Wednesday, February 8, 2017

MSM Treats Liberal And Conservative Women In Contrasting Manners That Its Impossible To Go Unnoticed

IWB ^ | Gabrielle Seunagal 

Left wing women are showered with praise in the media, while right wing women are harshly censured. During the 2016 Presidential Election, Hillary Clinton and Melania Trump were treated very differently. Distasteful liberal bias reared its ugly head, once again.

Democrat nominee, Hillary Clinton was applauded for the white pantsuit that she wore to the third Presidential Debate. The media linked her attire to the Women’s Suffrage Movement and their connotations of virginal purity. Mrs. Clinton’s pantsuit was reported as having “invoked patriotism and the history of women’s struggle for political equality in America.” Soon-to-be First Lady, Melania Trump, wore a stunning white dress when she spoke at the Republican National Convention, but unlike Hillary Clinton, Melania’s fashion choices were not paid tribute to. The media branded Mrs. Trump’s white dress as not “American” enough and insinuated that she attempted to portray herself as the “right” kind of immigrant. These accusations are libelous and outrageous. When Mrs. Clinton wore white, she was applauded, yet Mrs. Trump was criticized for wearing white. If Melania Trump were a Democrat, the news anchors and journalists would sing her praises and paint her as a loving mother and successful immigrant.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

The surprising real reason for the hate against Donald Trump

Life Site News ^ | February 3, 2017 

February 3, 2017 (LifeSiteNews) – Forget most of the complaints and accusations against Donald Trump you are hearing these days. There is a growing, ugly and violent war being waged against the Trump administration and conservatives in general. Most of that war is being orchestrated and funded by massively-financed elites of one general movement – the several decades old movement for an aggressively secular, borderless, de-populationist New World Order and world government.

I strongly urge watching the video below produced by Remnant TV. It provides crucial context. I believe, based on all that I have seen, read and experienced for the past 40 and more years, that the video is right on the mark. Nothing else can explain the massive US and international howling and vicious, non-spontaneous, “spontaneous” demonstrations that have been taking place in many cities and nations.

All the people in the various elements of this New World Order movement fully expected that Hillary Clinton’s election would lead to the implementation of the final stages of their plans. Under Barack Obama and the powerful influence of the European Union, UN and other elites, everything had been rapidly moving towards their gaining powers they have long sought. With that power they were set to radically transform international society, take full control of the economies of all nations, eliminate national sovereignties and impose dramatic social changes and extreme de-population measures on the world.

The election of Donald Trump and a majority of Republicans to the Senate, Congress, governorships and other positions, have left the One-Worlders reeling. To them it has been like a giant earthquake upending their world and their evil plans. They are enraged and hysterical that their expectations of a dizzying final achievement of the total power of man as god has been smashed. That is their ultimate goal - replacing God with man - the great sin of pride of Adam.

Here are the main, all closely interconnected elements of the New World Order movement:

  • The now totally co-opted, corrupt United Nations and European Union. Watch Nigel Farage rip the EU parliament for their condemnations of Trump's policies. (start at 1 minute)
  • International Planned Parenthood and other abortion- and contraception-promoting organizations.
  • All population control organizations
  • Multi-billionaire George Soros and the numerous radical social agitation organizations that he has funded with hundreds of millions of dollars. Soros is one of the main drivers of the evil New World Order movement.
  • The leaders of the global warming/climate change movement, which among other things, want to destroy capitalismde-populate the world and are disposed to pantheistic occultism.
  • Most of the mainstream media in the West that are controlled by New World Order elites. These information controllers are spewing shameless propaganda and lies that too many gullible, uninformed citizens are falling for.
  • The militant LGBT/radical feminist movements attempting to impose their sexual world view on all nations through the United Nations and by other means. These movements are essential to the NWO because destruction of traditional marriage, family life and traditional sexual morality results in dramatic decreases in child-bearing. Crippling the family also cripples the first allegiance of family members to each other, to their religious faith and their community, which then facilitates control by central or world governance - all well-documented goals of past totalitarian regimes. Most so-called LGBT (recently invented term) individuals are likely not aware they are being used for this.
  • Marxist, anarchist and other violent social radical groups, usually funded by George Soros.
  • American public education institutions, especially due to the influence of wealthy, far-leftist teachers unions, have long ago been taken over and co-opted into propagandizing students every day with their anti-American, anti-Christian ideological world view. In recent years students have been especially subjected to totally one-sided, on-going heavy indoctrination on climate change ideology calling for massive changes to society.
  • Masonry, forbidden to Catholics, and similar societies of anti-Christian elites who still exert substantial influence in the world. 
  • Most astonishingly, the Vatican itself seems involved as Pope Francis, the German bishops and others around him have openly developed close relationships with many leading One-Worlders, inviting them to the Vatican to give talks and advice (contrary to strong statements from Francis against abortion, gay “marriage”, for large families, etc.). Reports suggest George Soros favored Bergoglio during the Conclave that elected him pope. For the first time ever, the New World Order movement has gained powerful public backing for many of their agendas from the head of the Roman Catholic Church, who has aggressively insisted that climate change, open borders, anti-capitalism and more are now issues of moral and religious obligation for a new, worldly Catholic Church. It also appears that some in the Vatican are laying the groundwork for a moral and religious case in favor of population control, use of contraception, small families and acceptance of homosexuality, again regardless of many contrary statements by Francis. See some of the evidence here,  hereherehere and here,.
  • Many of the world’s multi-billionaires and largest corporations, who have been seduced into the movement. e.g Bill Gates, Apple, Michael Bloomberg, Warren Buffet, Mark Zuckerberg and more.
  • Militant Islam – Angela Merkel, other EU leaders, George Soros and other "progressive" New World Order advocates, even within the Catholic Church, are using a contrived, massive influx of aggressive Islamists (many Muslims are not Islamists, but too many are) into the West to force the one-world, open-borders New World Order onto the West. The Islamists are also facilitating the final smashing of Christian civilization wherever they are flooding into previously Christian nations. Canada, under open borders advocate Justin Trudeau, is accelerating this movement in his country. See this hateful speech by an Islamist Marxist at a Toronto Black Lives Matter anti-Trump rally February 4. Syed Hussan called for revolutionary overthrow of Canadian society, sowing of terror and removal of borders. I suggest many Islamists in Europe, Canada and the EU are or will be soon calling for the same. The one-worlders are playing a very dangerous game given that militant Islam has its own historically consistent desire to subjugate the world and force Islam and Sharia law onto all nations. Emboldening, financing and promoting acceptance of their totalitarian ideological and political religion, which is unlike any other, has been aiding a major resurgence of ages-old Islamic world conquest efforts.

Can Trump and his administration endure this near satanic, on-going assault? Many prayed for him during the election and he astonishingly prevailed. It is clear, despite the president's personal flaws, that he is doing many right things. He would not be so intensely hated by all these people if he were not.

Even more prayers are needed to protect, guide and inspire Trump and his administration to stay the course and serve the Will of God. Prayers are needed for his continued conversion - especially on the homosexual/transgender rights issues.

There is also great need to pray for the physical safety of President Trump and his leadership team.

The election of Donald Trump has caused the decades-old war that has been waged on what is left of Christian civilization to be suddenly revealed for the ugly and evil war that it has been all along. Until now the war has been very one-sided, with the one-world progressives generally being the only ones fighting, as the relatively passive Christians and their non-Christian allies have given naïve, timid and disorganized resistance.

The election of Donald Trump has suddenly brought everything into the open that was already underway. It has forced a necessary climax in this world-wide culture war.

This is good. But the “good” must now respond by finally starting to earnestly wage a defensive war to completely defeat the one-worlders.  It is time to wake up to the reality of our collective and individual responsibilities in this international conflict between good and evil.

It is not possible to overstate the gravity of the situation.

Keep in mind that in 1976 (showing how long this has been on-going)  Pope John Paul II, as then Cardinal Karol Wojtyla, warned,

We are now standing in the face of the greatest historical confrontation humanity has ever experienced. I do not think that the wide circle of the American Society, or the whole wide circle of the Christian Community realize this fully. We are now facing the final confrontation between the Church and the anti-church, between the gospel and the anti-gospel, between Christ and the Antichrist.

Donald Trump did not start the conflict. He has merely brought it all out into the open for us to respond to.

Israeli Company Bidding Hard to Build Trump’s Wall

The Jewish Forward ^ | February 1, 2017 | Naomi Zeveloff 

The Israeli company that built Israel’s border fence is making a play this week to construct U.S. President Donald Trump’s wall with Mexico.
According to Bloomberg, the U.S.-based unit of Magal Security Systems Ltd. presented at a January 31 conference on border security attended by officials from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
The company, whose shares have risen almost 50% since Trump’s election, showcased a fiber-optic fencing system that it says is used in airports and seaports around the world. The company also built Israel’s border fence with Gaza and the West Bank.
“We have the right product and we have the experience in Israel that helps in showcasing our product,” Magal’s Chief Executive Officer Saar Koursh told Bloomberg.
Israel contends the fences keep Israel safe, while Palestinians say they are part of a system of collective punishment that limits freedom of movement.
Trump cited Israel an example of a nation that has stopped undocumented immigration in an interview with Fox News.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu boasted about the fence’s effectiveness in a subsequent tweet.

BUSTED: CNN Rigged Cruz-Sanders Debate – Caught Handing Out Questions To The Audience!

Gateway Pundit ^ | Feb 7th, 2017 | Ryan Saavedra 

CNN has been caught handing a out question to a member of the audience instructing her what to ask Ted Cruz during Tuesday nights debate with Bernie Sanders about the future of Obamacare.
The Question that was read by Carol Hardaway:
"I have multiple sclerosis but could not afford insurance – without the treatment or medications i need, i had problems with walking, with my speech, and my vision. When the affordable care act was passed I moved from our home state of Texas because they refused to expand Medicaid to Maryland and within 2 weeks I started receiving treatments through Medicaid and am now well enough to work as a substitute teacher.
Senator Cruz, can you promise me that you and the Republican leaders in congress will have – actually have a replacement plan in place for people like me who depend on their Medicaid? In other words, I like my coverage, can I keep it?"
Below is a close up of the question that was asked to Senator Ted Cruz. The email is from a Gmal account as you can see from the top of the paper. The subject line reads “Your Question,” as the two photographs below show.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Japan's Sharp may break ground on $7 billion U.S. plant in H1 - source (700,000 jobs possible)

Reuters ^ | February 8, 2017 

Japanese display maker Sharp Corp may start building a $7 billion plant in the United States in the first half of 2017, taking the lead on a project initially outlined by its Taiwanese parent Foxconn, a person with knowledge of the plan said.

A decision by Foxconn to give Sharp the lead would come as Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe prepares to travel to the United States to meet U.S. President Donald Trump, who in his inauguration speech vowed to put "America first".

In a package Tokyo hopes will please Trump, Abe will unveil investments to create as many as 700,000 U.S. jobs, people familiar with the matter told Reuters earlier.

"The investment will be by a Japanese consortium that will also include manufacturing equipment makers," said the person, who was not authorised to speak with media and so declined to be identified....
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

The Trump Chaos Theory: Don't buy that Donald Trump's White House is roiled by infighting.

US News & World Report ^ | February 7, 2017 | Peter Roff, Contributing Editor for Opinion 

Washington, it must be said, is an ugly town.

To some people this may come as a surprise. Those of us who have been here for any extended period of time know it to be full of snakes and worms and scrambling back-biters all looking for ways to climb ahead of the other guy. When President Harry Truman said anyone in the nation's capital who wanted a friend "should buy a dog," he was only scratching the surface.
It wasn't that long ago, for example, that someone whose opinion I respect and who generally seems to be plugged into what is going told me with some assurance that White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus would be "out" within six weeks. This, mind you, was before he had spent a single full day in his West Wing office.
Stories like this are exactly how the city operates. Where it might have come from, who's to say? Maybe it started with someone seeking to gain power within the White House at Priebus' expense. Maybe it started with someone who doesn't like President Donald Trump, has never liked him, and wants to cause chaos in his immediate circle. Maybe it started with some low-level functionary who wanted to sound more clued in – because knowledge is power – and therefore more important in front of someone they wanted to impress.
The point is, stories like this float around without anything ever coming to fruition because it gives people who don't really know anything something to talk about.
The topic de jour seems to be the division of power inside the Trump White House. The uninformed speculation reporters on television are tossing around is fascinating, reminiscent of the old story about the group of blind men trying to describe an elephant. No one really knows what's going on yet they are bold enough to suggest the president has deliberately set his closest advisers against one another because he thrives on chaos.
Having followed some of the folks in Trump's inner circle for some time now, the idea is poppycock. There may be competition among them for the president's ear but – and here's what most of the punditocracy doesn't yet get – it is not per se destructive to Trump, his administration or the country.
Most everyone in the White House and across the government is still getting plugged in. They're learning their jobs in full view of the country. Each and every honest mistake is, along with the few obvious blunders, amplified by an openly hostile press corps cheering for the new folks to fail. This makes things look more disorganized than they probably are.
Who has power inside the White House is a parlor game, something pundits can talk about without actually knowing anything and still sound smart. There are people the president seems to rely on more than others – any list of which would have to include Priebus, Vice President Mike Pence, counselors Steve Bannon and Kellyanne Conway, his daughter Ivanka and his son-in-law Jared Kushner. There are almost assuredly others but let's take just those centers of power, for lack of a better term, inside the West Wing,
They are all very smart people who are very good at what they do. These are the people that got Trump elected when most folks didn't believe he had a prayer of winning. They did it by being strategic and by being clever and by shrewd use of the resources available to them. If ever there was an example in American politics of a David slaying a Goliath it is Trump defeating former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton.
A smart person would, before announcing they were all locked in some kind of death struggle competing for the president's attention, try to figure out what their jobs were and if they in fact complimented one another more than they were in conflict. Creative tension based on a variety of experience can be a good thing; in this case, it probably is. It certainly forces everyone to come to the table each day with their "A Game" at the ready because the one who isn't prepared will get run over by the others.
People are starting to point to the first years of the Reagan administration as the gold standard for effectively organizing the White House. The one's with short memories – or who weren't yet born – are giving all the credit to James Baker, the Bush aide who became the 40th president's first chief of staff.
What those folks forget is it was Reagan who put the team who ran his West Wing together. Baker, while formidable, had to compete for the president's attention with Ed Meese, who came to Washington from California with the rest of the longtime Reaganites and who, more than any other, was the keeper of the ideological flame. Also in the mix was the late Michael Deaver, confidant of Nancy Reagan and the man in charge of the president's image in a White House where symbolic gestures and pictures mattered more than statements and press conferences.
Whatever bickering went on between Baker, Meese and Deaver, it almost always worked in the best interests of President Reagan – even if they sometimes used leaks to the press to tilt a story in a direction most favorable to the outcome they wanted.
As of yet there's no reason to presume the same is not true in the Trump White House. Let's say that, with Priebus handling the regular Republicans, Bannon on watch to make sure the "Trumpocraticans" remain on board, Conway overseeing the messaging, Pence handling Capitol Hill, and his family members looking out for his best interests first and foremost at all times, the president has assembled a strong team indeed, perhaps the strongest in recent memory, especially because each of them understands who ultimately is in charge.

Smearing Team Trump! ^ | February 8, 2017 | John Stossel 

Oh, no! I did it again.
It was a foolish mistake. But I slipped.
I read The New York Times.
This is bad for my health, because I get so mad at the smug socialist spin, but how can I not read it? It's my hometown paper. My wife wakes me up with indignant questions like, "How can you say government is too big? The Times says ... "
Aargh! Nearly every day brings a new Times outrage.
Saturday, a front-page story smeared Labor Secretary nominee Andy Puzder.
The story begins, "Decades before President Trump nominated him ... Puzder went to battle with federal labor regulators ... "
Wait a second. "Decades before"? They went back decades to criticize him? Actually, three decades -- to 1983, when as a young lawyer, Puzder represented a client whom the Labor Department accused of squandering union money.
The Times went on to say: "He has repeatedly argued that economic regulations stifle economic growth."
Puzder "argued" that? Regulations obviously stifle growth. That's their purpose -- to protect workers by putting limits on businesses' pursuit of profit. Regulation is a big reason this post-recession recovery has been so weak.
In just the last 10 years, the Department added regulations that require another 70 million hours of paperwork.
Monday: "Trump's F.D.A. Pick Could Undo Decades of Drug Safeguards."
Oh, no! Trump will poison America with unsafe drugs!
President Trump hasn't actually made his FDA pick yet, but the Times worries "his push for deregulation might put consumers at risk."
The reporter cites thalidomide, which, 60 years ago, "caused severe birth defects in babies whose mothers had taken the drug in pregnancy. Since then, the F.D.A. has come to be viewed as the world's leading watchdog for protecting the safety of food and drugs, a gold standard ... "
Fool's gold. The FDA protected American babies from thalidomide not by being smart, but by being so slow. By the time thalidomide neared approval, its bad effects were visible in Europe.
The Times eagerly reports damage done by drugs: "Drug safety watchdogs point to examples like the painkiller Vioxx, which was withdrawn from the market ... "
But "invoking Vioxx as the icon for such looseness is itself ignorant looseness," says my medical researcher brother, Tom. "FDA approvals are tradeoffs between benefits and risks. The FDA knew about Vioxx's risks. It was the company, not the FDA, that withdrew the painkiller. Many doctors now say it was an ill-advised move that deprives patients of a good alternative. Vioxx's risks are no greater than painkillers like Motrin sold over the counter.
The Times avoids detailing just how onerous today's regulation is. The reporter says, "The agency sets a 10-month goal for approving standard drugs."
Gee, goals are nice, but does the agency honor them? The Times doesn't say. It also doesn't mention that the 10-month goal only applies to the final step of regulation -- after all trials are done. The entire process takes an average 16 years and $2.6 billion.
Americans want protection from bad drugs, but how many of us suffer needless pain, or die, while waiting those 16 years? How many die because a drug's developers cannot raise $2.6 billion?
One more smear:
"President Trump's pick to lead the Federal Communications Commission, Ajit Pai, has aggressively moved to roll back consumer protection regulations."
Consumer protection? No. Socialist idiocy.
The Times says Pai "stopped nine companies from providing discounted high-speed internet service to low-income individuals."
No, he stopped a $9.25/month government subsidy for high-speed internet.
"He withdrew an effort to keep prison phone rates down," says the Times.
No, he stopped FCC lawyers from fighting about in-state phone calls because the FCC has no constitutional authority there.
Utterly reasonable. But the Times quotes an advocacy group saying, "Chairman Pai is showing his true stripes ... (doing) favors for the powerful corporations."
Please. Someone. Tell The New York Times that socialism was tried. It doesn't work.

A Second Thoughts Warrior-Why the Trump team is different from all others!

Frontpagemagazine ^ | February 8, 2017 | David Horowitz 

Reprinted from

Stephen Miller is President Trump’s senior advisor for policy and has been my friend since he was a student at Santa Monica High School in 2001, taking on his teachers and administrators for failing to respect country and flag in the wake of 9/11.
Steve was raised in a liberal Democratic California household and his second thoughts politically constitute one of the bonds of our friendship, which can serve to illuminate the unique character of this White House – widely misunderstood on the left and right – whose president and chief strategist, Steve Bannon, followed similar paths.
In the fourth year of the Obama era, I was the subject of a leftwing profile in titled, “David Horowitz Is Homeless.” It was an early example of what would now be called a “fake news” story, portraying me as a hapless figure suspended between the warring camps of left and right, unable to find a place in either. The false narrative was easy to expose. Through the David Horowitz Freedom Center my efforts were financially supported by over a hundred thousand conservative donors while the Restoration Weekend I hosted featured dozens of prominent conservative figures including now Vice President Mike Pence and soon to be Attorney General Jeff Sessions.
Like all effective hit pieces, the Tablet story contained a kernel of truth. While conservatives and Republicans were generally supportive of me and my work, they also took a noticeable distance from the confrontational stances and actions that became my political signature.
In 2002, for example, I launched a campaign to end the leftist stranglehold on the curricula of our major liberal arts schools. I organized chapters of “Students for Academic Freedom” on college campuses across the country, and called for an Academic Bill of Rights that would require professors to present students with two sides of controversial issues in a fair-minded manner. This modest proposal was viciously condemned by the academic left, and in the heat of the battle that ensued, I found myself pretty much alone. Republicans and conservatives failed for the most part to rally around the proposal and mainly avoided association with the effort. After seven years of futility and isolation, I was forced to acknowledge that I had failed.
I had come into the political right vowing to be as aggressive in defense of America as we leftists had been in attacking her. What struck me at the outset was the absence of a war mentality among my new political friends – a mentality I knew as second nature for the left. Democrats were relentlessly on the attack, framing moral indictments of their political adversaries and denouncing them as oppressors of the weak and vulnerable.
By contrast, Republicans addressed their adversaries in the language of accountants complaining about tax-burdens and budget overages. I noticed, too, how thoroughly intimidated Republicans were by the left’s moral attacks; they seemed temperamentally incapable of returning fire with fire. While Democrats routinely referred to them as racists, sexists and homophobes, conservatives responded by calling their assailants “liberals.”
Unassimilated as I felt to this political environment, I was never entirely alone. Like-minded conservatives were attracted to my work, especially younger conservatives who had been schooled by their leftist antagonists in the art of political warfare and were ready to fight back. One of these was 17-year-old Stephen Miller.
When we met in 2001, Steve was engaged in a battle with his high school authorities over their failure to stand up for the country in the wake of the 9/11 attacks. At the time, the nation was unusually united in rallying around the flag to defend the homeland, and schools had been directed to have students say the Pledge of Allegiance on a daily basis. Santa Monica was one of the most leftwing cities in the nation, and Santa Monica High refused to do so. One teacher even placed an American flag on the floor for his students to walk over and show their disrespect. Steve responded to this outrage with a one-man protest. He went on the Larry Elder Show, on KABC’s primetime hour, to launch a public campaign. I supported his effort with my online site
Even then I was impressed by how articulate and smart this young man was, and that he pulled no punches, so unusual in the conservative circles I was familiar with. Steve was so effective that he was eventually called on the carpet by the Superintendent of Schools who accused him of being personally responsible for the failure of the Santa Monica School bond issue on the November ballot – the first time that had happened in Santa Monica’s history.
Steve formed a chapter of our Students for Academic Freedom at Santa Monica High, and invited me to come to campus to speak. The event was initially blocked by the school administration, which forced Steve to undertake another battle, this time for free speech, a battle he eventually won. Over a hundred students attended my speech which was recorded by a film class. But the leftist faculty in charge of the class, apparently unable to handle its content, destroyed the film without explanation.
When Steve graduated, and informed me that he had been accepted by Duke University, I was relieved. Throughout these battles he had fought I had always wondered how he was going to get the faculty recommendations he needed to be accepted by a first-rate college, given the hostility of his school authorities.
In one of the Platonic Dialogues, Socrates observes that before a person can be judged to be courageous one has to ascertain whether the person was aware of the risks and possible consequences of his actions. Steve was an extraordinarily bright and ambitious young man with a promising future, and well aware of the obstacles he might be creating for himself. He went ahead with his protests anyway because he cared about his country more.
University campuses are so dominated by a potentially violent political left that I am unable to visit them without bodyguards and a campus security presence. Without such protection, I could never get through a speech and never be sure of emerging from the event unscathed. This is not personal to me, but is true of all conservatives targeted by the left, many of whom like me have been physically attacked. When I do speak, I am always mindful to point out, however, that the vicious verbal attacks directed at me are really intended to intimidate my student hosts, who are regularly called racists and Islamophobes for inviting me and have to live with these stigmas long after I am gone. These slanders are an injustice to me but an even greater one to the students. Unfortunately, in the present political climate there is no campus authority – faculty or administrative – who will defend conservative students and their right to have their own opinions.
. When Steve arrived at Duke he formed another chapter of Students for Academic Freedom and again invited me to speak on his campus. I had just published a book called The Professors: The 101 Most Dangerous Academics in America which was already notorious in academia. It was about the political abuse of the classroom by tenured radicals, and its appearance had created a firestorm in the academic world. Spokesmen for the American Association of University Professors denounced me as a McCarthyite witch-hunter and other academic leftists slandered me (improbably) as a Maoist and a Torquemada. The American Federation of Teachers created an entire website devoted to attacking me and distorting what I had said.
In the eyes of the academic community, I was public enemy number one. None of this daunted Steve. The event he singlehandedly organized was attended by 600 students and filmed by C-Span. Three professors organized a vocal demonstration inside the auditorium. Their original plan was to have their female students strip to the waist as part of the protest but the students declined.
Once again I was impressed by the young man’s fortitude in facing down his professors, and also by his organizational skills in putting together such a large event under difficult circumstances. My appearance was only one of many actions that Steve took at Duke to oppose its one-party classrooms and the thinly veiled prejudice of Duke faculty members — in full display during the public witch-hunt of the Duke Lacrosse players, which 80 of them openly supported. By the time he graduated Steve was the most well-known student leader and conservative on Duke’s politically correct and politically hostile campus, and looking for bigger horizons to conquer.
Steve’s ambitions were political, and when he graduated he went to Washington to pursue them. I provided him with recommendations first for jobs he took with Representatives Michele Bachmann and John Shadegg, and then with Senator Jeff Sessions a man whom I had known and admired as one of the most decent human beings in the Senate and one of its handful of stand-up conservatives. During the years that Steve served Sessions, as his right hand, my political passion was also for the minority and poor inhabitants of America’s inner cities and what I perceived as their oppression by the Democrats’ fifty to a hundred-year monopoly control.
As with my academic campaign, for reasons I tried hard to understand, Republicans were deaf to the plight of these victims of Democrat policies. The entire situation was summed up for me in a front-page story that appeared in the Los Angeles Times in January 2000. The article reported that Los Angeles had dropped a plan to end “social promotions” — the practice of passing students to the next level when they had learned nothing — because to do so would mean holding back 350,000 children – half the public school population, which is mainly Hispanic.
After reading this, I called Tom Campbell, who was running for the Senate as a Republican, and for whom I had hosted a fund-raiser. I said to him, “Tom, if you want to be senator, hold a press conference, call on President Bush to declare Los Angeles a social disaster area and demand that FEMA provide the funds to get these kids to schools private or otherwise that will teach them. His reply? “I don’t believe in federal aid to education.”
I bring up this incident because it once again it summarizes my frustration with Republicans over many years trying to direct their attention to such problems and trying to prod them into aggressive political actions. Once again, it showed me that as a former radical I was constitutionally different from most Republicans. But there were important exceptions and Senator Jeff Sessions and his top aide, Steve Miller, were two of them.
Steve was in effect my conduit to Sessions, and soon I began to see in Sessions’ speeches and website posts the concerns I had expressed about the inner city and its forgotten victims, and also the facts that I had assembled and the outrage I had expressed. I knew this was Steve’s work, and that it reflected the fact that both Sessions and he shared these concerns in a way that was rare on the political right – not because Republicans were racists, but because they had what they felt were more pressing and practical agendas, and because Democrats had such a tight lock on the voters of those districts that Republicans were content to concede them in advance. And, of course, part of this was because they didn’t have a fire in their bellies over the injustice that this shame of America’s inner cities represented. But Steve Miller did.
When Steve joined Trump early on in the campaign and Sessions’ endorsement soon followed and my friend Steve Bannon, who was like-minded on these matters, became his chief strategist, I realized a new day was dawning in Republican politics and therefore in American politics too. Trump was focused on making inroads with inner city voters and the victims of Democrat policies.
In light of this, I sent a memo to Bannon and Miller resurrecting a plan I had drawn up for George W. Bush during the 2000 campaign, which had been politely rejected by his domestic policy chief Josh Bolten when I presented it to him. My plan was for a voucher program, designed to be so big the media couldn’t ignore it and to provide such significant scholarships (equivalent to the tuitions taxpayers were investing in the failed public schools) that when inner city parents became aware of them, it would blow up the Democratic base. The Bush team’s rejection of this voucher plan was just another case of the Republican fecklessness to which I had grown accustomed.
Yet while Bush’s team rejected the plan to help the inner-city children, Trump’s team incorporated it into their campaign platform. Trump’s plan would allocate $130 billion in vouchers for inner city children with a tuition of $12,000 for each child, which was equivalent to the amount paid by taxpayers to public schools where 40% of the students never graduated and 40% of those who did graduate were functionally illiterate.
When I watch Steve’s rapid fire responses now, as he is interviewed before the cameras, and relish his articulation of complex policies and mastery of the arguments that support them, I am still impressed, even though I saw this coming many years past.
But what I continue to marvel at is the way he continues to move forward despite the incoming fire, the way he doesn’t bend or falter before the onslaught of mean-spirited and ignorant attacks on his character and motives. In this he is like Bannon and their boss Trump, and unlike the Republicans we have known. These are the new conservatives who are changing the face of the Republican Party, and America too. For me it is all captured in a single image.
Over the years people would refer to my Freedom Center as a “think tank” and I would correct them, “No, it’s a battle tank,” because that is what I felt was missing most in the conservative cause — troops ready and willing to fight fire with fire. The Trump administration may be only a few weeks old, but it is already clear that the new White House is a battle tank. I am as proud as could be that my friend Steve Miller is one of its generals, and I no longer feel in any way homeless.

California Spelling




The Two!


Flexing Muscles!


UC Berkeley


Obama's Legacy!


Delay this game!




Can't remember?


You Sure?


WTF, over?


A Revolution?


A Worthless Degree!




A Basement Full


How stupid!


The Glass Ceiling




Show Me!


Riot Gear!




No, No, No!


The Best?