Party Is A Done Deal. Tags:final, Rassmussen Reports, Trump Change, Donald TrumpTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
by Paul Jacob, Contributing Author: Socialists often brag how their activism — through unions — gave the modern world its five-day workweek. One could spend a book picking at this boast, but no need: it’s overshadowed by the latest.
A socialist country has just reduced the workweek to two days! Hooray for socialism!
Or, no cheers at all. For this epochal move occurred in Venezuela, the “world’s worst performing economy,” with an inflation rate soaring to 720 percent and an absence of food, toilet paper, and . . . electricity: “President Nicolás Maduro will furlough the country’s public employees,” Nick Miroff writes in the Washington Post, “who account for a third of the labor force — for the bulk of the week, so they can sit through rolling blackouts at home rather than in the office.”
It’s only government employees who get the five-day weekend. And this is not a sign of socialist efficiency (heh heh), ushering in a Marxist utopia.
Another nation ruined by socialism and technocracy!
But not just any nation. Venezuela can boast one of the largest oil reserves in the world. If Norway and Alaska and desert sheiks can milk their underground deposits and distribute goodies to their people, why cannot Venezuelans manage it?
Because they extended socialist planning beyond a kleptocratic sharing scheme. Experts had advised them decades ago to build the world’s largest hydroelectric dam, live off low- or no-priced electricity as well as oil sales. Today, oil goes cheap . . . and there’s a drought, too little water behind the dam.
Now Venezuelans are trying to burn oil to generate electricity — mostly without success. Socialism has it all — rampant corruption and catastrophic inefficiency.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
------------------ Paul Jacobs is author of Common Sense which provides daily commentary about the issues impacting America and about the citizens who are doing something about them. He is also President of the Liberty Initiative Fund (LIFe) as well as Citizens in Charge Foundation. Jacobs is a contributing author on the ARRA News Service. Tags:Paul Jacob, Common Sense, Failure, Five-Day Weekend, Venezuela, To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
by Rob Bluey: PHILADELPHIA — “We’re heading toward totalitarianism,” economist by Dr. Walter Williams tells The Daily Signal in an interview at The Heritage Foundation’s annual Resource Bank meeting. The famed George Mason University professor says the government is gradually gaining more control over the lives of the American people. What can be done about it? Williams explains why it’s hard to change course, especially in regards to young people who embrace socialist ideas.
------------------ Rob Bluey is editor in chief of The Daily Signal, the multimedia news organization of The Heritage Foundation.
Walter Williams is an American economist, social commentator, and author of over 150 publications. He has a Ph.D. and M.A. in Economics from the UCLA and B.A. in economics from California State University. He also holds a Doctor of Humane Letters from Virginia Union University and Grove City College, Doctor of Laws from Washington and Jefferson College. He has served on the faculty of George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia, as John M. Olin Distinguished Professor of Economics, since 1980. Visit his website: walterewilliams.com. Tags:Walter Williams economist, Rise of Socialism, Rob Bluey, Heritage Foundation, The Daily SignalTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
by Ann Coulter: A guy just won the Republican nomination for president by spending no money, hiring no pollsters, running virtually no TV ads, and just saying what he truly believed no matter how many times people told him he couldn't say that.
I always hoped I'd see this once before I died. It's like to going to Mecca, for Americans. Pay attention, because it's the last time we're going to see it in our lifetimes.
For those of you not yet on the Trump Train, I know you don't want to vote for Hillary, but all the pundits have been trying to convince you that Trump's a complete fraud. (That was between their smug assurances that he wouldn't make it out of Iowa.)
It's odd. When Trump launched his campaign by talking about Mexican rapists and the wall, his critics hysterically denounced him, rushing to TV to say he did NOT represent the Republican Party! Only after it became resoundingly clear that large majorities of Americans agreed with Trump did his critics try a new tack: He doesn't believe it!
That's what my friend Andy McCarthy at the now-defunct National Review wrote recently. I had to spend the weekend figuring out how to attack a friend without saying, "This is the most retarded argument I've ever read."
Here goes: This was not Andy's best effort.
Of all the arguments that could be made against Trump, McCarthy settled on: I don't trust him on immigration. (I'd love to have been a fly on the wall at that pitch meeting.)
He bases this claim on a remark Trump made as a businessman four years ago in which he regurgitated the official GOP line about Romney -- and which was being stated as fact 1 million times a day on CNN, MSNBC and Fox News.
To wit, Trump told Newsmax that Mitt Romney "had a crazy policy of self-deportation which was maniacal," adding, "He lost all of the Latino vote ... he lost everybody who is inspired to come into this country."
It is strange that Trump would denounce "self-deportation," which is like a chocolate sundae compared to his own plans for illegals.
But to give you the tenor of the interview, Trump went on to promote "Celebrity Apprentice," note that he had just bought the Old Post Office building in Washington, D.C., and boast about his recently acquired Ritz-Carlton Golf Club and Spa in Jupiter, Fla. -- "which is a phenomenal area."
Also, a lot of people didn't like the phrase "self-deportation." Why not just say: "They'll go home the same way they came"?
So is Trump lying about his signature issue, immigration? The countervailing evidence to that 2012 pop-off is:
-- Nine months of Trump soaring to the top of the polls and slaying all comers by talking about how he's going to build a wall and make Mexico pay for it;
-- His never, ever, ever backing down on the wall, sanctuary cities, anchor babies, suspending Muslim immigration, etc., etc., despite unprecedented attacks from both the liberal and "conservative" media;
-- The fact that he talks about immigration at every single one of his massive rallies and always gets the biggest, most sustained standing ovations when he mentions the wall;
-- The blizzard of tweets he sent out in 2013 denouncing Rubio's amnesty bill as it was sailing through the Senate, supported by the entire liberal media, Rupert Murdoch, Fox News, most of talk radio, and every other GOP candidate for president this year, including, for a while, Ted Cruz (whose job was to know about bills being voted on in the Senate, unlike a Manhattan developer);
-- Trump's one and only policy guy is the magnificent Stephen Miller, who was Sen. Jeff Sessions' main immigration guy.
And so on.
Maybe Trump is the Manchurian Candidate and contrary to his entire life's work he really just wants fancy people in Manhattan to like him.
Maybe the window into his soul is what he said four years ago about Romney's phrase "self-deportation."
Maybe 50 years of Trump's talking about the working class was all a clever ruse leading to this one shining moment when he would trick Americans into voting for him, so he could sell us out, like any other candidate would.
On the other hand, maybe he's changed his mind about that 2012 remark.
I'm bitter and cynical enough on immigration that I don't trust anyone not to betray us. But if there was ever a candidate we could believe will build a wall and stop the mass importation of the Third World, it's Trump.
----------------- Ann Coulter is a conservative author of ten New York Times bestsellers, writes numerous columns and is a frequent guest on numerous radio and TV shows. Her web site is AnnCoulter.com. She is the author of Adios America which she signed and gave to the ARRA News Service editor at the 2015 Eagle Council. Tags:Ann Coulter, Donald Trump, immigration To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
51 Families Sue Over Illinois High School’s Transgender Bathroom Policy
More than 300 mothers, fathers, and students at
Township High School District 211 filed a lawsuit challenging
the school's new policy that allows a transgender
student into the girls' locker rooms. (Photo: iStock)
by Kelsey Harkness: A group of 51 families whose children attend a high school in Illinois filed a federal lawsuit Wednesday, attempting to reverse a policy that allows a transgender student to use girls’ bathrooms, locker rooms, and other sex-specific facilities.
The families are challenging a policy at Township High School District 211 that was mandated by the U.S. Department of Education to accommodate the transgender student, who was born male but identifies as a female.
“It’s an organic group of parents and students who came together and said, ‘We have to do something about this—we can’t just roll over and allow the federal government to force our school to commingle the sexes in locker rooms,’” said Jeremy Tedesco, a lawyer representing the families.
The suit, which challenges the Education Department’s authority to redefine the term sex in Title IX of U.S. law to include gender identity and to enforce it against schools, is the first of its kind, Tedesco told The Daily Signal.
The president of the group filing the lawsuit, Students and Parents for Privacy, said she and other Cook County parents with children in the school district decided legal action “was the only thing we could do at this point.”
“We tried,” she said, adding: We did everything we could to work with the school district, and we were really hoping they would do the right thing and protect the privacy of all students, but when they chose not to, we felt we had no choice in order to protect the girls in the locker room.The group’s president asked that her name not be published because of the sensitive nature of the case.
The issue began in December 2013, when Student A filed a complaint with the Education Department against Township High School District 211, based in the village of Palatine, Ill.
The complaint alleged that District 211 had discriminated against the transgender student on the basis of sex.
After completing an extensive investigation, the Education Department’s Office of Civil Rights said on Dec. 2 that Township High School District 211 was in violation of federal law for refusing to grant Student A full access to the girls’ locker room.
The school had granted Student A some accommodations, including changing the student’s name on official records, allowing the student on the girls sports teams, and granting the student access to the girls’ bathrooms. But District 211 drew the line at providing Student A unrestrained access to the girls’ locker rooms because of the privacy concerns of other girls using them. Instead, the school offered a private facility to Student A.
Daniel Cates, superintendent of District 211, said in an October newsletter: The goal of the district in this matter is to protect the privacy rights of all students when changing clothes or showering before or after physical education and after-school activities, while also providing reasonable accommodations to meet the unique needs of individual students. Our responsibility is to provide an environment conducive to learning for all its 12,000+ students.According to the Education Department’s investigation, the student felt “crushed” by the school district’s decision not to allow access to the locker rooms, “which she said indicated that the school did not accept her as a female.”
After the Education Department had completed its investigation, it ordered District 211 to grant Student A full access to the girls’ locker rooms and install privacy curtains inside those locker rooms, or else be at risk of losing federal financial assistance.
Thomas Petersen, director of community relations at Township High School District 211, said the school “could potentially lose up to $6 million in federal funding.”
Now, the 73 parents and 63 students who are members of the group Students and Parents for Privacy are suing, arguing the Education Department lacks the authority to redefine sex in Title IX of U.S. law to include gender identity.
The parents and students also are asking for an injunction against the Justice Department, which has enforcement authority under Title IX, and an injunction against Township School District 211 from carrying out the Education Department’s demands.
“What we’re attempting to do in this case is stop the Department of Education from redefining sex in Title IX to include gender identity,” Tedesco, senior counsel for Alliance Defending Freedom, told The Daily Signal. “It has no authority whatsoever to do that.”
Debate Over Title IX
Title IX is the federal law that bans discrimination on the basis of sex in any federally funded education program. Whether or not Title IX applies to transgender students is an issue that has been vigorously debated, with courts ruling on both sides.
Most recently, a federal appeals court in Richmond, Va., ruled that a transgender high school student who was born female but identifies as a male has the right to pursue discrimination charges against a school district for blocking access to the boys’ bathrooms.
The judges of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit cited the Obama administration’s interpretation of Title IX in issuing their 2-1 decision.
The Obama administration stated in a 2014 document that “Title IX’s sex discrimination prohibition extends to claims of discrimination.”
Tedesco called the ruling in Virginia a “complete outlier,” arguing that other courts have ruled the opposite way: There’s been several courts that have addressed the question of whether Title IX applies to and protects against gender identity discrimination, and all those courts up to the 4th Circuit’s decision have said it does not.If Americans want to add additional protections for gender identity, Tedesco said, it’s the job of Congress—not the Education Department—to make those changes. He said:If Congress wants to redefine sex to include gender identity—if they want to add gender identity as a protected class under Title IX—they can do that through the regular lawmaking process. But Congress has rejected it several times, so the Department of Education just comes in and makes it up and adds it to the law. That’s something they have no authority whatsoever to do. And now they’re running around the country and forcing essentially what is a new Department of Education rule against schools across the country.Since 2010, Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn., has proposed that Congress pass a measure that would provide protections for students from discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. Thus far, that legislation has failed.
Township High School District 211 is the first school in the nation that the Education Department found in violation of Title IX over transgender issues. Now, it’s the first school in the country to face a lawsuit of this kind.
The Path Forward
In December, six female students attempted to explain to the District 211 school board why they were uncomfortable with allowing Student A into their locker room.
“Although we will never fully understand your personal struggle,” the girls said, addressing the transgender student, “please understand that we, too, all are experiencing personal struggles that need to be respected.”
The president of Students and Parents for Privacy said she supports accommodations for Student A that balance the student’s interests with the rest of the student body.
“We understand why Student A doesn’t want to be in the boys’ locker room,” she said. “We get it. But the girls’ locker room isn’t the answer either. We believe in accommodation, but we don’t believe in an accommodation that hurts other students.”
Student A, who is represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, said in an earlier press release that using a separate locker room “stigmatized me, often making me feel like I was not a ‘normal person.’”
The head of the privacy group, who has children in the school district, said the group cares about Student A but is asking for fairness. She said: We truly do care about these children who struggle with gender identity, and these children are welcome in my home. All I ask is that the respect go both ways. That’s what we’re not seeing. We’re just seeing demands.The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, hinges on the idea that the school can and should make accommodations for Student A, but those accommodations shouldn’t violate the privacy and safety rights of other students.
Absent the lawsuit, Tedesco suggested, there’s little chance of finding middle ground.
“The reality is, the folks driving this agenda on the other side from us won’t accept anything other than full access to the opposite-sex restroom and locker room as the solution,” the families’ lawyer said, adding: And what happened at District 211 is proof positive of that. They gave Student A accommodation after accommodation after accommodation, and ultimately the [Education Department] said no, full access is the only thing that’s going to solve the issue.------------------------ Kelsey Harkness / (@kelseyjharkness) is a news producer at The Daily Signal where this article was first shared. Tags:51 Families, Sue Over, Illinois High School’s Transgender Bathroom Policy, Kelsey Harkness, The Daily SignalTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Obamacare, Illegal Aliens Pushing New York To Bankruptcy
by Daniel Greenfield: Undocumented illegal aliens are having a documented effect on New York City's finances.
New York's flailing left-wing mayor is proposing $2 billion for the city's hospitals as part of an $82 billion budget. A budget that the city can't afford. What's driving the costs? Illegal aliens and ObamaCare.Closer to home, de Blasio said the growth in tax revenue that has swelled city coffers is starting to slow — with projected growth of 3.6% in 2016 and 1.9% in 2017, compared to an average of 7% in the last five years.
The executive budget would bring city spending on Health and Hospitals to $2 billion, up by $700 million since the mayor took office.
Health and Hospitals, which runs 11 hospitals around the city, has been reeling from financial troubles that officials say threaten its survival, necessitating last-minute injections of cash to keep it afloat.
The trouble comes in part because Obamacare included funding cuts assuming more people would have insurance, but the public hospitals still have to care for large numbers of undocumented immigrants who aren't eligible.New York has 375,000 illegals and they tend to use public hospitals.To make things even tougher for Health + Hospitals, New York has a staggering 375,000 undocumented non-citizens who lack health insurance, according to the Mayor’s Task Force on Immigrant Health Care Access. Under the federal Affordable Care Act, they are specifically barred from getting government-subsidized private health insurance — so they end up using public hospital facilities for even routine health needs, putting more strain on the system.
“They’re our fellow New Yorkers. We believe in supporting them,” de Blasio said at his budget briefing of the undocumented who don’t have insurance. That’s in keeping with the liberal New York assumption that any and all city services, no matter the cost, should be provided to undocumented immigrants.
A 2014 report by the Citizens Budget Commission flagged the problem with having so many people use hospitals for normal health needs, noting that nearly a quarter of admissions to H+H facilities are “preventable” — not medically necessary.
It’s an expensive proposition. Another budget-buster is the administration’s position, announced in its new report on H+H, that “unlike what has happened in other cities, Health & Hospitals will remain a vibrant public system — it is not for sale and the city will not abandon it.”Until it does. New York City hospitals are frantically consolidating or being sold off due to ObamaCare. Catholic acute care hospitals in New York City vanished in a puff of smoke. Which puts yet more strain on city hospitals. On top of that, city hospitals are basically giant urgent care clinics for illegal aliens. Which no one wants to pay for.
And New York isn't alone in this boat. California is trying to get ObamaCare for illegal aliens.In a potentially precedent-setting maneuver, legislators are attempting to clear the way for undocumented immigrants to buy health insurance through Covered California, the state’s Obamacare exchange.The math remains quite simple and quite impossible.
-------------- Daniel Greenfield is Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center and a New York writer focusing on radical Islam. David Horowitz is a Contributing Author of the ARRA News Service Tags:Daniel Greenfield, FrontPage Mag, Obamacare, Illegal Aliens, New York, BankruptcyTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
by Daniel Greenfield: And why shouldn't it be? Obama opened the door with exactly this intention. Enforcement has dropped sharply. The border patrol has been turned into coyotes smuggling in illegals. And here we are.Through the first six months of fiscal 2016, which ended on March 31, border officials apprehended 27,754 unaccompanied children, the CBP reported — a 78 percent jump from the 15,616 apprehended in 2015, and just shy of the 28,579 apprehended in 2014.
For family units, which consist of at least one child traveling with at least one adult, the increase was even more dramatic. In the first six months of 2016, 32,117 families were apprehended, the CBP reported — an increase of 131 percent from the 2015 figure (13,913) and 62 percent from the 2014 figure (19,830).Of course this easily backfires into a contribution to the Trump campaign. But the Democrats are counting on transforming illegal migration into a civil rights issue. Quickly followed by legalization and demographic transformation. But a growing sense of crisis at the border could easily turn things around very sharply.
-------------- Daniel Greenfield is Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center and a New York writer focusing on radical Islam. David Horowitz is a Contributing Author of the ARRA News Service Tags:Daniel Greenfield, FrontPage Mag, illegal immigration, up 131%, 2016To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Tags:Jaws, mainstream media, for Hillary Clinton, against, Donald Trump, editorial cartoon, AF BrancoTo share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
by Kerby Anderson, Contributing Author: Today is the National Day of Prayer. It is a vital part of our American heritage. The first call to prayer happened before the American Revolution. In 1775, the Continental Congress called on the colonists to pray for wisdom as they considered how they would respond to the King of England.
Perhaps one of the most powerful calls to prayer came from President Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War. In 1863, he issued a proclamation for a day of “humiliation, fasting and prayer.” Here is some of that proclamation: “We have been the recipients of the choicest bounties of Heaven. We have been preserved, these many years, in peace and prosperity. We have grown in numbers, wealth and power, as no other nation has ever grown. But we have forgotten God. We have forgotten the gracious hand which preserved us in peace, and multiplied and enriched and strengthened us; and we have vainly imagined, in the deceitfulness of our hearts, that all these blessings were produced by some superior wisdom and virtue of our own. Intoxicated with unbroken success, we have become too self-sufficient to feel the necessity of redeeming and preserving grace, too proud to pray to the God that made us.”
In 1952, Congress passed and President Harry Truman signed a resolution which declared an annual, national day of prayer. In 1988, President Reagan signed into law a bill that designated the first Thursday of May as the time for the National Day of Prayer. That is why various celebrations throughout this country are taking place today.
It is estimated that there have been more than 130 national calls to prayer, humiliation, fasting, and thanksgiving by presidents of the United States. There have been 60 Presidential Proclamations for a National Day of Prayer because every president has signed these proclamations. And there have been almost 1,000 state and federal calls for national prayer since 1775.
Today is the National Day of Prayer. Please pray for this nation and its leaders.
----------- Kerby Anderson is a radio talk show host heard on numerous stations via the Point of View Network endorsed by Dr. Bill Smith, Editor, ARRA News Service Tags:Kerby Anderson, Viewpoints, Point of View, National Day of Prayer, 2016To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Trump is going to win the Republican nomination for president. Easily.
What is remarkable is that this predictable outcome was not obvious to more commentators months ago.
He was a joke. A circus. He wasn't really running. He wasn't serious. He was the flavor of the week. He would implode rapidly.
Trump stormed on to the scene in June 2015, immediately rose to the top of national GOP polls and stayed there all the way to the end of the year on a simple-to-understand economic message against unbridled trade and immigration and of restoring American greatness.
Still what was to become of the failed #NeverTrump"movement" — really just a small club of wild-eyed Washington, D.C. insiders who apparently only talk to themselves — who were adamant in their insistence that he simply could not win.
Nobody would show up to vote for him. He had no ground game. Blah, blah, blah.
Then 2016 came, and voters began to actually render their verdict. As they usually tend to do in competitive Republican contests for president, Iowa and New Hampshire winnowed the field down to two candidates with a real shot at being the nominee: Cruz and Trump.
But, no, said #NeverTrump — which must have had a strong component of #NeverCruz included — Florida Senator Marco Rubio, who showed up in third in Iowa, was the one. He would turn it into a three-man race. A lot of eggs were put in the Rubio basket despite ample history suggesting gaining momentum after the first two contests was next to impossible.
South Carolina really was a critical turn. After that, #NeverTrump more or less settled on a regional strategy based around the remaining competition's home states. If Cruz carried Texas, John Kasich took Ohio and Rubio claimed Florida, Trump's momentum would be stopped.
That, in spite of all objective evidence suggesting that after Iowa and New Hampshire, the only candidate who actually had a shot of beating Trump at the nomination was Cruz. But, for whatever reason Rubio stuck with it all the way to Florida when he should have probably dropped out after South Carolina. He (and Kasich) peeled votes from Cruz in the intervening weeks that Cruz desperately needed in order to compete all the way to June. Was Rubio trying to help Trump?
Because he's the real reason why Cruz didn't have as much of a shot. Rubio staying in allowed Trump to win Nevada, Alabama, Arkansas, Massachusetts, Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia, Louisiana, Hawaii, Michigan, Mississippi, Florida, Illinois, Missouri and North Carolina with pluralities, and prevented Cruz from achieving a critical majority in Texas.
Not that the end result would have been much different. Trump was a strong candidate in his own right who was always going to be hard to beat. But all the insistence on three-man races to get to the elusive contested convention — which will never happen — and the reluctance to get behind Cruz when he was the only one who really had a chance are the key reasons behind #NeverTrump's failure.
Instead, Trump knocked Rubio out by sweeping the South including Florida and Virginia. Yes, Cruz won Texas. And Kasich won Ohio on March 15 — just in time to be mathematically eliminated from winning the nomination outright.
At that point, Cruz was the only one with a real shot, as he won other states. Kasich had no real campaign beyond his home state, but for whatever reason he stayed in the race, too, becoming the next Rubio.
Onward! cried #NeverTrump. All Cruz and Kasich had to do was suck enough votes and delegates from Trump to prevent him from winning the nomination at the June convention in Cleveland, Ohio.
It would be a contested convention, we were assured. Trump would never get a majority of the delegates. He would lose after the first ballot.
Instead, Trump went on to sweep the rest of the northeast, including his home state of New York, plus Pennsylvania, Maryland, Delaware, Connecticut and Rhode Island. There, he won his first majorities in the GOP contest that once had 17 candidates.
Still, Trump's fate was sealed, all the smartest people in the room prophesized. Cruz would win Indiana and would cede Oregon and New Mexico to Kasich. Trump's momentum would be halted and that would be that. California and New Jersey on June 7 would not be enough to put Trump over the 1,237 delegates he needed to win.
Instead, Trump thumped Cruz in Indiana on May 3, who then dropped out of the race. And without Cruz — who after Iowa was always the only candidate who could have possibly stopped Trump but nobody would listen, much to Cruz' dismay — so too did the hopes of #NeverTrump die.
#NeverTrump? Never mind. What a joke.
---------------- Robert Romano is the Senior Editor of Americans for Limited Government. His article was first shared on the ALG's NetRight Daily blog. Tags:Robert Romano, Americans For Limited Government, #NeverTrumo, Never Mind. Donald Trump, GOP nominee To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!
Personal Tweets by the editor: Dr. Bill - OzarkGuru
#Conservative #Constitution #NRA #GunRights #military 22 yr #veteran #professor #Christian #ProLife #TCOT #SGP #CCOT #schoolchoice #fairtax Married-50+yrs #MAGA
Comments by contributing authors or other sources do not necessarily reflect the position the editor, other contributing authors, sources, readers, or commenters. No contributors, or editors are paid for articles, images, cartoons, etc. While having reported on and promoting the beliefs associated with the ARRA, this blog/site is not controlled by nor funded by the ARRA. This site/blog does not advertise for money or services nor does it solicit funding for its support.
Fair Use: This site/blog may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available to advance understanding of political, human rights, economic, democracy, and social justice issues, etc. This constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material as provided for in section Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 of the US Copyright Law. Per said section, the material on this site/blog is distributed without profit to readers to view for the expressed purpose of viewing the included information for research, educational, or satirical purposes. Any person/entity seeking to use copyrighted material shared on this site/blog for purposes that go beyond "fair use," must obtain permission from the copyright owner.