ARRA News Service
News Blog 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. 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 "Blog" - no paid ads - no payments for articles. Fair Use Doctrine is posted & used.
Blogger/Editor/Founder: Bill Smith, Ph.D. [aka: OzarkGuru & 2010 AFP National Blogger of the Year]
Contact: (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 (429-347 BC)

Friday, April 19, 2019

Media Continues to Cause Distorted Fear of School Violence

by NRA-ILA: When it comes to the wellbeing of today’s youth, one would think that all could agree that provoking unnecessary fear should be avoided. That apparently is not the case, however, when it comes to pushing the narrative that changes are urgently needed to America’s gun control laws to keep schoolchildren safe from an “epidemic” of “gun violence” that is spiraling out of control. The truth is that schools are as safe as they’ve been in the last two decades, yet polls show the public believing the opposite to be true.

According to an Economist/YouGov poll conducted April 13 – 16, 61% of Americans think students and faculty today are less safe from firearm-related violence in schools than they were in 1999. The poll additionally revealed that two thirds of the respondents believe school shootings have increased during that timeframe.

A YouGov article summarizing the results stated, “Well over half the public say they have heard ‘a lot’ about [firearm-related school violence], the horror of which may have caused so many Americans to say that school shootings have increased, and not decreased, in the last 20 years.”

These findings should concern anyone who believes reality is relevant to policymaking and who wants the best for America’s schoolchildren because they show kids are being unnecessarily terrified about a risk of harm that if anything has actually decreased in recent decades.

Northeastern University Professor of Criminology, Law, and Public Policy James Alan Fox has waged a lonely campaign to bring a dose of reality to the modern discussion of firearm-related violence in schools. An avowed supporter of gun control, he nevertheless seeks to reassure students and parents that – contrary to what they hear in the media – schools remain a safe place.

Fox has published research showing that “shooting incidents involving students have been declining since the 1990s.” Commenting on his findings, he stated, “There is not an epidemic of school shootings.”

Fox also responded to the wave of media stories marking the 20th anniversary of the terrible murders at Columbine High School in Littleton, CO, by admonishing readers in a USA Today editorial this week that “the level of fear is inconsistent with the risk.” The article goes on to suggest measures that can be taken to promote a safe school environment without sending students and faculty an exaggerated message that the “bad guy is gunning for you!”

Fox blamed “cable news and social media” for promoting inaccurate perceptions around firearm-related violence in schools.

Fellow gun control advocate Garen Wintemute of the University of California at Davis agreed with Fox, telling NPR last year:

Schools are just about the safest place in the world for kids to be. … Although each one of them is horrific and rivets the entire nation for a period of time, mass shootings at schools are really very uncommon, and they are not increasing in frequency. What's changed is how aware we are of them.Harvard instructor and expert in risk analysis David Ropeik has calculated that the statistical likelihood of any public school student being killed by a gun in school on any given day since 1999 as 1 in 614,000,000. Ropeik characterized that as “far lower than almost any other mortality risk a kid faces, including traveling to and from school, catching a potentially deadly disease while in school or suffering a life-threatening injury playing interscholastic sports.”

Given all this, it’s not only inaccurate for the media to portray firearm related violence in schools as an increasing threat that should preoccupy America’s students and teachers, it’s unethical and subordinates the peace of mind of young kids to a political agenda.

Americans should celebrate the fact that schools are getting safer and should provide reassurance, not additional trauma, to children saturated by today’s agenda-driven and too often misleading media environment.
Source: NRA-ILA

Tags: NRA-ILA, media, media bias, cause distorted fear, school violence 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 UN Population Fund’s Dirty Little Secret

by Stefano Gennarini: Even after decades of human rights abuses from coercive population control, the UN Population Fund (UNFPA), continues to emphasize population control and to impose population control targets on countries all around the world.

The one-billion-dollar agency backed by Nordic countries, Canada and the United Kingdom, says its mission is to help women make their own choices when it comes to motherhood. But its programming is designed almost exclusively to steer women to preventing or ending motherhood through contraception and abortion.

The population control bias is plain in the latest iteration of UNFPA’s flagship annual State of the World’s Population. The report, titled “Unfinished Business: The Pursuit of Rights and Choices for All”, was released early this year in order to mark UNFPA’s fiftieth anniversary and influence a UNFPA conference in Nairobi this November.

The UNFPA report tells the story of the population control and family planning movement without ever distancing UNFPA from population control. It glosses over the many million women who were forcibly sterilized or forced to abort their children as a direct result of UNFPA’s work.

The report merely notes that international policy has moved from a “target” approach to population control to one based on women’s “empowerment.” If that were true, it would indeed be a good thing. But so long as UNFPA promotes contraceptive use targets and women don’t have the option of a safe pregnancy and delivery, UNFPA’s promises of choice ring hollow.

Over 60% of UNFPA’s annual programming expenses are for contraception. Less than 20% are dedicated to improving maternal health. UNFPA actually advocates that governments should spend more money on contraception because it is cheaper than making pregnancy and childbirth safe for mothers and their children with maternal health programming.

And here is where it really gets dirty.

All that money isn’t actually going towards making contraception more available or accessible. As UNFPA plainly admits, contraception is already widely available. Less than 2% of married women in poor countries say they lack access to contraception, according to USAID surveys. This level of market saturation has remained constant for nearly 20 years, despite an eightfold increase in international aid for population policies.

The main thrust of investments in family planning are instead used to attempt to convince women who, according to surveys originally designed by UNFPA, don’t want to use contraception, or who object to it on moral and health grounds, to use it nevertheless. In plain terms, internationally backed family planning programs are propaganda campaigns.

Nowhere is this more visible than the target on “sexual and reproductive health and reproductive rights” designed by UNFPA to measure progress on the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals. The UNFPA target effectively amounts to a “contraceptive use” quota for countries. Countries that have less than near one-hundred percent contraceptive use are targeted for more family planning propaganda. Ironically, these are the same countries where women themselves say they don’t lack access to contraception.

Alongside the family planning propaganda, UNFPA also promotes homosexual and transgender ideology, harmful comprehensive sexuality education for children, and access to contraception and abortion for girls as young as 10 without parental consent, and other controversial policies under the umbrella of “gender equality.” The report openly praises the sexual revolution and welcomes homosexual/trans ideology, and it includes Roe v. Wade as a landmark event in population policies .
Stefano Gennarini is the Vice President for the Center of Legal Studies at the Center for Family and Human Rights (C-Fam). He represents C-Fam at UN headquarters in New York and researches and writes on international law and policy for C-Fam, advising UN delegations and liaising with pro-family organization around the world. Stefano earned a Juris Doctor from Notre Dame Law School in Indiana in 2011 and was a Blackstone Legal Fellow in 2009.

Tags: Stefano Gennarini, Center for Family and Human Rights, United Nations, The UN Population Fund, Dirty Little Secret To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Mueller-Media Madness

by Newt Gingrich: Watching the first wave of reaction to Attorney General Barr’s Press Conference and the release of the Mueller Report led me to conclude America is trapped in a cycle of media madness.

This media madness is crippling the country, maximizing partisan divisions, and absorbing so much time and energy that it cripples America in trying to come to grips with dangers that could destroy us.

Mueller reported after a nearly two-year effort which involved 19 lawyers, 40 staff, more than 2,800 subpoenas, nearly 500 search warrants, and around 500 witnesses. The investigation spent more than $25 million.

If the Mueller team could have found President Trump guilty, they would have. After all, Mueller recruited as his legal team – 14 Democrats, 12 of whom have contributed to Democrats. Of these lawyers seven were Clinton donors, one attended Clinton’s election night party, and one represented the Clinton Foundation and Hillary Clinton herself.

Far from being innocent of bias, two of the Mueller team’s lawyers met with Christopher Steele, the author of the discredited dossier, before the 2016 election.

For supposed balance, Mueller had one Republican lawyer on the team and zero Trump donors.

When almost two years of digging by this anti-Trump wolfpack could produce no signs of guilt, it is reasonable to conclude that was because there were no signs of guilt.

However, the anti-Trump news media has too much invested in hating Trump to give up just because two years of work by 14 highly motivated, aggressive Democrat lawyers found no laws broken.

The first 24 hours of coverage give a pretty good clue to the next phase of this madness. Every small item in the Mueller report will become an excuse to harass the Trump team and Republicans in general (note the nasty tone of the CBS interview with Sarah Sanders over whether she used one word wrongly).

Just watch: Reporters who were totally wrong will interview Democratic politicians who were totally wrong, and they both will focus on the next phase of the anti-Trump cycle. It doesn’t matter how often reporters have been demonstrably wrong and misled by their anonymous sources, they still pontificate as though they know something. It doesn’t matter how much Democratic congressmen or senators were wrong, they will just launch a new attack on President Trump.

The fascinating thing is President Trump’s ability to ignore the madness and focus on leading the country. Through all the hysteria, he has been able to focus on getting conservative judges on the federal bench, cutting regulations, tax cuts, job creation, North Korea, the Middle East, Venezuela, China, and trade negotiations with multiple countries – even with 92 percent negative news coverage and Democrats attacking him every day.

It has been impressive watching the President limit his responses to Twitter attacks and sections of his rally speeches while continuing to hold meetings and focus on the vast substantive challenges facing America.

Now President Trump is liberated from the dark cloud of the Mueller investigation. After 448 pages, the conclusion was no collusion of any kind with Russia and no proof of obstruction of justice strong enough to warrant prosecution.

Given the ongoing hostility and negativity with this positive report, imagine what would have happened if President Trump had received the kind of judgment Ken Starr rendered on President Bill Clinton.

In the Starr Report, Clinton was found to be guilty of breaking the law 11 times. Seven of those charges included acts of perjury (some multiple times), and five were explicitly obstruction of justice (including the ninth charge of witness tampering).

Imagine where we would be today if Robert Mueller had used the word guilty on 11 different counts involving President Trump. Imagine where we would be if the Mueller Report had said President Trump was guilty of five counts of obstruction of justice.

That is where the Left, the news media, and the Democrats had hoped Mueller would end up. They were counting on a definitive finding of guilt – just as they were counting on Hillary Clinton to win on election night 2016.

Instead, they were forced to come to grips with a Donald Trump presidency (anyone can see it has been agonizing for them). So, now the Left is once again having to come to grips with deep, bitter disappointment.

The 2016 disappointment led the Left to invent the Russian collusion explanation because they could not bring themselves to tell Hillary it was her fault she lost.

I’m interested to see where this latest traumatic disappointment will lead them – and what they will latch on to as their next vehicle for avoiding reality.

Meanwhile, the reality of the Trump presidency – and the renewed strength of President Trump as a vindicated innocent man – will continue to change America in a direction the country likes and the Left hates.
Newt Gingrich (@newtgingrich) 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. This commentary was shared via Gingrich Productions.

Tags: Newt Gingrich, commentary, Mueller-Media Madness To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

'Reservoir Dems' Prepare for a Trump 2020 Landslide

Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-MN & House SpeakerNancy Pelosi, D-CA.
by David P. Goldman: Secret footage of the Democratic Party's 2020 convention is available online. Actually, I don't time-travel, so I linked to the Mexican standoff at the end of "Reservoir Dogs," where three of the characters shoot each other dead. Quentin Tarantino's cinematic flourish captures the state of the Democratic Party better than Obama's talk of a circular firing squad, because Democrats are drawing a bead on other Democrats with malice, aforethought, and mayhem in their hearts.

Being intersectional means never having to say you're sorry, and it also means demanding that everyone else say they're sorry. Nancy Pelosi is under siege by the left, the Washington Post reports, because she hasn't done enough to defend Rep. Ilhan Omar against the consequences of her "some people did something" outrage. Pelosi only said that Trump's 9/11 tweet was "beneath the dignity" of his office and demanded extra security for Omar, but she didn't snap to attention fast enough for the left.

Meanwhile, Pete Buttigieg faces allegations that racism was the reason for the 2012 firing of South Bend's black police chief, on the strength of tape-recorded conversations with white police officers. A judge may or may not release the tapes, The Hill reports, but in any case, "There is roiling anger in South Bend over the allegations of racism. Black leaders in the city say that if there is evidence of racism, it could call into question scores of convictions that stemmed from white police officers investigating black suspects in a city that is 25 percent black."

And let's not forget that Joe Biden is a serial groper, whose "long-running apology tour hits the #MeToo era," as Matt Viner wrote in an April 4 Washington Post commentary. "Joe Biden hasn't offered a full-throated apology for his treatment of Anita Hill in the 1990s," the screed begins, and you can imagine the rest. And Bernie Sanders is now a rich white man. "Can he still represent the interests of working-class Americans?" asked another WaPo commentary.

Let's see if I did my intersectional sums correctly: Feminists like Pelosi are Islamophobes, gays like Buttigieg are racists, blacks are homophobic, and white men like Biden and Sanders are misogynist and classist, as the case may be. Beto O'Rourke is a misogynist, although his ode to cows may win him the bovine vote. I suppose the Democrats will have to nominate Cory Booker, who says he isn't gay but might be, and whose net worth might be as low as $600,000.

No goofier notion ever invaded American political thinking than the idea of a coalition based on entitled victimhood and invented identity. Victimhood is inconsolable and identity is inviolable. In the weird world of intersectionality, gays have to abase themselves before blacks for racism, and blacks have to abase themselves before gays for homophobia, and everyone has to abase himself for exhaling carbon dioxide. This isn't a coalition. It's a mob of mutually irreconcilable elements as likely to turn on each other as on anyone else.

One can debate whether the American republic is founded upon common principles and a commitment to compromise (a form of social contract) or a common culture (Lincoln's "mystic chords of memory" and his concept of Americans as an "almost chosen people"). Intersectionality rejects the concept of a unifying culture in favor of a plethora of identities that are incompatible with each other, as well as the common culture. African-Americans and Hispanics can be misogynists and homophobes; feminists and LGBTQ's can be racist, and Muslims can be all of these things. All of them are classist, including newly-minted millionaire Bernie Sanders.

The great debate in antiquity on the character of a republic opposed Cicero to St. Augustine. Cicero argued that a republic was founded on common interest, to which Augustine replied that it depended on a common love. The Reservoir Democrats are united by hatred of a third party, namely the American republic itself, as well as hatred of each other and often of themselves. Where do we find worse misogyny than in raps about "bitches" and "Ho's"? Where do we find worse homophobia than in Muslim regimes that execute gays? Where do we find classists more arrogant than the liberal environmentalists who are willing to wipe out the livelihood of working people because of their fanatical belief in computer models? Long before these hyenas have finished ravaging the American body politic they will turn on each other. They already have.

A Trump landslide is in the making for 2020.

With the lowest rate of African-American unemployment in history, and wages rising fastest at the low end of the spectrum, a lot of blacks will vote for a president who improved their circumstances.

A lot of legal Hispanic immigrants will vote for a president who wants to protect them from unfair competition from illegal workers, and protect their communities from the social pathologies arising from illegal immigration.

A lot of gays will vote for a president who stands up to Muslim regimes that murder gays, and to apologists for Muslim terrorists who shoot up gay nightclubs.

A lot of Americans will stop believing the liberal media who assured them daily that proof of Trump's collusion with Russia would appear momentarily.

And a lot of Americans will turn away in revulsion from a Democratic Party that eschews any criticism of the likes of Rep. Ilhan Omar. The Dumbocrats don't learn. From the outset, a clear majority of voters has supported Trump's restrictions on travel from Muslim-majority countries. Rep. Omar is a millstone that Nancy Pelosi has hung around her neck. Browbeaten by the loonie left in her own party, Pelosi has no choice but to identify with the odious Omar, claiming to CNN just this morning that Omar is "not anti-Semitic." Omar says that Jews "hypnotized the world" and bribe Congress with "Benjamins" ($100 bills). If that's not anti-Semitic, I'm the Dalai Lama. We may not be a land of geniuses but we're not complete idiots, either.

All of this adds up to a Trump landslide and a miasma of liberal misery unlike anything we've seen since the great days of the Gipper.
David P. Goldman writes for PJMedia and is the columnist “Spengler” for Asia Times Online.

Tags: David P. Goldman, PJ Media, Reservoir Dems, Prepare for,Trump 2020 Landslide To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Victor Davis Hanson Presents 'The Case For Trump'

A titan delivers a stirring keynote address at the Freedom Center retreat.
Victor Davis Hanson
ARRA News Service: Historian-author-pundit Victor Davis Hanson, author of The Case for Trump, opened the Freedom Center's annual West Coast Retreat at the Terranea Resort in Rancho Palos Verdes (April 5-7, 2019) with a wide-ranging and stirring keynote address. Check out the transcript and video below!

Victor Davis Hanson: Thank you very much. I was listening to Judge Jeanine last night, and it is strange times. I was on a flight the other day coming back from a speech and a guy tapped me and said, "Did you write this book?" and he pulled it from under the seat. I said, "Yeah" and he said, "Could you sign it?" He came over and then he put it back under the seat. He said, "It's like wearing a MAGA hat, that cover."

So I was listening to her [Judge Janine] go through all of the things, and then sometimes when I'm at work, the Stanford Studio--our Hoover Studio-- shuts down, so I went to do a Fox show. When I got a call from the Fox producer he said, "They won't let you on unless you write out in advance an outline of everything you're going to say." So, I called him up, and I said, "I just heard two professors go on a rant on MSNBC with the Stanford logo from the studio about why Trump is treason and should be impeached," and they backed down, and they said, "Okay, we won't do it." The next time, they did the same thing.

So, there's a climate we're in right now that’s insidious everywhere. We have a climate of fear that this popular culture has created, and it sounds like deterrence. They want to call you names. But if you back off a little bit, then that's a victory for them, and that's why I thought that her final call to arms was well taken. What I'd like to do is just ask a series of questions for about 25 minutes and open up for questions:

How did this guy get elected, and I mean by that, how was he nominated? How did he do pretty well for the first 2 years? Why do two groups of people hate him, the left of course, but as I learned from a reaction to this book, the Never Right hate him even more-- the Never Trump Right. Then what's the prognosis to the degree that anybody knows for 2020?

One thing we forget about the 2016 Republican primary field is that it wasn't like this Democratic field that we're seeing with a lot of really crazy people. We were told these were the All-Stars. It wasn't like the 2012 field. We wanted a governor. There was supposedly Chris Christie, Scott Walker and Bobby Jindal. If you wanted an up-and-coming Senator, there was Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz. If you wanted a successful outsider, it wasn't Donald Trump. It was Carly Fiorina or Ben Carson. So we had this wonderful selection, and we nominated somebody for the first time in the history of the United States as a major nominee, who was then elected, but had neither political or military experience.

Well, what was Trump’s point? We misinterpret sometimes and think he was a populist or a nationalist or a Jacksonian. But if you actually look at what he said, the doctrine was 80 percent Republican orthodox. And by that, I mean he wanted tax reform and reduction. He got that. He wanted to beef up the defense budget as most Republicans. He did that. He wanted to restore deterrence. He did that. He wanted to restore our traditional relationship with Israel. That was pretty much a standard Republican position. He wanted more energy production. He wanted strict constructionist judges. All of them wanted that. So what distinguished him? There were two or three things, but one is that he tweaked the traditional Republican message in about three or four areas.

The first was he said that it wasn't foreordained that China would take over the world in 2050. Insidiously, we had accepted that China had become this population, or this supposed superior brand of communist-capitalism; that it would bully the allies of Asia, form a sort of a Greater Asia, co-prosperity similar in the way Japan did; and we had to get used to it. Trump said that not only were they not foreordained, but they were successful because of asymmetries in trade. Whether that's true or not doesn't matter. That was the message. And a couple times, if you go through what he said, it was very simplistic but there was a logic to it. A billion people had a GDP--depending on how we measured of 8 to 10 or $11 trillion. 330 million had a GDP of 21 trillion. So, one American, if you say we're all workers, was producing almost 2 ½ times the goods and services of his Chinese counterpart. If you look at ratings of universities in the world, research universities--Times Education Supplement, University of Tokyo--of the top 20, about 17 are American. Five of them are in California. I think there's one or two in China. If you look at agricultural production, oil production, military expenditures, it's just preponderantly in America's favor. Maybe the long-term trajectory was considered not so rosy, but he said that this was not foreordained.

Trump also said you didn't have a country if you had an open border, and that immigration had to be measured. We get a million entries a year for legal immigrants and diverse, rather than 70 percent coming from south of the border. Meritocratic is 85 percent of illegal immigrants do not have a high school diploma. And legal, that seems self-evident. It wasn't at the time. Remember, Jeb Bush said that illegal immigration was an act of love. Most people in the Republican Party just didn't want to discuss that.

The third thing that was quite different was he said if you're going to be involved in an optional military engagement, you have to translate a tactical victory on the ground into a strategic advantage. So, it didn't really matter how well we did during the surge. I was a big supporter of the surge, but if you don't pacify Iraq, or you don't secure it, whatever the reason is. The same thing with Afghanistan. The same thing with Libya. And so it was a punitive: bomb the sh-t of out ISIS but do not waste precious resources when you've got a huge debt when the real rival might be China in the long term. Why are you fighting in the streets of Kabul when you can't get a strategic advantage in the region? That was new for a Republican, and of course, being Trump, he said all sorts of other things that were gratuitously cruel to Bush but not necessarily inaccurate about the Iraq intervention, and he fudged about his own support. He had supported it, then he said he didn't, but that's Trump.

The Republicans had fallen in this trap of confusing cause and effect. Somebody takes Oxycotin, and therefore, is not eligible to work in a factory. No, it's the other way around. A job is left, and then somebody took it. It's not to excuse that behavior, but what he was saying is that energy is pretty cheap in America. The workforce is not that bad, simply located area. There should be a reason why a welder from Bakersfield or somebody in Youngstown or somebody in York, Pennsylvania should benefit from globalization. It is not the idea that any muscular labor that can be Xeroxed will be, and it's your fault that you didn't learn coding or head to the fracking fields of Dakota. That was sort of what a colleague in National Review of mine wrote. That message, and here was the brilliant part, it was geared toward the Electoral College of North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, Iowa, Indiana, Ohio, where the election was really going to be held. Texas was not going to go blue in 2016. It's not going to go blue in 2020. We in California are not going to go red. That's where the election is, and appeal, and I don't know to this day why those 16 other candidates didn't grasp that basic fact, but they didn't, including the people who were advising them: Bill Crystal, Max Boot, a lot of people I won't mention that I work with at National Review. If you go back – and I quoted them in the book – if you go back to what they said, they even went to the point that these people were not just deplorable or irredeemable or clingers but should be swapped out and illegal immigration was good because you were getting really robust young people. There's a certain logic to it. But the idea that you write off a whole section of the population--and you can do so because it's politically correct, this came from the conservative Right, both during but especially after the election-- shows you where the Republican establishment mindset was.

How did he beat them? He got the nomination. How did he beat Hillary Clinton? Think of the odds against him. He was outspent 2½ to 1. He was the first Republican that I can think of, maybe Barry Goldwater was slightly that way, where the Republican establishment was pretty much against him. And by that, I mean, the major organs of expression-- National Review, Commentary, Weekly Standard were against him. The Washington, New York intellectual Group were against him. People like Mitch McConnell in the Senate and Paul Ryan to the extent that they could be candid were lukewarm, and, privately, they were against him, and yet he beat Hillary Clinton. Part of it was that Hillary Clinton was a lousy candidate. We don't fully appreciate how lousy she was.

If you go into West Virginia, not that she was going to carry it, but you say coal is dead, and they're going to be put out of work, and Donald Trump goes in and says he loves big beautiful coal, that's a difference. Or if you go down to the South and say, "I'm so tired" and you fake that accent, then you go up to New England, and you fake a New England accent, and you wear the clothes of the region flannel here, the straw hat; and you're running against a guy who wears this red tie and suit and a Queen's accent whether he's in Tulare, California or whether he's in Florida, wherever he is, he's authentic. He's also empathetic. If you're telling people that you've got to go build solar panels in Appalachia, and he's going around and using the first person possessive – our farmers, our workers, our vets – that’s a difference. And that was the disconnect. They never understood that a billionaire from Manhattan with a Queen's accent could connect better with average people than Hillary Clinton, the so-called progressive party of the people.

The other thing is that there was a very prominent person at the Hoover Institution. I was sitting at a table, and he was giving me a lecture about how awful the Trump campaign was – this was right before the election – and how he didn't have any analytics, and they were going to fail. Peter Till was sitting, and getting very angry with this, and he said, "He's got great analytics because his analytics is not fifty states. He won't be in Arizona and Georgia, as Hillary will be next week trying to get a landslide. That's not going to happen, she’s wasting her efforts and that’s why Trump, as the proverbial fox, will be in her hen house eating the chickens of the Midwest. And he said, "How do you know this?" He said, "Because I designed the analytics for him." And so there was a perception that Trump had a bunch of buffoons, and he did have Amoroso and Scaramucci, but even those people were not as buffoonish as everybody thought. But he had some very sophisticated people working for him, and he was underrated.

The other thing that made him very successful besides this message, I mentioned that he was empathetic in a certain way. But the Republican base, whatever we call it, the Tea Party, the Reagan Democrat, the old parole voter, 6 to 8 million of them had not voted-- either had not voted or had not voted for John McCain or Mitt Romney. And if they all were to come out, 90 percent 85 percent, there was a chance they could flip these states by very tiny margins – 70, 80, 90,000 votes. But to get them out you require not just this message that we talked about that he tweaked, but you had to have a different idea. The worst thing a candidate can do, I think you all agree, is to saw off the limb of their own supporters that go out on a limb to support them. By that I mean all of us were so angry at Reverend Wright--anti-Semitic, racist, anti-American. And we wrote that. We said that. And then when John McCain says, "I'm not going to mention Reverend Wright, I wouldn't do that." That's telling his supporters, "I'm better than you are" even though you're going out and taking the hit for him. Or when Mitt Romney didn't grab that mic from Candy Crawley, and you're attacking Candy Crawley for being an improper moderator, you feel like an idiot. But what Trump was telling to these people is, "Go out. Be another Lee Atwater. Do whatever you have to do to win. I'm sick and tired of losing nobly. No more Marquess of Queensbury Rules.

So, I remember when we had the Access Hollywood tape, somebody from a prominent magazine called me and said we're going to vote tomorrow to withdraw support. I said, "That was an old video. But the point is, you have no idea." They said, "Well, he'll be crushed. I said, "Trump? He'll be happy about this. He will be enthused. He will have a good debate." I said, "They will have every possible woman in Bill Clinton's history lined up in the front row." And they did because I said, "This is an invitation to fight back." So, there was a sense that they wanted not just a different message, but they wanted a messenger that would not embarrass their own base.

So then he got elected. I’ll overuse that image of Shane or the Magnificent Seven, or High Noon, or Dirty Harry, or Curtis Lamay or George Patton, but in literature and history, there is this archetype of somebody that's not part of the system and yet has skill sets, imagination, real value; and is brought in to solve an existential problem. In our case, we hadn't had 3 percent GDP. We really were locked in this Middle East mindset where the Palestinians were still called refugees unlike the Volga Germans or the 13 million that walked back to Germany from the Sudetenland or East Prussia. They're no longer refugees and the Iran deal was sacrosanct.

All of these things we thought were wrong but we couldn't change it. And so we brought this person in. Because he was free of any obligations, he was able to just do things: get out of the Iran deal, get out of the Paris Accord. Just the other day, recognize the Golan Heights, decertify the UN via American funds to the Palestinians, move the embassy to Jerusalem, green light Keystone, open federal lands for, etc., etc. And in the process, as you know, of all of these careers or a Patton or a Lamay or the movie Dirty Harry or Shane, the more that they can stand up and solve a problem, the more that people get uneasy with them. So the more that Trump got the economy going, the more we had the luxury of concentrating or focusing on his tweets. So we all had this impression that wow, the economy's doing pretty well. Wow, jobs were 3.8 the other day. It just came out. More jobs, more people were hired than we thought. But why did he have to go after George Conway, of all people? I really didn't like it that he went after the ghost of John McCain. But we wouldn't be saying that if we were in an existential crisis, but we're not. So that's the sort of the Sophocles in paradox. When these people come in, they start to get results and those very results allow us the luxury of regretting that we were ever so base and crude to allow him to come in.

I've done a lot of interviews, because one of the things the book sellers like you to do is regional talk shows. And a lot of people say: Why would you want to write a book about him? And these are even conservatives who will say why would you do that? You were writing about World War II. That was good. But the idea is you don't want to come out and endorse Donald Trump because it's a reflection on all of your education and your sobriety or your sense of judiciousness. But we just come out and say we needed a Shane to come in and clean things up. And then all tragic heroes don't end well. So, as I said, I don't think Donald Trump will be invited to a funeral of post-presidents. It's not going to happen. The next president is not going to call him up and say you're a wise man now, got any advice? It's not going to happen. And he could just as easily get back to the World Wrestling Foundation, get back in the ring after he's president. As he said, "I'm not unpresidential." I'm quoting him direct. "I'm new Presidential."

So we have this ambiguity, but it's really an ambiguity that reflects as much on our character as his. If you think things are going well, and, by past president, he hasn't done anything more outrageous. People say, well, that's a low bar. And I said no. It's a very low bar because if you look at what JFK did, by that I mean Anna Roosevelt was arranging affairs with Lucy Mercer for FDR -- his own daughter. And I just got in a big argument with him. He said, well, how could you, a Ph.D.? I said, especially a Ph.D. But he said how could a Ph.D. support Donald Trump given what he does? I'm just playing a thought process. I said I didn't like it when he exposed himself to the Cabinet. I didn't like the idea that he deflowered a virgin. I didn't like that he asked one of his own aides to fellate one of his own staffers in the pool. I thought it was terrible he was having some kind of bizarre sex right off the ... See? See? I said everything I just mentioned applied to Bill Clinton, JFK, and FDR. And, more importantly, we don't know because the world is tragic. It's not melodramatic.

The two best sterling characters we had as President were Jimmy Carter, I think, and Gerry Ford. No better people. But if you look at that period between 1974 and 1980, it's not an argument that good character means bad leadership. It's just an argument that every once in a while they're not synonymous, and we should remember that.

Why do people hate him [Trump]so much? The left, I think there are two or three reasons. The first is the utter shock. I went back and looked at the New York Times the day before the election, and it was three series of analytics they were quoting, not just polls but analytics, based on surveys of who was going to vote and what the percentage was of each – and one said 2 percent chance of winning, another 7 percent, another 12. Nate Silver, 3 days before, said he has a 27 percent chance of winning, and they just got furious at him. How dare you say that? He doesn't have 27. That's going to encourage people. So there was this sense of utter shock that this person won and he won the way he did, and it interrupted 16 years, 16 years of an Obama-Clinton regnum.

So, they were thinking two to three Supreme Court judges. They were thinking that what is now the New Green Deal would sort have been fast tracked. I also think we would've seen a real effort to institutionalize reparations; and this new agenda that almost makes infanticide permissible – I shouldn't say almost. It does. Abortion would have been institutionalized. I think we would be talking about a wealth tax, 70 to 90 percent income tax on the top rates. I think there would have been an effort to abolish or do something with ICE. This border that we see, I think, would be permanently open. I think there would've been some type of massive cancellation of student debt. I think that, had they won the House, Senate and the presidency – I don't know if they could've pulled it off given the nature of the constitutional amendment process--but there would've been an effort to change the composition of the Court and, also, abolish the Electoral College and allow 16 year olds to vote along with felons. In other words, efforts to institutionalize that 16 years into a 30, 40‑year period, and I think they might have been successful.

And so they hated him because he stopped that. And not only did he stop it, but being Donald Trump, he's used it three times: I'm using my pen and phone, remember that phrase from Obama? as an executive order to undo a lot of these things-- to deregulate, to open up federal lands for gas production. He did things that deliberately irritated them.

The second thing was, and this applies a little bit to the Never Trumper. If he succeeded without any of these references, even though he went to Tufts and he had a good education, but if he succeeded without consulting the Council on Foreign Relations, the World Bank, calling up the Hoover Institution, then that, by nature, might be a referendum on people who did that as a requisite for good governments or a prognosticator of a good Presidency. In other words, if you didn't go to Yale Law School like Clinton or Harvard Law School like Barack Obama but you had a more impressive economic record-- not that the two are necessarily equivalent, but it might suggest to a lot of people--maybe we in this country got to get away from this idea that Yale, Harvard, Stanford means something rather than just a cattle brand. One thing about Trump, he is prescient as we saw from the admission scandal. A lot of people look at these universities just, as their child, as some kind of steer who will be branded and put in the right herd in the right pasture but not necessarily worrying too much whether they get educated or not. But it's a referendum on the status quo, and I think that worried a lot of people.

And then there's a sense, especially in the progressive side, that you can have style over substance, and you can see that with Joe Biden. If Joe Biden says that FDR should have gotten television in 1929 and addressed the nation about the Great Depression, and he said it as Joe Biden, then nobody has dare said to him that there was no TV, commercially, available, and FDR was not President or put you all back in change, or that Barack Obama is the first clean African-American candidate, as if Barbara Jordan was a brilliant candidate. But there was the idea of the way you say it, who you say it to and what you say. If you say take a gun to a knife fight or get in their faces or you people from Philadelphia like a brawl or Trayvon is like the son that I never had or punish our enemy….If you can say that in a particular style and a particular way of saying it, it's okay. But if you say the same things with a Queen's accent or a Sarah Palin accident, then it's a window into a dark soul. And he did that. And I thought, you know what? This is confirmation of the deplorables, the irredeemables, the wrong people.

There was a great article in American Greatness by a Hoover scholar, Jeremy Carl, and they looked at tribal affinities by race and class. I don't know if you saw it, but it was quite revealing that every group, birds of a feather flock together. African-Americans seem to have an innate trust more of African-Americans, Hispanics, other Hispanics, Asians of Asians, and white people of a certain class more but the least of all, 52 percent, as I recall. But the one group that did not trust its own tribe and had a dislike for it were wealthy, white, liberal people. Maybe that would be noble as Socratic citizens of the word, but what it told me is that type of person has something psychologically very angry at itself, its tradition. And its emblemized by Donald Trump. His way of talking, how he made his money, the people who like him, to them, it all conjures up certain violations of their sense of self. And their sense of self is: I have become a progressive. I have taken out identity insurance. And because, in the abstract, I care and feel, I don't want a wall on the southern border. Therefore, I can have a wall around my Mark Zuckerberg estate. I really do want to stop transfers of water because I care about the smell, but not Hetch Hetchy that brings me a shower every morning in Palo Alto. I really do like the idea of the public schools. I do not like teachers unions. But I have to at least put my kids in Castelay or Sacred Heart or the Mendel school. So, for them, that particular subset that really hates Trump, it's the idea that this guy just comes in, and all of their pretensions or all of their disconnects, he challenges. And then he doesn't just challenge it, he points out how hypocritical they are. He does that all the time. If you look at his tweets, that's one constant theme. You have walls. Why can't the nation have walls? If you don't want Betty Boss to do something, then put your kid in a public school. That's a very scary thing to do for a lot of people.

This is even more perplexing because, if you look at all of the things that Trump has done and you go to that place, the Bulwark, and see what people are writing or see what Max Boot or David Frum or Bill Kristol or George Will are writing, almost all of the issues that they've spent their life advancing have now been either suspect or rejected because Trumps' fingerprints are on them. Think of that. This messenger has polluted my message to the extent that I no longer want that message to succeed. I want him to fail and, with it, the Republican Party.

And then, like some mystical Phoenix, they're going to ask me to come and, again, in sober and judicious terms, rebuild the party in my image. That's what it's all about.

But why that hatred? And I think part of it is most of the people who were involved in the Never Trump were in some ways invested in particular campaigns, especially the Rubio campaign, some, the Cruz. And they really did feel that they would be the wise men, as they usually are. They would be asked to come into the White House. They would be on the talk shows. They would be the people who were advising. And this Trump guy – I think Eliot Cohen, a Never Trumper, summed it up best when he wrote his op‑ed and said: I went in and offered my expertise, and they not only didn't take it, they made fun of me. This is a person who wrote almost every day how awful Trump was. I had another person call me, and he said you know any of these people? I said not particularly. Maybe. And he said can you believe what they did? I said what? I offered my services to the State Department, and they have a special office in the White House that examines every tweet and Facebook posting. And I said duh. I said there was just an op‑ed on September 5, 2018. The guy said that I'm part of the resistance trying to destroy the Trump administration from within. And he said yeah. This was during the primary, and he's this way. And I said so why would you want to work for him? Well, because he needs me. And that attitude of entitlement, I think, something about Trump and the people he brought in said we don't just not want you people, at least some of them, but we don't like you. And that was a tit for tat. They started it, and Trump, unlike most Republicans, was not magnanimous. He thought that their hostility should not be repaid with magnanimity. He thought it should be repaid with even greater scorn. And that's typical of him. If you look at his tweets, take the worst, stupid things he's been in with John McCain or the Pakistani Gold Star family or whoever it is. He usually gets hit first, and then, as some coiled cobra, he strikes back. But he never really starts it. But once somebody starts it, then he goes back, and that appeals to a particular American. It's very American, and that bothers the Never Trump even more. They felt that given ‘my’ position and wisdom and education and experience, I have the right to make fun of this outside buffoon, and I would never imagine that he would question me, and he did. And so they're looking at him now, and I think they're afraid that they've become useful idiots. By that I mean their currency, their funding, their residence, now, is based on we, as Republicans, can tell the world that he's not of us, and we hate him, and he's going to destroy the country, but we're afraid that once he's gone, the people who fund us and welcome us might consider us no longer useful, and then where do they go?

I don't think the establishment is going to come back after Trump, whether he's gone in 2020 or 2024, and say okay. Let's get to work and start listening to us again because, remember, since 1988, the Republican Party had not won 51 percent of the popular vote. It lost five out of the last six popular votes. It's not that Trump won the popular vote, but they got killed in the Electoral College, except for that 2000 election. So this is a time, at the state and local level, just in the Obama administration alone, they picked up over 1,100 seats, so there was something wrong on the national ticket that these architects of orthodoxy had not addressed, and we know what it was. They had a message, and they had messengers that did not appeal to these people in these key swing states of the Midwest and Florida and places.

What are his chances in 2020? Well, as historians, we just have to ask ourselves what happens to an incumbent President? They usually win, about 75 percent, 80 percent of the time. And when they don't, whether it's George H. W. Bush or Jimmy Carter or their second term implodes, it's usually one of three things. A sudden economic downturn can happen with Trump. I just talked to a lot of economists at Hoover. Most of them are Never Trump. They think that we're in trouble. I don't think we'll see a recession before the election. An unpopular war in Iraq or Vietnam? I don't think that's in the cards. Or a scandal, a Watergate scandal or something of that nature. I don't think the Mueller thing is going to pan out. In fact, I know it's not.

So then how is he doing on other metrics? At this time, in their beginning of their third year, Barack Obama and Clinton had come up a little bit, and they went from 43 to 45 percent in the Gallup. We didn't have a real clear politics. That's pretty much where Trump is. Trump lost 39, I guess it's now 40, seats in the House. Clinton lost 53. Obama lost 62. Clinton lost 8 senators. Obama lost 6 in their midterms. Trump picked up 2. Clinton pretty much got 49 percent, thanks to the second running of Perot, but he did defeat Bob Dole handedly. And Barack Obama defeated Mitt Romney handedly. So, in some sense, Trump's reelection chances, the history of it, is pretty good. It's his to lose.

Everybody thinks that Trump is running in a popularity contest. Presidential candidates are between good ones and better or bad ones and worse. We saw that in 2016 with Hillary Clinton. People, in that party, did not understand that when she got up on the podium and started shrieking in that squeaky…. – that just turned people off. Or that sense of entitlement about the emails or that array of people around her, they didn't understand that her negatives were just as high as Trump but even, perhaps, higher because they were underreported. And so, this time around, the Democratic Party, as I said, has this menu, and we saw with Al Sharpton – remember, Al Sharpton came into national prominence for inciting a riot that led to a death for anti-Semitic, homophobic, and racist slur, and now he is some kind of adjudicator on reparations, of all things. And these candidates are going to this racist and begging him for their endorsement. And they think that's going to play out in the general election, and they think the infanticide's going to play out, and they think the wealth tax is going to play out and the open borders, all these issues I just mentioned. But the problem with all of them is, if you look at their polling, and there has been polling, on every single one of them, they don't approach 51 percent. So then the question is, if they actually get tagged with this, it's going to be very hard for a guy like Joe Biden to run in a primary and not have to endorse some of those, whether in the debates or the convention.

So then the question is they don't have a winning message, and Trump, this time around, is not just the Manhattan controversial developer. He'll have a 4‑year record, and it will be pretty good.

So then the question is the candidates themselves, can they overturn the message? But the problem here is that white privilege, white privilege, white privilege, white privilege, identity politics, identity politics, identity politics. And by the logic of the Democratic Party, it's time for white males to step aside. They've had their turn. And the inclusivity party will now put Stacey Abrams, who's never been elected to anything, as Vice President, maybe, Cory Booker, Elizabeth Warren. All of them are identified, whether favorably or not, with identity politics and ethnic heritages. And so the question is, when you look at the polls, the three leaders are Biden, Beto, and Bernie. And so that's a contradiction. And we saw with Hillary Clinton that her formula for success was that I'm going to inherit all the upside of Barack Obama. I'm going to inherit record minority turnout so that I'm going to get so many votes in Pittsburgh and Philadelphia it'll wipe out western Pennsylvania, so many in Ann Arbor and Detroit, it'll wipe out southern Michigan, so many in Milwaukee, etc., etc. But what turned out is she inherited the downside from Obama, turning off the white working class, and none of the upside, not that record participation. And so, if they nominate any of those three people, they won't get – and even if they nominate a Kamala Harris or Cory Booker, I don't think they will get the ethnic or racial residents that Obama did, partly because there's no longer a novelty factor involved.

And so, to sum up, we get into 2020. It reminds me of what Talleyrand said of the Bourbons, they have forgotten nothing, and they've learned nothing in 4 years. And they still believe that 2016 was a fluke. They still read each other's op‑eds. They still think the polls are absolutely accurate, and they still think that, just maybe, when we sued for the Voting Rights Act, the voting machines right after the election, that would have worked. Just maybe we could talk those electors into not following their constitutional responsibilities. Remember that? And they will not vote for what the states voted for. Just maybe we can get that emoluments clause of the Constitution and get him out. Just 200 House members sued. Just maybe we can evoke the 25th Amendment and declare him unfit. Just maybe we can revive the dossier and get the Mueller investigation. Just maybe we can sue him on his taxes. Just maybe Barr misinterpreted the Mueller report, and there's going to be bombshell. The walls will close in. The noose will be tightening again. And all of this is in lieu of what? Of having a message that resonates with 51 percent of the people and candidates that don't appear as if they're crazy. And with that, I'll take questions. Thank you.

Moderator: We have time for a couple questions. Anybody have a question? Any questions?

Audience member: Um, my question is about McCain. It's my understanding that Trump is angry at him for things that go back to the 2016 election. And I'm not sure what McCain did to cause that anger. Could you explain that?

Hanson: If you were Donald Trump, I think his writ would be about four or five things. He would say that in 2008 McCain, as Romney did in 2012, went up to Trump Tower and asked for his endorsement, and Trump provided it, even though he may or may not have preferred McCain. And then you would argue that after the dossier failed, even though it was leaked to Michael Isikoff and David Corn and Julia Joff and others and they wrote articles during the election and it failed to stop the Trump campaign, there was an effort, then, to destroy the transition. And then, in December, John McCain took that dossier, gave it to his aide, Kramer, who went over to Britain to talk to Christopher Steele. Then he seeded that in the State Department and seeded it with maybe some of the intelligence. And John McCain was hoping, then, that would develop enough hysteria -- he hoped right. Or then, if we talk to Donald Trump, he said John McCain ran in his latest primary on one plank, and that was to repeal Obamacare. And then, even though he was ill, he made a special trip to go in and be the tie-breaking vote against something he'd campaigned on just to spite Donald Trump. Or then you would say that, in a very petty way, Trump mentioned, I allowed the funeral. Well, he should have done that anyway. But the point he was trying to make was the John McCain funeral turned into something like the Paul Wellstone funeral. I hadn't seen anything like it since Paul Wellstone. By that I mean, if you look at what Meghan McCain said, her eulogy was basically an attack on Donald Trump. And even Barack Obama and George Bush, in coded language, attacked the President of the United States at a day of mourning, and these are supposed to be people better than Trump. So if you add all of those up, he had some grounds to be angry. Don't say anything about the dead unless it's good. That was sort of the canon of Western civilization. So when he came out and attacked McCain after his death, we were shocked about that. I guess we have one more.

Moderator: We have time for one more question.

Audience member: How do you feel about the way Trump is handling the whole immigration thing, the Mexican border and everything? What is your opinion about how he's handling it and if he's doing everything he can?

Hanson: Well, I mean, these are two questions. Why is the border – especially as the weather warms up, what we're seeing now is going to be nothing because these caravans are really going to come in May, June, and July. So he missed an opportunity to really put Congress, when he had both the House and Senate. I don't know if Paul Ryan would have cooperated, but, my God, they could have built a wall. I doubt Paul Ryan would have done it. But the point I'm making is what more is he supposed to do when he doesn't have a majority of pro‑wall senators, even in his own party? So he has a narrow majority in the Senate. But, as you saw from that emergency vote, they weren't with him. He lost the House. The courts are against him. And I know that Ann Coulter and all these other people are furious at him, but what is he supposed to do now, other than threaten Mexico with tariffs or threaten Mexico with closing the border? And people are coming because they feel that there are forces in the United States, liberal, judicial, political, whatever they are, that will nullify federal law and that they will get across the border before Trump is re-elected and might win back the House and Senate. They are told that. If you're going to come to the United States, now come. And why are they doing this? Because the Democratic Party, as we just said, doesn't feel that its message is persuasive to 51 percent of the electorate. So, it either thinks that it has to let 16 year olds vote, change the electorate by ex‑felons in key states, 16 year olds or illegal aliens, and second and third generation will change and flip California, flip Nevada, flip New Mexico, flip, maybe, Arizona and Texas. Or change the system. Change the Electoral College. But, again, these are efforts to deal with a reality that's not palatable to them. Political reality right now is going to fundamentally change America in the way they want it, and so they have to change us.

Audience member: When you say close the border, though, how do you close the border?

Hanson: So he's trying to do e‑verify. He's got people in his own party that are not on board on that. To close a border, you'd have to do about five things. You would have to tell sanctuary cities that they were confederate nullificationists and they were not going to get federal funds. Or you would have to say somebody who's interested in nullifying federal gun law in Utah can go ahead and buy a handgun. You can just take it home the day he buys it. Or somebody in Arizona that wants to plow over a field where an EPA endangered species lizard is, go ahead and do it. You nullified federal law. It doesn't exist. He's tried to do that. He's tried to sue and say if you have a sanctuary city, you're not going to get police and highway funds. He's been overturned. So he can't do anything about sanctuaries. It's ridiculous. He should have, I think, immediately just take Homeland Security, DOD, EPA and say transfer monies and start building the first day he was president because we know that the wall, while it won't keep out all – it will free up resources. But if you just think of it rationally and think, if you were president, what would be the 10 or 12 things you would try to do to discourage this, I think he's done them all.

Audience member: But why now? You said about closing the borders. Right now, what do we see happening years from now?

Hanson: Well, he said that because he's headed into an election, and the economists are telling him he's not going to get 2.9 or 3. annualized GDP growth and that the government shutdown may – I don't know whether it did or not, but it may have hurt him by 2 or 3 points. And if he shuts down this multi-billion-dollar daily trade, that he's going to suffer a little economic hit, or at least enough that his enemies will say he destroyed the economy. And so that's why. But it's very hard to – unless you have a wall, unless you have a system that punishes the employer, unless you have a system that says you can deport somebody who's here illegally, and especially who's committed a crime – we don't have any of that. And he keeps thinking that he can do it, but he doesn't have a party behind him in the Senate. He doesn't even have the party majority in the House anymore. And even when he did, they weren't behind him. And he doesn't have support from the courts. I get very tired. I wrote a book about it, and when we did do better, we had people like Chuck Schumer and Hillary Clinton and Bill Clinton, even Barack Obama, saying you have to close the border. And they were doing that because, even as late as 2007 and 8, the Democratic Party was so scared of the working union electorate, and they thought that cheap wages would hurt working class Americans. Though minority communities were impacted adversely through their social services, they felt that crime came in. So they were pretty tough on the border. In fact, I could make an argument that by 2002 they were becoming tougher than Republican Wall Street Journal establishmentarians that wanted cheap labor. Remember, it was Cesar Chavez' group that went down in the '80s and patrolled the border to stop illegal aliens coming in and depressing farm wages. Thank you.
H/T FrontPage Mag.

Tags: Freedom Center, Victor Davis Hanson, West Coast Retreat, The Case for Trump, Donald Trump, FrontPage Mag To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Tennessee County Votes To Become Gun Sanctuary

by Tom Knighton: The sanctuary county movement has, for the most part, been centered around counties in states that are adopting gun control in some real way. States like New Mexico, Washington, and Nevada have looked to pass gun control and found themselves with a number of counties in quiet rebellion.

Now, a county in Tennessee is figuring there’s no reason for just those counties to have all the fun.

Polk County commissioners voted Thursday night in favor of making the county a “gun sanctuary.”

Commissioner James Woody said the vote was 8 to 1.

The resolution reads in part, “the Polk County Government won’t authorize funds, resources, or agencies to enforce any element such as laws, orders, and mandates that infringe on the right to bear arms.”

All current laws still apply.

... But it’s citizen’s Second Amendment rights that Woody said they’re really looking to protect. The resolution means the county government would not enforce any gun control measures passed by state and federal lawmakers if it infringed on their Second Amendment rights.

“We’re seeing different places, cities and states are curtailing the ownership of guns,” Woody said. “Sanctuary is as you said is a place of refuge, is a place of protection.”
Why would Polk County worry about that? It’s not like Tennessee is looking to create a whole pile of new gun laws. This is a state where a lawmaker made it a point to tell folks that a new bill wasn’t a red flag law. It’s not like they have a lot to be concerned about.

Yet the move also mentions federal gun control laws. That’s important.
For one thing, we have a Democrat-controlled House that has already passed several pieces of gun control legislation. We also have a Senate that, while unlikely to pass gun control, does have some members making moves suggesting it’s still possible. President Trump has stated he’s a supporter of the Second Amendment…right before banning bump stocks via action in the executive branch of government.

In other words, it’s not a great time to feel secure regarding the right to keep and bear arms.

Polk County’s move actually makes sense if you look at it from that perspective.

Imagine, if you will, that every county that voted for Trump in 2016 turned around and became Second Amendment sanctuary counties. That means out of 3,115 counties in the United States, 2,686 would be sanctuary counties for gun owners. That would send a very strong signal, wouldn’t it?

Realistically, that’s not likely to happen. However, enough counties opting to protect the right to keep and bear arms would have a similar effect, as well as tell area residents where they should live if they don’t want to worry about their gun rights being infringed upon. That makes a difference.

After all, I love my home state, but after gun grabber Stacy Abrams almost won the governorship, I feel my gun rights are a lot less secure, especially after the Georgia General Assembly failed to act on constitutional carry during the session earlier this year. Knowing that a county nearby was willing to be a sanctuary from such gun grabbing would definitely cause me to look that direction as a place to hang my hat.

In other words, these counties are going to become beacons for gun rights supporters, and that’s a good thing.

A better thing is if there are so many beacons, people have their pick.
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, Tennessee County, Votes To Become, Gun Sanctuary To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Missing the Power of the Cross

by Tony Perkins: Just a little over a month ago, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments on a World War I monument honoring 49 men who died in the war to end all wars. The memorial, built by the American Legion in 1925, is just 10 miles from SCOTUS in Bladensburg, Maryland. As they have in most towns, the American Humanist Society sued the city, demanding it tear down the 43-foot tribute that's been standing for almost 100 years. The reason? The memorial is a cross, which the humanists say violates the so-called separation of church and state.

It's hard to imagine how the monument -- which has been in place for 94 years -- is suddenly in violation of the Constitution. The families who dedicated the memorial in 1925 to the fallen soldiers would have never imagined this country tearing down the cross. But, if the Supreme Court were to uphold the lower court decision, it could lead to -- not just this cross being torn down -- but crosses all across the nation, including Arlington National Cemetery.

There are a lot of people, including FRC's legal experts, who believe there's a good chance the justices will decide in favor of the Peace Cross. But the court would most likely reach that decision by seeing the cross as a purely symbolic and historical statement. As Justice Stephen Breyer said about the cross's age, "History counts. But no more." In today's world, he argued, such an overt reference to the religion wouldn't be acceptable. "We're a different country. We are a different country now, and there are 50 more different religions."

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg seemed skeptical that the cross could survive constitutional scrutiny on historical grounds. "It is the pre-eminent symbol of Christianity," she said. "People wear crosses to show their devotion to the Christian faith." Both of their statements miss the most important point of all: the power of the cross. Whether it's a memorial to mark the graves of those who sacrificed their lives for freedom or the victims of a tragic accident on a highway, or a shooting at a public school, there's a reason people turn to the cross when faced with the reality of mortality and the beckoning of eternity. As Paul wrote, "For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God."

There are a lot of ways we can miss the life-transforming power of the cross. We can have the wrong focus -- concentrating on religion instead of a personal relationship with Jesus. We can have the wrong spirit, believing it's about God's judgment, not God's redeeming love. Or, we can have the wrong priorities, thinking it's about us and this world instead of about God and His kingdom.

Jesus certainly understood the power of the cross. Of course, part of that resolve was because He knew it was God's plan. "For the Lord God will help me," Isaiah 50:7 tells us, "therefore shall I not be confounded: therefore have I set my face like a flint, and I know that I shall not be ashamed."

Our call to follow Him requires the same resolve. "If anyone desires to come after Me," Jesus said, "let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow Me." It's only in the total surrender to a relationship with Jesus, accepting God's redemptive love and forgiveness, that we can genuinely experience the life-transforming power of the cross.

Take some time to think about this Easter weekend, and ask yourself: Does my life reveal the power of the cross?
Tony Perkins (@tperkins) 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, Missing the Power, the Cross To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Chag Sameach, Good News

by Gary Bauer, Contributing Author: Chag Sameach – A Joyous Festival
Today is a special day when the Jewish and Christian holidays of Passover and Good Friday coincide. The two pillars of Western Civilization – the Jewish and Christian faiths – will celebrate the God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Jesus.

Jews all over the world will gather tonight to celebrate the miracle of Passover, commemorating the liberation of their people from ancient Egypt.

The Book of Exodus tells us that Moses was sent by God to tell Pharaoh to "Let my people go." When Pharaoh refused, a series of plagues were inflicted on the Egyptian people. Through it all, Pharaoh's heart hardened and he still refused to end the bondage of the Jews.

The final plague that God used to free the Jews from Pharaoh and Egyptian captivity was to kill all the firstborn males.

Forewarned by God, Jews marked their doors with the blood of a lamb, and, as a result, He passed over their homes. Pharaoh finally relented and released the Hebrew people. (Exodus, Chapter 12.) God told the Jewish people to mark the day as a memorial day and to observe it as a feast to the Lord forever.

God was with His people then as He liberated the Jews of Egypt and led them to the promised land of Israel. He is with them now.

To all our Jewish friends, Chag Sameach, a joyous festival!

Good News
Of course, Jesus and his disciples were Jews, so they celebrated Passover. And whether the Last Supper was in fact a Passover meal has been the subject of much debate.

Sadly, it seems that the resurrection itself has become debatable. A recent poll conducted for the BBC found that only 46% of self-identified Christians in the United Kingdom believe that "Jesus died on the cross and was resurrected at Easter so that you can be forgiven for your sins." I'm not entirely sure why the other 54% think they are Christians!

While Christmas tends to overshadow most holidays, ultimately, it is not a birthday (or chocolate bunnies) that we celebrate -- it is the resurrection. It is Easter that makes us Christians!

If Christ had not risen from the grave, He would have been forgotten as a common rabble-rouser whose birthday would have no significance.

Today, on Good Friday, we think about the Cross and the sacrifice paid for our sins; the amazing love that took our place; and the grace we have been given. Romans 5:8 tells us, "But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us."

While some worship a god who commands men to die for him, we worship a loving God who gave His son to die for us. Thank God for the cross and the empty tomb!

With Christ's resurrection, we have confidence in a caring Creator, rather than the chaos of the cosmos. We have confidence in a glorious future, rather than the finality of the grave.

Why do we have such confidence? Because "It is finished." Christ's atoning work on the Cross is done, and we are saved.

On Easter morning, we do not gather to remember a martyr. We come together to worship the risen Son of God!

He is risen! He is risen indeed!
Gary Bauer (@GaryLBauer)  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, Chag Sameach, Good News To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Falling In Line . . .

. . . The Mueller Report has revealed no Collusion or no Obstruction, but that isn’t stopping the Leftist Mainstream media from dishing out fake news against President Trump.

Editorial Cartoon by AF "Tony" Branco

Tags: AF Branco, editorial cartooon, Falling in Line, Mueler Report, rno Collusion, No Obstruction, Leftist mainstream media, fake news, against, President Trump To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

Stopping the Campusfication of American Life

Or any other College entrance. 
by Michael Barone: Many people, years after they graduate from high school and college, have nightmares about taking exams for a course for which they have done none of the reading and are totally unprepared. They wake up full of anxiety and relax only when they realize they left school years ago.

But increasingly, it seems like none of us ever get out of school, as the rules and restrictions that have proliferated on college and university campuses over the last two or three decades ooze out and spread to the wider society. We find ourselves dealing, exams aside, with the campusfication of American life.

For those of us whose experience goes back far enough, this once seemed quite desirable. Campuses in the 1950s and 1960s were the most open and tolerant parts of American society. Just about any ideas could be advanced and defended. Racial and ethnic discrimination was frowned upon and dismantled. Unequal treatment of women largely disappeared in the 1970s.

But that was then, and this is now. Coat-and-tie dress codes are long gone, but campuses have become the least free and the most restrictive zones of American life -- and the most monopartisan. Conservatives, a minority in faculties half a century ago, are largely nonexistent in faculties now, and liberals fond of tolerance have been replaced by "progressives" determined to propagate their ideas and suppress others.

A majority of colleges and universities, according to the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, has enacted speech codes, restrictions that seem to metastasize in the night. The idea has been implanted that speech that is found offensive by anyone, especially anyone who claims victim-group status, amounts to violence -- an idea contradicted by both logic and experience. Offenders are punished by an ever-metastasizing corps of administrators, who now nationally outnumber college and university teachers.

I used to imagine that the effects of restrictive campuses would wear off when graduates encountered the real world. Instead, the post-campus world has come to embrace the idea suppression of the campuses. FIRE's success in overturning campus speech codes has been outmatched by the mudslide of restrictions promoted by corporate HR departments, as their Nurse Ratcheds eagerly pursue violators, and even more by the giant media companies through which so much of the communication of ideas passes. Even though Congress shielded Google, Facebook and Twitter from legal consequences for the ideas they transmit, they are actively in the business of idea suppression.

Anyone who regularly visits blogs like -- I'm not talking about alt-right stuff here -- often encounters news that some conservative writer has been blocked, some conservative blog's content has been rendered inaccessible, some conservative website has been downgraded in search ratings.

Sometimes this may happen by mistake, as social media firm executives claim. But it's obvious that very often it is the result of actions and decisions by recent graduates of left-dominated campuses determined to prevent the communication of ideas they consider politically incorrect. Why should free speech be valued by these youngsters? It wasn't at school.

The social media firms may reply that they need smart people and thus hire high-test-score people from selective colleges and universities. But their employees are not the only smart people in America, and there is no law that requires all social media firms to have all their facilities in the San Francisco Bay area, the most monopartisan metro area in the United States.

The fact is that Mark Zuckerberg, Sergey Brin, Larry Page and whoever is running Twitter these days have allowed their firms to become the unelected censors of America and much of the world. The increasing criticism and hostility they've encountered should not surprise them given we live in a nation where most people still believe in free speech, even if many who run campuses don't.

Speech bans are not the only bad idea that has spread from campuses to poison the larger society. College and university admissions departments' surreptitious use of racial quotas and preferences has been matched by corporate HR departments. The campus kangaroo courts encouraged by the Obama Education Department's "guidance" have their equivalents in post-campus life.

Currently, Harvard's alleged anti-Asian quotas are being challenged in court. Education Secretary Betsy DeVos has ditched the Obama "guidance" and, after thorough investigation, advanced regulations to protect the interests of both accusers and those accused.

Those are encouraging signs that the host society can fight back against the infections festering in its campus wing. It needs to fight back against the campusfication suppression of free speech as well.
Michael Barone is a Senior Political Analyst for the Washington Examiner and a Resident Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a Fox News Channel  and co-author of The Almanac of American Politics Shared by Rasmussen Reports.

Tags: Michael Barone, editorial, Rasmussen Reports, Stopping, Campusfication, American Life To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service and "Like" Facebook Page - Thanks!

View U.S. National Debt

Don't miss anything!
Subscribe to the
ARRA News Service
It's FREE & No Ads!

You will receive a verification email
& must validate you subscribed!

You Then Receive One Email Each AM
With Prior Days Articles / Toons / More

Also, Join & leave conservative posts & comments on

Recent Posts:
Personal Tweets by the editor:
Dr. Bill - OzarkGuru - @arra
#Christian Conservative; Retired USAF & Grad Professor. Constitution NRA ProLife schoolchoice fairtax - Editor ARRA NEWS SERVICE. THANKS FOR FOLLOWING!

Action Links!
State Upper & Lower House Members
State Attorney Generals
State Governors
The White House
US House of Representatives
US Senators

Facebook Accts - Dr. Bill Smith
ARRA News Service
Arkansans Against Big Government
Alley-White Am. Legion #52
Catholics & Protestants United Against Discrimination
End Taxpayer Funding of NPR
Overturn Roe V. Wade
Prolife Soldiers
Project Wildfire 4 Life
Republican Liberty Caucus of Arkansas
The Gold Standard
US Atty Gen Loretta Lynch, aka Eric Holder, Must Go
Veterans for Sarah Palin
Why Vote for Hillary (Satire)
FB Groups:
Arkansas For Sarah Palin
Arkansas Conservative Caucus
Arkansas County Tea Party
Arkansans' Discussion Group on National Issues
Blogs for Borders
Conservative Solutions
Conservative Voices
Defend Marriage -- Arkansas
FairTax Nation
Arkansas for FairTax
Friends of the TEA Party in Arkansas
Freedom Roundtable
Pro-Life Rocks - Arkansas
Republican Network
Republican Liberty Caucus of AR
Reject the U.N.


Request Via
Article Comment

Links to ARRA News
A Patriotic Nurse
Agora Associates
a12iggymom's Blog
America, You Asked For It!
America's Best Choice
ARRA News Twitter
As The Crackerhead Crumbles
Blogs For Borders
Blogs for Palin
Blow the Trumpet Ministry
Boot Berryism
Cap'n Bob & the Damsel
Chicago Ray Report - Obama Regime Report
Chuck Baldwin - links
Common Cents
Conservative Voices
Diana's Corner
Greater Fitchburg For Life
Lasting Liberty Blog
Liberal Isn't Amy
Marathon Pundit
Patriot's Corner
Right on Issues that Matter
Right Reason
Rocking on the Right Side
Saber Point
Saline Watchdog
Sultan Knish
The Blue Eye View
The Born Again Americans
TEA Party Cartoons
The Foxhole | Unapologetic Patriot
The Liberty Republican
The O Word
The Path to Tyranny Blog
The Real Polichick
The War on Guns
Twitter @ARRA
Underground Notes
Warning Signs
Women's Prayer & Action

Editor's Managed Twitter Accounts
Twitter Dr. Bill Smith @arra
Twitter Arkansas @GOPNetwork
Twitter @BootBerryism
Twitter @SovereignAllies
Twitter @FairTaxNation

Editor's Recommended Orgs
Accuracy in Media (AIM)
American Action Forum (AAF)
American Committment
American Culture & Faith Institute
American Enterprise Institute
American Family Business Institute
Americans for Limited Government
Americans for Prosperity
Americans for Tax Reform
American Security Council Fdn
AR Faith & Ethics Council
Arkansas Policy Foundation
Ayn Rand Institute
Bill of Rights Institute
Campaign for Working Families
CATO Institute
Center for Individual Freedom
Center for Immigration Studies
Center for Just Society
Center for Freedom & Prosperity
Citizens Against Gov't Waste
Citizens in Charge Foundstion
Coalition for the Future American Worker
Competitive Enterprise Institute
Concerned Veterans for America
Concerned Women for America
Declaration of Am. Renewal
Eagle Forum
Family Research Council
Family Security Matters
Franklin Center for Gov't & Public Integrity
Freedom Works
Gingrich Productions
Global Incident Map
Great Americans
Gold Standard 2012 Project
Gun Owners of America (GOA)
Heritage Action for America
David Horowitz Freedom Center
Institute For Justice
Institute for Truth in Accounting
Intercollegiate Studies Institute
Judicial Watch
Less Government
Media Reseach Center
National Center for Policy Analysis
National Right To Work Foundation
National Rifle Association (NRA)
National Rifle Association (NRA-ILA)
News Busters
O'Bluejacket's Patriotic Flicks
Open Secrets
Presidential Prayer Team
Religious Freedom Coalition
Renew America
Ron Paul Institute
State Policy Network
Tax Foundation
Tax Policy Center
The Club for Growth
The Federalist
The Gold Standard Now
The Heritage Foundation
The Leadership Institute
Truth in Accounting
Union Facts

Blogs For Borders

Reject the United Nations

Presidential Prayer Team

Thousands of Deadly Islamic Terror Attacks Since 9/11

FairTax Nation on FaceBook
Friends of Israel - Stand with Israel
Blog Feeds
Syndicated - Get the ARRA News Service feed Syndicated!
ARRA Blog Feed

Add to Google Reader or Homepage

Add to The Free Dictionary

Powered by Blogger

  • To Exchange Links - Email:!
  • 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 principles & beleifs beliefs of other organizations, this blog/site is soley controlled and supported by the editor. 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.
  • © 2006 - 2020 ARRA News Service
Creative Commons License
Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial Share Alike 3.0 Unported License.

  • 7/23/06 - 7/30/06
  • 7/30/06 - 8/6/06
  • 8/6/06 - 8/13/06
  • 8/13/06 - 8/20/06
  • 8/20/06 - 8/27/06
  • 8/27/06 - 9/3/06
  • 9/3/06 - 9/10/06
  • 9/10/06 - 9/17/06
  • 9/17/06 - 9/24/06
  • 9/24/06 - 10/1/06
  • 10/1/06 - 10/8/06
  • 10/8/06 - 10/15/06
  • 10/15/06 - 10/22/06
  • 10/22/06 - 10/29/06
  • 10/29/06 - 11/5/06
  • 11/5/06 - 11/12/06
  • 11/12/06 - 11/19/06
  • 11/19/06 - 11/26/06
  • 11/26/06 - 12/3/06
  • 12/3/06 - 12/10/06
  • 12/10/06 - 12/17/06
  • 12/17/06 - 12/24/06
  • 12/24/06 - 12/31/06
  • 12/31/06 - 1/7/07
  • 1/7/07 - 1/14/07
  • 1/14/07 - 1/21/07
  • 1/21/07 - 1/28/07
  • 1/28/07 - 2/4/07
  • 2/4/07 - 2/11/07
  • 2/11/07 - 2/18/07
  • 2/18/07 - 2/25/07
  • 2/25/07 - 3/4/07
  • 3/4/07 - 3/11/07
  • 3/11/07 - 3/18/07
  • 3/18/07 - 3/25/07
  • 3/25/07 - 4/1/07
  • 4/1/07 - 4/8/07
  • 4/8/07 - 4/15/07
  • 4/15/07 - 4/22/07
  • 4/22/07 - 4/29/07
  • 4/29/07 - 5/6/07
  • 5/6/07 - 5/13/07
  • 5/13/07 - 5/20/07
  • 5/20/07 - 5/27/07
  • 5/27/07 - 6/3/07
  • 6/3/07 - 6/10/07
  • 6/10/07 - 6/17/07
  • 6/17/07 - 6/24/07
  • 6/24/07 - 7/1/07
  • 7/1/07 - 7/8/07
  • 7/8/07 - 7/15/07
  • 7/15/07 - 7/22/07
  • 7/22/07 - 7/29/07
  • 7/29/07 - 8/5/07
  • 8/5/07 - 8/12/07
  • 8/12/07 - 8/19/07
  • 8/19/07 - 8/26/07
  • 8/26/07 - 9/2/07
  • 9/2/07 - 9/9/07
  • 9/9/07 - 9/16/07
  • 9/16/07 - 9/23/07
  • 9/23/07 - 9/30/07
  • 9/30/07 - 10/7/07
  • 10/7/07 - 10/14/07
  • 10/14/07 - 10/21/07
  • 10/21/07 - 10/28/07
  • 10/28/07 - 11/4/07
  • 11/4/07 - 11/11/07
  • 11/11/07 - 11/18/07
  • 11/18/07 - 11/25/07
  • 11/25/07 - 12/2/07
  • 12/2/07 - 12/9/07
  • 12/9/07 - 12/16/07
  • 12/16/07 - 12/23/07
  • 12/23/07 - 12/30/07
  • 12/30/07 - 1/6/08
  • 1/6/08 - 1/13/08
  • 1/13/08 - 1/20/08
  • 1/20/08 - 1/27/08
  • 1/27/08 - 2/3/08
  • 2/3/08 - 2/10/08
  • 2/10/08 - 2/17/08
  • 2/17/08 - 2/24/08
  • 2/24/08 - 3/2/08
  • 3/2/08 - 3/9/08
  • 3/9/08 - 3/16/08
  • 3/16/08 - 3/23/08
  • 3/23/08 - 3/30/08
  • 3/30/08 - 4/6/08
  • 4/6/08 - 4/13/08
  • 4/13/08 - 4/20/08
  • 4/20/08 - 4/27/08
  • 4/27/08 - 5/4/08
  • 5/4/08 - 5/11/08
  • 5/11/08 - 5/18/08
  • 5/18/08 - 5/25/08
  • 5/25/08 - 6/1/08
  • 6/1/08 - 6/8/08
  • 6/8/08 - 6/15/08
  • 6/15/08 - 6/22/08
  • 6/22/08 - 6/29/08
  • 6/29/08 - 7/6/08
  • 7/6/08 - 7/13/08
  • 7/13/08 - 7/20/08
  • 7/20/08 - 7/27/08
  • 7/27/08 - 8/3/08
  • 8/3/08 - 8/10/08
  • 8/10/08 - 8/17/08
  • 8/17/08 - 8/24/08
  • 8/24/08 - 8/31/08
  • 8/31/08 - 9/7/08
  • 9/7/08 - 9/14/08
  • 9/14/08 - 9/21/08
  • 9/21/08 - 9/28/08
  • 9/28/08 - 10/5/08
  • 10/5/08 - 10/12/08
  • 10/12/08 - 10/19/08
  • 10/19/08 - 10/26/08
  • 10/26/08 - 11/2/08
  • 11/2/08 - 11/9/08
  • 11/9/08 - 11/16/08
  • 11/16/08 - 11/23/08
  • 11/23/08 - 11/30/08
  • 11/30/08 - 12/7/08
  • 12/7/08 - 12/14/08
  • 12/14/08 - 12/21/08
  • 12/21/08 - 12/28/08
  • 12/28/08 - 1/4/09
  • 1/4/09 - 1/11/09
  • 1/11/09 - 1/18/09
  • 1/18/09 - 1/25/09
  • 1/25/09 - 2/1/09
  • 2/1/09 - 2/8/09
  • 2/8/09 - 2/15/09
  • 2/15/09 - 2/22/09
  • 2/22/09 - 3/1/09
  • 3/1/09 - 3/8/09
  • 3/8/09 - 3/15/09
  • 3/15/09 - 3/22/09
  • 3/22/09 - 3/29/09
  • 3/29/09 - 4/5/09
  • 4/5/09 - 4/12/09
  • 4/12/09 - 4/19/09
  • 4/19/09 - 4/26/09
  • 4/26/09 - 5/3/09
  • 5/3/09 - 5/10/09
  • 5/10/09 - 5/17/09
  • 5/17/09 - 5/24/09
  • 5/24/09 - 5/31/09
  • 5/31/09 - 6/7/09
  • 6/7/09 - 6/14/09
  • 6/14/09 - 6/21/09
  • 6/21/09 - 6/28/09
  • 6/28/09 - 7/5/09
  • 7/5/09 - 7/12/09
  • 7/12/09 - 7/19/09
  • 7/19/09 - 7/26/09
  • 7/26/09 - 8/2/09
  • 8/2/09 - 8/9/09
  • 8/9/09 - 8/16/09
  • 8/16/09 - 8/23/09
  • 8/23/09 - 8/30/09
  • 8/30/09 - 9/6/09
  • 9/6/09 - 9/13/09
  • 9/13/09 - 9/20/09
  • 9/20/09 - 9/27/09
  • 9/27/09 - 10/4/09
  • 10/4/09 - 10/11/09
  • 10/11/09 - 10/18/09
  • 10/18/09 - 10/25/09
  • 10/25/09 - 11/1/09
  • 11/1/09 - 11/8/09
  • 11/8/09 - 11/15/09
  • 11/15/09 - 11/22/09
  • 11/22/09 - 11/29/09
  • 11/29/09 - 12/6/09
  • 12/6/09 - 12/13/09
  • 12/13/09 - 12/20/09
  • 12/20/09 - 12/27/09
  • 12/27/09 - 1/3/10
  • 1/3/10 - 1/10/10
  • 1/10/10 - 1/17/10
  • 1/17/10 - 1/24/10
  • 1/24/10 - 1/31/10
  • 1/31/10 - 2/7/10
  • 2/7/10 - 2/14/10
  • 2/14/10 - 2/21/10
  • 2/21/10 - 2/28/10
  • 2/28/10 - 3/7/10
  • 3/7/10 - 3/14/10
  • 3/14/10 - 3/21/10
  • 3/21/10 - 3/28/10
  • 3/28/10 - 4/4/10
  • 4/4/10 - 4/11/10
  • 4/11/10 - 4/18/10
  • 4/18/10 - 4/25/10
  • 4/25/10 - 5/2/10
  • 5/2/10 - 5/9/10
  • 5/9/10 - 5/16/10
  • 5/16/10 - 5/23/10
  • 5/23/10 - 5/30/10
  • 5/30/10 - 6/6/10
  • 6/6/10 - 6/13/10
  • 6/13/10 - 6/20/10
  • 6/20/10 - 6/27/10
  • 6/27/10 - 7/4/10
  • 7/4/10 - 7/11/10
  • 7/11/10 - 7/18/10
  • 7/18/10 - 7/25/10
  • 7/25/10 - 8/1/10
  • 8/1/10 - 8/8/10
  • 8/8/10 - 8/15/10
  • 8/15/10 - 8/22/10
  • 8/22/10 - 8/29/10
  • 8/29/10 - 9/5/10
  • 9/5/10 - 9/12/10
  • 9/12/10 - 9/19/10
  • 9/19/10 - 9/26/10
  • 9/26/10 - 10/3/10
  • 10/3/10 - 10/10/10
  • 10/10/10 - 10/17/10
  • 10/17/10 - 10/24/10
  • 10/24/10 - 10/31/10
  • 10/31/10 - 11/7/10
  • 11/7/10 - 11/14/10
  • 11/14/10 - 11/21/10
  • 11/21/10 - 11/28/10
  • 11/28/10 - 12/5/10
  • 12/5/10 - 12/12/10
  • 12/12/10 - 12/19/10
  • 12/19/10 - 12/26/10
  • 12/26/10 - 1/2/11
  • 1/2/11 - 1/9/11
  • 1/9/11 - 1/16/11
  • 1/16/11 - 1/23/11
  • 1/23/11 - 1/30/11
  • 1/30/11 - 2/6/11
  • 2/6/11 - 2/13/11
  • 2/13/11 - 2/20/11
  • 2/20/11 - 2/27/11
  • 2/27/11 - 3/6/11
  • 3/6/11 - 3/13/11
  • 3/13/11 - 3/20/11
  • 3/20/11 - 3/27/11
  • 3/27/11 - 4/3/11
  • 4/3/11 - 4/10/11
  • 4/10/11 - 4/17/11
  • 4/17/11 - 4/24/11
  • 4/24/11 - 5/1/11
  • 5/1/11 - 5/8/11
  • 5/8/11 - 5/15/11
  • 5/15/11 - 5/22/11
  • 5/22/11 - 5/29/11
  • 5/29/11 - 6/5/11
  • 6/5/11 - 6/12/11
  • 6/12/11 - 6/19/11
  • 6/19/11 - 6/26/11
  • 6/26/11 - 7/3/11
  • 7/3/11 - 7/10/11
  • 7/10/11 - 7/17/11
  • 7/17/11 - 7/24/11
  • 7/24/11 - 7/31/11
  • 7/31/11 - 8/7/11
  • 8/7/11 - 8/14/11
  • 8/14/11 - 8/21/11
  • 8/21/11 - 8/28/11
  • 8/28/11 - 9/4/11
  • 9/4/11 - 9/11/11
  • 9/11/11 - 9/18/11
  • 9/18/11 - 9/25/11
  • 9/25/11 - 10/2/11
  • 10/2/11 - 10/9/11
  • 10/9/11 - 10/16/11
  • 10/16/11 - 10/23/11
  • 10/23/11 - 10/30/11
  • 10/30/11 - 11/6/11
  • 11/6/11 - 11/13/11
  • 11/13/11 - 11/20/11
  • 11/20/11 - 11/27/11
  • 11/27/11 - 12/4/11
  • 12/4/11 - 12/11/11
  • 12/11/11 - 12/18/11
  • 12/18/11 - 12/25/11
  • 12/25/11 - 1/1/12
  • 1/1/12 - 1/8/12
  • 1/8/12 - 1/15/12
  • 1/15/12 - 1/22/12
  • 1/22/12 - 1/29/12
  • 1/29/12 - 2/5/12
  • 2/5/12 - 2/12/12
  • 2/12/12 - 2/19/12
  • 2/19/12 - 2/26/12
  • 2/26/12 - 3/4/12
  • 3/4/12 - 3/11/12
  • 3/11/12 - 3/18/12
  • 3/18/12 - 3/25/12
  • 3/25/12 - 4/1/12
  • 4/1/12 - 4/8/12
  • 4/8/12 - 4/15/12
  • 4/15/12 - 4/22/12
  • 4/22/12 - 4/29/12
  • 4/29/12 - 5/6/12
  • 5/6/12 - 5/13/12
  • 5/13/12 - 5/20/12
  • 5/20/12 - 5/27/12
  • 5/27/12 - 6/3/12
  • 6/3/12 - 6/10/12
  • 6/10/12 - 6/17/12
  • 6/17/12 - 6/24/12
  • 6/24/12 - 7/1/12
  • 7/1/12 - 7/8/12
  • 7/8/12 - 7/15/12
  • 7/15/12 - 7/22/12
  • 7/22/12 - 7/29/12
  • 7/29/12 - 8/5/12
  • 8/5/12 - 8/12/12
  • 8/12/12 - 8/19/12
  • 8/19/12 - 8/26/12
  • 8/26/12 - 9/2/12
  • 9/2/12 - 9/9/12
  • 9/9/12 - 9/16/12
  • 9/16/12 - 9/23/12
  • 9/23/12 - 9/30/12
  • 9/30/12 - 10/7/12
  • 10/7/12 - 10/14/12
  • 10/14/12 - 10/21/12
  • 10/21/12 - 10/28/12
  • 10/28/12 - 11/4/12
  • 11/4/12 - 11/11/12
  • 11/11/12 - 11/18/12
  • 11/18/12 - 11/25/12
  • 11/25/12 - 12/2/12
  • 12/2/12 - 12/9/12
  • 12/9/12 - 12/16/12
  • 12/16/12 - 12/23/12
  • 12/23/12 - 12/30/12
  • 12/30/12 - 1/6/13
  • 1/6/13 - 1/13/13
  • 1/13/13 - 1/20/13
  • 1/20/13 - 1/27/13
  • 1/27/13 - 2/3/13
  • 2/3/13 - 2/10/13
  • 2/10/13 - 2/17/13
  • 2/17/13 - 2/24/13
  • 2/24/13 - 3/3/13
  • 3/3/13 - 3/10/13
  • 3/10/13 - 3/17/13
  • 3/17/13 - 3/24/13
  • 3/24/13 - 3/31/13
  • 3/31/13 - 4/7/13
  • 4/7/13 - 4/14/13
  • 4/14/13 - 4/21/13
  • 4/21/13 - 4/28/13
  • 4/28/13 - 5/5/13
  • 5/5/13 - 5/12/13
  • 5/12/13 - 5/19/13
  • 5/19/13 - 5/26/13
  • 5/26/13 - 6/2/13
  • 6/2/13 - 6/9/13
  • 6/9/13 - 6/16/13
  • 6/16/13 - 6/23/13
  • 6/23/13 - 6/30/13
  • 6/30/13 - 7/7/13
  • 7/7/13 - 7/14/13
  • 7/14/13 - 7/21/13
  • 7/21/13 - 7/28/13
  • 7/28/13 - 8/4/13
  • 8/4/13 - 8/11/13
  • 8/11/13 - 8/18/13
  • 8/18/13 - 8/25/13
  • 8/25/13 - 9/1/13
  • 9/1/13 - 9/8/13
  • 9/8/13 - 9/15/13
  • 9/15/13 - 9/22/13
  • 9/22/13 - 9/29/13
  • 9/29/13 - 10/6/13
  • 10/6/13 - 10/13/13
  • 10/13/13 - 10/20/13
  • 10/20/13 - 10/27/13
  • 10/27/13 - 11/3/13
  • 11/3/13 - 11/10/13
  • 11/10/13 - 11/17/13
  • 11/17/13 - 11/24/13
  • 11/24/13 - 12/1/13
  • 12/1/13 - 12/8/13
  • 12/8/13 - 12/15/13
  • 12/15/13 - 12/22/13
  • 12/22/13 - 12/29/13
  • 12/29/13 - 1/5/14
  • 1/5/14 - 1/12/14
  • 1/12/14 - 1/19/14
  • 1/19/14 - 1/26/14
  • 1/26/14 - 2/2/14
  • 2/2/14 - 2/9/14
  • 2/9/14 - 2/16/14
  • 2/16/14 - 2/23/14
  • 2/23/14 - 3/2/14
  • 3/2/14 - 3/9/14
  • 3/9/14 - 3/16/14
  • 3/16/14 - 3/23/14
  • 3/23/14 - 3/30/14
  • 3/30/14 - 4/6/14
  • 4/6/14 - 4/13/14
  • 4/13/14 - 4/20/14
  • 4/20/14 - 4/27/14
  • 4/27/14 - 5/4/14
  • 5/4/14 - 5/11/14
  • 5/11/14 - 5/18/14
  • 5/18/14 - 5/25/14
  • 5/25/14 - 6/1/14
  • 6/1/14 - 6/8/14
  • 6/8/14 - 6/15/14
  • 6/15/14 - 6/22/14
  • 6/22/14 - 6/29/14
  • 6/29/14 - 7/6/14
  • 7/6/14 - 7/13/14
  • 7/13/14 - 7/20/14
  • 7/20/14 - 7/27/14
  • 7/27/14 - 8/3/14
  • 8/3/14 - 8/10/14
  • 8/10/14 - 8/17/14
  • 8/17/14 - 8/24/14
  • 8/24/14 - 8/31/14
  • 8/31/14 - 9/7/14
  • 9/7/14 - 9/14/14
  • 9/14/14 - 9/21/14
  • 9/21/14 - 9/28/14
  • 9/28/14 - 10/5/14
  • 10/5/14 - 10/12/14
  • 10/12/14 - 10/19/14
  • 10/19/14 - 10/26/14
  • 10/26/14 - 11/2/14
  • 11/2/14 - 11/9/14
  • 11/9/14 - 11/16/14
  • 11/16/14 - 11/23/14
  • 11/23/14 - 11/30/14
  • 11/30/14 - 12/7/14
  • 12/7/14 - 12/14/14
  • 12/14/14 - 12/21/14
  • 12/21/14 - 12/28/14
  • 12/28/14 - 1/4/15
  • 1/4/15 - 1/11/15
  • 1/11/15 - 1/18/15
  • 1/18/15 - 1/25/15
  • 1/25/15 - 2/1/15
  • 2/1/15 - 2/8/15
  • 2/8/15 - 2/15/15
  • 2/15/15 - 2/22/15
  • 2/22/15 - 3/1/15
  • 3/1/15 - 3/8/15
  • 3/8/15 - 3/15/15
  • 3/15/15 - 3/22/15
  • 3/22/15 - 3/29/15
  • 3/29/15 - 4/5/15
  • 4/5/15 - 4/12/15
  • 4/12/15 - 4/19/15
  • 4/19/15 - 4/26/15
  • 4/26/15 - 5/3/15
  • 5/3/15 - 5/10/15
  • 5/10/15 - 5/17/15
  • 5/17/15 - 5/24/15
  • 5/24/15 - 5/31/15
  • 5/31/15 - 6/7/15
  • 6/7/15 - 6/14/15
  • 6/14/15 - 6/21/15
  • 6/21/15 - 6/28/15
  • 6/28/15 - 7/5/15
  • 7/5/15 - 7/12/15
  • 7/12/15 - 7/19/15
  • 7/19/15 - 7/26/15
  • 7/26/15 - 8/2/15
  • 8/2/15 - 8/9/15
  • 8/9/15 - 8/16/15
  • 8/16/15 - 8/23/15
  • 8/23/15 - 8/30/15
  • 8/30/15 - 9/6/15
  • 9/6/15 - 9/13/15
  • 9/13/15 - 9/20/15
  • 9/20/15 - 9/27/15
  • 9/27/15 - 10/4/15
  • 10/4/15 - 10/11/15
  • 10/11/15 - 10/18/15
  • 10/18/15 - 10/25/15
  • 10/25/15 - 11/1/15
  • 11/1/15 - 11/8/15
  • 11/8/15 - 11/15/15
  • 11/15/15 - 11/22/15
  • 11/22/15 - 11/29/15
  • 11/29/15 - 12/6/15
  • 12/6/15 - 12/13/15
  • 12/13/15 - 12/20/15
  • 12/20/15 - 12/27/15
  • 12/27/15 - 1/3/16
  • 1/3/16 - 1/10/16
  • 1/10/16 - 1/17/16
  • 1/17/16 - 1/24/16
  • 1/24/16 - 1/31/16
  • 1/31/16 - 2/7/16
  • 2/7/16 - 2/14/16
  • 2/14/16 - 2/21/16
  • 2/21/16 - 2/28/16
  • 2/28/16 - 3/6/16
  • 3/6/16 - 3/13/16
  • 3/13/16 - 3/20/16
  • 3/20/16 - 3/27/16
  • 3/27/16 - 4/3/16
  • 4/3/16 - 4/10/16
  • 4/10/16 - 4/17/16
  • 4/17/16 - 4/24/16
  • 4/24/16 - 5/1/16
  • 5/1/16 - 5/8/16
  • 5/8/16 - 5/15/16
  • 5/15/16 - 5/22/16
  • 5/22/16 - 5/29/16
  • 5/29/16 - 6/5/16
  • 6/5/16 - 6/12/16
  • 6/12/16 - 6/19/16
  • 6/19/16 - 6/26/16
  • 6/26/16 - 7/3/16
  • 7/3/16 - 7/10/16
  • 7/10/16 - 7/17/16
  • 7/17/16 - 7/24/16
  • 7/24/16 - 7/31/16
  • 7/31/16 - 8/7/16
  • 8/7/16 - 8/14/16
  • 8/14/16 - 8/21/16
  • 8/21/16 - 8/28/16
  • 8/28/16 - 9/4/16
  • 9/4/16 - 9/11/16
  • 9/11/16 - 9/18/16
  • 9/18/16 - 9/25/16
  • 9/25/16 - 10/2/16
  • 10/2/16 - 10/9/16
  • 10/9/16 - 10/16/16
  • 10/16/16 - 10/23/16
  • 10/23/16 - 10/30/16
  • 10/30/16 - 11/6/16
  • 11/6/16 - 11/13/16
  • 11/13/16 - 11/20/16
  • 11/20/16 - 11/27/16
  • 11/27/16 - 12/4/16
  • 12/4/16 - 12/11/16
  • 12/11/16 - 12/18/16
  • 12/18/16 - 12/25/16
  • 12/25/16 - 1/1/17
  • 1/1/17 - 1/8/17
  • 1/8/17 - 1/15/17
  • 1/15/17 - 1/22/17
  • 1/22/17 - 1/29/17
  • 1/29/17 - 2/5/17
  • 2/5/17 - 2/12/17
  • 2/12/17 - 2/19/17
  • 2/19/17 - 2/26/17
  • 2/26/17 - 3/5/17
  • 3/5/17 - 3/12/17
  • 3/12/17 - 3/19/17
  • 3/19/17 - 3/26/17
  • 3/26/17 - 4/2/17
  • 4/2/17 - 4/9/17
  • 4/9/17 - 4/16/17
  • 4/16/17 - 4/23/17
  • 4/23/17 - 4/30/17
  • 4/30/17 - 5/7/17
  • 5/7/17 - 5/14/17
  • 5/14/17 - 5/21/17
  • 5/21/17 - 5/28/17
  • 5/28/17 - 6/4/17
  • 6/4/17 - 6/11/17
  • 6/11/17 - 6/18/17
  • 6/18/17 - 6/25/17
  • 6/25/17 - 7/2/17
  • 7/2/17 - 7/9/17
  • 7/9/17 - 7/16/17
  • 7/16/17 - 7/23/17
  • 7/23/17 - 7/30/17
  • 7/30/17 - 8/6/17
  • 8/6/17 - 8/13/17
  • 8/13/17 - 8/20/17
  • 8/20/17 - 8/27/17
  • 8/27/17 - 9/3/17
  • 9/3/17 - 9/10/17
  • 9/10/17 - 9/17/17
  • 9/17/17 - 9/24/17
  • 9/24/17 - 10/1/17
  • 10/1/17 - 10/8/17
  • 10/8/17 - 10/15/17
  • 10/15/17 - 10/22/17
  • 10/22/17 - 10/29/17
  • 10/29/17 - 11/5/17
  • 11/5/17 - 11/12/17
  • 11/12/17 - 11/19/17
  • 11/19/17 - 11/26/17
  • 11/26/17 - 12/3/17
  • 12/3/17 - 12/10/17
  • 12/10/17 - 12/17/17
  • 12/17/17 - 12/24/17
  • 12/24/17 - 12/31/17
  • 12/31/17 - 1/7/18
  • 1/7/18 - 1/14/18
  • 1/14/18 - 1/21/18
  • 1/21/18 - 1/28/18
  • 1/28/18 - 2/4/18
  • 2/4/18 - 2/11/18
  • 2/11/18 - 2/18/18
  • 2/18/18 - 2/25/18
  • 2/25/18 - 3/4/18
  • 3/4/18 - 3/11/18
  • 3/11/18 - 3/18/18
  • 3/18/18 - 3/25/18
  • 3/25/18 - 4/1/18
  • 4/1/18 - 4/8/18
  • 4/8/18 - 4/15/18
  • 4/15/18 - 4/22/18
  • 4/22/18 - 4/29/18
  • 4/29/18 - 5/6/18
  • 5/6/18 - 5/13/18
  • 5/13/18 - 5/20/18
  • 5/20/18 - 5/27/18
  • 5/27/18 - 6/3/18
  • 6/3/18 - 6/10/18
  • 6/10/18 - 6/17/18
  • 6/17/18 - 6/24/18
  • 6/24/18 - 7/1/18
  • 7/1/18 - 7/8/18
  • 7/8/18 - 7/15/18
  • 7/15/18 - 7/22/18
  • 7/22/18 - 7/29/18
  • 7/29/18 - 8/5/18
  • 8/5/18 - 8/12/18
  • 8/12/18 - 8/19/18
  • 8/19/18 - 8/26/18
  • 8/26/18 - 9/2/18
  • 9/2/18 - 9/9/18
  • 9/9/18 - 9/16/18
  • 9/16/18 - 9/23/18
  • 9/23/18 - 9/30/18
  • 9/30/18 - 10/7/18
  • 10/7/18 - 10/14/18
  • 10/14/18 - 10/21/18
  • 10/21/18 - 10/28/18
  • 10/28/18 - 11/4/18
  • 11/4/18 - 11/11/18
  • 11/11/18 - 11/18/18
  • 11/18/18 - 11/25/18
  • 11/25/18 - 12/2/18
  • 12/2/18 - 12/9/18
  • 12/9/18 - 12/16/18
  • 12/16/18 - 12/23/18
  • 12/23/18 - 12/30/18
  • 12/30/18 - 1/6/19
  • 1/6/19 - 1/13/19
  • 1/13/19 - 1/20/19
  • 1/20/19 - 1/27/19
  • 1/27/19 - 2/3/19
  • 2/3/19 - 2/10/19
  • 2/10/19 - 2/17/19
  • 2/17/19 - 2/24/19
  • 2/24/19 - 3/3/19
  • 3/3/19 - 3/10/19
  • 3/10/19 - 3/17/19
  • 3/17/19 - 3/24/19
  • 3/24/19 - 3/31/19
  • 3/31/19 - 4/7/19
  • 4/7/19 - 4/14/19
  • 4/14/19 - 4/21/19
  • 4/21/19 - 4/28/19
  • 4/28/19 - 5/5/19
  • 5/5/19 - 5/12/19
  • 5/12/19 - 5/19/19
  • 5/19/19 - 5/26/19
  • 5/26/19 - 6/2/19
  • 6/2/19 - 6/9/19
  • 6/9/19 - 6/16/19
  • 6/16/19 - 6/23/19
  • 6/23/19 - 6/30/19
  • 6/30/19 - 7/7/19
  • 7/7/19 - 7/14/19
  • 7/14/19 - 7/21/19
  • 7/21/19 - 7/28/19
  • 7/28/19 - 8/4/19
  • 8/4/19 - 8/11/19
  • 8/11/19 - 8/18/19
  • 8/18/19 - 8/25/19
  • 8/25/19 - 9/1/19
  • 9/1/19 - 9/8/19
  • 9/8/19 - 9/15/19
  • 9/15/19 - 9/22/19
  • 9/22/19 - 9/29/19
  • 9/29/19 - 10/6/19
  • 10/6/19 - 10/13/19
  • 10/13/19 - 10/20/19
  • 10/20/19 - 10/27/19
  • 10/27/19 - 11/3/19
  • 11/3/19 - 11/10/19
  • 11/10/19 - 11/17/19
  • 11/17/19 - 11/24/19
  • 11/24/19 - 12/1/19
  • 12/1/19 - 12/8/19
  • 12/8/19 - 12/15/19
  • 12/15/19 - 12/22/19
  • 12/22/19 - 12/29/19
  • 12/29/19 - 1/5/20
  • 1/5/20 - 1/12/20
  • 1/12/20 - 1/19/20
  • 1/19/20 - 1/26/20
  • 1/26/20 - 2/2/20
  • 2/2/20 - 2/9/20
  • 2/9/20 - 2/16/20
  • 2/16/20 - 2/23/20
  • 2/23/20 - 3/1/20
  • 3/1/20 - 3/8/20
  • 3/8/20 - 3/15/20
  • 3/15/20 - 3/22/20
  • 3/22/20 - 3/29/20
  • 3/29/20 - 4/5/20
  • 4/5/20 - 4/12/20
  • 4/12/20 - 4/19/20
  • 4/19/20 - 4/26/20
  • 4/26/20 - 5/3/20
  • 5/3/20 - 5/10/20
  • 5/10/20 - 5/17/20
  • 5/17/20 - 5/24/20
  • 5/24/20 - 5/31/20
  • 5/31/20 - 6/7/20
  • 6/7/20 - 6/14/20
  • 6/14/20 - 6/21/20
  • 6/21/20 - 6/28/20
  • 6/28/20 - 7/5/20
  • 7/5/20 - 7/12/20
  • 7/12/20 - 7/19/20
  • 7/19/20 - 7/26/20
  • 7/26/20 - 8/2/20
  • 8/2/20 - 8/9/20
  • 8/9/20 - 8/16/20
  • 8/16/20 - 8/23/20
  • 8/23/20 - 8/30/20
  • 8/30/20 - 9/6/20
  • 9/6/20 - 9/13/20
  • 9/13/20 - 9/20/20
  • 9/20/20 - 9/27/20
  • 9/27/20 - 10/4/20
  • 10/4/20 - 10/11/20
  • 10/11/20 - 10/18/20
  • 10/18/20 - 10/25/20
  • 10/25/20 - 11/1/20
  • 11/1/20 - 11/8/20
  • 11/8/20 - 11/15/20
  • 11/15/20 - 11/22/20
  • 11/22/20 - 11/29/20
  • 11/29/20 - 12/6/20
  • 12/6/20 - 12/13/20
  • 12/13/20 - 12/20/20
  • 12/20/20 - 12/27/20
  • 12/27/20 - 1/3/21
  • 1/3/21 - 1/10/21
  • 1/10/21 - 1/17/21
  • 1/17/21 - 1/24/21
  • 1/24/21 - 1/31/21
  • 1/31/21 - 2/7/21
  • 2/7/21 - 2/14/21
  • 2/14/21 - 2/21/21
  • 2/21/21 - 2/28/21
  • 2/28/21 - 3/7/21
  • 3/7/21 - 3/14/21
  • 3/14/21 - 3/21/21
  • 3/21/21 - 3/28/21
  • 3/28/21 - 4/4/21
  • 4/4/21 - 4/11/21
  • 4/11/21 - 4/18/21
  • 4/18/21 - 4/25/21
  • 4/25/21 - 5/2/21
  • 5/2/21 - 5/9/21
  • 5/9/21 - 5/16/21
  • 5/16/21 - 5/23/21
  • 5/23/21 - 5/30/21
  • 5/30/21 - 6/6/21
  • 6/6/21 - 6/13/21
  • 6/13/21 - 6/20/21
  • 6/20/21 - 6/27/21
  • 6/27/21 - 7/4/21
  • 12/19/21 - 12/26/21