Wednesday AM ~ thefrontpagecover

[Rudy Tirre]

TheFrontPageCover

~ Featuring ~  

Free Everything For Everyone

Tom McLaughlin

No, The Trump Administration 

Is Not Torturing Migrants

By John Daniel Davidson

{ thefederalist.com } ~ Perusing recent coverage of the border crisis, a casual reader might conclude the federal government is keeping migrant children in cages, torturing their parents, and operating World War II-style concentration camps... for Central Americans apprehended along the southwest border. Over the weekend, The New York Times ran an op-ed denouncing “mass atrocity” along the border and calling for doxxing Border Patrol agents. The author, a human rights lawyer, concedes that the Trump administration’s treatment of migrants doesn’t rise to the level of the killing fields of Cambodia or the genocide of Rwanda, but nevertheless it “appears to be the case” that “harsh conditions have been intentionally inflicted on children,” and that “the individuals running detention centers are arguably directly responsible for torture.” Then on Monday during a trip to a U.S. Customs and Border Protection facility on Monday, Rep. commie-Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez told reporters she “was not safe from the officers,” and that migrants there were forced to drink out of toilets and subjected to “psychological torture.” On Twitter, she wrote, “This has been horrifying so far. It is hard to understate the enormity of the problem. We’re talking systemic cruelty w/a dehumanizing culture that treats them like animals.” Sounds pretty bad, if true. But is it true? Is the Trump administration perpetuating a “mass atrocity” on the border and threatening members of Congress who ask too many questions? More specifically, are children still being separated from their parents? Are these “detention camps” we hear about creations of the Trump administration and its zero tolerance policy? In a word, no. Family separation—an admittedly vile policy—ended a year ago. The CBP detention centers are not operating any differently today than they were during the scumbag/liar-nObama administration, with the exception that today they are overcrowded and undermanned,  so there are problems with sanitation and conditions at some of the facilities. But the Central Americans apprehended by Border Patrol are not being held against their will, nor are children being kept in cages. Indeed, the entire statutory regime under which the Trump administration is dealing with the border crisis is no different than it was under scumbag/liar-nObama, because Congress has not changed any laws regulating the agencies in charge—despite the manifest reasons why it should. This is just one facet of a crisis that is now well out of control. The Trump administration didn’t cause it, and no policy or authority currently at its disposal will be able to end it. If there is blame to be apportioned for this mess, let’s lay it where it belongs: on lawmakers who refused for years, and still refuse, to reform our immigration laws and secure our border...  

https://thefederalist.com/2019/07/02/no-trump-administration-not-torturing-migrants/?utm_source=The+Federalist+List&utm_campaign=29740a8efe-RSS_The_Federalist_Daily_Updates_w_Transom&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_cfcb868ceb-29740a8efe-83771801  

.

Democrats Circling the Electoral Drain

By Brian C. Joondeph

{ americanthinker.com } ~ Democrats have convinced themselves that they represent the sentiments of a majority of Americans. Watching the recent Democrat presidential debates, one cannot help but conclude the opposite... Rather than looking beyond their liberal coastal enclaves to the fruited plain filled with deplorables and bitter clingers, Democrats simply look in the mirror of CNN or the Washington Post to see complete agreement, believing that all of America is on board with their wrecking ball agenda. The debates featured the 20 best candidates the Democrats could field to challenge the success and charisma of President Trump. Assuming a fifty-fifty political split in America, and the age requirement for the presidency, there should be 50-75 million potential Democrats to step up and challenge Trump. Yet these 20 candidates are the best out there? We have nonagenarians who have been in government for decades with no accomplishments to their names other than getting elected. Most of the candidates are so far to the political left that they should be running as socialists, or better yet, communists. The only thing separating the candidates are their looks and personalities. They all sing the same tune. Their favored constituencies are not Americans, but instead anyone outside America’s borders, invited into America to live at the expense of American taxpayers. socialist-Robert O’Rourke is even campaigning in Mexico, to be president, not of Mexico, but of the United States. Democrats want to get rid of private health care insurance for Americans and instead provide free government health care to illegal immigrants. Non-Americans go to the front of the line while Americans can’t even join the line. One candidate couldn’t even be bothered with policy specifics, instead channeling the Beatles “All you need is love” to solve the world’s problems. What do those outside the beltway think? Are they on board with America going the way of California, as a detour to the ultimate destination of Cuba or Venezuela?...

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/07/democrats_circling_the_electoral_drain.html  

.

Germany: Some Hate Speech 

'More Equal than Others'

By Judith Bergman

{ gatestoneinstitute.org } ~ In June, the "Al Quds Day" march took place in Berlin. Al Quds Day, in the words of the late historian Robert S. Wistrich, is "The holiday proclaimed by Khomeini in 1979... to call for Israel's annihilation" which "has since been celebrated worldwide..." In Germany, Al Quds Day marches have been taking place in the country's capital since the 1980s, first in Bonn and since 1996 in Berlin. On Al Quds Day in December 2000, more than 2,000 demonstrators in the  Kurfürstendamm -- a central boulevard in Berlin -- called for "the liberation of Palestine and the holy city of Jerusalem". In November 2002, only one year after 9/11, the march  featured slogans such as "Death to Israel" and "Death to the USA". At the march in 2016, the slogans were, among others, "Death to Israel", "Zionists kill children", and so on. Despite nearly four decades of such rhetoric -- the kind that is arguably capable -- according to paragraph 130 of Germany's Criminal Code, which prohibits hate speech -- "of disturbing the public peace" by inciting "hatred against a national, racial, religious group or a group defined by their ethnic origins", German authorities have continually refused to ban the Al Quds Day march. The argument is, reportedly, that the Administrative Court would overrule such a ban. "A constitutional state must act in accordance with the rule of law," said the spokesperson for the interior administration of the city of Berlin, Martin Pallgen. "Freedom of assembly and expression also applies to those who reject the rule of law". Instead, German authorities have prohibited marchers from being overtly anti-Semitic and inciting hatred against Jews. The exercise is a bit like telling a neo-Nazi march please to cover up the swastikas to look more presentable. It has not helped. In 2016, police issued specific instructions for the march's participants, banning them from expressing anti-Semitic views or inciting violence against Jews. That restriction, according to Benjamin Steinitz, the director of the Berlin-based Department for Research and Information on anti-Semitism (RIAS), curbed the undisguised hate speech somewhat, but led to the use of "coded messages", frequently in Arabic or Farsi, which most German police do not speak. "So," said Steinitz in 2017, "the police regulations have had some effect, but since the goal of this demonstration is the dismantling of the State of Israel, the anti-Semitic content is always there." Indeed, according to Der Tagesspiegel, despite the specific police instructions of previous years, in the June 2018 march, the police had to issue the following instructions to the participants: "It is forbidden to burn dolls. There must be no open calls for kidnapping or murder. The participants should not chant, 'Zionists into the gas' or 'Jew, Jew, cowardly pig, come out and fight alone'"... How did these people of the world become so hateful?   https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/14484/germany-hate-speech-al-quds  

.

Exiting Afghanistan

By Sharyl Attkisson

{ sharylattkisson.com } ~ Refugees continue to flee Afghanistan more than 17 years after the U.S. began pouring billions of U.S. taxpayer money into the Muslim country to help... Where has all the money gone? We asked the man tracking it on behalf of all of us: John Sopko, the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction. We begin with Afghanistan: our longest war in U.S. history. President Trump recently ordered thousands of US troops to be pulled back from Afghanistan and said he’s thinking about withdrawing entirely. The Afghan War has claimed the lives of thousands of US soldiers and wasted billions of our tax dollars. Our newest assessment comes from John Sopko, the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction.  When U.S. Inspector General John Sopko is on site in Afghanistan it’s not for sightseeing. Sopko: But the contract said this should be tile and the walls should be tile and there should be working stoves. Were there any working stoves? Afghan official: Ever since we inspected, we never found one. On this day, he’s inspecting yet another building our tax dollars paid for. Sopko: Was this supposed to be air conditioned?  Afghan official: Yes, sir. …And wondering where all the money went. Sopko: See Lieutenant, when we built this building there was supposed to be tile up the walls, there was supposed to be working stoves. 17 years long into America’s War in Afghanistan— one thing is clear: there’s more frustration than progress...

https://sharylattkisson.com/2019/07/exiting-afghanistan/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+SharylAttkisson+%28Sharyl+Attkisson%29  

.

China's New Silk Road Will Flop

By Peter Skurkiss

{ americanthinker.com } ~ The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is China's two-prong attempt to construct a new Silk Road. The first prong is the overland Silk Road Economic Belt. The other is the Maritime Silk Road... Both are being undertaken simultaneously and are said to one of the most ambitious infrastructure projects ever attempted by man. Here is a map showing the grand scope of the project. The BRI is intended to be a vast network of railways, seaports, gas and oil pipelines, and highways built by Chinese companies and labor. China also wants construct up to fifty special economic zones along its Silk Path modeled after its own Shenzhen Special Economic Zone. Over a trillion dollars is expected to spent on these projects by 2027. So far, sixty countries have signed up for the BRI or have expressed an interest in joining it. Most countries involved with the BRI are developing ones. They are looking for Chinese financing loans for infrastructure in the hopes of spurring their lagging economies. But China isn't just bottom fishing. It has carefully been targeting countries in South and Central Europe. In March of this year, Italy became the first developed country and G-7 member to join the BRI. This makes Italy the fourteenth European Union member state to ink an agreement with the Beijing. The BRI is sold as a win-win economic plan. Critics, however, see it more a means for China to enhance its political clout, strengthen its military position, and provide markets upon which to dump its excess manufacturing capacity. Through the BRI, China hopes for nothing less than to remake the geopolitical balance of power and boldly assert itself throughout the world. One has to wonder if the countries in the BRI have thought through the ramifications of what they're getting into. The most talked about concern is the 'debt trap.' Basically that's where China loans the money for infrastructure project, but the country on the receiving end cannot service the heavy debt. Then China either takes some real assets from the country or is granted diplomatic and/or military concessions in return. This is neo-colonialism with an Oriental spin. One example is when Beijing assumed control of Kenya's largest port over unpaid loans. There's also another matter. Viewing China without rose-colored glasses, one sees that it's not merely an amoral country but an immoral one with no respect for human rights. Apart from things like China's one-child policy, enforced at times by forced abortions, here are four other examples to prove the point...

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/07/chinas_new_silk_road_will_flop.html  

.

.

Free Everything For Everyone

Tom McLaughlin

 

{ tommclaughlin.blogspot.com } ~ What can 2020 Democrats say to the millions of Americans who have scrimped and sacrificed for a decade or more to pay off student loans? Do Democrat presidential candidates give them any thought at all when proposing to erase a trillion-and-a-half dollars of student debt that others owe? Will there be a reparations program for those who worked like slaves to pay off their loans? Or, must we pay the debts others incurred as well? Where is the justice in that?  

My choice of where to attend college was based on what I could afford and Massachusetts state colleges and universities were within my reach. Others at my small, Catholic high school went on to expensive, private colleges because their parents could afford to pay, or because they took out loans. Taxpayers in Massachusetts subsidized the universities from which I graduated and I appreciate that, but I paid taxes too because I’ve worked since I was sixteen, including while I was in high school and college. I worked full-time during two years of undergrad and another two years of grad school.  

Working is what I was doing while many of my peers were smoking weed and drinking beer in dorms and frat houses. Never did I take loans or grants from government, and I didn’t ask my parents for money either, knowing I was one of eight children. I paid my own way, but when my wife went back to school later in life she took out some loans because we had four children, some of whom were also going to college. We paid those loans off within a few years and celebrated the last installment. 

Not only would some 2020 Democrats forgive student loans, but they’d also make college free as well. Taxpayers would fund students who major in women’s studies, gender studies, and queer studies, and other majors of questionable academic value even though there are few, if any, jobs for which those “studies” prepare them. Democrat candidates are promising all kinds of free stuff — and not just for Americans either. During last Thursday’s televised debate, a moderator asked how many of them supported free healthcare for illegal aliens and every hand went up. Two weeks ago I wrote about hundreds of illegal aliens from Africa who walked across the Rio Grande and instantly became legal by telling border guards they were seeking asylum. From Texas, they were put on buses to Portland, Maine.  

The Democrats who have retaken control of Maine government are working hard to renew state welfare subsidies for the City of Portland when that city gives welfare to former illegal aliens — now asylees. California recently authorized free healthcare to illegal aliens. Most of the Democrat presidential candidates promise “Medicare For All” if they’re elected. What they don’t tell us is that hospitals and other health care providers would go out of business if they had to accept only Medicare rates for their services.

When my primary care physician (PCP) was fired from Bridgton Hospital for refusing to take on the huge caseload new management tried to impose on him, I had to search for a new PCP. My wife’s PCP had left Bridgton Hospital earlier and joined Intermed in Portland, but that practice wasn’t taking on any more Medicare patients — which is what I had become when I turned sixty-six. I understood why; they were losing money on Medicare patients. Fortunately for me, however, my wife’s PCP agreed to take me on anyway.  

My point here is that private health insurance payments far exceed low Medicare rates, but even with those de facto subsidies, Medicare is still projected to go broke. Still, Democrat presidential candidates are declaring they would abolish private health insurance if elected — which would, of course, hasten Medicare’s bankruptcy. About 150 million Americans pay for private health insurance policies.  

Here’s hoping I’m not wrong in my belief that voters in 2020 will realize we cannot afford what Democrats are proposing. Heck, we can’t even afford what we’re doing now with the national debt increasing at almost a trillion dollars a year. In 2019 our $22 trillion debt eclipsed our gross domestic product (GDP) and shows no sign of slowing down. The two biggest drivers of annual budget deficits are Social Security and Medicare and politicians of both stripes lack sufficient courage to tackle those “third-rail” issues.  

I voted for Donald Trump in 2016 and will likely vote for him again in 2020 if present trends continue. However, he’s not doing much about deficit spending. He has increased economic growth with tax cuts and reduced regulation. Federal revenue is up as a result, but not enough to balance the budget. Unfortunately, the best I can say about Trump and the deficit is that the Democrats are likely to be worse than he has been.    

 

https://tommclaughlin.blogspot.com/2019/07/free-everything-for-everyone.html