Have nothing to do with the [evil] things that people do, things that belong to the darkness. Instead, bring them out to the light... [For] when all things are brought out into the light, then their true nature is clearly revealed...

-Ephesians 5:11-13

Tag Archives: elections

Venezuela’s Maduro’s Election Victory Likely to be Short-lived

This article was published by the McAlvany Intelligence Advisor on Wednesday, October 18, 2017:

Venezuela’s Marxist dictator Nicolas Maduro celebrated the phony, fraudulent election on Sunday as if it were real and meant something:

We have won 75 percent of the country’s governorships … Chavismo [the socialist policies that have driven once-prosperous Venezuela into the ground] is alive [and] triumphant.

He rejoiced in the election’s supposed slap against foreign devils, including the United States: “This victory is a moral and political feat of the Venezuelan people who have learned to resist the onslaughts of the oligarchy’s war and who have said ‘no to sanctions,’ ‘no to interventionism.’’’

He didn’t tell his supporters that his victory is likely to be very short-lived.

That his election was clearly manipulated was spelled out by U.S. State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert:

Keep Reading…

U.S. Condemns Venezuela’s Election

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Tuesday, October 17, 2017:

On Monday, U.S. State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert stated the U.S. government’s official position on Venezuela’s Sunday elections: “We condemn the lack of free and fair elections yesterday in Venezuela. The voice of the Venezuelan people was not heard.” She added that there had been “last minute changes to polling station locations without public notice, manipulation of ballot layouts, and limited availability of voting machines in opposition neighborhoods.” In addition, independent credible outside monitors of the elections were prohibited from overseeing the election process by Marxist dictator Nicolás Maduro’s (shown) regime.

Independent polls showed that opposition candidates in the 23 state mayoral elections should have crushed the regime’s candidates, but instead

Keep Reading…

Gunmakers’ Stock Prices Continue to Rise Following Las Vegas Massacre

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Tuesday, October 3, 2017:

Dianne Feinstein, member of the United States ...

Dianne Feinstein

After the Las Vegas massacre on Sunday night, the stock prices of gunmakers rose two to three percent on Monday. Following the noisy threats of more gun controls by anti-gun politicians, those stocks have continued to rise on Tuesday. Since the close of business last Friday, for example, the stock price of Sturm Ruger & Co. has jumped by 6.3 percent, while American Outdoor Brands Corp. (which owns Smith & Wesson) is trading seven-percent higher. The stock price of Vista Outdoor Inc., the conglomerate with ownership of ammunition makers American Eagle, Blazer, and Federal Premium, as well as gunmakers Savage Arms and Stevens Arms, is trading 3.5 percent ahead of Friday’s closing price.

The simple explanation for this was expressed by Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics:

Keep Reading…

If Socialism Is the Problem in Venezuela, More Sanctions Are Not the Solution

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Wednesday, September 20, 2017:

Overshadowed by his remarks concerning North Korea’s “Rocket Man” and the “worst ever” Iranian nuclear deal, President Donald Trump’s views on Venezuela in his speech at the United Nations on Tuesday were soft-pedalled by the mainstream media.

But they were spot on:

The problem in Venezuela is not that socialism has been poorly implemented but that socialism has been faithfully implemented. From the Soviet Union to Cuba, Venezuela — wherever socialism or communism has been adopted, it has delivered anguish, devastation and failure.

 

Those who preach the tenets of these discredited ideologies only contribute to the continued suffering of the people who live under these cruel systems

Trump then added, without being explicit:

Keep Reading…

Democrats’ New Slogan Channels Papa John’s Pizza

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Tuesday, July 24, 2017:

English: Charles Schumer, United States Senato...

Charles Schumer

The Democrat Party’s new slogan, rolled out on Monday by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (shown, D-N.Y.) in the New York Times, sounds an awful lot like the slogan of Papa John’s Pizza (“Better Ingredients, Better Pizza, Papa John’s.”) The new official slogan of the party, according to Schumer, is “A Better Deal: Better Jobs, Better Wages, Better Future.”

A closer look reveals old, tired, stale, and tasteless ideas of a party that not only has lost its way, but has lost a majority of Americans along the way. A recent Washington Post/ABC News poll revealed that

Keep Reading…

3,500 Colorado Voters Cancel Their Registrations in Protest

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Monday, July 17, 2017:

Von Spakovsky

Hans von Spakovsky

When Colorado voters learned that their state is responding to President Trump’s Advisory Commission on Election Integrity’s request for voter information, nearly 3,500 of them deregistered. The Hill made it political, claiming that they “have withdrawn their registrations … citing distrust of the [commission].” The news outlet also allowed that many didn’t know just how much of their personal information was already open to the public and, for whatever reason, decided to exercise their right to privacy.

The request from the commission stated simply that each state, and the District of Columbia,

provide all publicly-available voter roll data including, if publicly available under the laws of your state, the full first and last names of all registrants, middle names or initials if available, addresses, dates of birth, political party (if recorded in your state), last four digits of Social Security number if available, [and] voter history from 2006 onward.

This was enough to trigger pushback and in some cases outrage at the obviously political overtones and implications of the request, in light of President Trump’s claim of voter fraud in the last election, and his selection of Hans von Spakovsky (shown) to the commission. Spakovsky’s initial appointment to the Federal Election Commission (FEC) by President George W. Bush back in 2005 was contested by Democrats and his nomination was withdrawn.

Some Democrats are claiming a witch hunt is taking place, and an effort to keep illegals from voting. As Alex Padilla, the Democrat activist who is California’s secretary of state, noted:

They’re clearly reached their conclusions already and have set up a commission to try to justify voter suppression measures being made nationally. It’s pretty shocking, the data request of a lot of personal information. I can’t even begin to entertain responding to this commission….

If you want to do [Russian President] Vladimir Putin a favor, put all of this personal voter information in one place, online, on the Internet.

Another Democrat who is also upset is Kentucky’s Secretary of State Alison Grimes, also echoed the “voter suppression” scheme of Padilla:

We don’t want to be a part of an attempt to nationalize voter suppression efforts across the state. Americans didn’t want, unanimously, a national gun registry, and they don’t want a national voter registry.

She added that the commission was “formulated on a sham premise” and violates states’ rights to run their own elections.

To hear von Spakovsky tell it, it’s all about the 2012 study done by the Pew Center on the States: “The whole point of this commission is to research and look at all of these issues, the issues the Pew study raised.” That study claimed that America’s voter registration system is “inaccurate, costly, and inefficient.” It also said the system “reflects its 19th century origins [which] has not kept pace with advancing technology and a mobile society.”

Its conclusions included these:

Approximately 24 million — one of every eight — voter registrations in the United States are no longer valid or are significantly inaccurate;

More than 1.8 million deceased individuals are listed as voters; and

Approximately 2.75 million people have registrations in more than one state.

Although the author of the study said it didn’t indicate voter fraud, “these findings underscore the need for states to improve accuracy, cost-effectiveness, and efficiency.”

The study, however, provided too great a temptation for the federal government to get involved — innocently involved, of course. Marc Lotter, Vice President Mike Pence’s press secretary, claimed that the request was innocuous, and von Spakovsky claimed that opposition to the commission’s request was “bizarre” because the request only asks for information that is already publicly available. But Lotter let slip that the information would be “housed through a federally secure system”, adding that “this is nothing unusual.” (Emphasis added.)

This is a variation on the theme: “Trust us; we know what we’re doing. Go back to sleep.”

Instead of having the executive branch of the government get involved with vote-fraud investigating, which is unconstitutional, David Becker, a Pew director, has already organized a joint pilot project involving eight states to try to make their voter lists more accurate. Said Becker: “What this system will do is it will take in data from the states who choose to participate … and it will be matched … [with] national change of address data from the Postal Service.”

Note the words “who choose to participate” as opposed to the innocuous “request” from Trump’s commission that comes with the unspoken threat of force. According to von Spakovsky, federal statutes already give the public the right to inspect publicly available voter registration records, adding that the attorney general can demand copies of records related to federal elections, if it comes to that.

How much better to keep the federales out of the matter altogether, and let Becker’s pilot program accomplish the same thing.

Perhaps Republican Secretary of State Delbert Hosemann from Mississippi has the right idea. In response to the commission’s “request”, he replied:

They can go jump in the Gulf of Mexico, and Mississippi is a great state to launch from.

Venezuela Coming Undone: Maduro Wants New Constitution

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Tuesday, May 9, 2017: 

Another crack opened in the wall supporting Marxist dictator Nicolas Maduro’s administration: On Monday Major General Miguel Rodriguez Torres, who ran Maduro’s intelligence service until he was fired in 2014, said his country is moving toward civil war: “We’re seeing much larger masses protesting across all major cities, including the working-class neighborhoods. The government is losing control.” He added:

Keep Reading…

Puerto Rico Headed to Bankruptcy Court, Likely Costing Investors Billions

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Wednesday, May 3, 2017: 

English: Map of Peuto Rico, with inset showing...

The federal fiscal oversight board created by Congress last June to fix Puerto Rico gave up on Monday, putting the island country into the hands of a federal bankruptcy judge.

The board, created last June, was designed to help newly elected Governor Ricardo Rossello come to terms with mutual funds and hedge fund owners that own the bulk of the island’s $73 billion debt. Rossello’s first effort, which would have applied a one-third financial “haircut” to them was turned down by the board, which called it too generous.

Rossello’s second effort would have applied a 50-percent haircut, but Franklin Advisers and Oppenheimer Fund, the two largest entities holding the island’s debt, pushed back.

Keep Reading…

ObamaCare is Imploding All by Itself

This article was published by The McAlvany Intelligence Advisor on Monday, March 27, 2017:

The Physician

The best person to ask about ObamaCare is not the patient, but the doctor. He’s the one carrying the burden: trying to help his patients with one hand while trying to manage the requirements of the state with the other. One who knows is Jeffery Barke, M.D., a 54-year-old family practice physician in Newport Beach, California. He not only predicted the collapse of ObamaCare (ACA) but wrote that it was planned that way:

As ObamaCare’s troubles mount, I’ve heard my patients and my peers in healthcare ask: How could the law’s authors not have seen this coming?

 

For my part, I think a different question needs to be asked: What if they did? What if ObamaCare was purposely designed to fail?

 

Every day, it seems like there are a dozen new headlines about the crisis facing ObamaCare. Premiums are rising faster than ever. Meanwhile, health insurance companies are abandoning the law’s exchanges left and right, unable to compete in the top-down, regulation-driven environment created by the law. Less than three years into its implementation, the law has never looked so precarious.

He saw firsthand that ObamaCare never did what it was supposed to do:

Keep Reading…

Trump Has Great Opportunity to Influence U.S. Jurisprudence

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Wednesday, February 15, 2017:

English: The United States Supreme Court, the ...

The United States Supreme Court, the highest court in the United States, in 2010.

In his acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention after becoming the Republican nominee for president, then-candidate Donald Trump reiterated the importance of the replacement of deceased Supreme Court Judge Antonin Scalia, stating, “The replacement of our beloved Justice Scalia will be a person of similar views, principles and judicial philosophies. Very important. This will be one of the most important issues decided by this election.”

Following Trump’s election victory in November, liberals voiced shock and consternation, especially in light of the Republican Party maintaining its majority in the branch of the legislature tasked with confirming Scalia’s replacement — the Senate. Nina Totenberg of National Public Radio declared that

Keep Reading…

Trump Names Son-in-law as Advisor; Media Raises Nepotism Issues

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Tuesday, January 10, 2017: 

Jared Kushner of the New York Observer.

Jared Kushner

President-elect Donald Trump named his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, as a senior advisor in his administration on Monday:

Jared has been a tremendous asset and trusted advisor throughout the campaign and transition and I am proud to have him in a key leadership role in my administration.

 

He has been incredibly successful in both business and politics. He will be an invaluable member of my own team as I set and execute an ambitious agenda, putting the American people first.

The anti-Trump media jumped at the chance to question Trump’s decision, claiming that it violated anti-nepotism rules put in place after President John F. Kennedy named his brother, Robert Kennedy, as attorney general.

Jamie Gorelick, an attorney advising Trump and Kushner on the matter, said there’s little to be concerned about:

Keep Reading…

Chuck Schumer Seeks “Common Ground” With Trump

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Monday, November 21, 2016:  

Senator Charles Schumer

Senator Charles Schumer

During a press interview at his office on Friday, New York Democratic Senator Charles Schumer said that he had spoken two or three times with President-elect Donald Trump: “He’s called. He’s friendly. The word is that he thinks he can work with me, but we’ll see. The jury’s [still] out.”

Schumer, just reelected for his fourth term as senator, will become the Senate minority leader in the 115th Congress as Harry Reid, the present Senate minority leader, is retiring. The Wall Street Journal characterized the interview as an effort by Schumer to seek “common ground” with Trump. Other members of the press weren’t so charitable.

Schumer was feisty,

Keep Reading…

Three Election Models Pick Trump to Win on Tuesday

English: Donald Trump at a press conference an...

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Monday, November 7, 2016:  

Poll-watching junkies are having a field day. There is one poll or another publishing its results on an almost hourly basis. As this is being written on noon Sunday, for instance, Investors Business Daily (IBD), which touts its survey as “the most accurate poll in recent presidential elections,” has Donald Trump ahead of Hillary Clinton by one point. The USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times’ “Daybreak” poll shows Trump ahead of Clinton by five points.

Nate Silver, in his FiveThirtyEight 2016 Election Forecast, has Clinton’s chance of winning at 64.7 percent versus Trump’s 35.3 percent. Silver predicts Clinton will win 48.4 percent of the popular vote (versus Trump’s 45.5 percent, which will give her 291 Electoral College votes to Trump’s 246.

In its running summary of other polls, Real Clear Politics shows Clinton up by 1.8 percent over Trump in the popular vote, while in the Electoral College it’s Clinton with 216 and Trump with 164, leaving 158 votes as “toss ups.”

There are at least two other prognosticators who don’t rely on polls at all, and they are predicting Trump will win on Tuesday. The first was explained by Tyler Durden at ZeroHedge back in January when he said that the stock market would predict November’s winner:

This relationship occurs because the stock market reflects the economic outlook in the weeks leading up to the election. A rising stock market indicates an improving economy, which means rising confidence and increases the chances of the incumbent party’s re-election.

 

Therefore, your time might be better spent from August through October watching the stock market rather than the debates if you want to know who will be President for the next four years.

Right on cue the stock market has declined nine days in a row (through last Friday), the first time that has happened since 1980. But more importantly is how it has behaved since Monday, August 1. The S&P 500 Index has declined by 4.5 percent which, according to Durden, translates into an 86 percent chance of Trump’s winning on Tuesday.

And then there’s the professor from Stony Brook University, Helmut Norpoth, and his “Primary Model”. Writes Norpoth on his website:

Winning early primaries is a major key for electoral victory in November. Trump won the Republican primaries in both New Hampshire and South Carolina, while Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders split the Democratic primaries in those states….

 

For the record the Primary Model … has correctly predicted the winner of the popular vote in all five presidential elections since it was introduced in 1996….

 

For elections from 1912 to 2012 the Primary Model [has retroactively picked] the winner … every time except in 1960.

 

Accordingly, Norpoth gives Trump an 87 percent chance of winning Tuesday’s election.

There’s also his “pendulum” model:

What favors the GOP in 2016 as well … is the cycle of presidential elections. After two terms of Democrat Barack Obama in the White House the electoral pendulum is poised to swing to the GOP this year….

 

Donald Trump is predicted to defeat Hillary Clinton by 52.5 percent to 47.5 percent.

In the “for what it’s worth” category, as this is being written, futures for Monday’s open are also turning negative. If the market closes down again on Monday, the 10th day in a row, it will only add validity to both Durden’s and Norpoth’s prediction: Trump will win on Tuesday.

Also, Professor Norpoth has such confidence in his models that he is using his own money to bet on Trump to win.

The S&P 500 is Picking Trump to Win

This article was published by The McAlvany Intelligence Advisor on Monday, November 7, 2016:

Back in January, Tyler Durden (a pseudonym), writing at ZeroHedge, said one would be far better off watching the markets than the debates if one wanted to know who the next president would be:

This relationship occurs because the stock market reflects the economic outlook in the weeks leading up to the election. A rising stock market indicates an improving economy, which means rising confidence and increases the chances of the incumbent party’s re-election.

 

Therefore, your time might be better spent from August through October watching the stock market rather than the debates if you want to know who will be President for the next four years.

Right on cue, the stock market has declined nine days in a row (through last Friday), the first time that has happened since 1980. But more importantly

Keep Reading…

Dutch Pol Geert Wilders Refuses to Attend His Trial; Says It’s “Political”

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Monday, October 31, 2016:

Geert Wilders, the Dutch politician best known for his criticism of Islam, won’t attend his own trial that begins Monday. He asserted,

Monday, the trial against freedom of speech begins … against a politician who says what the politically correct elite does not want to hear.

 

This trial is a political trial, in which I refuse to cooperate.

The trial concerns two public utterances that he made back in 2014, including one where he spoke to political supporters at The Hague. He asked them if they wanted fewer Moroccans in the country, and they responded “Fewer! Fewer! Fewer!” Wilders responded, “Well, we’ll take care of it, then.”

Some 6,400 complaints were filed with local police, mostly from Moroccans living in the country. The court sorted through them and found 35 that were valid to bring charges of discrimination against Wilders.

Wilders was also charged in 2011 with criminally insulting Islam and inciting hatred as a result. Those charges stemmed from articles that he had penned and statements that he made calling for a ban on the Koran, warning against an “Islamic invasion” of his country and the coming “tsunami of Islamization.” He described Islam as fascist, Moroccan youths as instigators of violence, and compared the Koran to Hitler’s Mein Kampf.

He authored the script for a 2004 film entitled Fitna, a 17-minute-long argument that Islam encourages acts of terrorism, anti-semitism, violence against women, subjugation of infidels, and sanctions against homosexuals. Wilders explained his intentions, saying that the film (which is free on the Internet) was “a call to shake off the creeping tyranny of Islamisation.”

When he was acquitted of all charges in that trial, Wilders called it victory not only for himself but for freedom of speech.

The present trial is a variation on the same theme: Wilders is being charged with discrimination against a group, not a religion, which in the Netherlands is considered a hate crime. Frans Zonneveld, a spokesman for the prosecution, explained the difference:

Islam is an idea, a religion, [and] according to the public prosecution service, you have a lot of room to criticize ideas. But when it comes to population groups [Moroccans make up about two percent of the 17 million citizens in the Netherlands], it’s a whole different matter. His remarks touched the very being of this population group.

 

You cannot choose to be a part of a population group or not; it’s a group that’s decided by birth, so it’s a whole different matter.

Wilders responded: “It is a travesty that I have to stand trial because I spoke about fewer Moroccans [in the Netherlands]. It is my right and duty as a politician to speak about the problems in our country.”

In the Netherlands, Wilders does not have the guarantees provided Americans under the Bill of Rights to the Constitution, specifically those spelled out by the First Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”  Instead he is faced with a greater likelihood this time around of going to jail, or at least paying a fine or doing some community service, for his “crime.” However, his Freedom Party will face the Netherlands’ ruling party in elections in March. At present the race is too close to call. A conviction of Wilders in this case could work to his party’s advantage, as an increasing number of Dutch citizens are becoming aware of his warnings and potential threats to their culture.

Mainstream Media’s Increasingly Blatant Liberal Bias May Backfire in Elections

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Monday, September 19, 2016:  

FOX Business Network's Mix/Minus and IFB board

FOX Business Network’s Mix/Minus and IFB board

Just three days after Pew Research reported that nearly two-thirds of Americans think the news stories they read, hear, and watch are biased, along came Gallup with a similar conclusion.

Pew found that 63 percent of its respondents doubted the veracity and neutrality of the stories they get from the mainstream media, a full 10-percent decline just since 2007. Pew also reported that the mainstream media finds itself in increasing financial difficulty owing not only to increasing distrust by its readers but competition from Internet-based sources.

For instance, newspaper advertising dropped by

Keep Reading…

The Potomac Two-Step: How McCain Has Stayed in Office for 34 Years

This article was published by The McAlvany Intelligence Advisor on Wednesday, August 31, 2016:  

Cover of "Clear and Present Danger (Speci...

It was Tom Clancy who first brought the term “the old Potomac two-step” to the public’s attention in 1990 with the publication of Clear and Present Danger. The book was turned into a movie four years later. The relevant dialogue is:

The President: “You’ll take the blame. Cutter and Ritter will take some too, but it won’t amount to much, they’ll get a slap on the wrist. Then $20,000 an hour on the lecture circuit. The rest of the blame will fall on Greer. Oh yeah, you’ll take him down with you. You’ll destroy his reputation. But that’s as far as it will go. The old Potomac two-step, Jack.”

 

Jack Ryan: “I’m sorry, Mr. President, I don’t dance.”

John McCain, who began his political career in 1982 in Arizona after moving there following his retirement from the Navy, does dance. So well does he dance, in fact, that

Keep Reading…

Election Pollsters Have One More Thing to Worry About: New Gun Owners

This article was published by The McAlvany Intelligence Advisor on Wednesday, August 10, 2016: 

English: A sign in rural United States adverti...

The difference between pollsters like Rasmussen and prognosticators like Nate Silver of Five Thirty Eight is like the difference between lightning and a lightning bug. Polling is tricky enough. Prognosticating is a whole other matter.

Rasmussen (and its peers) must develop the questions, determine whom to ask, decide when to call (weekdays, weekends, dinner time, etc.), and then confirm that they’re talking to the right person. They have to take into account that sometimes people will give wrong answers, or hide behind their answers because they have opinions that aren’t mainstream. Once the poll is taken, they must determine just how variable – how reliable – the results really are. That explains part of the plus or minus calculation included in them.

Silver (and his peers) build models based on past experience. It’s vastly more complicated

Keep Reading…

Could Increase in Gun Ownership Impact the Election?

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Tuesday, August 9, 2016: 

Glock model 22 (.40 S&W) in the new olive drab...

Glock model 22 (.40 S&W) in the new olive drab frame (with magazine)

The latest study by John Lott’s Crime Prevention Research Center (CPRC) raised an interesting question: Could the enormous increase in gun ownership and the attendant increase in the issuance of concealed carry permits have an impact on the presidential election in November?

The increase has been astounding, according to Lott:

Keep Reading…

Why Voting for Donald Trump Is a Morally Good Choice

By Wayne Gruden

Some of my Christian friends tell me they can’t in good conscience vote for Donald Trump because, when faced with a choice between “the lesser of two evils,” the morally right thing is to choose neither one. They recommend voting for a third-party or write-in candidate.

As a professor who has taught Christian ethics for 39 years, I think their analysis is incorrect.

Keep Reading…

Many of the articles on Light from the Right first appeared on either The New American or the McAlvany Intelligence Advisor.