In this file photo, we have a real class A winner, an example of the future generation who will be entrusted to meet the challenges of his time. (Photo: Shutterstock)
Personal responsibility and self-reliance used to be hallmarks of the American experience and one of the standards by which we were judged and we judged the world.
Self-sufficiency, a strong economy and a strong military.
These were all things that America stood for and it began with our roots in the founding of our nation. 200 plus years ago we came to this continent with nothing more than an idea and a box of tools. That idea was that men could govern themselves and by and large, they could do a better job of it.
Something changed along the way though. At some point we became more interested in having others govern for us, and making others responsible for our own actions. Whatever happened to people being responsible for themselves?
I can tell you – it started in school.
Years ago, when you forgot to bring your pencil, pen or eraser to school you got a warning, or borrowed it from a friend who kept quiet about it. Do it enough, or get caught borrowing, and you got a “pink slip” — aka detention. The slip had to be signed by your parent explaining to them that the student came to class unprepared and that a child should be prepared or plan to spend more time in detention.
Nowadays, they don’t do that.
You are made to sign a form saying your child has to bring extra for kids that don’t have enough money to buy their own. Never mind they all have cell phones, lunch money for hot lunches, or the latest sneakers, your kid has to provide for others like a good communist. Smart phones and computers are fine tools, but they aren’t a good pencil and eraser, or a well-written textbook. We managed to go from wagon trains to the stars by candle light after all.
People say it’s mean to punish the child for coming to school unprepared. Horse poop — it’s mean to teach the child to rely on others instead of teaching the child to be responsible in society. It’s meant to teach the child that enforced charity is okay. It’s mean to teach the child that coming to class unprepared to learn is A-Okay and that others will cover for you.
Well, it’s not ok, not in my book. A human being begins learning not just math and science in school, but how things work in life and the more complex social aspects of societal life in school. Too often we teach a child a lesson without understanding what it is that lesson really taught them.
Responsibility is one of those lessons.
People wonder why kids are growing up today irresponsible and blaming everyone else for their problems. You know why that is?
You taught em’ that.
Thomas Purcell is nationally syndicated columnist, author of the book “Shotgun Republic” and is host of the Liberty Never Sleeps podcast. More of his work can be found at LibertyNeverSleeps.com.
Thousands of people gather at Republique Square in Paris, Sunday, Jan. 11, 2015. Thousands of people began filling France’s iconic Republique plaza, and world leaders converged on Paris in a rally of defiance and sorrow on Sunday to honor the 17 victims of three days of bloodshed that left France on alert for more violence. (AP Photo/Peter Dejong)
President Barack Obama’s absence from the great gathering in Paris of national leaders from other countries, to show their solidarity with France in its opposition to Islamic terrorists, was another sign of the Obama administration’s continuing irresolution in the face of terror.
Even the recent courageous message of Egypt’s president, Abdel-Fattah el-Sisi, calling on his fellow Muslims around the world to “revolutionize” the interpretation of Islam, to make it more compatible with peaceful relations with other peoples, put no steel in the spine of Barack Obama.
From his earliest days in the White House, our president has downplayed the terrorist threat from Islamic extremists. He declared victory as he pulled American troops out of Iraq, setting the stage for a huge defeat when ISIS moved in to create their own new government, on both Iraqi and Syrian soil — while committing atrocities against men, women and children not seen since the days of the Nazis.
Undaunted, President Obama has since reaffirmed his determination to similarly pull American troops out of Afghanistan, with a similar declaration that they are no longer needed. He proceeds as if he can declare a war over when it suits the political convenience of his administration.
But a war is not over until the enemy stops fighting. The terrorist enemies of Iraq and Afghanistan are enemies of the United States as well. ISIS has left no doubt of that by beheading Americans and spreading the videotapes of these beheadings for the enjoyment of like-minded people in the Middle East and beyond.
Not even the movement of the world’s biggest sponsor of terrorism — Iran — toward building a nuclear bomb has caused the Obama administration to change its vision of the world. For Obama, the question has never been how to stop Iran from going nuclear, but how to stop Israel from stopping Iran from going nuclear.
He has accomplished that by public declarations of support for Israel, while engaging in protracted negotiations with Iran that serve only to allow Iran to fortify and proliferate the sites of its nuclear facilities, to the point where Israel’s bombers may no longer be able to destroy those facilities.
At one time, information was leaked that Israel had a secret arrangement with Azerbaijan for Israeli bombers to land there and refuel on their way back from bombing Iran’s nuclear facilities.
It is doubtful if anyone in the Obama administration would have dared to leak Israel’s military secrets without knowing that it was all right with the president. Since it is unlikely that very many people in the White House had this information, the leaker’s identity could hardly have remained secret from the president.
Barack Obama cannot be unaware of the consequences of these and other foreign policy decisions that undermine the security of America and America’s allies. He is not stupid, nor is there any reason to believe that he is cowardly.
Instead, there is a remarkable consistency between Obama’s domestic policies and his foreign policies on both economic and military matters. It was a sign of this consistency that he was proposing to have the taxpayers pay for free community college education while everyone else was focused on the terror attacks in Paris.
Barack Obama’s vision of the world, both at home and abroad, is one in which some people and nations are undeservedly far better off than others in many ways.
In the Obama view of the world, those who are undeservedly thriving (“You didn’t build that!”) are to be forced to pay for benefits to those who are not thriving, whether the latter are people on welfare, community college students or immigrants from poorer nations, who are to be let into the United States to take a share of Americans’ prosperity.
On the international stage, it is the same principle, where the problem is seen as Western nations being undeservedly better off than other nations, both economically and in terms of greater military power. Here too, Obama is for redistribution, even at the expense of his own country — if someone with such a “citizen of the world” viewpoint really thinks of America as his country, rather than a staging area for his world-changing, ideologically-driven crusades.
President Obama spoke Friday in Tennessee, which is starting its own tuition program for community college students. His proposal, modeled after Tennessee’s, is to make the schooling free. (Photo: Jabin Botsford/The New York Times)
Last Friday, President Obama unveiled his proposal to spend $60 billion over the next 10 years to provide free community college tuition to roughly 9 million students each year.
“Two years of college will become as free and universal as high school is today,” the president claimed.
However, many critics are quick to point out several serious flaws with Mr. Obama’s plan, which on the merits, appears more a political strategy than an economic strategy. Free and universal public education is in desperate need of reform, chronically suffering from problems that a continued increase of funding has not been capable of rectifying.
“Maybe we should take another look at ‘free education’ because it’s worked out so well in regards to high school and grammar school, both of which turn out miserable excuses for uneducated kids on a regular basis,” said Thomas Purcell, host of Liberty Never Sleeps and youngest graduate of Mesa. Purcell recently argued Obama’s plan focuses on quantity of education, not quality of education.
It is a concern that many on the president’s own end of the political spectrum say they share with Purcell and others on the right. “We should be much more concerned about quality and about completion,” said Sandy Baum, a senior fellow at the Urban Institute. Baum, a research professor at the George Washington University’s Graduate School of Education and Human Development, could only tell the New York Times that there might be a “potential financial benefit” to expanded access.
But others, even those on the left, aren’t that tactful.
“He shouldn’t be holding Tennessee Promise out as a model because it’s not a model; it’s a facade to cover up what is a dying system,” said Representative Steve Cohen, s Democrat from Tennessee and the architect of Tennessee’s HOPE college program.
Rep. Cohen said both the state program and Obama’s proposal help affluent and lower-achieving students, not those with financial hardship or have the best chance of academic success. While the president claims it will help the economically challenged, it would also pay for the tuition of middle- and upper-income students who do not qualify for it currently, nor do they need it.
He now believes education benefits to help pay for college tuition should be a system that rewards students for achievement.
Aside from concerns the president’s plan emphasizes quantity over quality, there is also the very serious two-point argument that holds 1) it is a wholly unneeded government intervention to a manufactured problem and, 2) more government intervention will only create a dire crisis.
First, community college is already tuition-free for most of the targeted students around the country. The federal Pell grant program covers low- and middle-income students up to $5,730 a year, and most states have their own grant programs that can be compounded with federal financial aide. With the national average for full-time community college tuition and fees at only $3,427, students are left with a considerable amount to put toward living expenses.
Undoubtedly, the president’s proponents would take issue with that assertion, but the data just don’t support their position.
A recent report from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) found students aren’t having a difficult time obtaining financial assistance to pay for tuition. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act required the CFPB to submit an annual report that analyzes complaints submitted by consumers, most recently from October 1, 2013, through September 30, 2014.
The report concluded that those who are in need of more financial assistance have little trouble taking out student loans with fair interest rates. However, what they found was that they couldn’t pay them back, because they couldn’t find a job.
The CFPB found 57 percent cited “repaying my loan/dealing with my lender” and 41 percent cited “problems when you are unable to pay/can’t repay my loan” as their number one problem. That’s a frightening finding, considering the class of 2014 graduated with an average student loan debt of $33,000. Even if we adjusted for inflation using the government’s bogus numbers and methods, that’s still nearly double the amount borrowers had to pay back 20 years ago.
The findings suggest the real problem is cost and post-college opportunity, not expanded access. Yet, the president’s plan does nothing to address cost, nor does it deal with the danger of current student debt defaulting en masse, which would dwarf the subprime mortgage crisis.
According to the CFPB, student loan debt ballooned to approximately $1.5 trillion in 2014. With the U.S. national debt surpassing $18 trillion, student loan debt now represents 6 percent of the total debt-blanket hanging over the economy. The amount of consumer debt from student loans is second only to mortgages, and the vast majority of student loans are already backed by the U.S. government through banks like Sallie Mae, or since 2010, by the Department of Education.
Unfortunately, they are also representative of the majority of loans that debts holders say they cannot pay back, by far. Obama’s plan would only shift more of the burden to the taxpayers, who are already in danger of being on the hook for another bailout.
Mr. Obama said the federal government will pay three-quarters of tuition costs, while the states pay one-quarter. Of course, as with public school education, federal monies will come with strings attached. Those strings have done nothing to improve America’s failing public schools, and will do nothing for community colleges.
It has long been a cultural belief that higher education leads to more opportunity. But, in today’s economy, it isn’t holding up to scrutiny, and that’s true even of advanced degrees. A recent paper published in the Journal of EconomicPerspectives found PhD research conducted by some of those with the most expensive degrees is grossly lagging in productivity.
“If the objective of graduate training in top-ranked departments is to produce successful research economists, then these graduate programmes are largely failing,” says John P. Conley and Ali Sina Önder, the authors of the new report. “Our evidence shows that only the top 10–20 percent of a typical graduating class of economics PhD students are likely to accumulate a research record that might lead to tenure at a medium-level research university. Perhaps the most striking finding from our data is that graduating from a top department is neither necessary nor sufficient for becoming a successful research economist.”
To make a long report short, government programs saturated the market for advanced degrees and reduced their value, thus reducing productivity. As a result of the private-public partnership between universities and the government, there are way too many PhDs produced each year juxtaposed to the number of job openings. More than 100,000 doctoral degrees were shelled out in the United States between 2005 and 2009, but in the same period there were just 16,000 new professorships.
Rather than increasing access to and the quantity of college degrees, while inevitably decreasing productivity, Purcell suggests we do just the reverse.
“Why don’t we consolidate all the community colleges into high schools and, that way, maybe a high school diploma will actually be worth something?” he proposed in a question. “It will save states a boat-load of money and make both high school and the community colleges viable again as institutions of learning, rather than places to fritter away an afternoon learning how to weave a basket.”
Lt. Colonel Ralph Peters, a Fox News military strategist and analyst, ripped President Obama for skipping the Paris rally Sunday to honor those killed during the terrorist attacks last week.
“I’ve taken a lot of heat for calling President Obama a coward,” Lt. Colonel Peters said during an interview on America’s Newsroom with Martha MacCallum Monday. “But he is a physical, mental, and intellectual coward.”
German Chancellor Angela Merkel, British Prime Minister David Cameron and Italy Prime Minister Matteo Renzi were among 44 foreign leaders marching with Hollande in a show of solidarity against the terrorists. Even U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — who are often at odds, but stood together earlier encouraging French Jews to emigrate from Israel – walked side-by-side with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas.
But President Obama was a very noticeable no-show at the event. When asked by Fox News’ Ed Henry what the president was doing Sunday that kept him from attending the rally, White House Press Secretary Josh Ernest couldn’t answer.
Peters, who was on to respond to the cover of the Daily News entitled, “YOU LET THE WORLD DOWN,” said “President Obama chose the side of the terrorists” when he skipped out on what was a historic event and a historical opportunity to show the Islamic world that the United States and the West were united against any attack on the values of western civilization.
U.S. Central Command’s Twitter account and YouTube account were both hacked Monday by ISIS sympathizers, who posted threatening messages. The avatar and background image for @CENTCOM was overtaken with the words “CyberCaliphate” and “I love you ISIS,” and the account put out a number of threatening tweets to U.S. military members.
“We can confirm that both the CENTCOM Twitter and YouTube accounts were compromised earlier today,” U.S. Central Command said in a statement. “We are taking the appropriate measures. We have no further information to provide at this time.”
The Pentagon has confirmed that they are aware of numerous phone numbers, email addresses and physical addresses of senior military officials, alongside maps, posted online with threats and calls to attack. However, PPD verified that numerous phone numbers were outdated, though it is unclear whether the physical addresses are, as well.
Both accounts are now suspended, but the ISIS hacking on CENTCOM occurred as President Barack Obama was speaking on cybersecurity.
Meanwhile, White House Press Secretary John Ernest said “there is a big difference between a major data breach and the hacking of a Twitter account.”
Political parties on a crossroads sign featuring Republicans and Democrats. PPD regularly tracks party ID, as well as other public polling conducted by Gallup, Rasmussen Reports, Reuters, and many more.
A new survey from Gallup found the number of Americans identifying as independents is at a record high, and Democrats have a slight party ID edge. Since the results, my Twitter feed and email box have lit up like a Christmas tree with comments and questions, most of which claiming an opportunity for the emergence of a third party.
Regarding turnout, our previous post-2014 election analysis called the low-turnout argument the “top midterm myth” because, while it is true that turnout was abysmally low nationwide, states with competitive Senate races actually saw record-high turnouts for midterm cycles. I won’t re-litigate that in this article — though readers should check it out — but I will say the bottom line is that turnout numbers by region in 2014 spoke more to the influence of super PAC spending than voters’ sentiments toward political parties.
Nevertheless, I thought it appropriate to dig into Gallup’s latest numbers a bit to help explain their implications.
“The most important fact we see is that the number of Americans who identify as independents is at a record high,” Gallup editor-in-chief Frank Newport said. “43 percent identified as independents when we asked them if you are Republican, independent, or Democrat.”
The truth is, with the exception of post-election surveys, which unsurprisingly show more Americans identifying with the winning party, this overall trend has been ongoing for at least two decades. From 1980, Democrats have held a consistent advantage — 10 points on average — yet they will have only occupied the White House for 16 out of the 36 years since, by the end of Obama’s term.
Why?
For starters, party ID is fluid, which is why “unskewing” polls based on pollsters’ R/D/I split is preposterous.
In the Gallup tracking poll conducted immediately after the 2014 midterm elections — a wave election that gave the GOP their largest majority in the House since the 1920s, a new majority in the Senate, and a record number of statehouses across the country — Republicans retook the party ID advantage.
Americans’ political allegiances shifted toward Republicans (w/ leaners) from the 43 – 39 percent deficit they faced prior to the elections, to a slight 42 – 41 percent edge over Democrats. While the poll represented a net shift of 5 percentage points in party allegiance in favor of the GOP, the post-Republican Revolution shift in 1994 was a far greater 16 points.
However, in the latest survey, Democrats have once again retaken a slight 4-point edge. Unfortunately, for them, the number of Americans identifying as Democrats is at a record-low — 30 percent — the lowest on record since Gallup began tracking the question in the 1980s. Solid Republicans are actually up 1-point — 26 percent — but near their own historic low in 1983, when President Ronald Reagan spanked Walter Mondale in a 49-state landslide election.
So, if the number of independents is at a new high and the number of Democrats at new low, then is this a watershed moment, one that presents disaffected Republican voters a historic chance to form a new party?
No.
First, Republican voters in general are more likely to identify as straight up independents than Democrats, a trend we began to observe in the 1994 election. The trend is clearly still present now, which helps to explain why the Republican Party’s favorability ratings are higher than those of the Democratic Party, 42 percent and 36 percent, respectively.
Many of these voters are part of what we used to refer to as the “Perot Coalition,” or they fit the voter profile of those who did. Let’s take a look at the profile of these voters, which on the surface, may appear to benefit those who want a third-party system.
They are “America-firsters,” meaning they are strongly pro-American business, despise NAFTA and other H.W. Bush-Clinton Era trade policies, and favor reducing imports to protect American jobs. They also oppose widespread intervention overseas, such as “nation-building” or being the “world’s police,” and support cutting back on America’s commitment overseas.
However, they also do not like weakness when America’s vital interests — and, sometimes pride — are challenged. Because they are “America-firsters,” they are strongly opposed to illegal immigration (more on this in a moment).
Political Reformers
These voters are staunchly opposed to waste, fraud and corruption, leading them to favor term limits. They are extremely concerned with the size of the national debt and out-of-control spending, which is why they support a balanced-budget amendment to the U.S. Constitution. But they also hate corporate welfare and not only favor cuts to federal spending but also raising taxes on higher income Americans to achieve fiscal sustainability.
[/tab] [tab title=”Location”]
Widespread, but concentrated in regions from the Mid-West and Northern, predominantly white states, to central and Northern Appalachia.
[/tab]
[tab title=”Demographics”]
White: 58 Percent
Hispanic: 14 Percent
Black: 7 Percent
Asian: 15 Percent
Other: 6 Percent
[/tab] [/tabs]
These voters have always represented a large number of so-called independents, though they largely vote Republican. However, judging by demographics in the new Gallup poll, we can now add older-aged Democrats to their ranks, likely candidates for those who voted in 2014 for Thom Tillis in North Carolina, Joni Ernst in Iowa, Cory Garnder in Colorado, Scott Walker in Wisconsin, Rick Snyder in Michigan, and Rick Scott in Florida.
In 1994, on average, they broke in large numbers for Republican candidates — thanks to the courting efforts of Newt Gingrich — and told Gallup they identified with the GOP in their post-election survey. In 1996, they voted in smaller numbers for Bob Dole, but by a similar margin. In 2000, they broke heavily for George W. Bush by more than 2 to 1 over Al Gore, and so on.
In 2012, they stayed home and Mitt Romney lost. In 2014, they voted in decent numbers and Republicans won them back.
Real Bottom Line
The record high number of independents reflects the result of a long-term trend with Republican-leaning voters, the addition of older Democratic voters who feel abandoned by the party, and disenfranchised conservatives. However, unlike the grim outlook for Democrats, the data point to a clear path forward for Republican voters seeking to reshape the Republican Party.
While a new party would do nothing but result in a three-way split of Reagan’s three-legged stool, a reshaping of the Republican Party akin to the far left-wing hijacking of the Democratic Party after 2004 would better serve their agenda. Building a larger tent is always better than destroying the small one that shelters you, but it will take anti-establishment forces.
Nearly two-thirds of Republican likely voters in a recent PPD Poll said they wanted a new speaker of the House, which is quite unsurprising. Due to differences on economic fairness, including corporate welfare tax breaks and immigration, the Republican establishment has struggled to keep these Republican-leaning, independent voters into the fold. If Republican leadership intends to quit fighting amnesty while handing out tax breaks to the big business members of the Chamber of Commerce, I’d expect to see a growing number of self-identifying independents in the future.
That being said, if you cannot affect change from the inside, you are unlikely to do so from the outside, particularly with inadequate numbers.
President Barack Obama arrives to speak about education during a visit to Pellissippi State College in Knoxville, Tn, on Jan. 9, 2015. Obama wants to make two years of community college free, a proposal he said on Thursday he would flesh out in his State of the Union speech later this month. Kevin Lamarque/Reuters
Last week, President Obama suggested that we make community college free for anyone who wants to “work” for it.
Excuse me, but we already have a system that allows people to work for a college education — it’s called capitalism and the free market. You work at making something or selling something that people want, and they give you money for it. Then, you take the money and exchange it for a college education.
See how that works? A “free” education through a system we have already in place.
But maybe, I’m being too cynical. Maybe we should take another look at “free education” because it’s worked out so well in regards to high school and grammar school, both of which turned out to be miserable excuses for educated kids on a regular basis.
However, I suggest we do it right. Or at least in a manner that doesn’t sacrifice conservative principles for a few votes. Here’s a compromise that we make with community colleges.
Why don’t we consolidate all the community colleges into high schools and, that way, maybe a high school diploma will actually be worth something?
We can lay off a good amount of redundant administrative people and move high school and community college onto the same campuses. While we are at it, let’s offer classes in the now 6 year high school that can offer people a trade such as welding, or auto repair, and really prepare our kids for the realities of life. Now kids will graduate with the ability to earn with basic careers or advance to college and study more advanced fields.
What a great idea!
It will save states a boat-load of money and make both high school and the community colleges viable again as institutions of learning, rather than places to fritter away an afternoon learning how to weave a basket or how to learn to write about aliens from Mars.
Republicans should jump on this politically. It will piss off the teachers’ unions, alienate the president from one of his core voting blocks and place the GOP squarely in the camp of building a QUALITY education and not a QUANTITY education.
After all, that’s really the goal isn’t it?
Or, at least it should be.
Thomas Purcell is nationally syndicated columnist, author of the book “Shotgun Republic” and is host of the Liberty Never Sleeps podcast. More of his work can be found at LibertyNeverSleeps.com.
Friday Bradley Parrish, 25, and David Dempsey, 27, robbed a Comfort Inn, a Holiday Inn, and tried to rob a Checkers in North Augusta, South Carolina, before hitting a Quality Inn in Aiken. However, shortly after Dempsey is seen on surveillance video entering the hotel lobby about 10:30 p.m., the robbery suspect shoots himself in the leg.
“All of a sudden he goes, ‘Give me all your money,’ so I started pulling out bills and everything,” Pat Coats told WRDW-TV. “I didn’t want to get shot.”
But as Demspey was making his way to the door with some $300.00 in cash, something happened.
“On the way out I hear a pop, and the gun had gone off,” Coats told WRDW. “He screams then starts limping.”
Police told the Associated Press that they were at the hotel within minutes of the incident. Dempsey actually stopped a deputy and asked for help for his gunshot, who quickly discerned he and Parrish were the hotel robbers. With the pair were Autumn Cooper, 19, and Breanna Dudley, 21. All four were arrested and taken to the Aiken County jail.
“Fortunately they didn’t get away with it and we’ll just have to see how much time they spend in jail,” Coats added to WRDW.
This week on Fox News Sunday, Julie Pace, George Will, Karl Rove, and Juan Williams join Chris Wallace to debate tactics to combat radical Islam.
In the second half, the FNC panel debates the new balance of power in Washington now that the new Congress has taken control. Last week, the Republican-dominated House of Representatives voted to approve the widely popular Keystone XL pipeline, a move that roughly 70 percent of the American people agree with.
However, the White House has said they would veto the bipartisan bill when it makes it through the Senate. The administration had been waiting on a court decision, allegedly, which came down last week. The judge ruled in favor of proponents of the Keystone pipeline.
“It is time for this to be over!” Judge Jeanine Pirro said Saturday night in her Opening Statement in response to the radical Islamic terrorist attacks in Paris.
“We need to kill them,” she said. “We need to kill them, the radical Muslim terrorists hell-bent on killing us. You’re in danger. I’m in danger. We’re at war and this is not going to stop.”
Though three suspects in the attacks on Charlie Hebdo and a Jewish kosher deli are dead, at least one is still at large. However, the judge said the West has been going about it all wrong, respecting the defeat of radical Islam.
“After this week’s brutal terror attacks in France, hopefully everybody now gets it,” Judge Jeanine said. “And there’s only one group that can stop this war: the Muslims themselves.”
Pirro slammed the U.S. for sending foreign aid to countries that don’t cooperate, or worse, help foster radicalism in their countries, and single-out a few in particular.
“Our job is to arm those Muslims to the teeth. Give them everything they need to take out these Islamic fanatics,” she said. “Let them do the job. Let them have at it. And as they do, we need to simply look the other way. It is time for this to be over and stop sending American dollars to any Arab country that does not support this mission, Pakistan at the top of the list.”
Transcript
Force Arab nations to choose. They’re either with us or they’re against us. And stop with this nuclear negotiation nonsense. They don’t operate the way we do. You can’t negotiate. You can’t mediate. You can’t bargain. You can’t even reason with these people!
Now, Egyptian President el-Sisi – a Muslim in a country 85-percent Muslim – rid Egypt – the largest Arab country – of Islamic fanatics. He threw out Hamas terrorists and outlawed the Muslim Brotherhood, the mother of all terrorist organizations.
And ironically, days before the attack in France that same President el-Sisi called for a religious revolution to take out violent jihadists. He called on the imams and the religious establishment to lead the fight, saying the entire world is waiting for their next move.
I’ve been telling you for a year that they’re coming for us. That there is a reverse crusade in progress, a Christian genocide. Hundreds of thousands of innocents killed in the Middle East.
Seven months ago, I said that we needed to bomb ISIS as it began to steamroll through Iraq. Bomb them. Bomb them. And bomb them again. For which, I was roundly criticized.
Our country’s response to this threat? The FBI destroys tens of thousands of documents deemed offensive to Islam. The CIA removes the word “Islamic” before terrorist in the Benghazi talking points. The Ft. Hood massacre, the Oklahoma beheading, both workplace violence. Are we morons?
Of course, none of this should be a surprise given that our president invited the Muslim Brotherhood to fill the first two rows of his “apology for being an American speech” in Cairo in 2009.
And as we cower to these Islamic fanatics, our president and former Secretary of State Clinton say they will prosecute the man who made the video – free speech be damned!
They call murders accompanied by “Allah Akbar” workplace violence. This surrender is nothing more than a coward’s response to the fear of this fanatical terrorism. And this political correctness will be the death of us.
They can kill us, but we can’t hurt their feelings? I’m surprised there isn’t a new executive order that simply says “don’t offend Muslims”.
And make no mistake – as sure as I’m talking to you – there will be efforts to limit our First Amendment – our free speech – to comply with Sharia blasphemy laws which call for death to those who slander the prophet Mohammad.
At a time when we have never been in more danger, our president is focused on free community college on his continuing his march to reduce the size of the military and eviscerate our national security.
Our government’s response to the terror threat is to have interfaith dialogue, to try to understand and empathize with our enemy. And when they want to shut us up, they call us “Islamaphobes.”
Muslim groups like CAIR and the Nation of Islam have been integrated into our society. Muslims were even invited to worship at the national cathedral in Washington, DC.
We are directed by a political correctness so bizarre so disconnected from reality that it does nothing but assist our enemy in our own destruction.
They have conquered us through immigration. They have conquered us through interfaith dialogue. And they have conquered us by co-opting our leaders into a position of embarrassment.
Now he Prime Minister of France – just a few hours ago – stated that France is at war with radical Islam. Why can’t our president even say the words “radical Islam” or “Islamic terrorists” – let alone protect us Americans.
It’s not like we haven’t suffered from these fanatical terrorists. Thousands of Americans have died at their hands: the World Trade Center, U.S.S. Cole., Tanzania, Ft. Hood, Benghazi.
When the head of MI5 – one of the most secretive positions – shows his face to the world saying that Britain is going to get hit next , it is time to get serious.
And as this Islamic cancer metastasizes throughout the world – Boko Haram in Nigeria, Al-Shabaab in Somalia, Ansar al-Sharia in Libya, Al Qaeda, ISIS – and as it goes through Europe, it is headed our way.
Our forefathers gave up everything, their fortunes, their families, their lives to create a government where free speech and freedom of religion were sacrosanct.
This surrender, this refusal to call it what it is is an insult to my father, my grandfather and everyone who served in armed forces, who fought to protect what is sacred to every American.
You have %%pigeonMeterAvailable%% free %%pigeonCopyPage%% remaining this month. Get unlimited access and support reader-funded, independent data journalism.
