Barrrack And Hillary Tweeted ''Easter Worshippers'' Attacked : Not Churches or Christians Murdered by Muslims!

'Hey Barrrack, we've got these Christians on the run now!'

Nothing to see here folks, it's just the progressive socialist liberal democrats explaining who they are and what they intend for all the rest of us unbelievers.

Individual freedom and liberty and capitalism, federalism, are destructive for bringing true equality, diversity and inclusion to the population. 

Just as the Muslim terrorists want to bring death ad destruction to America as a nation of unbelievers, Christians. Do the progressive socialist liberals that believe anyone that believes in a God bigger then themselves must be destroyed?

 There can be only one god and it's the god of government and authoritarian control of all outcomes. Oh, and with them at the levers of power to make it happen. It's the only ''fair'' way to live. Everyone must suffer equally.

Why Obama and Clinton Tweeted About ‘Easter Worshippers,’ Not Christians

Dennis Prager / @DennisPrager / April 23, 2019

Sometimes, a few sentences tell you more about a person—and, more importantly, an ideology—than a learned thesis. That is the case with tweets from Hillary Clinton and former President Barack Obama two days ago in response to the mass murder of more than 300 Christians and others in Sri Lanka.

Their tweets are worth serious analysis because they reveal a great deal about the left. Of course, they reveal a great deal about Clinton and Obama, too, but that doesn’t interest me. And that, too, is important. Many Americans—especially conservatives and “independents”—are more interested in individual politicians than in political ideologies.

Many conservatives have long been fixated on Clinton—so much so that probably any other Democrat would have defeated Donald Trump, as conservative anger specifically toward her propelled many people to the polls.

Similarly, Republican Never-Trumpers are fixated on Trump rather than policy. They care more about Trump’s personal flaws than about the mortal dangers the left poses to America and the West or about the uniquely successful conservative policies Trump promulgates.

And independents all claim to vote “for the person, not the party.”

Only leftists understand that one must vote left no matter who the Democrat is, no matter who the Republican opponent is. Leftists are completely interchangeable: There is no ideological difference among the 20 or so Democrats running for president. Mayor Pete Buttigieg is not one degree to the right of Kamala Harris or Elizabeth Warren.

That is why it is important to understand Clinton and Obama’s tweets: to understand the left, not to understand her or him.

Here are the tweets:

Obama: “The attacks on tourists and Easter worshippers in Sri Lanka are an attack on humanity. On a day devoted to love, redemption, and renewal, we pray for the victims and stand with the people of Sri Lanka.”

The attacks on tourists and Easter worshippers in Sri Lanka are an attack on humanity. On a day devoted to love, redemption, and renewal, we pray for the victims and stand with the people of Sri Lanka.— Barack Obama (@BarackObama) April 21, 2019

Three hours later, Clinton tweeted: “On this holy weekend for many faiths, we must stand united against hatred and violence. I’m praying for everyone affected by today’s horrific attacks on Easter worshippers and travelers in Sri Lanka.”

On this holy weekend for many faiths, we must stand united against hatred and violence. I'm praying for everyone affected by today's horrific attacks on Easter worshippers and travelers in Sri Lanka.— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) April 21, 2019

As they both spelled “worshipers” the same idiosyncratic way and used the term “Easter worshippers,” it is likely they either had the same writers or Clinton copied Obama.

Here’s what’s critical: Neither used the word “Christians.” And in order to avoid doing so, they went so far as to make up a new term—”Easter worshippers”—heretofore unknown to any Christian.

When Jews were murdered at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh, Clinton mentioned the synagogue in a tweet. But in her post-Sri Lanka tweet, despite the bombing of three churches filled with Christians, Clinton made no mention of church or churches.

In a tweet after the massacre of Muslims in New Zealand, she wrote that her heart broke for “the global Muslim community.” But in her latest tweet, not a word about Christians or the global Christian community.

Obama similarly wrote in his tweet about New Zealand that he was grieving with “the Muslim community” over the “horrible massacre in the Mosques.” But in his tweet about Sri Lanka, there is no mention of Christians or churches.

The reason neither of them mentioned Christians or churches is that the left has essentially forbidden mention of all the anti-Christian murders perpetrated by Muslims in Europe, the Middle East, and Africa, and of all the Muslim desecration of churches in Europe, Africa, and anywhere else.

This is part of the same phenomenon—that I and others have documented—of British police and politicians covering up six years of rape of 1,400 English girls by Muslim “grooming gangs” in Rotherham and elsewhere in England.

Essentially, the left’s rule is that nothing bad—no matter how true—may be said about Muslims or Islam and nothing good—no matter how true—may be said of Christians or Christianity.

Clinton’s post-New Zealand tweet also included these words: “We must continue to fight the perpetuation and normalization of Islamophobia and racism in all its forms. White supremacist terrorists must be condemned by leaders everywhere. Their murderous hatred must be stopped.”

''My heart breaks for New Zealand & the global Muslim community. We must continue to fight the perpetuation and normalization of Islamophobia and racism in all its forms.

''White supremacist terrorists must be condemned by leaders everywhere. Their murderous hatred must be stopped.''— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) March 15, 2019

She made sure to condemn “Islamophobia,” but she wrote not a word about the far more destructive and widespread hatred of Christians in the Muslim world, seen in Muslims’ virtual elimination of the Christian communities in the Middle East, the regular murder and kidnappings of Coptic Christians in Egypt, and the murder of Christians in Nigeria.

She calls on “leaders everywhere” to condemn “white supremacist terrorists,” one of the smallest hate groups on Earth, but never calls on leaders everywhere to condemn Islamist terrorists, the largest hate group on Earth.

These two tweets tell you a lot about Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. But far more importantly, they tell you a lot about the left.

Case Against USS Cole Bomber Falls Apart : Justice System Corrupted!

The justice system is under attack and for good reason. It has become, it appears, so complicated from efforts of so many interested parties and individuals that seek to personally to use and abuse the system.

Can it be just that simple? Just corrupt individuals that want to advance their own agenda at the expense of everyone else?

But aside from this is the thought just how effective is the federal government is anything even close to adjudicating justice? Is the federal government to big to be able to function effectively? Are there too many people that actually believe they can do anything they want because they system is so fractured they will never be found out?

The sad part is the federal government is too big and out of control.

And then think about this in light of what happened with the case against the USS Cole bomber abomination, a government agency of between 300,000 and 500,000 bureaucrats that will control our healthcare for more the 185 million citizens as well as 20 to 30 million illegal immigrants, if the progressive socialist liberal democrats are able to institute ''Medicare for all''? 

It's called ''Single payer healthcare''! Remember Barrrack said that was his goal? Don't vote for self destruction. don't vote democrat!~

Case Against Accused USS Cole Bomber Stalled Again

Cully Stimson / @cullystimson / April 19, 2019

The trial against the al-Qaeda terrorist accused of killing 17 American sailors in the attack on the USS Cole—which was was hit by explosives while harbored in Yemen in 2000—suffered a serious setback this week.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit issued a decision in the Guantanamo Bay military commission’s case that will complicate, if not derail, the government’s efforts to bring Abd Al-Rahim Hussain Muhammed Al-Nashiri (hereinafter Nashiri) to justice.

The court threw out (vacated) all orders of the military judge—Col. Vance H. Spath—from November 2015 because he should have recused himself from the case when he applied for post-retirement employment as an immigration judge.

His conduct created a “disqualifying appearance of partiality.” The court’s reasoned and thorough decision, if not overturned, forces the government to re-group and decide how (or whether) to move forward with a case that has dragged on for years.

A Complex Case

The case is complex and has a long history. The first military commission case against Nashiri fell apart in 2009 for a variety of reasons. The government brought a second case against him in 2011.

As of March 2017, there were 436 substantive written motions, 327 of which were argued orally. The commission had received testimony from 33 witnesses in more than 58 hours of testimony. The government provided over 265,930 pages of discovery to the defense.

According to the government brief in this appeal, during the four years that Spath presided over the case, he “issued approximately 460 orders.” Given the time Spath has been on the case and the ruling from the D.C. circuit, about half of his orders (230) are now vacated.

A member of al-Qaeda, Nashiri is a citizen of Saudi Arabia, and one of the 14 high value detainees brought to the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, in September 2006 from CIA custody during the George W. Bush administration. He is held by the United States government as a law of war detainee.

According to the U.S. government military commissions website, Nashiri was charged in 2011 with murder, attempted murder, conspiracy, and other crimes out of an attempted attack on the USS The Sullivans in January 2000, the attack on the USS Cole in October 2000, and the attack on the MV Limburg in October 2002.

In total, 18 people were killed and almost 50 were injured in those attacks. If convicted, Nashiri could receive the death penalty.

A colonel in the Air Force Judge Advocate General’s Corps, Spath was the judge in Nashiri’s case from July 10, 2014, until Aug. 6, 2018. During his four years on the case, he issued approximately 460 written orders. After six years of pretrial proceedings, Spath announced in March 2017 that the parties should prepare for the trial in 2018.

On Nov. 19, 2015, while he was presiding over the Nashiri case, Spath applied for a job with the Department of Justice as an immigration judge. He did this, despite the fact that the DOJ was involved in the case, having detailed an experienced attorney to assist with the prosecution.

According to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, Spath “never disclosed the fact of his application, much less its details, to Al-Nashiri or to his defense team.”

In his application, which came to light through a Freedom of Information Act request by the Miami Herald, Spath highlighted his “five year of experience as a trial judge,” that he had been “handpicked” to preside over the military commissions case against Nashiri, and he even included, as the D.C. Circuit noted, “a writing sample … he issued in Al-Nashiri’s case.”

Spath got an offer of employment from the DOJ to serve as an immigration judge in March 2017 with a start date of Sept. 18, 2017.  Spath requested a start date of May 15, 2018, but the DOJ demurred, stating that it would “hold his paperwork and contact him again in January [or] February, 2018.” He was eventually informed that he could start on July 8, 2018, and a new judge took over the Nashiri case in August 2018.

In the summer of 2018, one of Nashiri’s appointed defense counsel heard that Spath had been pursuing a job as an immigration judge while he was presiding over Nashiri’s case.

The defense team filed a discovery request to pursue this, but the government refused to provide any information, according to the court’s opinion, “calling the reports ‘unsubstantiated assertions’ and arguing that the ‘defense request offers no basis to believe that the former presiding military judge has applied for a position with the [Justice Department] or even contacted the [Justice Department] regarding employment.”

A week later, the Associated Press ran a story about Spath’s appointment as an immigration law judge, and included a photo of Spath next to then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions during a welcoming ceremony for new immigration judges.

Nashiri’s lawyers filed an appeal to the Court of Military Commissions Review, or CMCR, requesting discovery and vacating Spath’s rulings, claiming that his conduct “created a disqualifying appearance of bias.” On the same day the CMCR denied the motion, the Justice Department announced the investiture of the “largest class” of immigration judges “in the agency’s history,” including Spath. After more appeals, the case ended up at the D.C. Circuit.

The Court’s Holding

Turning to the issue of judicial ethics and impartiality, the court noted that “judges must preserve both the reality and appearance of impartiality,” and they “shall disqualify themselves in any proceeding in which their impartiality might reasonably be questioned.”

Those rules apply to military commissions’ judges, and focus “not on whether a military judge harbored actual bias, but rather on what would ‘appear to a reasonable person … knowing all the circumstances.’” The question to be resolved, noted the court, was whether an average citizen would “reasonably question a judge’s impartiality.”

The court held that Spath’s conduct fell “squarely on the impermissible side of the line.” Noting that “judges may not adjudicate cases involving their prospective employers,” the court found that the “attorney general himself is directly involved in selecting and supervising immigration judges,” that the DOJ detailed “one of its lawyers to prosecute Al-Nashiri,” and the attorney general “plays an important institutional role in military commissions.”

The attorney general, the court continued, “was a participant in Al-Nashiri’s case from start to finish.” The challenge that Spath faced was “to treat the Justice Department with neutral disinterest in his courtroom while communicating significant personal interest in his job application.”

Spath undermined his apparent neutrality by stressing his role in the Nashiri case in his job application, and refusing to disclose his application to the defense, according to the court.

And to add insult to injury, the court noted that the very judge the CMCR and the government suggested should hear the appeal of one of the contested matters in the case was herself “engaged in apparently undisclosed employment negotiations with the Justice Department during the pendency of this very case.”

After explaining why it decided to vacate all orders Spath issued from the date he applied to the DOJ, the court made this sobering observation:

''Although a principle so basic to our system of laws should go without saying, we nonetheless feel compelled to restate it plainly here: criminal justice is a shared responsibility. Yet in this case, save for Al-Nashiri’s defense counsel, all elements of the military commission system—from the prosecution team to the Justice Department to the CMCR to the judge himself—failed to live up to that responsibility.''

In conclusion, the court noted that it did “not take lightly the crimes that Al-Nashiri stands accused of committing,” but that this case required an “unimpeachable adjudicator all the more important.”

The court’s ruling leaves the government in the unenviable position of re-starting the case from Nov. 19, 2015, if it can. It gives legal scholars who have repeatedly criticized military commissions more ammo to argue that they are a failure and should be ended.

It is clearly a victory for Nashiri’s defense team, and is yet another heartbreaking setback to the families of the victims who are yearning for justice.

The Mueller Report Begins Again : democrat Hate Drives Them

It's just easier to hate someone then to have some kind

of actual reason to be better.

The conclusion of the Mueller report is as was predicted, not the end of progressive democrats attacking a successful and aggressive ''can do'' dually elected President of the United States.

It makes sense Trump cares about the country and it's people. democrats hate both as they are unreliable as dups.

The liberal socialist democrats know instinctively that if our current President, Donald J Trump is allowed to continue his journey of successfully fulfilling his campaign promises and actually ''Make America Great Again'', the democrats will be destroyed.

And the scariest part for the democrats is Donald Trump is and has made America Great Again. Whether it domestic policy or foreign policy, he has decidedly made America, again, the leader of the world.

It's clear, the democrats will have to dig deep to find something to run on as they attempt to unseat Donald Trump. Hate is not enough and identity politics to generate votes. But it's clear if we want to save the country, never vote for any democrat at any time. It is about self destruction.  

Mueller Report Clearing Trump Should Prompt Congress to Halt Endless Investigations

Hans von Spakovsky / @HvonSpakovsky / April 22, 2019

The report by special counsel Robert Mueller released Thursday by Attorney General William Barr confirms that Barr was completely accurate when he told Congress in March that Mueller found no evidence of collusion or coordination between the Trump election campaign and Russian officials.

The second half of the nearly 450-page report also confirms Barr’s legal conclusion that there was no obstruction of justice by President Donald Trump.

Portions of the report have been redacted to protect the confidentiality of grand jury material, ongoing prosecutions, and national security. But these redactions affect only a relatively small part of the overall report.

Even with these redactions, the report makes it clear that no Americans—including no one in the Trump campaign—cooperated, coordinated, or colluded with Moscow’s attempts to influence our 2016 election.

It is also evident that—despite his anger and frustration at what he perceived to be a politically motivated investigation—the president took no actions that actually obstructed the Mueller investigation.

Internal White House conversations and meetings described in the Mueller report make the extent of the president’s anger clear. He was innocent of the accusations being made and “thought the Russia story was developed to undermine the legitimacy of his election,” according to the report.

The inaccurate reporting of the collusion claims for two years by some in the media—and the Hillary Clinton campaign’s involvement with the Steele dossier that helped instigate the investigation—make the president’s indignation appear fully justified.

Trump wanted Mueller fired—not because the president wanted to obstruct or undermine an investigation, but because he knew there was nothing to investigate. In the end, however, he let the pointless exercise continue.

It would be very difficult to make an obstruction charge out of actions that were simply discussed but never implemented—particularly when there seems to be no corrupt motive involved, such as an intent to cover up an actual crime.

In his news conference Thursday, Barr made a number of important points that must be kept in mind when reviewing this report and Barr’s conclusion that no obstruction of justice occurred.

First, Barr said Trump placed no restrictions or limitations on Mueller or anyone else at the Justice Department. Mueller was given complete authority and all of the resources and money he needed to do a wide-ranging, comprehensive investigation.

Second, Mueller got complete access to look at all of the information, documents, and witnesses needed to thoroughly investigate the collusion and obstruction of justice claims.

Even though he could have, Trump did not assert executive privilege. The president also gave the special counsel full access to White House staff, including White House counsel Don McGahn, who was interviewed for 30 hours by lawyers working for Mueller.

Some will point out that Mueller did not get to interview Trump. Mueller makes clear in his report that he believes a “criminal investigation during the President’s term is permissible” and that he therefore had the power to subpoena the president.

The fact that Mueller never did subpoena Trump is evidence that Mueller felt he had obtained all the information he needed without a face-to-face interview with the president.

Contrast that with President Barack Obama’s assertion of executive privilege during the congressional probe into Attorney General Eric Holder and Operation Fast and Furious, a botched investigation of gun smuggling from the U.S. into Mexico.

Many consider Fast and Furious to be one of the most reckless law enforcement operations ever carried out by the Justice Department. Yet the Obama White House obstructed a full and thorough investigation by barring access to critical documents and information.

Third, Barr gave Trump’s personal attorneys a chance to also review Mueller report—something Barr characterized as standard Justice Department procedure. Trump’s lawyers, however, did not request any redactions from the report.

So what do the president’s political opponents make of all this?

Leading Democrats still insist that further investigation is required. Mueller’s investigation involved his own team of 19 lawyers, as well as 40 FBI agents, intelligence analysts, and forensic accountants. It racked up 2,800 subpoenas, 500 search warrants, 230 orders for communication records, 50 orders for pen registers, 13 requests for evidence from foreign governments, and interviews with 500 witnesses.

Are we to believe that this wasn’t enough?

I seriously doubt that the public will support the efforts by Democrats to keep alive a now-failed narrative that claims that when the American people voted to elect Trump president, the Russians made them do it.

Yes, the Mueller report contains many conflicting claims by different people; a lot of speculation and assumptions that have not been proven in a court of law; and a great deal of discussion of legal issues like the applicability of obstruction of justice statutes to a president in the exercise of his constitutional authority and powers.

But let’s focus on the bottom line.

Mueller’s “investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities,” the Mueller report found. Moreover, the report concluded that “the evidence does not establish that the President was involved in an underlying crime related to Russian election interference.”

In addition, there is ample support in the second half of the Mueller report for Barr’s conclusion, in consultation with other senior Justice Department officials, that the evidence developed by Mueller “is not sufficient to establish that the President committed an obstruction-of-justice” offense.

Some Democrats dream that if the House of Representatives brings in Mueller to testify, he will produce some kind of “smoking gun” withheld from the report.

They will be disappointed. And they will have wasted even more of our time and taxpayer money in what will be hard to see as anything other than a partisan witch hunt.

Enough is enough. It is time for Congress to get on with dealing with the real problems facing our country.

Originally published by Fox News

Alexa Driving The Narrative : 'But Judge I Wasn't Speeding!'

This is a little dated but still fun. The only scary thing is it might be the future whether we want it or not as new cars will have Alexa or something like that. I guess the laughing will end if you have to go to court and defend yourself from the on-board computer tell all.

The judge will ask which one of you is lying?

People and Their Dogs : It IS A Relationship!(Video)

Take a break today for the insanity of politics and watch this little short and really cool video of people and their dogs. A real stress reliever.

Enjoy!

https://www.facebook.com/petslov3/videos/2059920794137468/

Earth Day : What Happened? The Earth Is Still Here! Who Knew!

But it's not about the environment, and never was for the radical environmentalists. It has always been about the money and the all consuming need for the power for control.

Little wonder then that nearly all progressive socialist liberal democrats are leading the attack in the population to be subservient and compliant.

The basic watch word for the environmental fascists is capitulation to their demands for money and control of everyone's lives. We are all doomed if we don't obey.

And the best reason for the porgressive socialist liberals to want to control all activities in a civil society is the very most basic foundation principles of our Constitution, individual freedom and the ownership of property. Having the freedom to succeed and find prosperity must end as anyone that has independent thought is a danger to the socialsit liberal agenda and ideology.

Once those principle have been removed, for your own good, then little is left but to obey the new rules for survival.

On Earth Day, Gloomy Predictions Haven’t Come to Pass

Nicolas Loris / @NiconomistLoris / April 22, 2019

This Earth Day, it almost feels like we should be carving some turkey. Why? Because we have a lot to be thankful for since the first Earth Day event occurred 49 years ago.

We should be thankful that the gloom-and-doom predictions made throughout the past several decades haven’t come true. Fearmongering about explosive population growth, food crises, and the imminent depletion of natural resources have been a staple of Earth Day events since 1970. And the common thread among them is that they’ve stirred up a lot more emotions than facts.

“By the year 2000, if present trends continue, we will be using up crude oil at such a rate … that there won’t be any more crude oil,” ecologist Kenneth Watt warned around the time of the first Earth Day event. “You’ll drive up to the pump and say, ‘Fill ‘er up, buddy,’ and he’ll say, ‘I am very sorry, there isn’t any.'” Watt also warned of global cooling and nitrogen buildup rendering all of the planet’s land unusable.

The issue, however, is that present trends don’t continue. They change dramatically for a number of reasons. Innovation happens. Consumer behavior changes. Importantly, price signals play a huge role in communicating information to energy producers as well as consumers.

Higher prices at the pump encourage companies to extract and supply more oil. Expensive gas prices, meanwhile, motivate entrepreneurs to invest in alternatives to oil, whether that’s batteries, natural gas vehicles, or biofuels. Drivers will examine their consumption options as well, whether carpooling, finding alternative modes of transportation, or, over time, purchasing a more fuel-efficient vehicle.

Here we are, 19 years past Watt’s arbitrary deadline, and drivers are pulling up to the pump saying, “Fill ‘er up, buddy” (figuratively speaking, as Watts also didn’t foresee self-service stations) without any cause for concern.

Thanks to human ingenuity and the entrepreneurial drive of energy producers, the United States is now the world’s largest oil producer, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, and continually breaking records.

While global energy poverty and food insecurity remain a pressing challenge, the problem is getting much better, not worse. World Bank and United Nations data show extreme poverty and global hunger has noticeably dropped since 1970. And according to the International Energy Agency, the number of people without access to electricity fell to below 1 billion people for the first time.

Clearly, there’s work to be done. But signs are pointing in the right direction.

In the United States, the common perception is that the country’s environmental state is deteriorating. On the contrary, through investment in new technologies, and through legislation, environmental trends have improved significantly in the United States.

Pollutants known to cause harm to public health and the environment are declining. According to the Environmental Protection Agency’s latest air quality trends report, the combined emissions of the six common air pollutants have decreased 73% between 1970-2017.

We should be thankful for economic liberties that provide people with the means to protect the environment. As a country grows economically, it increases the financial ability of its citizens and businesses to care for the environment and reduce pollutants emitted from industrial growth.

Countries with greater economic freedoms have cleaner environments and greater environmental sustainability. The Heritage Foundation’s Index of Economic Freedom and Yale University’s Environmental Performance Index show a highly positive correlation between a country’s environmental performance and its economic freedom.

Freer economies have access to more products and technologies that make our lives healthier and the environment cleaner. For instance, the availability of simple products such as soaps, cleaners, and detergents makes our homes dramatically cleaner and healthier. The development of sanitation systems and availability of garbage collection greatly reduce many types of diseases and reduce toxins in the air and water.

These products and services may not be what immediately comes to mind on Earth Day, but they’ve had an enormous impact on cleaning up the planet.

And we should be thankful for clearly defined and protected private property rights. One of the first lessons I learned in economics is that nobody washes a rental car because you don’t care for what you don’t own.

Property rights are a central hallmark in the United States and around the world for improved environmental stewardship, conservation and health of species, wildlife, habitats, forests, and other resources. The absence of enforced private property rights in developing country remains one of the largest barriers to improved prosperity and environmental well-being.

Catastrophic but unlikely gloom-and-doom predictions will continue to grab media headlines, but free societies with the protection of property rights are tried and true pathways to a healthier, cleaner world. As we reflect on the progress we’ve made as a free society, let’s celebrate and be thankful.

Originally Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC

Gov. Ron DeSantis : Florida Reborn With Conservative Principles!! Who Knew?

Fantastic!! Other Conservatives have tried to make a difference in the past in Florida but haven't succeeded.

Ron DeSantis has succeeded and now Florida has become a leader in the production of success on all fronts. Standing tall and strong, following what he knew was a workable formula for success.

Living the good life in Florida has become successfully revived and it wasn't by chance. It was the implementation of Conservative principles. They work and have always worked when supported.

In Florida, Ron DeSantis Accelerates Conservative Agenda

Fred Lucas / @FredLucasWH / April 15, 2019

As his first legislative session winds down, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis—elected five months ago by the narrowest of margins—has soared in popularity while pursuing an aggressive reform agenda that includes reshaping the state’s judiciary, investigating school safety, and enforcing immigration laws.

“He’s off to a fast start. He’s a trailblazer throughout the state,” Scott Parkinson, who served as chief of staff for DeSantis in the U.S. House of Representatives, told The Daily Signal. “As a member of Congress, he had to be a consensus builder and build coalitions. As a governor he can lead on principle. He has such a unique life experience to be a leader,” Parkinson said.

DeSantis, 40, is a graduate of Yale and Harvard Law. He went on to serve as a Navy JAG officer, as an adviser to Navy SEALs in Iraq, and as counsel for the U.S. detention center for suspected terrorists in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, before first being elected to the House in 2012.

Parkinson, now vice president of government affairs at Club for Growth, a conservative business advocacy group, said that when he saw DeSantis in late February, the governor was in active mode.
“He said he had been to his fourth city in a day,” Parkinson said. “He’s not tied to a desk in Tallahassee. He demonstrates leadership.”

DeSantis is a husband and father, too.

In 2010, the Jacksonville native married the woman who would become first lady of Florida—Casey Black DeSantis, an Emmy Award-winning TV host. They have one daughter, Madison, and a son, Mason.

In the governor’s race, DeSantis, a Republican, beat Democrat Andrew Gillum by fewer than 1% of the votes. A Mason-Dixon poll released April 4, though, shows DeSantis with a 62% approval rating. A Quinnipiac University Poll in March showed DeSantis with a 59% approval rating.

“Not surprisingly, he has had a bold agenda that has been both conservative and practical,” Sal Nuzzo, vice president for policy at James Madison Institute, a Tallahassee-based conservative think tank, told The Daily Signal. “It is a policy-driven bold agenda, but it is refreshing to some Democrats and, in some cases, former opponents.”

School Safety

At DeSantis’ request, the Florida Supreme Court in late February ordered a statewide grand jury to investigate whether school administrators are violating any laws and potentially endangering students.

“What’s truly devastating is that the tragedy in Parkland was avoidable,” DeSantis said in a written statement. “As governor, I have a moral obligation to protect the children in our state, which is why I have requested a statewide grand jury to investigate school safety practices and failures occurring around the state and to identify measures to improve the safety of our students.”

On Feb. 14, 2018, a former student with a rifle left 17 dead and 17 others wounded at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida. The shooter was known to have become violent in the past, but school officials reportedly ignored numerous warning signs at a time when the school district was promoting a politically popular alternative discipline policy. (Ogbjmma's guild lines for student discipline - Slickster)

Among the new governor’s first acts in office was to suspend Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel for his office’s poor response to the Parkland shooting. DeSantis replaced Israel with Gregory Tony, a former Coral Springs police sergeant.

Israel sued. On April 2, Broward Circuit Court Judge David Haimes upheld the governor’s authority to suspend the sheriff for neglect of duty and incompetence.

Still, Democrats in the state oppose the governor’s support for arming teachers, as do most voters despite giving DeSantis high marks, according to polls.  “Florida voters have stated loudly and clearly that they don’t want guns in our schools, yet DeSantis and Republicans continue to push legislation that would do exactly the opposite,” Florida Democratic Party Chairwoman Terrie Rizzo said in a formal statement.

“Teachers don’t want this, parents don’t want this, our state does not want this,” Rizzo said. “This bill threatens the safety of our students and teachers. It’s time for Republicans to drop the NRA’s dangerous agenda and start focusing on the issues Floridians care about.”

Conservative Court Majority

In what could be his biggest legacy accomplishment, DeSantis quickly reshaped the Florida Supreme Court from a 4-3 liberal majority to a 6-1 conservative majority.

Florida has mandatory retirement ages for its state Supreme Court justices. In 2018, voters approved a measure raising that age from 70 to 75.  Upon the retirement of three justices, DeSantis named three relatively young successors: Barbara Lagoa, 51, the first Cuban-American female on the court; Carlos Muñiz, 49, the first Nicaraguan-American; and Robert Luck, 40, the first Orthodox Jew.

“He named three justices and changed the Supreme Court for a generation,” Parkinson said. “Even though we’ve had Republican governors since the 1990s, none [has] had a Supreme Court to back them up.”

The significance of state supreme courts should never be underestimated, said Carrie Severino, chief counsel to the Judicial Crisis Network.  “It is an incredibly significant shift,” Severino told The Daily Signal, referring to Florida’s highest court. “It was one of the more liberal state supreme courts in the nation. It has gone from a 4-3 liberal majority to a 6-1 constitutional originalist majority.”

“The Florida Supreme Court was regularly causing trouble for Rick Scott,” she said of DeSantis’ Republican predecessor. “About 90% of all cases are heard in state courts, and state supreme courts are often the last word on an array of issues.”

Education Reform

DeSantis signed an executive order to “eliminate” the controversial Common Core education standards in Florida schools.

The measure requires the state to “equip high school graduates with sufficient knowledge of America’s civics, particularly the principles reflected in the United States Constitution, so as to be capable of discharging the responsibilities associated with American citizenship.”

The governor also opened up avenues for school choice for parents, including vouchers for private school. “I have heard parents from across the state loud and clear, and they all agree that it is time to finally end Common Core,” DeSantis said in a formal statement in late January, adding:

''So today, we are taking action through this executive order to ensure that Florida has the best academic standards in the nation and eliminating Common Core from our schools, as well as reaffirming my commitment to prepare our students for the real world through an increased focus on civic education.”

Accountability, Deregulation, Other Measures

DeSantis held a summit Jan. 31 with state agency chiefs, called “Florida Deregathon,” which resulted in rolling back the state’s occupational licensing requirements. The governor’s office sponsored the event in conjunction with the Department of Business and Professional Regulation and several state professional licensing boards.

In an effort to correct a past wrong—at least for the record—DeSantis issued posthumous pardons to the “Groveland 4,” four black men accused of raping a 17-year-old white girl in 1949.  The men were victims of mob violence and police shootings during the South’s Jim Crow era. The Executive Clemency Board unanimously approved the governor’s pardons.  “For 70 years, these four men have had their history wrongly written for crimes they did not commit,” DeSantis said, adding:

''I believe the rule of law is society’s sacred bond. When it is trampled, we all suffer. For the Groveland 4, the truth was buried. The perpetrators celebrated. But justice has cried out from that day until this.''

After decades of election problems, DeSantis also pushed for and accepted the resignation of Broward County Elections Supervisor Brenda Snipes and suspended Palm Beach County Elections Supervisor Susan Bucher.  The governor also suspended the mayor of Port Richey, Dale Glen Massad, calling him “clearly unfit.”

Before the suspension, deputies from the Pasco County Sheriff’s Office showed up at Massad’s house with an arrest warrant on charges of illegally practicing medicine at home without a license. The mayor allegedly began shooting at them.

Business Mission to Israel

DeSantis announced Tuesday that he would lead a business development mission to Israel in late May, to boost economic ties between Israel and Florida.  “I promised to be the most pro-Israel governor in America and that the first delegation I would lead would be to the state of Israel,” DeSantis said on the same day as Israel’s elections.

“Today, I’m pleased to report that I’m keeping that promise,” he said. “Our delegation will bring business, academic, and political leaders to help strengthen the bond between Florida and Israel.”

A Survivor of Communist Rule Tells Her Story : It Is Progressive Socialism

Actually having to survive under communist rule is of

no importance. Pay no attention to such nonsense.

Here is a history of a refugee from the days in the far east, Cambodia's decent into mass murder from  communist rule.

Details her jouney through the communist ideology and how it nearly killed her mind and body. She says she knows first hand, from personal experience progressive socialism doesn't work and never has. It is a killer of personal integrity and individual freedom.

But pay no attention this, Bernie's last statement while on the CNN Town Hall debate when asked what about his stand on communism, his ideology of democratic socialism, is it his agenda and ideolog on the riggers of government being all things for all people just communism for us all?

He said not at all. He doesn't support anything like communism. Really? Neo-communism?

He believes progressive socialism to be gospel. He was a communist before he found it to  be a problem in American politics and then he became an ''independent'' committed socialist.

But it's not just Bernie, it's everyone of the progressive socialist liberal far left democrats now running to lead the United States into the future. A future where all things are decided by those who live behind the walls, walls guarded by people with guns.

If you believe this is a good thing, then you are not from around here as you are completely ignorant of history of the failures of any kind of socialism or just plan stupid. 

Again, as the song lyric goes from ''Me and Bobby Mcgee'', ''Freedom means having northing else to lose''. But like integrity, once lost it can't regain.

Never vote for self destruction. Never vote democrat.

A Teen Refugee’s Flight to Freedom From Communist Cambodia

Courtney Joyner / April 22, 2019

For six years, the only luxuries Bopha Sayavong dreamed of were peace, quiet, food, and shelter.

It wasn’t until she landed in Little Rock, Arkansas, as a refugee from communist Cambodia on Oct. 31, 1981, that she began to imagine the luxuries freedom would bring.  Even after arriving in the U.S., though, life was not easy.

Sayavong at a refugee camp in the Philippines in 1979. (Photo courtesy of Bopha Sayavong)

“We just build it up from there, little by little, to figure it out,” Sayavong, now 59, told The Daily Signal in a phone interview from Marion, Illinois.  Anything would beat the four years from 1975 to 1979 she spent as a teenager in work camps created by the oppressive communist regime known as the Khmer Rouge.

Cambodia fell to communism in April 1975 when an attempted coup by the right-leaning military failed to push King Norodom Sihanouk out of power. Sihanouk then joined forces with the Communist Party.

After a five-year civil war beginning in 1970, the Khmer Rouge had seized enough land to end the conflict. However, the communists didn’t restore power to Sihanouk, but to the ruthless leader Pol Pot, who historians hold responsible for the deaths of 2 million Cambodians.

Once the communists seized Cambodia’s capital, Phnom Penh, they told all residents to evacuate to the provinces for three days.

Sayavong, whose name then was Bopha Huot, was 13. Her father was a small business owner who, while in the Cambodian army, had helped Americans training during the Vietnam War. Her family was considered to be in the lower ranks of the upper class.

“The evacuation was supposed to be three days, leave your home and return back in three days, but actually it … was a false statement. It was a lie by the communist regime just to take people out of their homes,” Sayavong said.

During the four years of the Khmer Rouge’s reign, the government owned all resources; currency did not exist. Sayavong said she was separated from her family during the evacuation as all Cambodians were divided by age, sex, and marital status. It was four years before she was reunited with her family.

“Their model is that everybody is equal, nobody is richer, nobody is poor,” Sayavong said of socialists and communists. “Sounds great, isn’t it? But that’s not true because the government owns everything. So guess who is the richest one? The government.”

She added:
People that refer to themselves as the millennial [generation], they have no clue what socialism is. I lived in both socialism and communism, and then I lived in the world of the U.S. One thing I can tell you is there is no place like the U.S. … People think [socialism] is so wonderful, it’s so fantastic, but that’s not true. It’s just like a painting: It looks fantastic, but when you live in it, then you know it.

What about young Americans’ attraction to socialism?

“It brings me pain to even think that our children go that far,” she said. “I do believe in equality. I want … no rich, no poor, all even. But as a human being, think about it: If the government tells you what to do, how to eat, how to breathe, how could that be equal? They are above you.”

Nearly 2 million Cambodians died between 1975 and 1979 as a result of the promised equality under Pol Pot’s Khmer Rouge regime.

Life under the communists was oppressive, and there was no such thing as a “full” stomach in the work camps, Sayavong said:  ''In the very beginning, they gave you a reasonable amount of portions, but [it] is never a generous amount and it’s never what you want to eat. Whatever they provide, that’s what you eat.

''Let’s just say today you’re going to have vegetables and rice; that’s what you have, vegetables and rice. And tomorrow, maybe you have a meat. But as the times goes by, as it’s progressed, like in the second year or so, you lose even more [food]. The third year you get even less. You get to the point where you have one tablespoon of rice a day. It’s not one serving, it’s [for] a day. They don’t even have enough salt.

''We … were so hungry, we eat grass and wild vegetables, and I don’t mean the grass that a cow eats. I mean any wild vegetation. We’d just taste it to see if it can be eaten, [then] we eat it. But our stomach is not made to digest those kind of plants. We don’t have two or three layers like the cows. So most people have disease, and the water is not treated [but] dirty.''

Her malnutrition was so bad, Sayavong said, that she couldn’t see at night from a lack of proper vitamins and minerals to support night vision.

There was no clock in her work camp; workers would start when the sun came up and stop when it went down. She said she worked every day in the fields to stay alive.  “You wake up in the morning, you go to work … ,” she said. “When you cannot work, they will decide to eliminate you because you are a waste of their food and supply.”

She added: ''They want everybody equal. So they have you work the field, building [a] village, growing rice, and farming because in order, in their stupidity, in order for you to be equals you have to start somewhere equal. …

''So they have everybody start at the same thing. They abandon the manufacturer, they abandon cattle ranges and all those stuff, they start everybody on the same level. Except themselves. Everybody else, except themselves. They don’t work, they manage you.

“You know, I prayed every night, silly as that sounds,” Sayavong recalled. “I didn’t know what God I’m praying to at the time. I was hoping my … breath would never come the next morning, because it’s just unbearable. And each day I say, ‘God, please, just take me, I’m ready.’ … This is not it. I kept waking up. Never die.

Bopha Sayavong, bottom left, in 1980 at a refugee camp in the Philippines. (Photo courtesy of Bopha Sayavong)

With the fall of the Khmer Rouge and end of its work camps, Sayavong said, she wandered through the jungle and found her mother, brother, and sister. Her father had died in a work camp.

In the jungle, her sister had discovered a poncho-covered boy hiding from the rain. It turned out to be Tom, a family friend before the communists had taken over and segregated everyone. Tom was 10 when his family died in the work camps, Sayavong said.  Her family adopted him.

To survive, Sayavong said, she spent the next year smuggling food on the border with Thailand. One day, a group of Americans with a “little red cross on their arm” came to the rescue, she recalled.

The American Red Cross set up refugee camps in Thailand for Cambodian citizens fleeing their country. After two years in a refugee camp in Khao-I-Dang, Sayavong’s family was transferred to a camp in the Philippines where they eventually found a friend who was a U.S. citizen and would sponsor them.

Finally, it seemed as if there would be some security. Sayavong went through an immigration process that took her and her family to Little Rock, Arkansas.

With the assistance of a local church, she learned to speak English, got a job in a factory that paid $3.25 an hour, and earned her GED certificate.   Today, Sayavong works as a pharmacist in southern Illinois.

She has been married since 1984 to Patrick Sayavong, a refugee from Laos whom she met in Arkansas at a Baptist church. They have two daughters—Sarah, 30, and Nicole, 22.

“There’s some heartache, and there’s some misstep, and that’s just part of life,” Sayavong said. “There are things we’ve done right, and there are things we’ve done wrong. You just tweak it as you go each year, each time, and look at where we are right now.”

Editor’s note: Bopha Sayavong is a longtime friend of the parents of the reporter, who has known her since age 9.