Some Black Lives Matter, but not all!

The reality is that homicides in major cities are not race neutral. 136,000 Americans are shot each year—over one million in the past decade and. 36,000 killed. The shooters were most likely black as well. This is a devastating plague acutely affecting black communities across the country.

The killings continue even as the country faces a Coronavirus pandemic that prompted the governor to place states on a stay-at-home lock-down. No one is to go out unless it is for essentials such as groceries and prescription medications. However, the killings did not stop and are rising rapidly. Again, it is mostly black victims.

When the big city Mayor’s got tough on “bad guys with guns,” homicides in went down. It is likely that most of those detained were black. In these reductions in homicides, the people who benefited most also were African Americans who lost fewer sons, daughters, fathers, and mothers to senseless street violence. More black people lived. However, the mantra has been about cops killing innocent black men.

In the past months, we have had highly destructive riots under the banner of Black Lives Matter. Each was started by the death of a black person at the hands of officer(s). Details in most, factual details are still coming out. Yet, in every case, the commencement of rioting and destruction started immediately.

For most people, it is difficult to balance the outrage of “death by police” with the daily black-on-black homicides that occur daily. This is the conversation we need to have. The riots have only destroyed. They have not produced any closure of the gap of needed understanding and change.

Don't Believe Trump Is Blocking Mail In Voting! The Truth Hurts!

 

USPS has been in trouble for years. Congress did nothing.

Now Democrats want a smooth running “all mail-in general election” and they are going mad!

 

U.S Government Accountability Office

U.S. Postal Service's Financial Viability - High Risk Issue

USPS financial viability continues to be high risk because USPS cannot fund its current level of services and financial obligations from its revenues. As stated in GAO’s 2019 High-Risk update, USPS faces financial challenges that include the following:

• Poor financial situation: USPS’s overall financial condition is deteriorating and unsustainable. USPS has lost $69 billion over the past 11 fiscal years—including $3.9 billion in fiscal year 2018. USPS’s total unfunded liabilities and debt ($143 billion at the end of fiscal year 2018) have grown to double its annual revenue.
• Insufficient cost savings: The savings from USPS cost-reduction efforts have dwindled in recent years. Although USPS has stated that it will aggressively reduce costs within its control, its plans will not achieve the kind of savings necessary to significantly reduce current operating costs.
• Unfavorable trends: USPS’s expenses are now growing faster than its revenues—partly due to rising compensation and benefits costs and continuing declines in the volume of First-Class Mail.

 

USPS Unfunded Liabilities and Debt as a Percentage of USPS Revenue, Fiscal Years 2007 through 2018

Further, USPS has missed $48.2 billion in required payments for postal retiree health and pension benefits as of September 30, 2018.  This includes $42.6 billion in missed payments for retiree health benefits since fiscal year 2010, and $5.6 billion in missed payments for pension benefits since fiscal year 2014. If USPS does not make any more payments for retiree health benefits, the fund supporting these benefits is projected by the Office of Personnel Management to be depleted in fiscal year 2030. If the fund is depleted, USPS would be required by law to make the payments necessary to cover its share of health benefits premiums for postal retirees. However, current law does not address what would happen if USPS misses those payments. Depletion of the fund, together with USPS’s potential inability to make remaining contributions, could affect postal retirees as well as USPS, customers, and other stakeholders, including the federal government.

The New Crime Wave 💥

America is getting less safe by the day. According to a new Wall Street Journal analysis, murders are up by nearly 25% this year. This crisis isn’t contained in just a handful of cities — it’s happening across the nation. The Journal found that homicide is rising by double-digit percentages in at least 36 of America’s largest cities. The usual suspects are on the list, like Chicago, Detroit, Philadelphia. But so are cities like Omaha and Phoenix. Austin has seen homicides rise by a staggering 64%. Amidst the pandemic, murders “are up because violent criminals have been emboldened by the sidelining of police, courts, schools, churches and an array of other social institutions,” as the Journal puts it. This crisis deserves far more attention — and action — from policymakers. Crime begets crime, and if this new wave isn’t stopped, it will claim even more lives and spread even farther. If our elected leaders won’t keep us safe, then the American people need to hold them accountable. → Read more: Homicide spike hits most large U.S. cities (Wall Street Journal) → Read more: Feds send agents into three U.S. cities for Operation Legend (New York Post)

Muslim writer makes plain the desire to call people to activism while ignoring the real problem

Muslim writer makes plain the desire to call people to activism while ignoring the real problem

Her call? It’s time to choose: Stand up to hate or sink into division

Below are excerpts with responses to her declarations….

This is a watershed moment in our nation’s history as we struggle to overcome racism, xenophobia, Islamophobia, misogyny, etc. Normally, we Americans could expect our president, the leader of our nation, to be at the forefront of this struggle, lighting the way toward a brighter future for all Americans. Instead, our president has chosen to produce and amplify messages of hate, marginalization and division, tearing our nation apart.

First, she misrepresents the moment as compared to U.S. history. The watershed is the invasion of Muslims that refuse to become a part of the American Culture. Secondly, she lies about Trump as the cause. In his words and behavior, he is not.

We have all seen more than the usual level of prejudice over the past three years, targeting nearly every minority community. American Muslim families have borne the brunt of this bigotry for more than a decade.

Here, she admits a lot of her complaints pre-date Trump.

The effect on all minority communities has been huge increases in discrimination, hate crimes and the bullying of children. The negative effect on the future of our nation, our families and communities is hard to overestimate.

Again, a vacant declaration. No citations or supporting data.

So, what are we, as fair-minded Americans, to do? In circumstances like these, it’s up to each one of us to set examples with our own actions and help lead the way toward a better future, for our families, our communities and our nation. While those who spread hatred and division claim their right to free speech, we must choose to firmly grasp our own freedom of speech to turn back the tide of negativity that threatens to engulf us all.

I’ve listened to this woman and what she has written for a number of years. It is Free Speech that allows this. CAIR (she is one of their executive directors) has been declared to be exactly what she says is wrong. Speech keeps us free!

Every one of us, as fair-minded Americans, can use our freedom of speech to inspire our fellow Americans to be their best selves.

So, if you agree with her you are fair-minded. If not, sorry, you must not be fair! She completely ignores the foundation of our country that is clearly spelled out in the Declaration of Independence. The love for and the commitment to those principles and truths called out is what makes us uniquely Americans!

Our voices, amplified through media and other platforms, can help inspire millions of fair-minded fellow Americans to do their part to build inclusive communities, to find solutions to the challenges of the future. We all have talents, abilities, ideas and networks that we can and must use to start repairing the damage that has been done to the fabric of our nation. It can’t wait until next month or next year. Each of us can start by visiting a mosque, a synagogue or a church of a different denomination so that we can truly get to know one another. Then, we can inspire our fellow Americans to also do the same by talking to family, friends, neighbors and co-workers, and by using social media to reach beyond those circles.

One’s religion or any other factor really comes into play in her world view. It is not simply thoughts, it is behavior. When one or more people kill large numbers of innocents, we judge the behavior. If those responsible, claim a particular allegiance, we judge that as well. 

This country is our home, and it is one of the most beautiful, and beautifully diverse, places in God’s amazing creation. I truly believe that if we can all work together and raise our voices for good, we can help make it the best it can be.

Again, she ignores the harsh reality of what is going on in our nation and others. Muslims are arriving and not assimilating into the American Culture.  They demand Sharia Law and want our Nation to bend to Islamic belief. Going to a Mosque or another person’s place of worship will not change that. How can we be one nation if we have those that come in (some say invade) to our countries and refuse to assimilate?

CAIR may be what they are accused of being. That is not my purpose here. I have read the Koran and know the Bible. I can find no way these two beliefs can co-exist; for one is diametrically opposed to the other in all ways.

Karen Dabdoub is executive director of the Cincinnati office of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, America’s largest American Muslim civil rights organization wrote the above article.

Racism? This will make your head explode!

Racism? This will make your head explode!

By Kate Murphy

Northern Kentucky University students stood in the Student Union Plaza Tuesday night protesting a racially charged flier posted on campus.

The “Welcome White Week” flier was placed next to a “Welcome Black Week” poster promoting recent events sponsored by African American Programs and Services at NKU.

The campus newspaper, The Northerner, reported more than 50 students and faculty, including NKU President Geoff Mearns, attended the student-led demonstration to speak out against the flier, racial discrimination and the issues they face on campus.

Students discussed the “underrepresentation they feel on campus and the challenges they face as black students,” according to The Northerner.

James Johnson, an organizer of the demonstration according to the report, posted about the event on Facebook.

He wrote, “Racism and discrimination must go! We will not stand for the undermining and the deliberate disrespect of our struggle. OUR VOICE WILL BE HEARD! #NKUREPLYINGBLACK.”

African American Programs and Services posted videos and photos of the event on its Facebook page and issued a statement of solidarity.

“African American Programs and Services stands in solidarity with students, staff and faculty who were offended by the intolerant flier created by individuals who chose not to embrace the recent ‘Welcome Black Week’ activities.

“Moving forward we value and respect dialogue regarding all viewpoints and will create educational spaces to build awareness and move towards the common good.”

University spokeswoman Amanda Nageleisen said the “Welcome White Week” flier did not go through university approval process with the Student Union and the student organization named is not active or registered with the university.

There is also no record of any of the events on the flier scheduled at NKU.

“We’re still looking into it,” Nageleisen said, “but all signs point to this not being a legitimate organization or flier or activity.”

She said the fliers first came to university’s attention Tuesday and they were quickly removed, mostly by students.

Welcome Black Week took place Aug. 29 through Sept. 2, shortly after students arrived on campus

Does the left really hate Christianity?

Does the left really hate Christianity? The nation's biggest problem and a  fresh solution

In an age when madness is the new normal – like when the president says global warming and not radical Islam is our real enemy, and when the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee is a career criminal and everyone knows it but supports her anyway, and when men who think they're women are now actively recruited into our military – one hidden factor underlies all this ever-metastasizing insanity. And that would be the left's war on Christianity. That's right, Christianity. You know, the religion of Columbus, the Pilgrims, the American colonists and Founding Fathers, George Washington and Abraham Lincoln, the religion of virtually every signer of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, of the abolitionists and of Martin Luther King Jr., and of the vast majority of soldiers who have ever fought and bled and died to preserve Americans' freedom. Yeah, that one. The truth is that in today's America, Christianity is increasingly regarded with utter contempt by today's elite class, including virtually the entirety of academia, the news media, the entertainment industry, our government and our courts. To these, Christianity – which for centuries served as the moral, cultural and legal foundation for the most successful nation in history – is a sort of outdated, ignorant, superstitious, anti-science worldview at best. At worst, it is considered a dangerously deluded, bigoted, hateful, Taliban-like totalitarian cult bent on imposing an unconstitutional theocracy on America.  Lastly, the left is in fear of Christianity. Why? Christianity is a mortal dichotomy with the non-Christian belief system. It strips the left of their ability to "hide" behind the myths, their humanist beliefs and behaviors; an amoral system that goes against the teachings of God and Christ. Do I overstate the case? Consider that just a few years ago, overt attacks on the religious freedom of Christians in America – like prohibiting schoolchildren from singing "Silent Night" at Christmastime or jailing a county clerk for conscientiously refusing to sign off on a same-sex marriage license – seemed few and far between. Though troubling, such cases were infrequent enough that we optimistically hoped they were aberrations, regrettable overreaches by some overzealous activist judge. Alas, today that illusion has been shattered by daily episodes of outright persecution of Christians with the full force of law, all because they were sincerely living their faith in exactly the same way Washington, Lincoln, the founders, the soldiers, our parents and grandparents did. It's no exaggeration to say that, on close examination, just about every crazy, perverse, suicidal trend you can identify in today's America – and for that matter, in Europe, currently reeling under the onslaught of a full-blown Islamic invasion – can be traced directly to the abandonment of the Western world's founding religion and moral values in response to the left's decades-long war on Christianity. So, now that we've acknowledged the problem – the real problem, underlying the vast majority of our other national problems – what can we do about it? "Outside a Christian event, and watched closely by police, was a mob of angry 'LGBT protesters.' A young woman who claimed to be with the press was present at the banquet. It was quickly discovered that she was actually with the mob outside and had somehow managed to sneak in." Rather than kick her out, Matt recalls, event organizers allowed her to stay, as long as she put away her video camera. Then something unexpected happened: This young woman, who identified as a lesbian, sat at a table with some of the most loving and godly women I know. They showed her the love of Christ. ... After I gave my remarks, this young lady – we'll call her Marie to protect her from being hanged for high treason by the 'equality' crowd – rushed over to me with tears in her eyes. "They lied!" she exclaimed of the protest organizers outside. "You don't hate us. You don't hate me. You really do care. And you're funny!" she added of some of the humor I typically, though not always successfully, weave into my writing and speaking. "I'll admit it," she continued, "What you said was hard to hear. But they lied to me. You don't hate anyone." A number of us then prayed for this priceless daughter of God the Father. She stayed around and visited with us until well after the event ended. Outside the event, Matt recalls, they "were greeted with scowls and profanity-laden taunts."  "What are you doing with them!" demanded one of the protesters of our new friend. To even my surprise, she ignored them, reached over and gave me a big hug. She saw that we loved her. She saw that Christ, in us, loved her. He died for our sins, her sins, and for the sins of each of her fellow protesters. Learning that "her friends, her ride home, had abandoned her," one of the ladies with whom "Marie" had been seated at the banquet "drove her home that night, continuing to minister to her along the way and for some time thereafter." This, by the way, is exactly how Norma McCorvey – better known as "Jane Roe," the abortion-legalization plaintiff in the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade case – crossed over from the side of death to the side of life, where she has happily lived and labored ever since: It was the genuine love and caring of the pro-life demonstrators she personally encountered that changed her, introducing her to something she desperately needed, indeed had needed all her life – the love of God. The point is, Matt is a happy warrior who exhibits both the strength and sweetness of a real Christian, as well as the knowledge of a lawyer. And all of this is very present in the strong final section of "Hating Jesus" on how to fight the good fight. Much more than a checklist of things to do, it evokes and encourages the spirit necessary for fighting this war – the spirit of a joyous Christian fighter willing to stand up for his faith even if sacrifice is required. Indeed, as the apostles knew and testified, there's a mysterious joy in standing up for the Kingdom of Heaven – even if it means enduring persecution – which goes far beyond the ability of words to describe. Just read "Hating Jesus" by Matt Barber. I promise you'll be glad you did.

Liberal reasoning: Idiotic or dishonest?

Liberal reasoning: Idiotic or dishonest?

By Walter E. Williams

Many people argue that liberals, socialists and progressives do not understand basic economics. I am not totally convinced about that.

Take the law of demand, for example, one of the fundamental principles of economics. It holds that the lower the cost of something the more people will take or do of it. Conversely, the higher the cost the less people will take or do something. By their actions, liberals fully understand the law of demand. Let’s look at some proof.

The Seattle City Council voted unanimously to establish a tax on gun and ammunition sales. Hillary Clinton has called for a 25 percent tax on gun sales. In Chicago, Cook County Board President Toni Preckwinkle proposed “violence taxes” on bullets to discourage criminals from buying guns. Let’s ignore the merit of these measures. They do show that gun grabbers acknowledge the law of demand. They want fewer gun sales and thus propose raising the cost of guns.

NBCBLK contributor Danielle Moodie-Mills said, “We need to stop misgendering people in the media, and there needs to be some type of fine that’s put into place for ... media outlets ... that decide that they’re just not going to call people by their name.”

What Moodie-Mills wants is for us to be obliged, if a man says he’s a woman, to address him as her and, if a woman says she’s a man, to address her as him. The basic point here is that Moodie-Mills acknowledges the fundamental law of demand when she calls for FCC fines for media people who “misgender” folks. By the way, if I claimed to be the king of Siam, I wonder whether she would support my demand that I be addressed as “your majesty.”

In the Ohio Legislature, Rep. Bill Patmon, a Democrat from Cleveland, introduced a bill to make it illegal to manufacture, sell or display toy guns. The ban would apply to any toy gun that a “reasonable person” could confuse with a real one. A $1,000 fine and up to 180 days in jail would be imposed for failure to obey the law. That’s more evidence that liberals understand the law of demand. You want less of something? Just raise its cost.

Even San Francisco liberals and environmentalists understand the law of demand. They’ve proposed a ban that over the next four years would phase out the sale of plastic water bottles that hold 21 ounces or less in public places. Violators could face fines of up to $1,000.

Former U.S. Secretary of Energy Steven Chu once said, “We have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe” in order to make Americans give up their “love affair with the automobile.” If gas prices rise high enough, Chu knows that Americans will drive less.

There you have it – abundant evidence that liberals, socialists and progressives understand the law of demand.

But wait a minute. What about raising the cost of hiring workers through increases in the minimum wage?

Aaron Pacitti, Siena College professor of economics, wrote that raising the minimum wage “would reduce income inequality and poverty while boosting growth, without increasing unemployment.” The leftist Center for Economic and Policy Research has written a paper whose title tells it all: “Why Does the Minimum Wage Have No Discernible Effect on Employment?” The U.S. Department of Labor has a page on its website titled “Minimum Wage Mythbusters” (http://tinyurl.com/lt47co9), which relays a message from liberal economists: “Increases in the minimum wage have had little or no negative effect on the employment of minimum- wage workers.”

What the liberals believe – and want us to believe – is that though an increase in the cost of anything will cause people to use less of it, labor is exempt from the law of demand. That’s like accepting the idea that the law of gravity influences the falling behavior of everything except nice people. One would have to be a lunatic to believe either proposition.

Questions We Should Ask In America But Aren’t ‘Allowed’ To – Thanks to PC-BS

Questions We Should Ask In America But Aren’t ‘Allowed’ To – Thanks to Politically Correct - BS

1) If Islam is really a religion of peace, as opposed to a particularly violent religion, then why do so many people and organizations across the world refuse to show Muhammad cartoons out of fear that they’ll be murdered by devout Muslims for doing it?

2) If illegal immigrants are supposed to help our economy, then why weren’t they helping the economies of the poor nations they fled?

3) Given that Hillary Clinton’s nearly accomplishment-free political career has been based on riding the coattails of a serial adulterer who has humiliated and cheated on her over and over, isn’t Hillary Clinton a terrible role model for young women?

4) If Barack Obama can directly contradict the laws on the books by refusing to deport millions of illegal aliens because of “prosecutorial discretion,” couldn’t a Republican President use the same precedent and refuse to prosecute people who don’t pay a capital gains tax or who violate EPA rules?

5) Wouldn’t it be just as stupid to send teenage Boy Scouts into the woods alone with gay men as it would to send teenage Girl Scouts into the woods alone with heterosexual men? …

6) Why should we take the threat of climate change seriously enough to cut back our lifestyles when even Al Gore, the foremost promoter of global warming hysteria, lives in a mansion, flies on private jets and rides around in SUVs? …

7) If we’re not willing to ask middle class Americans to at least pay in taxes what services provided to them from the government cost, then isn’t it time to start paring back the services the government offers until we get to a level of government that everyone but the poor is willing and able to pay for? …

8) If ISIS (Islamic State in Iraq and Syria) has nothing to do with Islam, then why does it have “Islamic” in its name? …

9) If cites like Detroit and Baltimore have been run by liberals for decades, then aren’t Democrats fully responsible for the problems those cities have?

10) Isn’t it racist to argue that black Americans are so uniquely stupid and incompetent that they can’t even manage to get a government ID to vote?

11) If a man works more hours than a woman, takes off less time to be with his children and does more unpleasant, difficult jobs, shouldn’t he make more money than she does?

12) Isn’t a media personality — with a platform that gets him out to large numbers of people — who falsely accuses someone of racism doing much more damage to society and promoting more hatred than some hick or frat boy who hates black people because of the color of their skin?

13) If Barack Obama can make large changes to Obamacare without the approval of Congress, then couldn’t a Republican President use the same precedent to gut Obamacare regardless of what Congress has to say about it? …

14) If gun-free zones are effective and border fences are ineffective, why is the border of the White House surrounded by a huge fence guarded by lots of Secret Service agents with guns?

15) If black Americans commit 49.3% of all murders and account for 51.5% of all violent crime among juveniles, yet there are almost two white Americans killed by the police for every black American (2,151 vs. 1130 over 12 years), then aren’t black Americans actually less likely to be killed by police than you’d expect given the crime statistics?

Pork and Islam

Pork and Islam

Let's hear it for a Quebec mayor...WAY TO GO QUEBEC.......

MAYOR REFUSES TO REMOVE PORK FROM SCHOOL CANTEEN MENU... EXPLAINS WHY

Muslim parents demanded the abolition of pork in all the school canteens of a Montreal suburb. The mayor of the Montreal suburb of Dorval,has refused, and the town clerk sent a note to all parents to explain why...

Muslims must understand that they have to adapt to Canada and Quebec, its customs, its traditions, its way of life, because that's where they chose to immigrate. They must understand that they have to integrate and learn to live in Quebec. They must understand that it is for them to change their lifestyle, not the Canadians who so generously welcomed them. They must understand that Canadians are neither racist nor xenophobic, they accepted many immigrants before Muslims (whereas the reverse is not true, in that Muslim states do not accept non-Muslim immigrants).

That no more than other nations, Canadians are not willing to give up their identity, their culture.

And if Canada is a land of welcome, it's not the Mayor of Dorval who welcomes foreigners, but the Canadian-Quebec is people as a whole.

Finally, they must understand that in Canada (Quebec) with its Judeo-Christian roots, Christmas trees, churches and religious festivals, religion must remain in the private domain. The municipality of Dorval was right to refuse any concessions to Islam and Sharia.

For Muslims who disagree with secularism and do not feel comfortable in Canada, there are 57 beautiful Muslim countries in the world, most of them under-populated and ready to receive them with open halal arms in accordance with Shariah.

If you left your country for Canada, and not for other Muslim countries, it is because you have considered that life is better in Canada than elsewhere.

Ask yourself the question, just once,  Why is it better here in Canada than where you come from?

Does anyone know or care that Jews do not eat pork?  That and they love this country!

Our law makers should take a lesson from this and not give in to Islamic extremist groups.

If you feel the same like or share!

Racist driven lack of reporting?

Racist driven lack of reporting?

By Doug Giles

For those of you who’re not in the know about this recent increase in this ghastly phenom carried out against us “white devils”, one of my guest contributors at ClashDaily.com, Angela Turner, did yeoman’s work last Friday and cobbled together this large list of insanely ill-reported burnings of white people that almost makes one think that lighting white people on fire might be the new “knock out game” perpetrated by black hoodrats on us pigmentally challenged white clods.

Angela states,

With the recent gruesome murder of Jessica Chambers, there is widespread speculation and argument as to whether her killer was black or white. Jessica, a 19-year-old from Mississippi, was found walking, engulfed in flames after her attackers put lighter fluid in her mouth and lit her on fire. The attack happened on December 6, in Mississippi. While we wait for the police to make an arrest, here are sixteen people from ages twelve to eighty-seven that have one thing in common: they are all white and they were all set on fire by blacks.

Robin and Mani Aldridge — Just last week, a beloved special needs teacher and her high school junior daughter from Charlottesville Virginia were beaten before they were burned in a house fire. Police arrested a black man named Gene Everett Washington and charged him with two counts of first-degree murder.

Michael Brewer – 15-year-old Michael from Miami had burns over 60% of his body after three black classmates poured alcohol on him and set him on fire. All three are serving time in prison.

Allen Goin — A 13-year-old from Kansas City, his two black teen attackers put him in a bear hug, poured gasoline on him and set him on fire saying, “This is what you get, white boy”.

Gabriela Penalba — A 23-year-old teacher in Knoxville Tennessee was set on fire by a 15-year-old black student. She briefly turned her back to the class when the student lit her hair and shirt ablaze.

Kathryn “Kit” Grazioli — Colorado Springs firefighters found Kit’s 87-year-old body burning on a trail after a nearby resident called to report the fire. Officers arrested a black 21-year-old, Marcus Smith, and charged him with 1st degree murder. Kit was a deacon at her church and loved by the community.

Jonathan Foster — In Houston, Mona Nelson, a black 44-year-old woman abducted and killed 12-year-old Jonathan with a blowtorch on Christmas Eve, later dumping his body in a ditch. She was found guilty of capital murder and sentenced to life in prison. The story was getting mainstream media coverage until they arrested a black woman.

Kenneth Athey — Beaten with a hammer, stabbed, doused with chemicals and set on fire, 87-year-old Kenneth survived to testify against his black male attacker.

Luke Fleischman — a black teenager, who was prosecuted as an adult and sentenced to seven years for the hate crime, set the 18-year-old on fire while sleeping on a bus in San Francisco.

Richard Michael Carter — Two black brothers were arrested for shooting and burning Richard, a father from South Carolina.

Flo “Violet” Parker –The 67-year-old homeless woman from California was set on fire by a black man as she slept on a bench.

Nancy Harris — The 76-year-old grandmother was killed when a black man set fire to her while she was working at a convenience mart. She was loved in her Texas hometown and known as Grandma to everyone.

Melinda McCormick — A black woman and two black men beat and burned Melinda to death.

Jimmy Sanders – Shot and burned after stopping to help two black men, Erik Ellis, 28, and Malcolm Melton, 22, with car trouble. “He didn’t answer his phone. I called about eight or nine times. About an hour after he wouldn’t answer I got really, really nervous and upset,” Betty Sanders said. Jimmy was 65 and also from Mississippi, where Jessica Chambers was just burned.

Raymond Vasholz — Raymond died after his black neighbor, Terrance Hale, attacked him and his wife and set fires. Elizabeth and Raymond were married 58 years.

You and I both know that if the race roles were reversed there’d be a systematic condemnation of such behavior and nationwide protests leveled at “racist whites” randomly torching innocent blacks; but heretofore the media has been pretty damn quiet with little to no connection of the dots.

MEET THE MIDTERMS’ 42 MEGA-DONORS

MEET THE MIDTERMS’ 42 MEGA-DONORS

A few dozen wealthy folks account for nearly a third of super PAC donations


by Fredreka Schouten and Christopher Schnaars


Forty-two of the nation’s super wealthy have donated nearly $200 million to super PACs to shape next week’s midterm elections, according to a USA TODAY analysis of contributions of $1 million or more.

In all, this relatively small group has provided nearly a third of the more than $615 million raised by all super PACs in the 2014 election, the analysis shows.

Liberal environmentalist Tom Steyer dominates the field, having pumped more than $73 million into these PACs. Most of his money has flowed to Next-Gen Climate Action, the super PAC he created to make climate change a priority in key races.

Former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg, who has made gun control a top cause, is No. 2 at $20 million, nearly 65% of which has gone to his super PAC, Independence USA.

“This is a handful of people who are really driving this train and driving the dialogue” of the midterms, said Sheila Krumholz of the Center for Responsive Politics. “This is a harbinger of things to come” in 2016, when the presidency is at stake.

Super PACs, which can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money as long as they operate independently of the candidates they support, have outspent the national parties by more than $107 million through midday Tuesday, a tally by the Center for Responsive Politics shows.

“When you give money to a generic party, you don’t necessarily get to direct how the money is being spent,” said Saul Anuzis, a former chairman of the Michigan Republican Party. “I think donors are becoming more sophisticated. People are much more likely to want to decide how the money is spent.”

The analysis highlights the small number of Republican-aligned megadonors who are banding together to bankroll a handful of super PACs at the forefront of GOP efforts to win control of the Senate. Republicans need to net six seats to take the majority.

In recent weeks, six people have given both to American Crossroads, a super PAC tied to GOP strategist Karl Rove, and Ending Spending Action Fund, a super PAC created by TD Ameritrade founder J. Joe Ricketts, who wants less government spending.

The multiple givers include Ricketts and hedge funder Paul Singer, who gave $9.3 million to 10 super PACs. Nearly a third of Singer’s donations have gone to American Unity PAC, his pro-gay rights super PAC. Singer also gave a combined $5 million to Crossroads and Ending Spending.

Crossroads is one of the biggest Republican players in the midterms, spending more than $20 million — first to help mainstream Republican candidates beat back Tea Party-affiliated challengers during competitive primaries earlier this year and now blistering Democrats on the airwaves during the home stretch to Election Day.

A slew of recent polls show momentum building for a Republican takeover of the Senate.

“That investment has paid dividends,” Crossroads’ spokesman Paul Lindsay said. “The support we’ve received recently” from donors “is a sign of the progress we have made in the last two years.”

Only one woman donated more than $2 million to super PACs in this cycle: former wrestling executive Linda Mc-Mahon. She has contributed more than $2.6 million to nine groups, including Crossroads and Ending Spending.

“I think donors are becoming more sophisticated. People are much more likely to want to decide how the money is spent.” Saul Anuzis, a former chairman of the Michigan Republican Party 

Democrats use "Gangster Government" To Win Elections

Democrats use "Gangster Government" To Win Elections

By George Will

The early morning paramilitary- style raids on citizens’ homes were conducted by law enforcement officers, sometimes wearing bulletproof vests and lugging battering rams, pounding on doors and issuing threats. Spouses were separated as the police seized computers, including those of children still in pajamas. Clothes drawers, including the children’s, were ransacked, cell phones were confiscated and the citizens were told it would be a crime to tell anyone of the raids.

Some raids were precursors of, others were parts of, the nastiest episode of this unlovely political season, an episode that has occurred in an unlikely place. This attempted criminalization of politics in order to silence persons occupying just one portion of the political spectrum has happened in Wisconsin, which often has conducted robust political arguments with Midwestern civility.

From the progressivism of Robert La Follette to the conservatism of Gov. Scott Walker today, Wisconsin has been fertile soil for conviction politics. Today, the state’s senators are the very conservative Ron Johnson and the very liberal Tammy Baldwin. Now, however, Wisconsin, which to its chagrin produced Republican Sen. Joe McCarthy, has been embarrassed by Milwaukee County’s Democratic district attorney, John Chisholm. He has used Wisconsin’s uniquely odious “John Doe” process to launch sweeping and virtually unsupervised investigations while imposing gag orders to prevent investigated persons from defending themselves or rebutting politically motivated leaks, which have occurred.

According to several published reports, Chisholm told members of his staff subordinates that his wife, a teachers union shop steward at her school, is anguished by her detestation of Walker’s restrictions on government employees unions, so Chisholm considers it his duty to help defeat Walker.

In collaboration with Wisconsin’s misbegotten Government Accountability Board, which exists to regulate political speech, Chisholm has misinterpreted Wisconsin campaign law in a way that looks willful. He has done so to justify a “John Doe” process that has searched for evidence of “coordination” between Walker’s campaign and conservative issue advocacy groups.

On Oct. 14, much too late in the campaign season to rescue the political participation rights of conservative groups, a federal judge affirmed what Chisholm surely has known all along: Since a U.S. Supreme Court ruling 38 years ago, the only coordination that is forbidden is between candidates and independent groups that go beyond issue advocacy to “express advocacy” – explicitly advocating the election or defeat of a particular candidate.

But Chisholm’s aim – to have a chilling effect on conservative speech – has been achieved by bombarding Walker supporters with raids and subpoenas: Instead of raising funds to disseminate their political speech, conservative individuals and groups, harassed and intimidated, have gone into a defensive crouch, raising little money and spending much money on defensive litigation. Liberal groups have not been targeted for their activities that are indistinguishable from those of their conservative counterparts.

Such misbehavior takes a toll on something that already is in short supply – belief in government’s legitimacy. The federal government’s most intrusive and potentially punitive institution, the IRS, unquestionably worked for Barack Obama’s re-election by suppressing activities by conservative groups. Would he have won if the government he heads had not impeded political participation by many opposition groups? We will never know.

Would the race between Walker and Democrat Mary Burke be as close as it is if a process susceptible to abuse had not been so flagrantly abused to silence groups on one side of Wisconsin’s debate? Surely not.

Gangster government – Michael Barone’s description of using government machinery to punish political opponents or reward supporters – has stained Wisconsin, illustrating this truth: The regulation of campaigns in the name of political hygiene (combating “corruption” or the “appearance” of it) inevitably involves bad laws and bad bureaucracies susceptible to abuse by bad people.

Because of Chisholm’s recklessness, the candidate he is trying to elect, Burke, can only win a tainted victory, and if she wins she will govern with a taint of illegitimacy. No known evidence demonstrates any complicity in Chisholm’s scheme, but in a new ad she exploits his manufactured atmosphere of synthetic scandal in a manner best described as McCarthyite. Indeed, one probable purpose of Chisholm’s antics was to generate content for anti-Walker ads.

Wisconsin can repair its reputation by dismantling the “John Doe” process and disciplining those who have abused it. About one of them, this can be said: Having achieved political suppression by threatening criminal liability based on vague theories of “coordination,” Chisholm has inadvertently but powerfully made the case for deregulating politics. 

New York Time Journalist: 'Obama Hates the Press'

New York Time Journalist: 'Obama Hates the Press'

While some journalists are awed by power and only become mouthpieces of propaganda, other journalists fight to preserve freedom of speech and the press. New York Times journalist James Risen decries post-9/11 government attempts to snuff the work of reporters, and says the Obama administration in particular hates independent journalists. Risen argues journalists must push back. On Oct. 5, the two-time Pulitzer Prize winner won the Elijah Parish Lovejoy award for courageous journalism because he may face jail time for not naming a whistleblower in the CIA after Risen wrote a piece about that agency's failed attempt to disrupt Iran's nuclear program. Lovejay was an antebellum minister and journalist in Missouri who opposed slavery. "Today, the U.S. government treats whistle-blowers as criminals, much like Elijah Lovejoy," Risen says. "I don't think any of this would be happening under the Obama administration if Obama didn't want to do it. I think Obama hates the press. I think he doesn't like the press and he hates leaks." Ironic since they're his greatest sycophants

IRS shows heavy hand with small-business owners

IRS shows heavy hand with small-business owners

By George Will

Earnest moralists lament Americans’ distrust of government. What really is regrettable is that government does much to earn distrust, as Terry Dehko, 70, and his daughter Sandy Thomas, 41, understand.
Terry, who came to Michigan from Iraq in 1970, soon did what immigrants often do: He went into business, buying Schott’s Supermarket in Fraser, Mich., where he still works six days a week.
The IRS, a tentacle of a government that spent $3.5 trillion in 2013, tried to steal more than $35,000 from Terry and Sandy that year.
Sandy, a mother of four, has a master’s degree in urban planning but has worked in the store off and on since she was 12.
She remembers, “They just walked into the store” and announced that they had emptied the store’s bank account. The IRS agents believed, or pretended to believe, that Terry and Sandy were or conceivably could be – which is sufficient for the IRS – conducting a criminal enterprise when not selling groceries.

What pattern of behavior supposedly aroused the suspicions of a federal government that is ignorant of how small businesses function? Terry and Sandy regularly make deposits of less than $10,000 in the bank across the street. Federal law, aimed primarily at money laundering by drug dealers, requires banks to report cash deposits of more than $10,000. It also makes it illegal to “structure” deposits to evade such reporting.
Because 35 percent of Schott’s Supermarket’s receipts are in cash, Terry and Sandy make frequent trips to the bank to avoid tempting actual criminals by having large sums at the store. Besides, their insurance policy covers no cash loss in excess of $10,000.
In 2010 and 2012, IRS agents visited the store and examined Terry’s and Sandy’s conduct. In 2012, the IRS notified them that it identified “no violations” of banking laws. But on Jan. 22, 2013, Terry and Sandy discovered that the IRS had obtained a secret warrant and emptied the store’s bank account. Sandy says that if the IRS had acted “the day before, there would have been only about $2,000 in the account.” Should we trust that today’s IRS was just lucky in its timing?

The IRS used “civil forfeiture,” the power to seize property suspected of being produced by, or involved with, crime. The IRS could have dispelled its suspicions of Terry and Sandy, if it actually had any, by simply asking them about the reasons – prudence, and the insurance limits – for their banking practices. It had, however, a reason not to ask obvious questions before proceeding.
The civil forfeiture law – if something so devoid of due process can be dignified as law – is an incentive for perverse behavior: Predatory government agencies get to pocket the proceeds from property they seize from Americans without even charging them with, let alone convicting them of, crimes. Criminals are treated better than this because they lose the fruits of their criminality only after being convicted.
Sandy remembers her father exclaiming “Aren’t we in the United States? We did nothing wrong.” They did something right in discovering the Institute for Justice’s activities against civil forfeiture abuse. IJ, a libertarian defender of property rights and other American premises, says that what was done to Terry is done routinely across the nation – indeed, it was done almost simultaneously to the owner of a gas station near Schott’s Supermarket who deposited his cash receipts whenever he could get to the bank, typically every few days.
Civil forfeiture proceeds on the guilty-until-proven-innocent principle, forcing property owners of limited means to hire lawyers and engage in protracted proceedings against a government with limitless resources, just to prove their innocence. Says IJ: “To make matters worse, forfeiture law treats property owners like random bystanders and requires them to intervene in the lawsuit filed by the government against their property just to get it back. That is why civil forfeiture cases have such unusual names, such as United States v. $35,651.11 in U.S. Currency – the case involving Terry and Sandy.”
In what it probably considered an act of unmerited mercy, the IRS offered to return 20 percent of Terry’s money. Such extortion – pocketing others people’s money – often succeeds when the IRS bullies bewildered people not represented by IJ, which forced the government to return all of Terry’s and the gas station owner’s money.
IJ’s countersuit seeks an injunction to prevent such IRS thefts and extortions. Meanwhile, earnest moralists might consider the possibility that Americans’ distrust of government is insufficient.