TheFrontPageCover
~ Featuring ~
  Afghanistan Is a Tough Sell for America
Harold Hutchison  
.
Mayor Pete’s Evangelical Brother-In-Law Deconstructs Buttigieg’s ‘Absurd And 
Outlandish’ Abortion Position
by SCOTT MOREFIELD
{ dailycaller.com } ~ South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg’s evangelical brother-in-law, Pastor Ryan Glezman, appeared on Tuesday night’s edition of “Tucker Carlson Tonight”... to discuss the 2020 Democratic presidential candidate’s use of Scripture to justify third-trimester abortions. Glezman had earlier called on his brother-in-law to “repent” for claiming that the Bible teaches that life begins when an infant takes it first breath. Fox News host Tucker Carlson brought Glezman on after playing a clip of Buttigieg’s comments. Glezman began with a “plea” to his brother-in-law to “open his Bible” and “reconsider his position and the way he is misrepresenting scripture to push this pro-abortion platform.” The evangelical pastor referred to Biblical passages in Psalms that refer to people as “fearfully and wonderfully made in the image in God” and “woven together in the woman’s womb.” “I don’t know how you can read this and come out of that with any other understanding that life begins at conception,” he said, calling Buttigieg’s interpretation “absurd and outlandish.” “This is a God issue,” he said. “This is a spiritual issue, not a political issue.” Glezman told Tucker he had not spoken “directly” to his brother-in-law, but also believes he will “reconsider” when he decides to “open up the Bible and read through Scripture and see what Scripture actually says.” “You know, we need to create a culture that speaks of human life and human beings who have value,” said Glezman. “We are commanded by Christ himself to uphold the dignity and respect of all human life. We need to stand for all the born and all the unborn … Pete has to make a decision. Are you going to stand up for the most vulnerable or seek the power and distort Scripture to meet your own political agenda? And that’s exactly what we are seeing just not with Pete but with the whole Democratic Party down the line.”
.
HUD Secretary: Trump 'Passionate' 
About Tackling Homelessness
By Susan Jones
{ cnsnews.com } ~ President Donald Trump has sent a team to Los Angeles to investigate the burgeoning problem of homelessness, which California cities seem unwilling or unable to address... Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson told Fox New Tuesday night, "The president is very passionate about doing something" to improve the situation: "Well we've had multiple conversations about the homelessness situation, which seems to be worse in places where there is a lot of regulatory barriers, Carson told Fox's Laura Ingraham. And California is a poster child for that. And if you go out there and you see some of those people on the street and you talk to them, you know, many of them simply are not capable of taking care of themselves. And, you know, we have to take some responsibility here. Now, generally, it's the responsibility of the locality, of the city, of the municipality, to take care of people. But if that's not happening, you know, it devolves to another level. So if the city and the state are not taking care of it, the federal government is obviously going to have to do something. And the president is very passionate about doing something. Carson said Trump "doesn't care" about the politics of this. "He looks at these people and recognizes that they are American citizens…and we have a responsibility to take care of them. Now, you know, that doesn't mean that we won't work with the localities, and I don't want to say specifically what is going to be done because I don't want to get ahead of it. But obviously, we can't just leave people in those situations.” According to The New York Times, the administration's fact-finding mission is happening as the president  prepares for a trip to California next week. But tent cities and homelessness are not a sudden concern of Trump's. In early July, in an interview with Fox News's Tucker Carlson, Trump said he was looking at the out-of-control homelessness situation in California cities "very seriously."...
.
How scumbag/liar-nObama's 
Iran Deal Funded Terrorism
By Aynaz Anni Cyrus and Kaveh Taheri
{ americanthinker.com } ~ In 2015, the Iranian Khomeinist regime received up to $150 billion into its bank accounts from the scumbag/liar-nObama administration. That windfall of cash was provided through terms of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the Iran Nuclear Deal... That gusher of western cash then flowed directly into terror funding, even though Iranian experts and dissidents had warned over and over again that the money would not be spent on the Iranian people, but rather would go to enrich the repressive regime, and to fund its warring proxies in the region. The scumbag/liar-nObama administration clumsily acceded to the most dangerous terms of any deal ever enacted by the Free World against its own best interests. The JCPOA gave essential money to prop up the regime and its criminality. Since that flood of cash was released, millions of dollars have been smuggled by Iran every day. Most of the money is spent on Iran's wars in Syria, Lebanon, Yemen and other countries in the Middle East. Iran-backed merchants and agents are involved in a massive web of money-laundering between Iraqi territory and Iran. The Islamic regime uses that shadow money to fund terrorism and destabilize the region. Iran annually sends up to $800 million to Hezb’allah, and $70 million to Hamas and other groups in the Gaza Strip, as estimated by the Israeli Ministry of Defense in 2017. In a State Department briefing on April 2, 2019, U.S. Special Representative for Iran Brian Hook asserted that 70 percent of Hezb’allah's revenue comes from the Iranian regime. Hook reiterated that point on April 22, 2019 in an interview with Al Arabiya: “Historically, Iran gives Hezb’allah $700 million a year. That’s 70% of their budget.” Hassan Nasrallah, who is the leader of Hezb’allah, had also publicly affirmed Iran’s support as early as 2017: “We are open about the fact that Hezb’allah’s budget, its income, its expenses, everything it eats and drinks, its weapons and rockets, come from the Islamic Republic of Iran.” Iran spends at least $6 billion yearly in Syria,  according to Jesse Shahin, a spokesman for the office of Staffan de Mistura, the United Nations’ Special emissary on Syria. But Iranian experts strongly believe that the amount is much higher than this... https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/09/how_obamas_iran_de...  
.
Taliban Marks 9/11 Anniversary With 
Defiance, Rocket Attacks
By Patrick Goodenough
{ cnsnews.com } ~ With defiant statements directed at President Trump and the Afghan government, the Taliban marked the 18th anniversary of 9/11 by claiming to have fired missiles at the U.S. Embassy in Kabul and the U.S. Air Force Base at Bagram... The terrorist group said in a statement its “mujahideen” had fired missiles at the U.S. Embassy in the Afghan capital shortly after midnight, and launched a similar attack at Bagram, some 30 miles north of Kabul, a base it described as the “largest nest of American invaders in the country.” It claimed that according to its sources “the enemy suffered casualties in both attacks,” but said it was awaiting further information. “The occupiers have suffered heavy casualties and financial losses at Bagram,” Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujadid tweeted separately. According to the Associated Press, a rocket landed at the U.S. Embassy in the Afghan capital minutes after midnight, but officials “declared all-clear about an hour later and reported no injuries.” Queries sent to U.S. forces in Afghanistan about the Bagram claim brought no response by press time. Earlier on Tuesday evening, Afghanistan’s Interior Ministry reported that a rocket had landed near the compound of the Defense Ministry in Kabul, causing no casualties. The ministry is situated about a mile from the U.S. Embassy. The attacks come as America marks the anniversary of al-Qaeda’s terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, 2001. The U.S. invaded less than a month later to topple the Taliban regime which had provided its al-Qaeda allies a safe haven in its “emirate.”...
.
Anti-Gun Laws Will Never 
Solve Gun Violence in America
By Trevor Thomas
{ americanthinker.com } ~ Despite of what the left-wing media wants you to believe, there is not an epidemic of mass shootings, or an epidemic of gun violence in general, in the United States. The data make this clear... In fact -- and again, in spite of what many in the media would have us believe -- by many accounts, mass shootings are not even on the rise. Definitions of what constitutes a “mass shooting” vary, but using “standard definitions,” a recent piece in The Conversation -- an academic and research journal -- declares that “Mass shootings aren’t growing more common.” In support of this conclusion, The Conversation article references data presented in USA Today: Northeastern University criminologist James Alan Fox, a leading expert with decades of experience on such matters, has long held that “There is no evidence that we are in the midst of an epidemic of mass shootings.” This was true five years ago, as the graphic below, using Professor Fox’s data, reveals: And it’s true today, as Fox recently revealed in a lengthy interview  with Reason’s Nick Gillespie: “There is no evidence that we are in the midst of an epidemic of mass shootings.” Even the liberals at Politico agree. There, Grant Duwe, a research director for the Minnesota Department of Corrections and author of Mass Murder in the United States: A History, concludes that mass shootings are “roughly as common now as they were in the 1980s and ’90s.” Not only are mass shootings still very rare, but they represent an extremely small portion of overall gun murders in the U.S. Even a leftist publication like Vox  makes note of this. While using a variety of data, including Professor Fox’s,  Vox’s Dylan Matthews rightly reveals that “while tragic,” deaths as a result of mass shooting “are a tiny sliver of America’s gun homicide problem.” What’s more, though we comprise about four-and-a-half percent of the world’s population, and though we own about half of the world’s privately owned guns, America accounts for less than half of one percent of the world’s murders. Likewise, across the U.S., this trend is similar: the presence of guns does not correlate to more gun murders. As this piece points out, many of the safest areas in America have the highest rates of gun-ownership...
.
.
Afghanistan Is a Tough Sell for America
Harold Hutchison:  The revelation that the Trump administration called off a summit with Taliban and Afghan leaders slated to take place at Camp David has caused some consternation. But both the justification for the negotiations and their suspension are understandable.

First of all, it needs to be said that the talks with the Taliban were not President Donald Trump’s idea. Barack scumbag/liar-nObama started them, and during the scumbag/liar-nObama administration, those talks led to the release of the “Taliban Dream Team” in exchange for a deserter. They were a bad idea then, and still are a bad idea now. However, at this point, continuing the talks was an understandable bad idea prior to the Taliban admitting they were carrying out car bombings and other attacks to gain leverage.

Why? Because, at this point, America has four options in Afghanistan:

  • Win the war by a massive surge of forces into the country where 2,296 American troops have died in a war fought for close to 18 years now (as of this coming October 7)

  • Muddle along as we are now, leaving the fight to Special Operations Command

  • Negotiate a deal of some sort

  • Lose by just pulling out

Until the cancellation of the talks, America was doing a combination of options two and three. America arguably lost the chance to carry out option one when scumbag/liar-nObama announced a timetable-based strategy in Afghanistan back in 2009, but that was set up by earlier mistakes by George W. Bush, notably the failure to expand America’s military in the aftermath of 9/11.

While his immediate actions in the wake of the unprovoked attacks made America safer, the failure to aggressively defend those actions in the wake of lies peddled by the Leftmedia ranks as an immense blunder. Had Bush shown a quarter of the fight in defending the Long War against those lies that Trump has shown with Hollywood charlatans on Twitter, America might be in much better strategic shape now.

But he didn’t. We saw the heroes who got Khalid Sheik Mohammed to talk receive dishonorable mistreatment at the hands of politicians from both parties, with rino-John McCain and Dianne Fein-stein being two of the most prominent perpetrators. That dishonorable treatment included leaving those who answered the country’s call to do a difficult job to twist in the wind as the “Gitmo Bar” and ACLU turn America’s own legal system on those who defended it on behalf of members of al-Qaida.

We saw military readiness decline badly, and the War on Terror went badly off track. Bush’s failure to expand the United States military meant that China eventually felt emboldened to pursue a more aggressive posture in the South China Sea, while Russia launched aggression against Georgia and the Ukraine.

NATO declined as well, and also failed to meet obligations in terms of defense spending. Trump then got flak for rightly calling out Germany and Canada, among other countries.

But NATO’s failures were not the only thing that led many Americans to think that Europe was content to coast and let America fight the War on Terror alone. Some NATO allies investigated or even prosecuted American intelligence operatives for their actions in the War on Terror. NATO allies refused to fight alongside America in Iraq.

And in the meantime, especially under Obama, our troops had their hands tied behind their back with overly restrictive rules of engagement. As America prematurely pulled out of Iraq and Afghanistan, the fight was turned over to Special Operations Command. We can’t help but wonder if recent controversies are partially due to the fact that these elite troops bear most of the burden of the fight against radical Islamic jihadists, making multiple deployments.

The fact is, talking with the Taliban after they harbored Osama bin Laden and the al-Qaida leadership is not a good look. Then again, neither is sending American troops to fight and die when we have no clear plan for victory — much less the will to carry it out. The Taliban’s recent actions, though, show that the latter is the lesser of the two evils — and thankfully, President Trump seems to be acting accordingly.   ~The Patriot Post

https://patriotpost.us/articles/65364?mailing_id=4521&utm_mediu...  

Views: 5

Comment

You need to be a member of Tea Party Command Center to add comments!

Join Tea Party Command Center

LIGHTER SIDE

 

Political Cartoons by Tom Stiglich

Political Cartoons by Michael RamirezPolitical Cartoons by Bob Gorrell

ALERT ALERT

YIKES!!! Chelsea Clinton Emphatically States A Person With A Beard And A Penis Can ‘Absolutely’ Identify As A Woman

  • The one issue Hillary and Chelsea don’t appear to agree on entirely is transgender self-identification
  • In an interview with The Sunday Times, journalist Decca Aitkenhead asked the Clintons about transgender self-identification
  • Chelsea Clinton replied ‘yes’ emphatically when asked if someone with a beard and penis can ever be a woman
  • ‘It’s going to take a lot more time and effort to understand what it means to be defining yourself differently,’ Hillary said
  • Aitkenhead said Hillary became ‘uneasy’ when the question was asked while Chelsea shot a ‘furious stare’ at the journalist as her mother answered
  • Hillary added: ‘It’s a very big generational discussion, because this is not something I grew up with or ever saw’

(Daily Mail) – It may appear Hillary and Chelsea Clinton always see eye-to-eye, but in a recent interview one topic cracked the facade of the like-minded mother-daughter power duo.

The one issue Hillary and Chelsea don’t appear to agree on entirely is transgender self-identification.

In an interview with The Sunday Times, journalist Decca Aitkenhead asked the Clintons if someone with a beard and a penis can ever be a woman, to which Chelsea replied emphatically, ‘Yes.’

However, as Aitkenhead describes it, Hillary looked ‘uneasy’, and blamed generational gaps for being less accepting.

‘Errr. I’m just learning about this,’ Hillary responded. ‘It’s a very big generational discussion, because this is not something I grew up with or ever saw. It’s going to take a lot more time and effort to understand what it means to be defining yourself differently.’

The Clintons sat sown with Aitkenhead to promote the book they co-authored, The Book of Gutsy Women: Favorite Stories of Courage and Resilience.

The book features Danica Roem, the first trans woman elected to a U.S. state legislature.

According Aitkenhead’s account, she tells Hillary during the interview that many British feminists of Hillary’s generation have a problem with the idea that a ‘lesbian who doesn’t want to sleep with someone who has a penis is transphobic.’

Hillary nods in agreement, while Chelsea ‘stiffens and stares at me’, according to Aitkenhead.

The journalist then adds that many women of Hillary’s generation are uncomfortable with biological males sharing women’s bathrooms.

‘I would say that, absolutely,’ Hillary nods firmly. ‘Absolutely. Yes.’

That’s when Chelsea begins shooting a ‘furious stare’ at Aitkenhead, who points it out to her.

‘I’m a terrible actor’, Chelsea laughs.

Chelsea then says she is thrilled with the National Health Service’s decision to assign patients to single-sex wards according to the gender they identify as, instead of their biological make up.

‘How can you treat someone if you don’t recognize who they feel and know in their core they are?’ Chelsea says.

‘And I strongly support children being able to play on the sports teams that match their own gender identity,’ she adds. ‘I think we need to be doing everything we can to support kids in being whoever they know themselves to be and discovering who they are.’

At this point Hillary looks conflicted.

‘I think you’ve got to be sensitive to how difficult this is,’ Hillary says. ‘There are women who’d say [to a trans woman], ”You know what, you’ve never had the kind of life experiences that I’ve had. So I respect who you are, but don’t tell me you’re the same as me.” I hear that conversation all the time.’

Despite the clear tension in the room, the pair say they don’t argue about this topic.

But according to Aitkenhead, ‘I get the impression they don’t like to present anything less than a united front to the world.’

BONUS VIDEO

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service