The Conscience of A Nation: Defeating Democrat Extremism

Ken Blackwell

by Ken Blackwell, Contributing Author: This week marked the 30th year of The March for Life. This event is the largest and longest-running march on Washington, in protest of Roe v. Wade and the general lack of protection for the rights of the unborn. Certain Democrats have it out for the hundreds of thousands marching, but the reality is abortion is becoming more and more unpopular across the United States.

For the past eleven years a poll has been conducted in conjunction with the March for Life; an annual pulse-taking of the nation. This year, the Knights of Columbus/ Marist Polling survey found that 75 percent of Americans say that abortion should be limited to the first 3 months of pregnancy. More shocking is the fact that this includes 60 percent of Democrats who responded to the survey. Also, 61 percent of people who identify as pro-choice are in favor of abortion restrictions.

Featured prominently in the poll are questions surrounding Roe v. Wade, the infamous case that made abortion legal nationwide. 65 percent of people who responded say that if the Supreme Court revisits the case, they should either send it to the states for them to decide or outlaw it entirely. Additionally, three-quarters of Americans believe that taxpayer funding should not be used on abortions. Even a majority of Democrats are opposed, with 56 percent responding that they did not think abortion should be funded with taxpayer money.

With this rise in support of pro-life positions, or at least some amount of regulation, why are Senators Hirono, Harris, and others claiming pro-life proponents are extremists? The Democratic position is abortion on demand, but only 30 percent of the United States supports the democratic stance of abortion on demand. This makes Hirono and Harris the real extremists.

Democrats have long been pushing left on abortion rights, despite scientific advancements in pre-birth care. They continually must move the goalposts from “it is a fetus, not a human” to “it’s a woman’s right to choose.” They are sliding, grasping onto a big policy fight that they can try to rally behind. The Democrats are losing one of their favorite hills to die on, and they’re afraid it’ll cost them votes.

Another poll that spells trouble for Hirono, Harris, and their ilk was recently released. Also by Marist, this poll shows that an overwhelming number of Americans [AS1] believe that religion should play no part in whether a Judge should be confirmed by the Senate. This puts holes in the religious test recently applied by some Democrats. Of course, the only reason they ask judicial nominees about their religion is to try to find out how they would vote on an abortion issue. 85 percent of respondents say that faith should not be a factor in appointing individuals to federal jobs.

Additionally, 55 percent of Americans say that religious liberty should be protected even if it goes against government laws. This includes a majority of Democratic, Independent, and Republican respondents.

It is such a blow to the Democrats that 70 percent of Americans disagree with abortion on demand. Like cornered animals, expect them to lash out even harder, condemning pro-life candidates and religious individuals alike. We have already seen it with the mistreatment of Rep. Tulsi Gabbard at the hands of her own party. Sen. Harris and Sen. Hirono tore into her over her father’s connections to the Catholic fraternity, The Knights of Columbus, an organization that donates $100 million annually.

The fight for life has generally been led by religious leaders. This new polling suggests they’re having a significant effect on even non-religious individuals. Modern revolutionary science is helping the cause as well, leaving Democrats with a shrinking platform of arguments. In the end, the only case left for them will be fitting for their extremism: “women should be allowed to murder.”
------------------
Ken Blackwell (@kenblackwell) is a former ambassador to the U.N., a former Domestic Policy Advisor to the Trump Presidential Transition Team, and former Ohio State Treasurer and mayor of Cincinnati who currently serves on the boards of numerous conservative policy organizations. He is a contributing author to the ARRA News Service

---

Tags: Ken Blackwell, Conscience of A Nation, Defeating, Democrat Extremism To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Mike Pence: The Mainstream Media Must Stop 'Attacks on Christian Education'

Vice President Mike Pence & his wife Karen Pence

by Tyler O'Neil: In an audio recording provided to PJ Media before airing on "Washington Watch," Vice President Mike Pence condemned the mainstream media's decision to turn his wife's employment at a Christian school into a major scandal. Media outlets, activists, and even elected leaders condemned Karen Pence's Christian school for its "anti-LGBT" stance, which merely follows the sexual morality laid out in the Bible.

"Are you concerned about this effort to marginalize people of faith that’s going on in our culture right now?" Family Research Council (FRC) President Tony Perkins asked Pence in the recording for FRC's radio show "Washington Watch."

Pence said the attacks did not surprise him, but he did condemn the media for stigmatizing Christian education.

"Karen and I have been in and around public life for almost two decades, and so to be honest with you we’re used to the criticism," the vice president said. "But the attacks on Christian education by the mainstream media have got to stop."

"We cherish the freedom of religion in this country. This administration stands four-square for the freedom of religion of people of all faiths, and to see the mainstream media criticize my wife because she’s choosing to return to the classroom of an elementary Christian school is wrong," Pence declared.

"Again, the attacks on Christian education must end," he repeated.

News that Karen Pence would return to teaching art at Immanuel Christian School dropped on Tuesday. A HuffPost reporter unearthed the school's covenant with teachers, holding them to the Bible's sexual morality — sex is only permissible inside a marriage between one man and one woman for life.

Various media outlets reported that Pence's school "bans gay and transgender students." Accounts blasted the school as "anti-LGBT."

Liberal activists with large followings tweeted messages like "F**k those homophobes!" and "Totally insane." A journalist called Karen Pence "a terrible human being," and another liberal activist said the vice president's wife was "unfit to even be around kids." He even suggested that any parent who allowed his or her kids to be taught by Karen Pence should lose his or her parental rights entirely.

Mike Pence is an extremist bigot. Karen Pence is an extremist bigot. She's unfit to even be around kids, let alone teach them. Anyone willing to allow their kid to be taught by a dangerous monster like Karen Pence is unfit to be a parent. Ask me how I really feel.

— Palmer Report (@PalmerReport) January 16, 2019

"Civil rights" groups like the ACLU and Human Rights Campaign attacked Karen Pence as if her decision to teach at a Christian school meant "disavowing LGBTQ youth" and telling people with same-sex attraction and gender dysphoria they are second-class citizens.

Each of these media outlets, activists, and organizations seemed utterly blind to the fact that for 2,000 years, almost every single Christian denomination has followed the Bible's clear sexual ethic. Even today, hundreds of millions if not billions of Christians around the world believe homosexual activity is sinful and that transgender identity is false to the way God created human beings as male and female.

Immanuel Christian School and other schools like it are merely exercising their religious freedom. Furthermore, the school does not "ban" people who experience same-sex attraction or gender dysphoria, and it has one moral standard that is high and difficult for "straight" people to abide by, as well. This is a matter of living by the Bible's precepts.

Vice President Pence was right to address religious freedom on this issue. Many of the news outlets that breathlessly reported his wife's employment also frequently put "religious freedom" in scare-quotes, suggesting that freedom of conscience is really a smokescreen for bigotry. LGBT activists are pushing to have public accommodations law prevent any Christian school or business from following Christian morality and refusing to participate in or support what the Bible considers immoral.

The vitriol spewed at Karen Pence only underscores how important it is to defend religious freedom in the public square, and to make it plain that Christianity is not a smokescreen for bigotry. Sadly, it seems so many people have no understanding of the Bible and no experience with evangelical Christians to show them what Christians really believe and why Karen Pence's teaching is no scandal.
--------------------
Tyler O'Neil is Assistant Editor of PJ Media, He is a conservative fundraiser and commentator and has written for numerous publications.

---

Tags: Tyler O'Neil, PJ Media, Vice President, Mike Pence, Mainstream Media, must stop, attacks on, Christian education' To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

It’s Time to Stop Religious Bigotry in Congress

by Newt Gingrich: As we take time to honor and remember the life and work of Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr. – whose efforts changed our nation for the better and helped end bigoted, exclusionary policies against African Americans – we should also remember his message applies to bias and bigotry in all its forms.

In a 1963 speech at Western Michigan University, Reverend King said:

“There are certain things in our nation and in the world which I am proud to be maladjusted and which I hope all men of good-will will be maladjusted until the good societies realize. I say very honestly that I never intend to become adjusted to segregation and discrimination. I never intend to become adjusted to religious bigotry.”

Republicans did exactly the right thing this week when they expressed their “maladjustment” toward Representative Steve King’s recent bigoted remarks. Congress members who use hateful language should be censured.

Democrats should express “maladjustment” toward bigotry in their own party – specifically the rising anti-Semitism and anti-Catholicism.

Where is the vote of disapproval for Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee, who in December questioned whether U.S. District Judge nominee Brian Buescher was qualified to be a federal judge given his Catholic faith and membership in the Knights of Columbus – a century-old Catholic charitable organization? In written questions, Hawaii Senator Mazie Hirono and California Senator Kamala Harris specifically suggested Buescher should quit the organization if he was confirmed.

This is a clear attempt to apply the religious test that anti-faith members of the Democrat party are trying to put in place.

It was more of the same anti-Catholic bigotry which Senate Democrats levied against the judicial nominee for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, Amy Coney Barrett, during her confirmation hearings in September 2017. Then, Senator Dianne Feinstein of California remarked to Barrett that “the dogma lives loudly within you” and commented that Barrett’s religious beliefs may prevent her from upholding the law as a judge.

Similarly, where is the official condemnation for Michigan Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib?

Tlaib received a great deal of attention for using foul language when referring to the President at a campaign event – but that’s not really what concerns me. Where is the Democratic outrage for Tlaib’s relabeling Israel as Palestine on the map in her office? Why are House Democrats not moving to denounce her for having private dinners with a pro-Hezbollah activist who tweeted, “Israel does not have a right to exist. The terrorist entity is illegal and has no basis to exist other than a delusional ISIS-like ideology.”

What about disapproval for Tlaib’s defense of former CNN commentator Marc Lamont Hill after he was fired for calling for a Palestinian state “from the river to the sea,” a common phrased used by Hamas for decades which describes wiping out Israel from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean?

Finally, why have no Democrats condemned Minnesota Congresswoman Ilhan Omar, a vocal supporter of the BDS movement (which stands for boycott, divestment, and sanctions for Israel)? She has publicly called Israel evil and claimed the nation had “hypnotized the world,” a common anti-Semitic trope.

In addition to considering Reverend King’s message of ending bigotry, my hope is that Democrats would also follow their colleague, Hawaii Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard, who wrote earlier this month for The Hill that:

“The party that worked so hard to convince people that Catholics and Knights of Columbus like Al Smith and John F. Kennedy could be both good Catholics and good public servants shows an alarming disregard of its own history in making such attacks today.

“We must call this out for what it is – religious bigotry. This is true not just when such prejudice is anti-Catholic, but also when it is anti-Semitic, anti-Muslim, anti-Hindu, or anti-Protestant, or any other religion.”

Aside from being morally bankrupt, nurturing bigotry against religious groups in Congress will cost the Democrats in the long run. As Michael Gerson wrote Thursday in The Washington Post, “if liberal Democrats want to compare the Catholic Church to a hate group, good luck with that. They will offend the last religious traditionalists they haven’t already and alienate a good many others besides.”

As Reverend King said, we should all be maladjusted to bigotry. It has no place in America – and especially not American government.
----------------------
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, commentary, Time to Stop, Religious Bigotry, in Congress To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Life on the March

by Tony Perkins: There will always be some quiet symmetry to the March for Life falling so closely to the day we honor Martin Luther King, Jr. In so many ways, their cause is the same -- the struggle against a deep and painful injustice. It's a fight that's been passed down through the generations, an heirloom of tragedy that Americans are desperate to end.

Dr. King never lived to see his dream fulfilled. Some wonder if it ever was. But today, in the sea of young faces, there is hope. Hope for the unborn, to be sure, but also hope for the dignity of every person. White or black, young or old, we are all members of the same human family. And together, we are determined to wash clean the stains of a nation that stopped remembering who it is.

So many things have changed since that first march so many years ago. Politicians have come and gone, laws have been written and unwritten -- but the bond that brings masses of Americans to Washington every January is the same. We will march until the day -- hopefully soon -- when we no longer have any reason to. When every child is welcomed in life and protected in law.

And we have never been closer than now. Thanks to President Trump, this administration is on a mission to restore the culture of life in America. Not even a Democratic House will stop this White House from doing what it knows is right: protecting women and children from the greatest human rights crisis of our time. This is a movement, the president told the tens of thousands of pro-lifers on the National Mall in his video message, "founded on love... Every child is a sacred gift from God." Together, he promised, we'll work to prove it. "Today," he announced to the roar of the crowd, "I have signed a letter to Congress to make clear that if they send any legislation to my desk that weakens the protection of human life, I will issue a veto -- and we have the support to uphold these vetoes."

Like every other president, Donald Trump will stand on the longstanding principle that taxpayers should not be forced to finance abortion. At the prompting of 169 House members and 49 senators, he fired a shot across the bow, warning Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) that he won't allow Democrats to succeed with their radical plans to overturn the Hyde amendment."I am concerned that this year, Congress may consider legislation that could substantially change federal policies and laws on abortion, and allow taxpayer dollars to be used for the destruction of human life. Like several of my predecessors who served as president of the United States, I am writing to make sure that there is no misunderstanding of my views on these important issues... Every child should be welcomed into life and protected in law."It's "alarming," he went on, "that the House of Representatives, in its short time under Democrat control this year, has already sought to reverse important pro-life protections. These issues are deeply emotional and made even more complicated when Congress compels American taxpayers to fund efforts that end human life." It is the most basic duty of government, he insisted, "to guard the innocent." And to the relief of tens of thousands of Americans making today's mile-long walk to the Supreme Court, that's exactly what he has spent his presidency doing.
--------------
Tony Perkins is President of the Family Research Council . This article was on Tony Perkin's Washington Update and written with the aid of FRC senior writers.

---

Tags: Tony Perkins, Family Research Center, FRC, Family Research Council, Life on the March To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Golden Fleece Goes To Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services

The Golden Fleece Award

ARRA News Service: Congressman French Hill (R-AR) named the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) as the latest winner of the Golden Fleece Award for accepting inflated bids for the management of Medicare Part D plans, resulting in roughly $9.1 billion in extra payments to insurers from 2006 to 2015.

“Clearly, more transparency and accountability are needed to ensure that cost forecasts for Medicare prescription-drug benefits are not wildly inflated by insurance providers," said Rep. Hill. "At a time when healthcare costs are skyrocketing, and our nation is over $20 trillion in debt, it is essential that our federal agencies act as good stewards of taxpayers’ dollars.”

In the letter to the Administrator of Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Seema Verma, Congressman Hill wrote:January 17, 2019

The Honorable Seema Verma
Administrator
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
7500 Security Blvd
Baltimore, MD 21244-1849

Dear Ms. Verma:

I write today to inform you that the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) is this month’s recipient of my Golden Fleece Award for accepting inflated bids for the management of Medicare Part D. These bids have resulted in roughly $9.1 billion in extra payments to insurers between 2006 through 2015.

According to a recent article in the Wall Street Journal, from 2006 to 2015, insurers submitted and secured inflated bids for the administration of Medicare Part D plans, which resulted in $9.1 billion of taxpayer funds being kept by insurers. This is particularly concerning as these funds were paid out in addition to the profits already built into these bids.[1] At a time when healthcare costs are skyrocketing, and our nation is over $20 trillion in debt, it is essential that our federal agencies act as good stewards of taxpayers’ dollars.

I am committed to ensuring effective practices at our Nation’s federal agencies. Should you require any additional authority from Congress to address these concerns, I urge you to notify us as soon as possible. I would also welcome any technical assistance you could provide to Congress to correct statutory issues that have contributed to this problem. Thank you for your consideration and I look forward to working with you to address this important issue.

Sincerely,

French Hill
Member of CongressTo view the letter, click HERE.

About the Golden Fleece Award
Every year, Congress appropriates trillions of dollars to fund the federal government, and every year the federal government wastes portions of these funds in unconscionable ways. In an attempt to increase accountability for every single government program, Congressman Hill decided to bring back the Golden Fleece Award.

Originally introduced by Democratic U.S. Senator from Wisconsin William Proxmire in March 1975, the Golden Fleece Award was a monthly bulletin on the most frivolous and wasteful uses of hardworking taxpayers’ dollars. The Golden Fleece Award became a staple in the U.S. Senate during this time, and Senator Robert Byrd once stated that the awards were “as much a part of the Senate as quorum calls and filibusters.”

In reviving this idea, the Golden Fleece Award will again have the opportunity to serve as an important reminder to taxpayers about the need for necessary, commonsense reforms to our federal spending.

---

Tags: Rep. French Hill, R-AR, awards, Golden Fleece Award, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, CMS, Seema Verma, accepting inflated bids, management of Medicare Part D plans, $9.1 billion, extra payments to insurers, 2006 to 2015 To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

March For Life, Pro-Life America, Kudos To Knight

Thousands gather at the 46th March for Life on Jan. 18, 2019
in Washington (U.S. Today)

by Gary Bauer, Contributing Author: March For Life - I love this day! Every year hundreds of thousands of people come to Washington, D.C. -- in January! -- to march for the sanctity of life. This is the 46th annual March for Life, and that tells you something about the dedication of the pro-life movement.

Usually the "mainstream media" ignore the march or disrespects it by giving equal weight to the few dozen pro-abortion demonstrators who might show up. But the Washington Post today did not ignore the march. The Post attacked it by taking issue with the theme of this year's march, "Unique from Day One: Pro-Life is Pro-Science."

In its notorious Roe v. Wade decision 46 years ago, the Supreme Court dodged the question of when life begins, just like Barack Obama dodged Rick Warren's question in 2008 about when a baby earns human rights.

But a lot has changed since 1973. Every few months brings a technological advancement or scientific breakthrough that more fully reveals the unborn child as a living, feeling human being.

You can read more in my latest opinion piece at The Washington Examiner.

Pro-Life America - A Marist poll released this week finds overwhelming support for pro-life ideas and legislation limiting abortion. For example:

• Only 15% of those surveyed said abortion should be legal for any reason at any point during pregnancy.
• 84% support varying restrictions, such as banning late-term abortions.
• Asked specifically about Roe v. Wade, only 30% felt the Supreme Court should uphold Roe, leaving abortion unrestricted as it is now. Sixty-five percent said the Court should make abortion illegal or allow the states to make restrictions.
• 75% of those surveyed oppose the use of their tax dollars to promote or perform abortions overseas.

The last point is important to keep in mind because Speaker Nancy Pelosi included an amendment to use your tax dollars to pay for abortions overseas in her legislation re-opening the government.

In addition, the newly-empowered House Pro-Choice Caucus is vowing to repeal the Hyde Amendment, which prohibits taxpayer funding of most abortions in Medicaid.

Nancy Got Grounded - The same media that praised Nancy Pelosi as a "genius" for delaying the president's State of the Union address were beside themselves yesterday when President Trump hit back. He was blasted as "childish," "unpresidential" and "strategically nitwitted."

I am an enthusiastic supporter of the president, but I have a slightly different take on this. I think Trump should have let Pelosi go to Afghanistan and then grounded her there, since she is the main obstacle to securing the border. (Sarcasm!)

Speaking Of Border Security. . . There were a lot of shocked people on both sides of the aisle after a new NPR poll was released this morning. It found that President Trump's approval rating among Hispanics jumped 19 points -- from 31% to 50% -- during the government shutdown when Trump has been talking every day about securing the border.

Many on the left (and even some in the GOP consulting class) just don't understand how this can be, but it's no mystery to me.

Hispanics in border communities are the first ones impacted by massive waves of illegal immigration. It impacts their schools, their hospitals and their communities first. It depresses their wages and increases crime in their neighborhoods.

In fact, another recent poll found that 69% of voters support "building a fence in high-crime areas along the U.S.-Mexico border."

I also think there is a tradition in Latin America of admiring strong leaders, and that is certainly the kind of president we have now.

Omar vs. Israel - Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) was asked on CNN yesterday about a tweet she wrote in November 2012. It read, "Israel has hypnotized the world, may Allah awaken the people and help them see the evil doings of Israel."

At the time, Israel had launched Operation Pillar of Defense in response to Hamas firing 1,500 rockets at Israeli civilians. Hamas was doing evil, not Israel.

Co-host Poppy Harlow asked Omar how she would respond to Jewish Americans who were offended by her characterization of Israel. Incredibly, Omar doubled down, saying, "I don't know how my comments would be offensive to Jewish Americans."

How can she be that clueless? Well, she is a product of the Somali community in Minnesota, which is a hotbed of radical Islamic recruitment.

And this takes us back to the immigration debate. Why are we importing so many people from parts of the world that we know are hotbeds of anti-Semitism?

By the way, Speaker Pelosi just appointed Omar, a supporter of the anti-Semitic BDS movement, to the House Foreign Affairs Committee. That's like giving an arsonist a job at the fire station!

Kudos To Knight - The NFL's anthem controversy continues. Left-wing groups are pressuring performers to show their support for Colin Kaepernick by backing out of the halftime show at Super Bowl LIII. The game will be held in Atlanta on February 3rd, assuming Democrats don't shut it down too.

Atlanta-native Gladys Knight, who is signing the national anthem at the Super Bowl, was recently challenged about the controversy. Here's how she responded:

"It is unfortunate that our National Anthem has been dragged into this debate when the distinctive senses of the National Anthem and fighting for justice should each stand alone.

"I am here today and on Sunday, Feb. 3 to give the Anthem back its voice, to stand for that historic choice of words, the way it unites us when we hear it and to free it from the same prejudices and struggles I have fought long and hard for all my life. . .

"I have been in the forefront of this battle longer than most of those voicing their opinions to win the right to sing our country's Anthem on a stage as large as the Super Bowl LIII."

Knight is right! The whole purpose of the national anthem is to unite us. And it always did that until just a few years ago when the left became completely unhinged in its hatred of America.
-------------------
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, March For Life, Pro-Life America, Kudos To Knight To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

A Federal Appeals Court Just Took a Big Swing at Planned Parenthood

by Kevin Daley: The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals lifted an injunction forbidding Texas from stripping Planned Parenthood of Medicaid funds Thursday, while stridently criticizing the abortion provider for its rhetoric and medical practices.

“Planned Parenthood’s reprehensible conduct, captured in undercover videos, proves that it is not a ‘qualified’ provider under the Medicaid Act, so we are confident we will ultimately prevail,” Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said in a statement after Thursday’s ruling.

The case arose after a pro-life group called the Center for Medical Progress released videos purporting to show Planned Parenthood violating medical and ethical standards codified in federal law and state regulations. Texas terminated its Medicaid provider agreement with Planned Parenthood shortly thereafter, citing infractions documented in the videos.

In turn, Planned Parenthood asked a federal court to restore its Medicaid funding. Thursday’s ruling—which related to a jurisdictional issue in that case—is especially striking for its numerous rebukes of Planned Parenthood. Judge Edith Jones, a Ronald Reagan appointee, delivered the opinion.

Perhaps the most noteworthy of the decision’s reprimands is a graphic depiction of post-abortion fetal remains taken from a Center for Medical Progress video on the fourth page of the opinion. A small arm is visible in the picture. Texas cited the manner in which Planned Parenthood disposes of fetal remains as one reason for terminating its Medicaid eligibility.

In another instance, the decision all but accuses Planned Parenthood of breaking federal law banning partial-birth abortions. The ruling highlights a Center for Medical Progress video in which an administrator called Dr. Tram Nguyen said doctors at one facility could evacuate an intact fetus—thereby breaking federal law—provided they sign a form that they did not “intend” to do so. Such procedures allow researchers to recover organs like the thymus or the liver.

Later in the opinion, the panel chides Planned Parenthood for failing to address Nguyen’s comments in court filings.

“The plaintiffs’ briefing with regard to the substance of the discussions contained in the videos is curiously silent,” the decision reads.

Planned Parenthood has denied it intentionally alters abortion procedures for impermissible reasons.

The panel also dismissed Planned Parenthood’s claim that the Center for Medical Progress videos were “deceptively edited,” a soundbite that redounded across the press after the tapes first appeared.

“The record reflects that [the Texas Office of Inspector General] had submitted a report from a forensic firm concluding that the video was authentic and not deceptively edited,” a footnote in the decision reads. “And [Planned Parenthood] did not identify any particular omission or addition in the video footage.”

Finally the panel accused the judiciary of politicking on abortion cases. Ordinarily, providers like Planned Parenthood must challenge Medicaid termination decisions in an administrative forum and state court before seeking a federal court’s intervention. By allowing Planned Parenthood to skip directly to federal court—as the trial court did here—the 5th Circuit said judges are engaging in ideological favoritism.

“Had [Texas] terminated the Medicaid provider agreements of any other type of health care provider, the incongruity of allowing that provider to use patient litigation proxies to avoid administrative review and [reach] federal court would be obvious and unacceptable,” the ruling reads.

The decision comes as pro-life activists gather in Washington in advance of Friday’s March for Life.

The question before the 5th Circuit did not relate to abortion directly: After Texas disqualified Planned Parenthood from Medicaid eligibility, the abortion provider sued, claiming the federal Medicaid statute allowed it to do so. A federal district judge agreed, allowing the lawsuit to proceed. The 5th Circuit had to decide whether that decision was correct.

The federal appeals courts are divided over the answer to that question. Though the Supreme Court generally intervenes when the circuits disagree over the same question of law, the justices denied review in a related controversy from Kansas in December, drawing a vigorous dissent from Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch that accused the court of playing politics.

In that instance, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Brett Kavanaugh joined with the court’s liberal bloc, effectively preserving a pro-Planned Parenthood decision in the lower court.

The 5th Circuit’s Thursday decision concluded that it is bound by precedent to find Planned Parenthood can proceed with its lawsuit in federal court under the Medicaid statute, though Jones wrote a concurrence to her own majority opinion urging the full 5th Circuit to revisit that question.

However, the 5th Circuit gave Texas a partial victory, finding the trial court assessed Planned Parenthood’s request for an injunction under the wrong standard. The panel lifted the injunction, and ordered the lower court judge to reconsider Planned Parenthood’s request under a different standard that is more accommodating of Texas.

As such, the state has a much better chance of prevailing when the matter returns to the trial court for further proceedings.

Texas awards approximately $3.4 million to Planned Parenthood affiliates through Medicaid annually. The decision notes this is a “smidgen” of the revenue Planned Parenthood’s Texas affiliates generate each year, which runs over $57 million.
--------------------
Kevin Daley (@kevindaleydc) is a legal affairs reporter for the Daily Caller News Foundation. H/T The Daily Signal.

---

Tags: Kevin Daley, Daily Caller News Foundation, The Daily Signal, Federal Appeals Court, Planned Parenthood To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Op-ed Examines How Gun Control In Venezuela Led To Tyranny

by Tom Knighton: Venezuela was once the jewel of South America. It’s an oil-rich nation with a long growing season and abundant natural resources. Plus, it’s a beautiful place that would make a wonderful tourist destination…if it wasn’t a socialist hellhole where people are eating zoo animals to survive.

Now, an op-ed is noting that gun control is a tool of the tyrannical Maduro government in the country.Is Venezuela paying the price for adopting gun control?

The shocking nature of Venezuela’s economic collapse has been covered ad nauseam. However, one aspect of the Venezuelan crisis that does not receive much coverage is the country’s gun control regime.

Fox News recently published an excellent article highlighting Venezuelan citizens’ regret over the gun control policies the Venezuelan government has implemented since 2012. Naturally, this regret is warranted. The Venezuelan government is among the most tyrannical in the world, with a proven track record of violating basic civil liberties such as free speech, debasing its national currency, confiscating private property, and creating economic controls that destroy the country’s productivity.

Elections have proven to be useless, as they’ve been mired with corruption and charges of government tampering. For many, taking up arms is the only option left for the country to shake off its tyrannical government. However, the Venezuelan government has done well to prevent an uprising by passing draconian gun control which will be detailed below.

…  Venezuelans are now defenseless against a government that runs roughshod over their civil liberties, while also destroying their economic livelihood. As if it weren’t enough, everyday Venezuelans must put up with rampant crime and the constant threat of colectivos, Venezuela’s infamous pro-government paramilitary units.

Although gun control in and of itself does not automatically lead to tyranny, historical events remind us that well-intentioned interventions from previous governments can be used by the next round of political operatives for nefarious purposes. Firearms bans, confiscation, and registration give the state a virtual monopoly on violence, thus turning its citizens into defenseless subjects. When the rubber meets the road, a disarmed populace has no chance against a well-armed Leviathan.It’s an interesting piece, one well worth reading.

Of course, there aren’t many arguments there that Second Amendment advocates won’t recognize. That’s because regardless of the nation, the reason to protect our right to keep and bear arms remains the same. It is the only way to preserve our liberties.

Meanwhile, in France, what started as a flippant comment about rural folks needing to walk more is turning ugly. Protestors have rioted ever since President Macron made his announcement of a new carbon tax and French police have been unable to quell the unrest. Keep in mind that while these are rioters, not mere demonstrators, they’re still outraged over a government that they feel is out of touch with them.

How is Macron reacting? Not particularly well.Last week, when we looked at the French government’s plans to “crack down” on the yellow vest protesters and rioters, it sounded like they were just passing new laws to allow for jail time for unauthorized marches. While a bit on the heavy-handed side, it still sounded like typical law enforcement in a more socialist-style government. But now the concept of a “crackdown” has definitely been taken to the next level. The riot control officers are breaking out the semiautomatic rifles and issuing live ammunition to deal with the crowds.So the government is prepared to shoot these protestors, people who are sick of a government screaming at them about how they need to suck it up. When we have riots in this country, the police use any number of tactics to quell the unrest. That might be because there’s always a chance of shooting at protestors will lead to people shooting back. That’s something the French police don’t have to worry about as guns are essentially banned in France.

No, gun control doesn’t invariably lead to tyranny, immediately, anyway. But it’s always a precursor to it. Once the government disarms the citizenry, there’s nothing to stop it from happening.
---------------
Tom Knighton is a Navy veteran, a former newspaperman, a novelist, and a blogger at Bearing Arms. He lives with his family in Southwest Georgia.

---

Tags: Tom Knighton, Bearing Arms, Op-ed, Examines How Gun Control, Venezuela ,Led To Tyranny To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Behold the Democrat Politician Protection Act

Sen. Majority Speaker Mitch McConnell

by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell: For the past two years, our united Republican government drained money and power from Washington and returned it to states, communities and families. From middle-class tax cuts to regulatory reform, we took this approach and watched the nation thrive more as a result.

Democrats have a different philosophy. After November’s elections, everyone knew Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the new House would send the Senate far-left proposals to retighten Washington’s grip on the country. And right on cue, even as their refusal to invest in border security prolongs this partial government shutdown, House Democrats have wasted no time rolling out a sprawling proposal to grow the federal government’s power over Americans’ political speech and elections.

House Democrats won’t come to the table and negotiate to reopen government, but they’ve been hard at work angling for more control over what you can say about them and how they get reelected. They’re trying to clothe this power grab with clichés about “restoring democracy” and doing it “For the People,” but their proposal is simply a naked attempt to change the rules of American politics to benefit one party. It should be called the Democrat Politician Protection Act.

Why else would the bill scrap the neutrality of the Federal Elections Commission and set it up for a partisan takeover? Since Watergate, the commission has been a six-member body so neither party can use it to punish political opponents. Apparently, Democrats have grown tired of playing fair. This bill would weaponize the FEC with a 3-to-2 partisan makeup.

It would also empower that newly partisan FEC to track and catalogue more of what you say. It would broaden the type of speech the commission can define as “campaign-related” and thus regulate. Many more Americans would have to notify the feds when spending even small amounts of money on speech or else be penalized. That partisan FEC would also get wide latitude to determine when a nonprofit’s speech has crossed that fuzzy “campaign-related” line and then forcibly publicize the group’s private supporters.

Apparently the Democrats define “democracy” as giving Washington a clearer view of whom to intimidate and leaving citizens more vulnerable to public harassment over private views. Under this bill, you’d keep your right to free association as long as your private associations were broadcast to everyone. You’d keep your right to speak freely so long as you notified a distant bureaucracy likely run by the same people you criticized. The bill goes so far as to suggest that the Constitution needs an amendment to override First Amendment protections.

Democrats aren’t only coming after free speech. They’re also taking aim at your wallet. Pelosi and company are pitching new taxpayer subsidies, including a 600 percent government match for certain political donations and a new voucher program that would funnel even more public dollars to campaigns. Maybe that’s why every Democrat opposed our tax cuts for middle-class families and small businesses. They’d rather use your money to enrich campaign consultants.

I’m as firm a supporter as anyone of vigorous debate and a vibrant political discourse — but I don’t think Americans see an urgent need for their tax dollars to be used to bankroll robocalls and attack ads, including for candidates they dislike.

Democrats would also like you to pay for generous new benefits for federal bureaucrats. Their bill proposes making Election Day a new paid holiday for government workers and six additional days’ paid vacation for federal bureaucrats to work the polls during any election. This is the Democrats’ plan to “restore democracy”: extra taxpayer-funded vacation for bureaucrats to hover around while Americans cast their ballots.

Even more egregiously, the legislation dedicates hundreds of pages to federalizing the electoral process. It would make states mimic the practices that recently caused California to incorrectly register 23,000 ineligible voters. It would make it harder for states to fix inaccurate data in their voter rolls. Yet the legislation declines to address the sketchy “ballot harvesting” that upended the result in North Carolina’s 9th District — perhaps because the practice is perfectly legal in California, where Democrats made huge gains in 2018.

The whole package seems tailor-made by Washington Democrats to help their D.C. attorneys descend on local communities, exploit confusion and try to swing elections. The antics we saw in Florida in November would be only the beginning.

From the First Amendment to your ballot box, Democrats want to rewrite the rules to favor themselves and their friends. Upending the FEC, squeezing taxpayers, attacking privacy and jeopardizing our elections are a price they’ll happily pay for this partisan power grab.

Fortunately, the November elections that handed Pelosi the House also expanded Republicans’ Senate majority. I hope the two bodies can find common ground and build on the bipartisan successes of last Congress — but this outlandish Democrat proposal is not a promising start. My colleagues and I will proudly defend your privacy and your elections.
------------------
Mitch McConnell, a Republican from Kentucky, is Majority Leader of the U.S. Senate. He also shared the article in the Washington Post

---

Tags: Mitch McConnell, Majority Leader, U.S. Senate, Democrat Politician Protection Act To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Congress Earns 'Nero Award' For Fiddling While America Is Invaded

. . . Why Democrats’ actions are especially egregious.

by Michael Cutler: President Trump has decided to not sign off on the federal budget until it includes money for a physical barrier to finally secure the dangerous and highly porous U.S./Mexican border from the un-inspected entry of aliens and cargo.

That tough decision has been a long time coming.

With no budget, nonessential sections of the government have been shut down and some federal employees deemed “essential” are working without pay.

As a former federal employee I can certainly empathize with those federal employees. I recall working without pay when prior partial government shutdowns occurred.

Many pundits and “political analysts” have said that the administration should compromise. As things now stand, there is nothing to compromise about. Any “compromise” with Pelosi and company would only compromise national security. That “compromise” has been ongoing for decades and we have all too many dead bodies that prove how dangerous open borders are.

The media is focused on how many days federal employees have gone without pay, but no one is keeping track of how many years our borders have failed to prevent the entry of narcotics, weapons, criminals, terrorists and foreign workers who displace hard-working Americans and drive down the wages of those who are fortunate to keep their jobs.

The mainstream media has reported, as part of coverage about the impact of the partial government shutdown, that some TSA employees have failed to report for duty, thereby causing delays at airports as long lines of travelers wait to be screened by the diminished workforce.

Certainly there is not much that can be done when TSA personnel don’t show up for work. After all, no one would want to board an airliner unless all passengers and their luggage are carefully screened.

However, isn’t it ironic that folks would never willingly fly on an airliner unless all of the passengers and cargo were carefully vetted, and yet because of our corrupt and globalist politicians, because of the multiple failures to secure our borders (including that perilous and porous one we share with Mexico), we are forced to live among millions of aliens who entered the United States without screening?

Yet that is precisely the situation we find ourselves in today and, if anyone complains about this, they are quickly tossed into Hillary’s “basket of deplorables"!

For the first two years of the Trump administration the House and Senate were both controlled by a Republican majority. Nevertheless the President’s call for funding for the border wall went unheeded and ignored.

Let’s be fair and honest: the “leadership” of both the Democrats and Republicans has never wanted secure borders or effective immigration law enforcement.

This was the underlying predication for my article, “Sanctuary Country - Immigration failures by design.”

It is not that America cannot secure its borders; it is that our political elites from both parties don’t want those borders to be made secure. They have come to see the immigration system as a delivery system for an unlimited supply of easily exploited foreign workers from Third World countries who come to America with Third World expectations of meager wages and unreasonable and hazardous working conditions.

Many of the politicians from both parties are attorneys. For them, particularly those who practice immigration law, a tsunami of illegal aliens provides an endless stream of clients for immigration law firms from coast to coast and border to border.

I discussed this on the “Breitbart News Tonight” radio show of which Breitbart posted a follow-up news article, "Exclusive–Michael Cutler: Immigration ‘Crisis’ a ‘Delivery System’ for Elites."

This is why the political leaders from both the Democratic and Republican parties have been insisting that since we cannot deport all of the illegal aliens who are present in the United States, the best we can do is legalize them to “get them out of the shadows.”

This is a thinly disguised game of “bait and switch” with the ultimate goal of getting those millions of illegal aliens into the waiting rooms of immigration law firms around the United States.

The Democrats exclaim that we must be “compassionate” and provide these “immigrants” with a pathway to citizenship while the Republicans insist that they are going to stand strong and “only” provide millions of illegal aliens with permission to work.

Either way, aspiring illegal aliens from around the world are getting the message: enter the United States by any means possible and little will be done to remove (deport) you but eventually you will be granted permission to work in the United States and gain lawful status.

The Democrats have insisted that when illegal aliens enter the United States, if they utter the magic password “political asylum” they will immediately be swept into a massive program that will enable them to remain in the country for many years. This further entices millions more illegal aliens to head for the United States.

In essence, the starter’s pistol has thus been fired for aspiring illegal aliens from around the world and for these aliens the “finish line” is the border of the United States.

That imagery is certainly apparent as we witness yet another “migrant caravan” heading north from El Salvador to the U.S./Mexican border.

The Democratic Party is adamant about not “wasting money” on a border wall or other such “low tech” solution to border security. Instead they would spend hundreds of millions of dollars on drones and sensors that would alert the overwhelmed Border Patrol when aliens run the border.

I have written about this madness in several articles but am compelled once again to make note of what should be obvious but is never reported in the mainstream media: a succession of government reports have shown that drones, which cost hundreds of millions of dollars, have been involved in fewer than one-half of one percent of all Border Patrol arrests.

Drones and sensors should be thought of as a sort of national burglar alarm for America. Drones and burglar alarms cannot make any arrests. All that they do is notify the appropriate authorities that a break-in has occurred or that our borders have been violated and then it is up to law enforcement agencies to respond to that alarm.

Many homes have burglar alarms, but I have never seen a house that is equipped with one that not only did not have strong, secure locks on the front door, but no front door at all!

For decades Americans have been held hostage in their own homes as more drugs and gang members have flowed across our borders and committed violent crimes in towns and cities across the United States.

Now hapless federal employees are being held hostage to the outrageous demands of the Democrats that nothing of meaningful consequence be done to truly secure the dangerous Mexican border.

Even as Chuck Schumer insists that there is no crisis and that President Trump is simply having a “temper tantrum,” not far from Schumer’s own home in Brooklyn, New York, a trial is being conducted at the federal courthouse in downtown Brooklyn (Eastern District of New York).

The defendant in this case is a citizen of Mexico, Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman, the alleged leader of the infamous Mexican Sinaloa Drug Cartel that purportedly smuggled more than 200 tons of cocaine into the United States along with tonnage of other drugs including cocaine, meth and marijuana across the U.S./Mexican border that President Trump is determined to finally secure.

There have been many articles written about the trial but one in particular has managed to capture some of the trial’s “highlights” (lowlights?). That article, "Joaquín 'El Chapo' Guzmán's trial: Nine crazy moments," was published on January 10, 2019 by the BBC.

Here is a particularly disturbing excerpt from that news report:
Hi-tech murder room

A trusted hitman for El Chapo kept a "murder room" in his mansion on the US border, which featured a drain on the floor to more easily clean up after slayings.

Edgar Galvan testified in January that Antonio "Jaguar" Marrufo had a room with white tiles that was sound-proofed "so no noise comes out”.

"In that house, no one comes out," Galvan told jurors.

Galvan said his role in the organisation was to smuggle weapons into the US, so that Marrufo could use them to "clear" the region of rivals.

At the time, he was living in El Paso, Texas, while Marrufo was living in Ciudad Juarez, just across the US-Mexico border.

But both men are now in jail on firearms and gun charges.

Perhaps someone should send Mr. Schumer and his radical cohorts a copy of the article.

During his administration Bill Clinton attempted to redefine the term “is.”

Now Schumer and the Democrats would like to redefine the term “crisis”; however, as John Adams sagely noted, “Facts are stubborn things.”Perhaps someone should send Mr. Schumer and his radical cohorts a copy of the article.

During his administration Bill Clinton attempted to redefine the term “is.”

Now Schumer and the Democrats would like to redefine the term “crisis”; however, as John Adams sagely noted, “Facts are stubborn things.”
-------------------------
Michael Cutler is a retired Senior Special Agent of the former INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service) whose career spanned some 30 years. He served as an Immigration Inspector, Immigration Adjudications Officer and spent 26 years as an agent with half of his career in the Drug Task Force. He has testified before well over a dozen congressional hearings, provided testimony to the 9/11 Commission. His website is michaelcutler.net. He also writes for FrontPage Mag a publication of theDavid Horowitz Freedom Center. David Horowitz is a Contributing Author of the ARRA News Service

---

Tags: Michael Cutler, FrontPage Mag, Congress, Earns 'Nero Award,' For Fiddling, While America, Is Invaded To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Brave New World

. . . Liberals always like to remind us we’re all children of immigrants but for many, they didn’t have welfare and food stamps available when they came here.

Editorial Cartoon by AF "Tony" Branco

---

Tags: AF Branco, editorial cartoon, Brave New World To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Smartphones and Kids

by Kerby Anderson, Contributing Author: Jean Twenge has been researching generational differences for a quarter century. But she noticed in 2012 abrupt shifts in teen behaviors and emotional states.

Up until that time there were gentle slopes of line graphs. Suddenly they became steep mountains and sheer cliffs. That year is when the proportion of Americans who owned a smartphone surpassed 50 percent.

Her article in The Atlantic asks the ominous question: “Have Smartphones Destroyed a Generation?” The generation she is thinking about would be the trailing edge of the millennial generation (born between 1995 and 2012). She calls them iGen because the smartphone and social media have shaped their lives.

Psychologically they are more emotionally vulnerable than the leading edge millennials. “Rates of teen depression and suicide have skyrocketed since 2011. It’s not an exaggeration to describe iGen as being on the brink of the worst mental-health crisis in decades. Much of this deterioration can be traced to their phones.”

A national survey of seniors found that: “Teens who spend more time than average on-screen activities are more likely to be unhappy, and those who spend more time than average on non-screen activities are more likely to be happy.”

Jean Twenge says, “There’s not a single exception.” She says the advice she would give to a teenager based on this survey is: “Put down the phone, turn off the laptop, and do anything that does not involve a screen.”

Of course, we don’t have to look at these dismal statistics and just lament. Her article and research should be a call to action for parents and grandparents. They are the ones buying these devices so they need to reevaluate the potential dangers to their children and grandchildren.
------------
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, Smartphones, Kids To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Skepticism in Order

by Paul Jacob, Contributing Author: It is not a question of “belief,” says Anastasios Tsonis.

In “The overblown and misleading issue of global warming,” this emeritus distinguished professor at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee explains that in a “scientific problem ‘believing’ has no place,” going on to clarify:

“In science, we either prove or disprove.”

And regarding climate there is no “settled science.” Lacking unquestionable experimental context — “we have only one realization of climate evolution” — no matter how strong our opinions, skepticism is always in order.

But let us admit the obvious, the “global warming”/“climate change” debate has been frustrating for just about everybody. And much of this is the result of dogmatism.

“The fact that scientists who show results not aligned with the mainstream are labeled deniers is the backward mentality,” Tsonis insists. “We don’t live in the medieval times, when Galileo had to admit to something that he knew was wrong to save his life.”

He argues that our lack of knowledge means that we should be circumspect about whether humans have caused the bulk of recent climate change. “Climate is too complicated to attribute its variability to one cause. We first need to understand the natural climate variability” — which, he says, “we clearly don’t.”

Tsonis concludes talking about problems more urgent than climate change. We can (and should) quibble with his list, but we should be open about our reasoning.

One reason for concentrating on these other issues is that we might be more likely to gain clarity on them.

And thus might be able to do something not foolish.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
------------------
Paul Jacob 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. Jacob is a contributing author on the ARRA News Service.

---

Tags: Paul Jacob, Common Sense, Skepticism in Order To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Don’t Give An Inch On The Wall, Mr. President

by Robert Romano: A bipartisan group of Senators led by Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Chris Coons (D-Del.) are urging President Donald Trump to sign a short-term continuing resolution to reopen the government for three weeks, purportedly to allow time for negotiations to occur as Congress considers Trump’s proposed border wall expansion.

But the only reason there is even any discussion at all about a border wall is because the President has said he won’t sign legislation funding the government that does not include the wall. Trump has something Congress wants — his signature — and as long as he denies it he has leverage under the constitutional separation of powers to see that his top priorities are funded.

If Congress wants to reopen the government, the quickest and easiest way to do that is to pass a bill that includes what the President asked for on the border wall. Sit down and negotiate, but realize the President’s priorities must also be included or else no deal.

Supporters of the President have urged him to hold the line against signing any bill that fails to address border security and the wall.

“It would be an extraordinary mistake to open the government without the funding of border security including the wall as part of that agreement,” Americans for Limited Government President Rick Manning said, noting that a deal could still be made.

Manning explained, “[I]f the Democrats wanted to open the government, a deal could be hammered out in under 24 hours which included steel border barriers, more border patrol and ICE officers as well as an increase in immigration judges to help those seeking amnesty to receive a speedier decision, and humanitarian aid for those who have crossed the border illegally so that their detention pending disposition is safe, secure and meets their medical and other basic needs.”

In fact, there’s a menu of options for Democrats to choose from to try to get the government reopened. But to get signed it is clear it needs to include the wall. And fully fund it, too, so there’s no need to have this discussion again with the September funding bill.

In 2018, the House prior to turning the majority over to Democrats passed $5.7 billion for the wall and other needs at the border, which is already a compromise from the $12 billion to $15 billion that was promised by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell in Jan. 2017.

Other compromises have been offered since Trump took office. Former House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) offered an immigration reform bill that would have built the wall, ended chain migration, ended the visa lottery, defunded sanctuary cities and implemented a national E-Verify system but also included legal status for those who were granted DACA with no fast track to a green card, the parents of citizens being granted renewable temporary visas and a guest worker program for agricultural workers. It would have instituted a merit-based approach to immigration by boosting the number of visas for skilled workers.

President Trump supported the Goodlatte bill. It even included provision for DACA, something Democrats have been pushing for and something that Trump campaigned against in 2016. He’s willing to compromise. Democrats might try putting something up that includes the wall plus their priorities and see what happens.

Otherwise, there will be little reason or incentive for President Trump to sign any spending bill. Ultimately, this battle is about whether the duly elected President can have his priorities included.

Elections matter.

So does the separation of powers.

Ultimately, if Congress lacks the votes to override a presidential veto of legislation, or if a bill cannot even get through the Republican Senate without the wall, then House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) have to deal. There’s no other way to get the government reopened if Trump simply won’t sign a bill with no wall — which is why he needs to stick to his guns. Don’t give them an inch, Mr. President.
--------------
Robert Romano is the Vice President of Public Policy at Americans for Limited Government.

---

Tags: Robert Romano, Americans for Limited Government, Son’t give an inch, on the wall, Mr. President To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

At Age 70, Time to Rethink NATO

by Patrick Buchanan: “Treaties are like roses and young girls. They last while they last.”

So said President Charles De Gaulle, who in 1966 ordered NATO to vacate its Paris headquarters and get out of France.

NATO this year celebrates a major birthday. The young girl of 1966 is no longer young. The alliance is 70 years old.

And under this aging NATO today, the U.S. is committed to treat an attack on any one of 28 nations from Estonia to Montenegro to Romania to Albania as an attack on the United States.

The time is ripe for a strategic review of these war guarantees to fight a nuclear-armed Russia in defense of countries across the length of Europe that few could find on a map.

Apparently, President Donald Trump, on trips to Europe, raised questions as to whether these war guarantees comport with vital U.S. interests and whether they could pass a rigorous cost-benefit analysis.

The shock of our establishment that Trump even raised this issue in front of Europeans suggests that the establishment, frozen in the realities of yesterday, ought to be made to justify these sweeping war guarantees.

Celebrated as “the most successful alliance in history,” NATO has had two histories. Some of us can yet recall its beginnings.

In 1948, Soviet troops, occupying eastern Germany all the way to the Elbe and surrounding Berlin, imposed a blockade on the city.

The regime in Prague was overthrown in a Communist coup. Foreign minister Jan Masaryk fell, or was thrown, from a third-story window to his death. In 1949, Stalin exploded an atomic bomb.

As the U.S. Army had gone home after V-E Day, the U.S. formed a new alliance to protect the crucial European powers — West Germany, France, Britain, Italy. Twelve nations agreed that an attack on one would be treated as an attack on them all.

Cross the Elbe and you are at war with us, including the U.S. with its nuclear arsenal, Stalin was, in effect, told. Hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops returned to Europe to send the message that America was serious.

Crucial to the alliance was the Yalta line dividing Europe agreed to by Stalin, FDR and Churchill at the 1945 Crimean summit on the Black Sea.

U.S. presidents, even when monstrous outrages were committed in Soviet-occupied Europe, did not cross this line into the Soviet sphere.

Truman did not send armored units up the highway to Berlin. He launched an airlift to break the Berlin blockade. Ike did not intervene to save the Hungarian rebels in 1956. JFK confined his rage at the building of the Berlin Wall to the rhetorical: “Ich bin ein Berliner.”

LBJ did nothing to help the Czechs when, before the Democratic convention in 1968, Leonid Brezhnev sent Warsaw Pact tank armies to crush the Prague Spring.

When the Solidarity movement of Lech Walesa was crushed in Gdansk, Reagan sent copy and printing machines. At the Berlin Wall in 1988, he called on Mikhail Gorbachev to “tear down this wall.”

Reagan never threatened to tear it down himself.

But beginning in 1989, the Wall was torn down, Germany was united, the Red Army went home, the Warsaw Pact dissolved, the USSR broke apart into 15 nations, and Leninism expired in its birthplace.

As the threat that had led to NATO disappeared, many argued that the alliance created to deal with that threat should be allowed to fade away, and a free and prosperous Europe should now provide for its own defense.

It was not to be. The architect of Cold War containment, Dr. George Kennan, warned that moving NATO into Eastern Europe and former Soviet republics would prove a “fateful error.”

This, said Kennan, would “inflame the nationalistic and militaristic tendencies in Russian opinion” and “restore the atmosphere of the cold war in East-West relations.” Kennan was proven right.

America is now burdened with the duty to defend Europe from the Atlantic to the Baltic, even as we face a far greater threat in China, with an economy and population 10 times that of Russia.

And we must do this with a defense budget that is not half the share of the federal budget or the GDP that Eisenhower and Kennedy had.

Trump is president today because the American people concluded that our foreign policy elite, with their endless interventions where no vital U.S. interest was imperiled, had bled and virtually bankrupted us, while kicking away all of the fruits of our Cold War victory.

Halfway into Trump’s term, the question is whether he is going to just talk about halting Cold War II with Russia, about demanding that Europe pay for its own defense, and about bringing the troops home — or whether he is going to act upon his convictions.

Our foreign policy establishment is determined to prevent Trump from carrying out his mandate. And if he means to carry out his agenda, he had best get on with it.
--------------------
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, time to rethink, NATO, age 70 To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!