The New Revere https://thenewrevere.com Conservative News and Opinion Mon, 11 Nov 2019 16:49:17 -0500 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.3 https://secureservercdn.net/184.168.47.225/b80.19d.myftpupload.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/cropped-NRDP-Site-Icon-1-32x32.jpg The New Revere https://thenewrevere.com 32 32 Ben Shapiro: Is Elizabeth Warren Set to Fall? https://thenewrevere.com/2019/11/ben-shapiro-is-elizabeth-warren-set-to-fall/ Mon, 11 Nov 2019 16:49:17 +0000 https://thenewrevere.com/?p=104207 This has been an awful week for the purported new 2020 Democratic presidential front-runner, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass. For months, Warren has received nearly unmitigated praise from the media for her bevy of “plans.” She’s been praised as “wonkish” and “brainy” and “focused.” Her growth in the polls has been the dual result of a […]]]>

This has been an awful week for the purported new 2020 Democratic presidential front-runner, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass. For months, Warren has received nearly unmitigated praise from the media for her bevy of “plans.” She’s been praised as “wonkish” and “brainy” and “focused.” Her growth in the polls has been the dual result of a strong organizational effort by her campaign in early primary states like Iowa and New Hampshire, and endless gobs of drool from reporters.

But now the bloom is coming off the rose.

For months, Warren has simply lied about whether she would raise middle-class taxes to pay for her Bernie Sanders-lite proposal to replace America’s health care insurance system with “Medicare for All.” To support that lie, on Friday, she released another one of her now-famous plans. It is a compendium of tissue-thin falsehoods, a plan about as plausible as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s Green New Deal. According to Warren’s plan, she’ll somehow manage to institute a wildly generous Medicare For All policy — including coverage for illegal immigrants — at a one-third discount off virtually all major estimates. She’ll radically reduce reimbursement rates for doctors and hospitals — and yet, care levels won’t suffer. She’ll cram down drugmakers’ prescription drug prices — but innovation won’t suffer. She’ll jack up taxes on the wealthy — but the wealthy won’t engage in tax avoidance.

The plan is a joke. It’s a lie.

But that’s Warren’s tendency: dishonest radicalism. At least Sen. Sanders, I-Vt., can be counted on to tell the unfortunate truth about soaking the middle class. Warren can be counted on to shift her policy proposals to appease specific constituencies and then lie about how she’ll pay for them. She’ll also lie about everything from her own ethnicity (Harvard Law School graduate David French rightly calls Warren an “academic grifter”) to her research on medical bankruptcy (she has claimed that “medical bankruptcies” represent a far higher percentage of all bankruptcies than can be supported by the facts).

All of this underscores her unelectability. As her poll numbers have risen, so, too, has Democrats’ wishcasting that perhaps — just perhaps — her unelectability has been overestimated. Maybe, the argument goes, voters aren’t put off by Warren’s radicalism and tendency toward scolding self-righteousness. Maybe Warren can pull this thing off.

Also last Friday, a poll came from The New York Times and Siena College. It pitted former Vice President Joe Biden, Sanders and Warren against President Trump in the battleground states and showed that among likely voters, Warren trails Trump in every major battleground state. She’s down by four points in Michigan, two in Pennsylvania, two in Wisconsin, four in Florida and four in North Carolina. Biden, by comparison, is up in all of those states except North Carolina.

And Warren’s numbers are likely to drop. Remember, Trump’s numbers aren’t particularly malleable. Neither are Biden’s, since he has 100% name recognition. Warren, however, isn’t widely known by the public. That means Trump — whose chief political skill lies in his willingness to use every iota of dirt against political opponents — will have the opportunity to define Warren. If she’s riding weak against Trump now, wait until he dubs her “Lieawatha.”

All of which explains why Warren has been faring worse in national polling of late. In early October, Warren actually surpassed Biden in the RealClearPolitics poll average of national numbers. Now she’s down nearly double digits again.

So hold the phone on that inevitable Warren nomination. Warren’s a weak front-runner. And she’s not getting any stronger.

PHOTO: Sen. Elizabeth Warren. Photo by AFGE. Attribution 2.0 Generic (CC BY 2.0)

]]>
Michelle Malkin: Radical Spawn Chesa Boudin: Nation’s Most Toxic DA Candidate https://thenewrevere.com/2019/11/michelle-malkin-radical-spawn-chesa-boudin-nations-most-toxic-da-candidate/ Sat, 09 Nov 2019 17:00:46 +0000 https://thenewrevere.com/?p=104197 Socialist Bernie Sanders just endorsed the bleeding-heart candidate for San Francisco District Attorney who makes President Obama’s Attorney General, Eric Holder, look like Sheriff Joe Arpaio. Meet Chesa Boudin. He’s the Bay Area public defender and former shill/translator for the late Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez who plans to turn the craphole of San Francisco into […]]]>

Socialist Bernie Sanders just endorsed the bleeding-heart candidate for San Francisco District Attorney who makes President Obama’s Attorney General, Eric Holder, look like Sheriff Joe Arpaio.

Meet Chesa Boudin. He’s the Bay Area public defender and former shill/translator for the late Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez who plans to turn the craphole of San Francisco into an even bigger sanctuary for the homeless, drug abusers, illegal immigrants, gangsters, vandals, thieves, recidivist criminals and cop-haters than it is already. Boudin leads a spooky field of left-lefter-leftists running for DA on the Nov. 5 ballot.

The cornerstone of Boudin’s campaign is sabotaging immigration enforcement. He has called for prosecution and imprisonment of ICE and police officers for doing their jobs and vowed to create an “immigrant defense unit” within the DA’s office to “stand up to Trump on immigration.”

While American veterans beg for money on San Francisco’s feces-clogged street corners, Boudin will instead subsidize “universal legal representation” for illegal immigrants facing deportation.

While American angel families are denied standing in American courts to sue the sanctuary outlaws whose policies enabled criminals in this country illegally to injure, rape or murder their loved ones, Boudin will “help every single immigrant victim of every crime obtain a U-Visa.”

Boudin’s campaign tagline claims he wants to build a criminal justice system “for everyone, not just the wealthy and well-connected.” The chutzpah. It burns.

Well-connected? Boudin has been endorsed by a who’s who of far-left celebrities, from Sanders to Hamas-linked “Women’s March” co-founder Linda Sarsour to Black Lives Matter hate crime hoax propagandist Shaun King to radical Chicago DA and Jussie Smollett fixer Kim Foxx to Black Panther Party commie revolutionary Angela Davis.

Wealthy? Boudin is the top fundraiser in the San Francisco DA’s race, raking in more than $623,000 in donations this year — a significant chunk from out-of-state academics, entertainment industry executives, and East Coast lawyers in New York and D.C. I discovered from Boudin’s most recent campaign finance disclosures that one of his top donors is Chloe Cockburn. She is a prominent partner of globalist billionaire George Soros’ Democracy Alliance. Cockburn moderated a crucial 2017 summit with Soros and other deep-pocketed liberal philanthropists to strategize on taking over local and state offices to reclaim “our progressive future.” Other bigwig Boudin donors hail from the Soros-allied Tides Foundation and Soros-funded Brennan Center for Justice.

What makes Boudin especially toxic is his family tree. Boudin is the militant offspring of spoiled-rich radicals Kathy Boudin and David Gilbert, members of the violent Weather Underground terrorist group, which bombed government buildings and corporate headquarters, aided convicted felons in jailbreaks and participated in a 1981 Brink’s armored car holdup in Nyack, New York, with the Black Liberation Army. That crime took the lives of three innocent Americans — police officers Edward O’Grady and Waverly Brown and private security guard Peter Paige.

Kathy Boudin was an 11-year fugitive from justice after an accidental homemade bomb explosion at her New York City townhouse resulted in three other deaths. At the time of her arrest in Nyack, Boudin gave police one of many false identities she had used to evade the law. She was paroled in 2003 after convincing parole board members that she acted nobly out of “white guilt” to protest racism against blacks. (Reality check: Officer Waverly Brown was a black, working-class military veteran.) Gilbert remains in prison. Their story was glorified and romanticized by Robert Redford in the 2013 movie, “The Company You Keep.”

After Kathy Boudin dropped off toddler Chesa at a babysitter’s house so she could help perpetrate the bloody $1.6 million Brink’s heist, this privileged elitist was adopted by another pair of America-hating domestic agitators, unrepentant Weathermen colleagues Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn. Ayers celebrated bombing the Pentagon in his radical memoir, “Fugitive Days,” taught at the University of Illinois in Chicago, and mentored Barack Obama. Dohrn declared war on “AmeriKKKa,” helped stage the “Days of Rage” in Chicago, when Weathermen blew up a memorial statue to police officers and rioted violently, leaving 75 policemen wounded and one permanently injured in a wheelchair, and then spent years as a fugitive from justice before settling into a comfy post as former director of the Legal Clinic’s Children and Family Justice Center at Northwestern University.

Steeped in Marxist ideology and self-pity, Boudin moaned to The New York Times that he was “sad that my parents have to suffer what they have to suffer on a daily basis” because they were “dedicated to fighting U.S. imperialism around the world.” No compassion for the families of the officers his parents helped murder, but the Yale grad and Rhodes Scholar did earn praise for his crusades against “urban misery in Bolivia, homelessness in Santiago and illiteracy in Guatemala.”

Now Boudin wants to avenge his cop-killing parents by imposing “restorative justice” and “decarceration” policies that will incentivize violent crime and endanger lives in San Francisco and beyond. If you think California is on fire now, just wait until this red diaper baby takes control of the prosecutorial wheel.

PHOTO: Downtown San Francisco, California. Photo by Mike McBey. Attribution 2.0 Generic (CC BY 2.0)

]]>
Ben Shapiro: The ‘Lynching’ Controversy and the Death of Common Language https://thenewrevere.com/2019/11/ben-shapiro-the-lynching-controversy-and-the-death-of-common-language/ Mon, 04 Nov 2019 14:32:47 +0000 https://thenewrevere.com/?p=104192 In the Bible, the people of Babel unite in fighting God; they decide to build a massive tower to challenge God’s supremacy. God, annoyed by their presumption, promptly causes them to speak a variety of tongues, dividing them and ending the foolhardy project. The story represents a simple truth: unity relies, at least in large […]]]>

In the Bible, the people of Babel unite in fighting God; they decide to build a massive tower to challenge God’s supremacy. God, annoyed by their presumption, promptly causes them to speak a variety of tongues, dividing them and ending the foolhardy project.

The story represents a simple truth: unity relies, at least in large part, on shared language.

In the United States, we’re watching our shared language disintegrate.

On Tuesday, President Donald Trump fired off one of his infamously impassioned tweets about the Democrats’ impeachment inquiry. Frustrated by Democrats’ lack of clarity on process with regard to that inquiry, Trump wrote: “So some day, if a Democrat becomes President and the Republicans win the House, even by a tiny margin, they can impeach the President, without due process or fairness or any legal rights. All Republicans must remember what they are witnessing here — a lynching. But we will WIN!”

Trump’s use of the word “lynching” immediately set off a firestorm. Characteristic among denunciations was one from former Vice President Joe Biden, who imperiously intoned: “Our country has a dark, shameful history with lynching, and to even think about making this comparison is abhorrent. It’s despicable.”

There was just one problem: Biden used the exact same language in October 1998 to describe the Clinton impeachment. “History is going to question whether or not this was just a partisan lynching,” Biden said back then. Which prompted Biden — today’s Biden — to condemn himself, stating: “That wasn’t the right word to use and I’m sorry about that. Trump on the other hand chose his words deliberately today in his use of the word lynching and continues to stoke racial divides in this country daily.”

Oh.

So when Joe Biden used the word “lynching” to describe his perception of a politically motivated impeachment in 1998, that was merely poor word choice. When Trump used it in 2019, he obviously meant to liken himself to black victims of white supremacist violence.

Or, alternatively, everyone is full of it.

Politics is wildly skewing our use of basic language. And that phenomenon is one of the key factors tearing apart the country. Every word becomes a potential dog whistle. Every phrase is parsed by the politically motivated for signs of malign intent. Politically correct language policing becomes the order of the day. Misunderstanding becomes malice; clarity becomes confusion.

The deliberate confusion fostered regarding gender pronouns is yet another example of this phenomenon. It is not a sign of malice to suggest that gender pronouns refer to objective measures of sex. It is a sign of a delusional culture to suggest that third party use of gender pronouns must refer instead to subjective self-identification. Yet we are told that virtue mandates that we pretend that transgender women are women, even if that means that biological men compete with biological women in sport; we are told that virtue requires that parents call their confused 7-year-olds by their chosen pronouns, even though confused children desperately require guidance, love and advice from parents, not mere affirmation of malleable self-identification.

We cannot have conversations with one another if we refuse to define terms. But refusal to define terms is one of the most fruitful methods of impugning others. If we seek division rather than unity, we’ll certainly find it. And as we cordon ourselves off into separate interpretations of language we once held in common, we’re less and less likely to ever again find common ground.

PHOTO: Donald Trump speaking with supporters at a campaign rally at Veterans Memorial Coliseum at the Arizona State Fairgrounds in Phoenix, Arizona. Photo by Gage Skidmore.

]]>
Conservative News and Opinion from Across the Web https://thenewrevere.com/2019/10/conservative-news-and-opinion-from-across-the-web-updated-hourly/ Thu, 17 Oct 2019 09:00:55 +0000 https://thenewrevere.com/?p=97767 News and opinion articles from the best conservative and/or libertarian websites, updated hourly. PHOTO: Ronald Reagan at Durenberger Rally by Michael Evans, 1982 (NARA/Reagan Library). This image is believed to be in the public domain and is from the National Archives. Made available via pingnews.com.]]>

News and opinion articles from the best conservative and/or libertarian websites, updated hourly.

Conservative Columnists with Political News Commentary, Analysis Read political news commentary and analysis from today's most popular conservative columnists and bloggers including Ann Coulter, Thomas Sowell, Michael Barone, Hugh Hewitt and many more leading conservatives.

The American Spectator Politics Is Too Important To Be Taken Seriously.

Latest – Reason.com Free Minds and Free Markets

www.washingtontimes.com stories: Opinion www.washingtontimes.com stories: Opinion

FOX News FOXNews.com - Breaking news and video. Latest Current News: U.S., World, Entertainment, Health, Business, Technology, Politics, Sports.

The Daily Caller The Daily Caller features breaking news, opinion, research, and entertainment 24 hours a day.

PHOTO: Ronald Reagan at Durenberger Rally by Michael Evans, 1982 (NARA/Reagan Library). This image is believed to be in the public domain and is from the National Archives. Made available via pingnews.com.

]]>
Michelle Malkin: ADL, Antifa and Koch: Toxic Anti-Trump League https://thenewrevere.com/2019/10/michelle-malkin-adl-antifa-and-koch-toxic-anti-trump-league/ Tue, 08 Oct 2019 10:37:07 +0000 https://thenewrevere.com/?p=104141 The Anti-Defamation League is a joke. Once a respected civil rights organization dedicated to fighting extremism and hate against Jews, the ADL lies in bed with violent antifa extremists and perpetuates hate against political opponents. The “progressive” group is now a brazenly partisan character assassination outfit headed by Jonathan Greenblatt, a Clinton/Obama operative and former […]]]>

The Anti-Defamation League is a joke.

Once a respected civil rights organization dedicated to fighting extremism and hate against Jews, the ADL lies in bed with violent antifa extremists and perpetuates hate against political opponents. The “progressive” group is now a brazenly partisan character assassination outfit headed by Jonathan Greenblatt, a Clinton/Obama operative and former George Soros-funded operative, whose contempt for President Donald Trump trumps all.

The ADL also partners with the corporate cheap labor lobby funded by Trump-hating billionaire Republican Charles Koch to stifle patriotic critics of open borders. In June, the Charles Koch Institute joined left-wing Silicon Valley companies and ADL’s speech police to exploit the riots in Charlottesville, Virginia, as a means of demonizing all Trump supporters and nationalist activists while giving cover to antifa online.

In 2017, left-wing antifa protesters had provoked and engaged in violent encounters at the Unite the Right rally. A man drove his car into a crowd there, killing one woman. New York Times reporter Sheryl Gay Stolberg tweeted on-scene that she “saw club-wielding ‘antifa’ beating white nationalists being led out of the park” (a candid observation that she later deleted after blowback from her narrative-enforcing colleagues). Live video footage showed left-wing protesters hurling objects at the white nationalists.

An independent review of the clashes by Timothy J. Heaphy of the Virginia law firm Hunton & Williams, commissioned by the Charlottesville city government, found that the Charlottesville police and Virginia State Patrol “failed to intervene,” “did not respond to requests for assistance,” were “insufficiently equipped to respond to mass unrest,” “failed to protect the points of egress, instead pushing the conflicting groups directly into each other,” and “failed to ‘stand up’ to protect human life.” Police supervisors told Heaphy they were ordered out of their protection zones,” one CPD lieutenant reported. “We were sitting there with our thumbs up our asses.” Another described how “we were prevented from doing police work” and a third officer stated plainly that “we failed this community.”

No matter. Charlottesville fueled efforts by the ADL, the Charles Koch Institute, the Center for American Progress, National Immigration Forum and Hope Not Hate (all Soros-funded satellites, as I report in my new book, “Open Borders, Inc.”) to conduct an internet witch hunt against conservatives and Trump supporters under the guise of eradicating “hate” and “extremism.”

That’s the backdrop you need to know for the ADL’s unveiling this week of a compendium of coded gestures it deems “hate symbols.” The database includes the “OK” hand sign (initially a joke on the 4Chan internet troll forum), bowl haircuts (because crazed church shooter Dylan Roof had one, all white men with bad hairdos like his must be massacre-minded white supremacists), and the numbers 1-11, 100%, 9%, 12, 13, 14, 18, 28, 38, 43, 83, 88, 311, 318, 511 and 737 (because somewhere someone purportedly associated with something remotely racist had some tattoo or slogan or hand sign using the Dastardly Digits of Evil).

It’s all beyond parody, but the most astonishing entries in the ADL’s kooky cookbook of code symbols are anti-antifa emblems. Drawing a slash mark through the antifa anarchists’ red and black flag is now tantamount to endorsing white nationalism. Opposing left-wing violence by a menacing network of black-masked bullies that has doxxed ICE agents, harassed elderly citizens and bloodied independent journalists, is inciting violence. Resisting defamation of immigration enforcement patriots standing up to smears by Abolish ICE and antifa is defamation.

Last weekend, I helped organize a Stand With ICE rally in Tacoma, Washington, at the GEO Group detention facility targeted by antifa firebomber Willem Van Spronsen. There, a brave Jewish immigrant from Germany, Jan Moritz held my hand and rallied the crowd of Old Glory flag-wavers against the open borders mob invoking the Nazi card to silence us:

“I escaped from tyranny and communism in East Germany as a small child. I was helped by a grandfather who escaped from tyranny and Nazi concentration camp in Germany. And these people call me a Nazi because I’m American?!”

When the violence-enabling, smear merchants of the ADL and its collaborators are in charge of weaponizing “hate” and “defamation” to destroy dissent, who will step up to de-platform them?

PHOTO: Donald Trump speaking with supporters at a campaign rally at the Prescott Valley Event Center in Prescott Valley, Arizona. Photo by Gage Skidmore. Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic (CC BY-SA 2.0)

]]>
Michelle Malkin: Triggering the Google Social Credit System https://thenewrevere.com/2019/09/michelle-malkin-triggering-the-google-social-credit-system/ Mon, 09 Sep 2019 10:00:39 +0000 https://thenewrevere.com/?p=104135 I learned last week from a Silicon Valley whistleblower, who spoke with the intrepid investigative team at Project Veritas, that my namesake news and opinion website is on a Google blacklist. Thank goodness the Big Tech giant hasn’t taken over the newspaper syndication business yet. Twenty years of column writing have allowed me to break […]]]>

I learned last week from a Silicon Valley whistleblower, who spoke with the intrepid investigative team at Project Veritas, that my namesake news and opinion website is on a Google blacklist.

Thank goodness the Big Tech giant hasn’t taken over the newspaper syndication business yet. Twenty years of column writing have allowed me to break news and disseminate my opinions without the tyranny of social justice algorithms downgrading or whitewashing my words. But given the toxic metastasis of social media in every aspect of our lives, especially for those who make their living exercising the First Amendment, it may only be a matter of time before this column somehow falls prey to the Google Ministry of Truth, too.

Armed with internal memos and emails, former Google software engineer Zachary Vorhies exposed how MichelleMalkin.com (online since 1999) was placed on a news blacklist banning my content from appearing on newsfeeds accessed through Android Google products. I do not advocate violence, publish porn or indulge in vulgarity or profanity (other than my occasional references to Beltway crapweasels). But I triggered the Google Social Credit System and there’s no going back.

My apparent sin: Independently growing a large organic following of readers on the internet who share my mainstream conservative views on immigration, jihad, education, social issues, economic policy, faith and more.

Other conservative victims of the Google ban hammer include: Twitchy (a Twitter aggregation site I founded in 2012), FrontPage Magazine (founded by prolific conservative author and journalist David Horowitz), the Daily Caller (founded by Fox News host and journalist Tucker Carlson), Legal Insurrection (founded by Cornell University law professor and investigative blogger William Jacobson), NewsBusters (founded by Media Research Center in 2005), The Gateway Pundit (founded by grassroots social media pioneer Jim Hoft in 2004), the American Thinker (another of the veteran conservative blogs founded in 2003 by Thomas Lifson), LifeNews.com (an independent, pro-life news site founded in 1992 by Steven Ertelt), the Catholic News Agency and The Christian Post.

I suspect, because so many of the blacklisted sites belong to the original generation of conservative bloggers, that Google’s ideology-based censorship significantly predates the timeframe of the documents that Vorhies (who worked at Google for eight years) shared with Project Veritas. Indeed, my first substantiated censorship by Google/YouTube, which was covered by The New York Times, occurred 13 years ago in 2006. Around that time, it also became clear to me that humans, not algorithms, were manipulating Google Images to prioritize unspeakably crude photoshopped images of me disseminated by left-wing misogynists. And not long after, my heavily trafficked blog posts started dropping off the search engine radar altogether.

Several previous Google insiders have confirmed that the Big Tech giant discriminates against right-leaning journalists, pundits and personalities — not to mention free-thinking employees within its own workforce who’ve been persecuted, fired and even harassed by police for their whistleblowing. Leaked documents also show that a small cadre of meddling social justice overlords at Google Central Command manually manipulate search engine results — despite the company elite’s brazen denial of the practice at a recent congressional hearing.

In the early days of New Media, entrepreneurs on the left, right and center rallied around the transparency and open access mantra, “Information just wants to be free.” Now, in the wholly disingenuous names of “trust” and “safety,” the overlords of the internet want to throttle information with which they disagree. Google employees actively demote content on YouTube deemed “controversial queries,” according to internal documents from Vorhies, including the following phrases:

–Abortion is barbaric.

–Abortion is wrong.

–Abortion is murdering.

–Abortion is a crime.

“Do vaccines cause autism,” “climate change hoax,” and “Girl speaks about the danger in Germany due to rape refugees” were also all red-flagged as dangerously “fringe” by the Google P.C. police. So was President Donald Trump’s factual statement that immigration chaos has led to “people that are from all over that are killers and rapists and they’re coming into this country,” which one open borders employee complained was “explicit bias” that “we should take a stand on.”

So they’re for foreign killers and rapists coming into this country? Noted.

Internal staff complaints catalyze search engine manipulation, so political agitation among Google employees is a harbinger of speech clampdowns to come. Just last week, more than 1,000 Google employees lobbied the company to shun any contract work with U.S. Customs and Border Protection or Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Given that Google works with the hate racket and smear machine known as the Southern Poverty Law Center, you bet I’m worried that my immigration blog and column archives (not to mention all my reporting on the treasonous Silicon Valley CEOs in my upcoming book, “Open Borders Inc.”) will trip the Google Social Credit wire.

With Google’s homegrown menaces squelching our freedom of expression, damaging our reputations and livelihoods through slimy and secretive blacklists, and hampering our ability to do honest research — not to mention mining student data in schools by tethering children to Google apps/email/Chromebooks and holding their academic progress hostage to Google’s high-tech leash — who needs foreign enemies? China ain’t got nuthin’ on America’s “Don’t Be Evil” thought control freaks.

PHOTO: Google logo in building. Photo by Robert Scoble. Attribution 2.0 Generic (CC BY 2.0)

]]>
Ben Shapiro: How the Quest for Power Corrupted Elizabeth Warren https://thenewrevere.com/2019/09/ben-shapiro-how-the-quest-for-power-corrupted-elizabeth-warren/ Sat, 07 Sep 2019 18:32:52 +0000 https://thenewrevere.com/?p=104131 I first met Elizabeth Warren when she was a professor at Harvard Law School, in 2004. She was fresh off the publication of her bestselling book, “The Two-Income Trap.” There’s no doubt she was politically liberal — our only face-to-face meeting involved a recruitment visit at the W Hotel in Los Angeles, where she immediately […]]]>

I first met Elizabeth Warren when she was a professor at Harvard Law School, in 2004. She was fresh off the publication of her bestselling book, “The Two-Income Trap.” There’s no doubt she was politically liberal — our only face-to-face meeting involved a recruitment visit at the W Hotel in Los Angeles, where she immediately made some sort of disparaging remark about Rush Limbaugh — but at the time, Warren was making waves for her iconoclastic views. She wasn’t a doctrinaire leftist, spewing Big Government nostrums. She was a creative thinker.

That creative thinking is obvious in “The Two-Income Trap,” which discusses the rising number of bankruptcies among middle-class parents, particularly women with children. The book posits that women entered the workforce figuring that by doing so, they could have double household income. But so many women entered the workforce that they actually inflated prices for basic goods like housing, thus driving debt skyward and leading to bankruptcies for two-income families. The book argued that families with one income might actually be better off, since families with two incomes spent nearly the full combined income and then fell behind if one spouse lost a job. Families with one income, by contrast, spent to the limit for one income, and if a spouse was fired, the unemployed spouse would then look for work to replace that single income.

Warren’s core insight was fascinating: She argued that massive expansion of the labor force had actually created more stressful living and driven down median wages. But her policy recommendations were even more fascinating. She explicitly argued against “more government regulation of the housing market,” slamming “complex regulations,” since they “might actually worsen the situation by diminishing the incentive to build new houses or improve older ones.” Instead, she argued in favor of school choice, since pressure on housing prices came largely from families seeking to escape badly run government school districts: “A well-designed voucher program would fit the bill neatly.”

Her heterodox policy proposals didn’t stop there. She refused to “join the chorus calling for taxpayer-funded day care” on its own, calling it a “sacred cow.” At the very least, she suggested that “government-subsidized day care would add one more indirect pressure on mothers to join the workforce.” She instead sought a more comprehensive educational solution that would include “tax credits for stay-at-home parents.”

She ardently opposed additional taxpayer subsidization of college loans, too, or more taxpayer spending on higher education directly. Instead, she called for a tuition freeze from state schools. She recommended tax incentives for families to save rather than spend. She opposed radical solutions wholesale: “We haven’t suggested a complete overhaul of the tax structure, and we haven’t demanded that businesses cease and desist from ever closing another plant or firing another worker. Nor have we suggested that the United States should build a quasi-socialist safety net to rival the European model.”

So, what happened to Warren?

Power.

The other half of iconoclastic Warren was typical progressive, anti-financial industry Warren. In “The Two-Income Trap,” she proposes reinstating state usury laws, cutting off access to payday lenders and heavily regulating the banking industry — all in the name of protecting Americans from themselves. While her position castigating the credit industry for deliberate obfuscation of clients was praiseworthy, her quest to “protect consumers” quickly morphed into a quest to create the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau — an independent agency without any serious checks or balances. But despite her best efforts, she never became head of the CFPB, failing to woo Republican senators. The result: an emboldened Warren who saw her popularity as tied to her Big Government agenda. No more reaching across the aisle; no more iconoclastic policies. Instead, she would be Ralph Nader II, with a feminist narrative to boot.

And so, she’s gaining ground in the 2020 presidential race as a Bernie Sanders knockoff. Ironically, her great failing could be her lack of moderation — the moderation she abandoned in her quest for progressive power. If Elizabeth Warren circa 2003 were running, she’d be the odds-on favorite for president. But Warren circa 2019 would hate Warren circa 2003.

PHOTO: Rally at US Sen 0236 Senator Elizabeth Warren. Photo by Edward Kimmel. Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic (CC BY-SA 2.0)

]]>
Ben Shapiro: Trump Is Right on the China Threat https://thenewrevere.com/2019/08/ben-shapiro-trump-is-right-on-the-china-threat/ Fri, 30 Aug 2019 13:43:01 +0000 https://thenewrevere.com/?p=104187 President Trump’s latest foray into the world of international economics — his ongoing trade war with China — has been widely derided by his critics. It’s been derided on the grounds that there is no long-term strategy; on the grounds that the trade war will not be, as Trump has bragged, “good and easy to […]]]>

President Trump’s latest foray into the world of international economics — his ongoing trade war with China — has been widely derided by his critics. It’s been derided on the grounds that there is no long-term strategy; on the grounds that the trade war will not be, as Trump has bragged, “good and easy to win”; on the grounds that Trump continues to send mixed signals, simultaneously claiming that China is bearing the brunt of his tariffs while desperately urging Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell to lower interest rates.

Now, Trump’s trade policy may not be well-considered. His understanding of trade is rudimentary at best — he still operates under the assumption that mutually beneficial trade is actually a zero-sum game. And Trump’s rhetoric may be confusing — it’s unclear whether Trump wants tariffs or wants to alleviate them. But Trump does have one thing absolutely right: China is an imperturbable geopolitical foe. And the United States ought to be taking a serious look at a long-term strategy to contain and then reverse the dominance of the totalitarian communist regime.

Trump is the only president of recent vintage to understand this simple truth. The Chinese regime is strengthening its totalitarianism; market forces have not opened up China’s politics. China’s attempts to strengthen its grip on Hong Kong, its forays into the complexities of Indian-Pakistani politics, its threats of sanctions against American firms over the sale of jets to Taiwan — all of this bespeaks the intent of the Xi Jinping regime, which has a philosophy of political revanchism. The supposed moderation of Dengism — the political philosophy of Deng Xiaoping, which supposedly prized pragmatism over doctrinal adherence to Marxist tenets — is being quickly reversed, with China’s economy placed at the mercy of political leadership. Dengism was always treated with too much optimism by the West: The same regime supposedly pushing for detente with the West stole hundreds of billions in intellectual property every year for years while continuing to build up its military. Still, Xi has moved away from even tepid moves toward openness.

Two significant projects in recent years demonstrate the scale of China’s ambitions. First, there’s the so-called Belt and Road Initiative, in which China has helped subsidize building infrastructure in a bevy of countries throughout the world. Up to 68 countries are already taking part. The project is designed to place these countries in hock to the Chinese government; it’s also designed to maximize China’s naval power in the region.

Then there is China’s heavy focus on government-subsidized building of 5G, using Huawei as the tip of the spear. China is offering 5G technology to developing countries at discounted prices, and those countries, hungry for the technology, have been accepting, likely at the cost of their own privacy and security. The goal, as always: maximization of China’s sphere of influence.

Free trade isn’t going to cure this. China’s government has been willing to utilize mercantilism to prop up its global ambitions. Capitalism hasn’t opened China’s politics. Free trade has indeed benefitted China’s citizens, bringing hundreds of millions out of poverty, but the Chinese government has responded with more repression, not less. All of which means that the United States must be pursuing a thorough strategy of opposition to China’s ambitions.

Trump seems to understand this. But if he fails to articulate that to the American people, his economic war with China will fail. That’s because if the American people are asked to shoulder an economic burden without being informed as to the rationale or the cost, they will rightly buck. Trump hasn’t explained that the burden exists, let alone why the American people should shoulder it.

With that said, at least Trump recognizes the threat China represents. The chattering class has, for far too long, ignored that threat, to the detriment of the United States and her allies.

PHOTO: Chinese flag. Photo by Tomas Roggero. Attribution 2.0 Generic (CC BY 2.0)

]]>
Ben Shapiro: Why the Left Is Reconsidering Al Franken https://thenewrevere.com/2019/08/ben-shapiro-why-the-left-is-reconsidering-al-franken/ Fri, 30 Aug 2019 09:37:28 +0000 https://thenewrevere.com/?p=104045 The New Yorker recently printed a lengthy piece by reporter Jane Mayer about the sad fate of former Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn. Franken resigned from the Senate in 2017 after a bevy of women accused him of sexual harassment; their accounts ranged from unwanted kisses to unsolicited a– grabbing. In the midst of the #MeToo […]]]>

The New Yorker recently printed a lengthy piece by reporter Jane Mayer about the sad fate of former Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn. Franken resigned from the Senate in 2017 after a bevy of women accused him of sexual harassment; their accounts ranged from unwanted kisses to unsolicited a– grabbing. In the midst of the #MeToo movement, Franken stepped down, all the while decrying President Trump’s own record of allegations concerning mistreatment of women.

At the time, there were two possible interpretations of events. The first was more inspiring: After decades of defending sexual misconduct by powerful Democratic figures, Democrats and their media allies were finally willing to reset a social standard. In the wake of #MeToo, they had reconsidered their worship of Teddy Kennedy, their pathetic willingness to cover for Bill Clinton. A new day had dawned.

Then there was the second, more cynical theory: Democrats and their media allies were looking to set a new standard out of pure partisanship. They weren’t really concerned about Franken’s victims any more than they had been about Clinton’s victims. Instead, they were looking to establish a level of morally superior ground upon which to attack Trump and demand that Republicans disown him.

This week, we found out which theory was true.

Mayer, the New Yorker reporter, rose to public acclaim just last year when she reported on then-Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh’s supposed sexual evils. With no supporting facts other than the hazy accounts of decades-old events, she attacked Kavanaugh with alacrity. Now, however, she has flipped: She’s concerned with Franken’s lack of due process; she questions the political motivations of one of his accusers; she points out that the evidence is supposedly scanty. Democrats, too, have risen to Franken’s defense. Many now claim that Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., was the real villain in this scenario, having rushed for Franken’s scalp precipitously.

In other words, Franken was kicked out of the party when Democrats were trying to build a case against Trump. Now that they’ve concluded that case won’t work, they want Franken back again. Presumably, they’ll soon be back to praising Clinton, too.

This sort of behavior is deeply destructive to American public discourse. That’s because a standard upheld only as a weapon to target political opposition is no standard at all. What’s more, the partisan interpretation of the standard creates an incentive for opponents to violate their own commitment to the standard. It’s a classic prisoner’s dilemma: The person who actually abides by a common moral standard and speaks out against bad behavior on all sides ends up the sucker. Only a fool would call out his own side to the cheers of opponents while his opponents defend their own degenerates.

The problem of politically motivated standards isn’t restricted to sexual abuse. It extends to race: Why should Republicans condemn President Trump’s tweets about the so-called Squad while Democrats maintain support for Rep. Ilhan Omar’s anti-Semitism and Rep. Ayanna Pressley’s racism? Why should Republicans provide ammunition to their ill-motivated opponents?

The only way to restore a common standard in politics is for both sides to rebuild trust, step by step. And that can only happen when both sides share common goals and values. Otherwise, everyone will decide that losing by abiding by the rules must take a back seat to victory by any means. And that means the destruction of our standards, one by one, until there are no standards left.

We’re getting pretty close already.

PHOTO: Former U.S. Sen. Al Franken. May 11, 2011. Photo by John Taylor. Attribution 2.0 Generic (CC BY 2.0)

]]>
Michelle Malkin: Freedom of Assembly Under Fire https://thenewrevere.com/2019/08/michelle-malkin-freedom-of-assembly-under-fire/ Tue, 27 Aug 2019 17:14:26 +0000 https://thenewrevere.com/?p=104041 Do law-abiding American citizens still have the right to gather peacefully to discuss their ideas without fear of government censorship and retribution? In my adopted hometown of Colorado Springs, the answer is “No” if you believe in strict border control or question whether the U.S. can survive as a nation-state. The answer is “No” if […]]]>

Do law-abiding American citizens still have the right to gather peacefully to discuss their ideas without fear of government censorship and retribution?

In my adopted hometown of Colorado Springs, the answer is “No” if you believe in strict border control or question whether the U.S. can survive as a nation-state. The answer is “No” if you wish to meet with others to express concern about the unsustainability of current U.S. immigration policy. The answer is “No” if you dare to speak unvarnished truths about the deleterious security and economic impacts of illegal immigrants, Third World and sharia-promoting Muslim refugees, temporary guest workers, chain migration beneficiaries, diversity visa lottery winners, and legions of unassimilated and unvetted visitors and other visa holders from around the world.

In spring 2017, award-winning journalist and former Hoover Institution media fellow Peter Brimelow and his educational nonprofit VDARE reserved the Cheyenne Mountain Resort for a conference on immigration and sovereignty issues. A local far-left gadfly who bragged about wearing her “pink pussy hat while driving (her) Prius” launched an online petition condemning Brimelow’s organization as a “hate group.” The petition threatened both the resort and the mayor, bellowing that “the residents of Colorado Springs will not support businesses that profit from hate groups and will not re-elect politicians hospitable to those hate groups!”

What exactly is “hateful” about VDARE’s work? You can visit VDARE.com and read their wide variety of news and opinions yourself. My syndicated column, published in the Colorado Springs Gazette and hundreds of other mainstream newspapers over the past 25 years, is also published by VDARE. So is Ann Coulter’s and Pat Buchanan’s. VDARE hosts a vital and honest discussion of an “America First” immigration policy, long considered third rail by the establishments in both parties before President Donald Trump embraced it and won the White House. Of course, I don’t agree with everything published on the site; neither do I agree with everything published on every op-ed page that has published my column. VDARE has never advocated violence or any illegal activity. The group counts foreign nationals, immigrants and members of racial and ethnic minorities among its strongest supporters, donors and contributors.

In mid-August 2017, obviously spooked by the violent outcome in Charlottesville, Virginia, where “alt right” protesters and violence-provoking antifa agitators clashed as local police refused to intervene as a result of a disastrous stand-down order, Colorado Springs Mayor John Suthers issued a chilling statement regarding the planned VDARE conference. While paying lip service to “freedom of speech,” Suthers rather unsubtly used his executive authority as the city’s top elected official to pressure local businesses against engaging with VDARE, its speakers and its supporters.

“I would encourage local businesses to be attentive to the types of events they accept and the groups that they invite to our great city,” Suthers warned. “The City of Colorado Springs will not provide any support or resources to this event, and does not condone hate speech in any fashion.”

This is the kind of feckless virtue-signaling you expect from Democratic mayors attacking Chick-fil-A over its founders’ commitment to traditional values. Here’s what’s truly pathetic: All it took for GOP Mayor Suthers to fold was one ambitious Democratic pot-stirrer and a few thousand crisis-exploiting petitioners on the internet (who knows how many of them were actually from Colorado Springs) echoing the talking points of the Southern Poverty Law Center smear machine — which has made a fortune calling everyone from Ben Carson to Ayaan Hirsi Ali to Brigitte Gabriel to Jeanine Pirro to VDARE to yours truly to Trump an agent of “hate.” (Never mind that the unhinged SPLC has paid out millions in defamation settlements, faces an onslaught of new lawsuits, and is crumbling internally amid employee accusations of sexual harassment and racial discrimination.)

Immediately after the mayor’s ominous decree, the Cheyenne Mountain Resort canceled VDARE’s contract. The liberal heckler’s veto won. The Republican mayor, a purported constitutional conservative, blithely threw the First Amendment under the bus.

VDARE is fighting back against what Brimelow calls the “Totalitarian Left” (and its surrender-ist GOP enablers). Colorado conservative lawyer Randy Corporon, who represents the group in its civil rights lawsuit against the city, told me: “Mayor John Suthers’ statement made clear that Colorado Springs would not provide police protection to VDARE’s lawful gathering in a private facility because of his disagreement with the participants’ views. His statement led Cheyenne Mountain Resort to cancel VDARE’s long-contracted event in spite of significant lost profit and cash damages paid to VDARE by the resort. Meanwhile, violent, disruptive protest groups like antifa receive police protections as they threaten, injure and maim.”

“I accepted this case,” Corporon said, “in order to expose the hypocrisy and in an effort to determine whether these precious First Amendment rights now only apply to groups and ideas favored by government.”

Unfortunately, Suthers’ discriminatory crusade against immigration hawks is being subsidized by Colorado Springs taxpayers left in the dark about the threat their own mayor poses to the essential freedom of assembly. Who needs antifa with free speech-squelching tyrants bullying patriots from inside the halls of power?

PHOTO: Colorado Springs, CO. Photo by Jasen Miller. Attribution 2.0 Generic (CC BY 2.0)

]]>
Ben Shapiro: Why We Embrace Conspiracy Theories https://thenewrevere.com/2019/08/ben-shapiro-why-we-embrace-conspiracy-theories/ Thu, 22 Aug 2019 10:00:15 +0000 https://thenewrevere.com/?p=104035 This week, convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein was found unresponsive in his jail cell from an apparent hanging, the day after a court unsealed a cache of documents from a lawsuit against his alleged procurer, Ghislaine Maxwell. Those documents included affidavits from Virginia Roberts Giuffre, the plaintiff, that allege Epstein trafficked her to major figures including […]]]>

This week, convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein was found unresponsive in his jail cell from an apparent hanging, the day after a court unsealed a cache of documents from a lawsuit against his alleged procurer, Ghislaine Maxwell. Those documents included affidavits from Virginia Roberts Giuffre, the plaintiff, that allege Epstein trafficked her to major figures including former New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, Prince Andrew of Britain and former Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell.

Epstein had allegedly attempted suicide in late July, when he apparently tried to hang himself in his cell. He was removed from that cell and placed on suicide watch. Only 11 days before his successful suicide, he was removed from suicide watch.

The failures were systemic. According to the Associated Press, guards on Epstein’s unit were “working extreme overtime shifts to make up for staffing shortages.” Epstein’s jailers were supposed to check on him every 30 minutes but didn’t do so, according to The New York Times. Epstein was also supposed to be housed with another inmate so he wasn’t alone; that never happened.

Given the public scrutiny on Epstein — he was the most famous federal inmate in custody — it’s no wonder that so many Americans are deeply suspicious of his suicide. Epstein had publicly associated with both President Donald Trump and ex-President Bill Clinton; Clinton had flown on Epstein’s plane multiple times. Within hours, dueling hashtags #ClintonBodyCount and #TrumpBodyCount trended on Twitter. President Trump, seemingly bothered by the hashtag targeting him, even retweeted Terrence K. Williams: “Died of SUICIDE on 24/7 SUICIDE WATCH? Yeah right! How does that happen … #JefferyEpstein had information on Bill Clinton & now he’s dead … I see #TrumpBodyCount trending but we know who did this! … RT if you’re not Surprised.” Conversely, MSNBC’s Joy Reid suggested that Attorney General William Barr, “Trump’s consigliere … whose prime directive is to protect Donald Trump no matter what,” might be covering up Epstein’s murder.

None of this is good for the country, obviously. But the question is why Americans seem so apt to believe conspiracy theories these days. Some of that certainly has to do with social media, where small pockets of fringe opinion can merge together to create larger pockets of fringe opinion.

Much of it has to do with generalized distrust of the media — distrust that is largely justified by media unwilling to question conspiracism from one side of the aisle. The same weekend Trump idiotically retweeted the Clinton-Epstein conspiracy theory, no less than three Democratic presidential candidates suggested that Michael Brown, the 18-year-old shot by a police officer in Ferguson, Missouri, in 2015 while charging that officer, was actually murdered. Not a single reporter apparently bothered to ask why these candidates were ignoring the report of Barack Obama’s Department of Justice, which found no evidence of murder.

More of it has to do with the human inability to accept widespread incompetence. Conspiracies are notoriously difficult to pull off. There are simply too many moving parts. Those who believe in conspiracy theories tend to attribute far more control to human beings than they generally have. Better to believe in conspiracies than to accept the difficult truth that those who are supposed to be able to handle their business often fail at it.

In political terms, though, conspiracism turns up the heat radically. That’s because every failure becomes evidence of malevolence on the part of your opponent; every oddity becomes yet another data point in favor of the all-powerful evil of those with whom you disagree.

Better, then, to abide by Hanlon’s razor: “Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.” We live in a deeply stupid time. And here’s the good news: Stupidity can be handled. Evil is another story.

PHOTO: Ben Shapiro speaking at the 2016 Politicon at the Pasadena Convention Center in Pasadena, California. Photo by Gage Skidmore. Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic (CC BY-SA 2.0)

]]>
Michelle Malkin: Open Borders Inc.: Who’s Funding the Wicked War on ICE? https://thenewrevere.com/2019/08/michelle-malkin-open-borders-inc-whos-funding-the-wicked-war-on-ice/ Wed, 21 Aug 2019 13:04:27 +0000 https://thenewrevere.com/?p=104031 All the gun control zealots out in full force last week have apparently gone to the beach. An alarming shooting took place at a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement offices in San Antonio on Tuesday. Local media reported that “multiple shots were fired on two floors targeting ICE officials.” But the Second Amendment saboteurs were […]]]>

All the gun control zealots out in full force last week have apparently gone to the beach. An alarming shooting took place at a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement offices in San Antonio on Tuesday. Local media reported that “multiple shots were fired on two floors targeting ICE officials.” But the Second Amendment saboteurs were AWOL.

Hello? Hello? Anybody home? Federal government workers are under literal fire for enforcing our immigration laws and protecting America. But the left-wing Moms Demand Action ignored the story. So did the anti-gun Brady Campaign agitators. And the usual stampede of camera-hogging Democratic presidential candidates lost their unquenchable thirst for the spotlight to blame “hate speech” for inducing violence.

The vacuum is bipartisan. With few exceptions, Beltway Republicans have also lost their tongues when they should be relentlessly smashing the open borders wall of silence about this escalating anti-ICE terror campaign. The San Antonio attack comes just one month after an antifa extremist ambushed an ICE detention facility in Tacoma, Washington, armed with a rifle and incendiary devices. The vengeful antifa gunman had assaulted a police officer last year at the same location, received a wrist slap, and then published a manifesto that declared: “I strongly encourage comrades and incoming comrades to arm themselves.”

The Tacoma terrorist had also invoked the incendiary ICE-bashing rhetoric of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. Her diatribes on ICE centers as “concentration camps” were, in turn, borrowed from and amplified by rent-a-mobsters who demonized Homeland Security employees at a string of summer demonstrations against ICE facilities the past two years — from the lawless hellhole of Portland to the D.C. swamp to the Big Apple criminal sanctuary to my adopted home state of Colorado, where the American flag was ripped from its post and replaced with the Mexican flag by still-unidentified vandals on the loose.

The same hysterical demagogues who are blaming me for the El Paso shooting because my first book on immigration in 2002 was titled “Invasion” are silent about the climate of hate wrought by:

–The New York Times op-ed page’s brazen call to target ICE and Border Patrol agents and their families.

–WikiLeaks’ “ICE Patrol” personal information and location database targeting more than 9,000 ICE employees, from auditors to young research assistants and interns, electricians, IT analysts, field intelligence officers, translators, anti-terrorism experts and detention and deportation agents.

–Twitter’s publication of bloody hate speech by antifa and Abolish ICE thugs, including Occupy Wall Street’s graphic cartoon advising followers on how to stab an ICE agent in the chest “and pull out his still beating heart.”

Who’s funding the wicked war on ICE? For starters, open borders billionaire George Soros’ Open Society Foundations, his son Alex’s Jewish social justice nonprofit Bend the Arc, Soros-backed CREDO Action, and the Soros-funded Center for Popular Democracy, United We Dream and Make the Road New York have all subsidized and stoked hatred of ICE and the Border Patrol.

This is not anti-Semitism, white nationalism or white supremacy. It’s fact.

And it’s not a conspiracy “theory” that Soros’ money has fueled dangerous immigration anarchy. It’s conspiracy truth.

Even more shocking is how much of the toxic propaganda undermining the men and women on our Homeland Security frontlines is being underwritten by unsuspecting taxpayers, churchgoers and consumers.

In the coming weeks, I will be exposing the global financiers and government programs promoting the campaign to “melt ICE,” turn the Border Patrol into the “diaper patrol,” open the floodgates to every last unvetted Muslim refugee and unassimilated, low-wage Central American laborer, and erase the America my legal immigrant parents taught me to cherish.

My seventh book, “Open Borders, Inc.: Who’s Funding America’s Destruction,” will be released on Sept. 10, 2019. I’ve compiled nearly 500 pages and 12 appendices and maps tracing tens of billions of dollars spent or received by 400+ nonprofits, religious charities, legal organizations, political lobbying groups, businesses and government contractors, backed up by 1,600-plus footnotes to educate my fellow citizens.

Border security and restored sovereignty start with defunding the funders of America’s destruction, and then prosecuting them as criminal open borders racketeers. Follow the money; find the truth.

PHOTO: This work has been released into the public domain by its author, Steve Hillebrand, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. This applies worldwide.

]]>
Ben Shapiro: Why Can’t We Unify in the Face of Evil? https://thenewrevere.com/2019/08/ben-shapiro-why-cant-we-unify-in-the-face-of-evil/ Fri, 16 Aug 2019 11:00:15 +0000 https://thenewrevere.com/?p=103439 This should be easy. We’re all on the same side. When a white supremacist terrorist shoots up a Walmart filled with innocents in El Paso, we should all be on the same side. We should be mourning together; we should be fighting together. Instead, we’re fighting one another. We’re fighting one another for one simple […]]]>

This should be easy.

We’re all on the same side. When a white supremacist terrorist shoots up a Walmart filled with innocents in El Paso, we should all be on the same side. We should be mourning together; we should be fighting together.

Instead, we’re fighting one another.

We’re fighting one another for one simple reason: Too many on the political left have become accustomed to castigating the character of those who disagree with the left on policy. Favor tougher border controls? This puts you on the side of the white supremacist terrorist. Believe in Second Amendment rights? You’re a vicious, violent cretin covering for those who commit acts of evil. Cite Western civilization as a source of our common values, believe that police forces across the United States are not systemically racist, favor smaller government intervention in the social sphere — in short, disagree with the program of the American left? Most of all, consider voting for Trump? You’re an accessory to murder.

Now, there are many on the political left who are too smart for this sort of specious reasoning and character assassination. But not everyone. Charles Blow of The New York Times, for example, writes in a column this week that “terrorists” and “policymakers” are the two “sides of white nationalism.” Blow clarifies: “White nationalist terrorists — young and rash — and white nationalist policymakers — older and more methodical — live on parallel planes, both aiming in the same direction, both with the same goal: To maintain and ensure white dominance and white supremacy.” Who, pray tell, are these evil white nationalist policymakers? Those who favor “border walls, anti-immigrant laws, voter suppression and packing the courts.” Never mind that many advocates of border security also advocate for broader legal immigration. Never mind that nobody actually favors voter suppression. To Blow, an R next to your name signifies merely a less militant Nazism than your neighborhood Hitler Youth.

David Leonhardt of The New York Times similarly argued this week that “American conservatism has a violence problem.” While admitting that conservative America “is mostly filled with honorable people who deplore violence and bear no responsibility for right-wing hate killings” and that “liberal America also has violent and deranged people,” Leonhardt lays the blame for an increase in political violence at the feet of “mainstream conservative politicians,” who are somehow connected to “right-wing extremists.”

There’s something in the water at The New York Times, obviously. Jamelle Bouie, another voice on The Times opinion page, suggested a “connection between white nationalism” and my personal “ideological project.” Never mind that I’ve been perhaps the loudest voice on the right decrying white nationalism for years; that I firmly fight for particular Western civilized values and small-government conservatism that foreclose and despise racism; that I’ve incurred hundreds of thousands of dollars in security costs for my trouble; that I require 24/7 security to protect me from white nationalist blowback; and that just weeks ago, the FBI arrested a white nationalist threatening to murder me. Obviously, all conservatives are the same — and all are complicit in the mission of white supremacy.

There can be no unity when one side of the political aisle firmly believes that the other side is motivated by unmitigated evil. No decent conversation about fixes can be had when you assume the person sitting across from you sympathizes with monsters who go to shoot up Hispanic Americans at a Walmart. If we can’t at least assume that we’re all on the same page in condemning white supremacist terror attacks and white supremacist ideology, we may as well pack this republic in. We’re done.

PHOTO: Ben Shapiro speaking with attendees at the 2018 Young Women’s Leadership Summit hosted by Turning Point USA at the Hyatt Regency DFW Hotel in Dallas, Texas. Photo by Gage Skidmore. Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic (CC BY-SA 2.0)

]]>
Michelle Malkin: Warning: How the VA ‘Red-Flags’ Patriots https://thenewrevere.com/2019/08/michelle-malkin-warning-how-the-va-red-flags-patriots/ Thu, 15 Aug 2019 12:53:37 +0000 https://thenewrevere.com/?p=103443 Gun-grabbing crisis vultures just can’t let the latest mass shootings go to waste. “Red flag” laws are now all the rage in the Beltway as the magic pill to prevent homicidal maniacs from wreaking havoc on the nation. Even President Donald Trump has endorsed the idea of preemptively confiscating people’s firearms if they are deemed […]]]>

Gun-grabbing crisis vultures just can’t let the latest mass shootings go to waste. “Red flag” laws are now all the rage in the Beltway as the magic pill to prevent homicidal maniacs from wreaking havoc on the nation. Even President Donald Trump has endorsed the idea of preemptively confiscating people’s firearms if they are deemed a “threat.”

But if you want to know how this American version of China’s social credit system would work in practice, let me remind you of how Veterans Affairs recklessly red-flags “disruptive” citizens without due process, transparency or accountability in the name of “safety.” Government bureaucrats routinely deprive our nation’s heroes of medical treatment based on arbitrary definitions of who and what constitutes a mental health menace.

I first reported on the VA’s secretive database on “disgruntled” and “disruptive” vets five years ago. Under the VA policy on “patient record flags,” federal bureaucrats can classify vets as “threats” based on assessments of their “difficult,” “annoying” and “noncompliant” behavior. The VA manual says the flags “are used to alert Veterans Health Administration medical staff and employees of patients whose behavior and characteristics may pose a threat either to their safety, the safety of other patients, or compromise the delivery of quality health care.”

What a crock. It’s precisely because so many vets receive inferior care from the feds that they have been forced to raise their voices. Have we all forgotten the 40 veterans who perished at the Phoenix, Arizona VA, which relegated patients to a bureaucratic black hole through secret waiting lists? Among examples of patients’ behavior referred to the red-flaggers in the VA’s “Disruptive Behavior Committees” (Orwell couldn’t have cooked up a better name): venting “frustration about VA services and/or wait times, threatening lawsuits or to have people fired, and frequent unwarranted visits to the emergency department or telephone calls to facility staff.”

Disabled Air Force veteran and veterans advocate/attorney Benjamin Krause has exposed the Soviet-style targeting of veterans flagged for exercising their First Amendment rights or threatening to sue the VA over neglectful care or for simply being too “expensive.” He calls it “straight out of a totalitarian regime.” In 2013, the VA inspector general concluded that the bureaucracy “does not have a comprehensive definition of what constitutes disruptive behavior.” In January 2018, a VA Office of Inspector General report found that large numbers of flagged veterans were being left in the dark about being placed on dangerous patient lists — with no recourse to remove phony flags or appeal in any meaningful way.

Despite rules requiring the “Disruptive Behavior Committee” to notify flagged patients of their status and informing them of their right to amend their reports, the OIG found no evidence in 49% of electronic health records that the panels had provided such notice and disclosure.

In 25% of medical records reviewed, the OIG “found no evidence that patients were informed they had the right to request to amend or appeal” special orders restricting care of flagged patients.

There are undoubtedly patients in the system who may pose real threats. But the “problem with the process is that it is secret,” Krause explains at DisabledVeterans.org. “The review process is done in secret and the veteran will not know who sat on the committee or what the evidence presented was prior to the decision. Only after the decision is made are veterans informed of the outcome and given a chance to appeal the vague allegations. That seems like a due process violation if I have ever seen one.”

Army vet David Scott Strain of Virginia told me recently that he was a flagged veteran. “My grave sin?” says Strain. “I tried to report the abuse of a deaf, infirm, WWII veteran. He was approximately 95 years of age. A male nurse stood behind his waiting room chair and shouted down at the top of his head, ‘Hello! Hello! Hello! If you can hear me, you can come in now!'”

Strain describes how the elderly vet “could not hear this, and the nurse went through 3 iterations, while giggling and looking at the wait-room personnel as if we were a comedy club audience. It was one of the sickest displays I’ve ever seen.”

For blowing the whistle on VA elder abuse, Strain says, he was banned from all satellite clinics and only granted access to one main facility. VA flaggers can “manufacture tone, the content of what you’re saying, and will even ascribe actions to you that you did not perform,” Strain warns. “The potential ‘red flag’ laws concern me deeply,” Strain told me. “Why any citizen would think it wise to let the government screw such handles to our backs, to threaten and wag us any which way, is beyond my understanding. However, I fully understand why politicians want it.”

Complain too much. Criticize the powers be. Ask too many questions. Boom! You’re a threat.

If such tyranny is allowed among those who volunteered to protect and serve our country in the name of safety, imagine how it will be implemented among the law-abiding, gun-owning general populace.

PHOTO: Veterans, Washington, D.C. Photo by Deveion Acker. Attribution 2.0 Generic (CC BY 2.0)

]]>