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

Category Archives: History

The Second Amendment Had a Very Good Day on Wednesday

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Saturday, November 6, 2021:  

The Supreme Court heard opening arguments on Wednesday in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen and, based on the questioning by a number of the justices, supporters of the Second Amendment are likely to claim a victory.

The question to be resolved is “Whether [New York] State’s denial of petitioners’ applications for concealed-carry licenses for self-defense violated the Second Amendment.”

Robert Nash and Brandon Koch brought the case after they were denied such licenses. The New York law reads that they must “demonstrate a special need for self-protection [which is] distinguishable from that of the general community or of persons engaged in the same profession.” The bureaucrats said they didn’t, and denied their applications.

This was despite the fact that Nash, for example, proved himself to be a person of exemplary character who had taken some gun-safety classes and had proved himself confident and capable in the handling of a firearm; and despite that fact that there had recently been a string of robberies in his neighborhood. The state officials denied their applications, ruling that there was no “special” proof that Nash and Koch were endangered more than any others in the general population.

When they sued, the lower court ruled that the denials were proper since the applicants “did not face unique or special danger to their lives.” On appeal to the Supreme Court, Nash and Koch declared that “The Second Amendment makes the right to carry arms for self-defense the rule, not the exception, and fundamental rights cannot be left to the whim of local government officials.”

The high court justices were tough on the defendants in the initial round of oral argument. Chief Justice John Roberts, probably the weakest link in the chain, was surprisingly supportive of the plaintiffs. He told the lawyers defending New York’s law, “The idea that you need a license to exercise the right [to bear arms], I think, is unusual in the context of the Bill of Rights.”

That should be heartening to those who have long claimed that “one doesn’t need permission to exercise a right.”

 

Justice Alito tripped up the defense over twisting history. Here’s the exchange:

Justice Alito: I’m going to give you an example, which is … troubling. I can see how it would slip through. I’m not accusing you personally of anything.

 

But, on page 23, you say that in founding-era America, legal reference guides advised local officials to “arrest all such persons as in your sight shall ride or go armed”….

 

So I looked at this manual, and what it actually says is “You shall arrest all such persons as in your sight shall ride or go armed offensively.”

 

And somehow that word “offensively” got dropped –

 

Ms. Underwood [defense attorney]: Well, our –

 

Alito: – from your brief.

 

Ms. Underwood: I will –

 

Alito: Do you think that’s an irrelevant word?

Alito went on to explain that by leaving out that word it changed the entire meaning, showing that that quote doesn’t support gun control at all.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh heard the state’s argument and told them, “That’s just not how we do constitutional rights, where we allow basic blanket discretion [to government bureaucrats] to grant or deny something.”

John Lott, president of the Crime Prevention Research Center, weighed in on the case in an op-ed published in Newsweek on Wednesday. He said that if you think Nash and Koch had it tough in New York, try getting a concealed-carry license “in California and six-other ‘may-issue’ states where officials can turn down requests for a carry permit for any reason, or for no reason at all.”

Lott pointed out that rarely are permits granted to ordinary citizens in those states but “when permit decisions rest solely with judges and bureaucrats, the few people who [do] get permits … often have special connections.… Those without connections, more often women and minorities, get the short end of the stick.”

In San Francisco, for example, Lott told of a woman with a court protective order who wasn’t able to get a permit, but the local sheriff’s personal lawyer did. In New Jersey, a man was denied a permit even though he was threatened and robbed at gunpoint in the past, and currently carries a lot of cash in his job servicing ATM machines.

Lott pointed out that “may carry” laws in those states “stop almost everyone [from getting a permit]. Only about 1 percent of adults in may-issue states have a permit to carry. In the other 42 states, 10.8 percent of adults have a concealed handgun permit.”

And those who do carry concealed are among the lowest risk individuals as they “are convicted of firearms-related violations at one-twelfth the rate at which police officers are convicted.”

Even Ian Millhiser, writing for the anti-gun Vox, said that “the NRA had a very good day in the Supreme Court” on Wednesday. After reviewing the oral arguments and the justices’ questions, he concluded that “the case is likely to end with the curtailment of states’ ability to regulate where people can carry guns.”

Tom Knighton, writing for BearingArms.com, said:

It was clear from the questioning that, while it’s unlikely we’ll see all rules restricting the carrying of a firearm overturned, we will probably see something like “shall-issue” becoming the law of the land….

 

More importantly … people in states like New Jersey and California are going to score wins … when we get the ruling on this next year, I expect they’ll be able to get a permit.

He added:

I also expect to see crime begin to drop as criminals start hearing about more and more people carrying firearms.

The war against guns will continue. As long as permission is still needed in some form or fashion to exercise the right to keep and bear arms, the Second Amendment will remain a second-class right.

Biden’s “Build Back Better” Agenda Is Dead, Say House Republicans

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Thursday, November 4, 2021: 

In an exclusive interview with Breitbart, three House Republicans, including the party’s chief deputy whip, Representative Drew Ferguson (R-Ga.), declared that Biden’s “Build Back Better” agenda following Tuesday’s debacle in Virginia is dead.

The day after the Democrats suffered stunning losses in Virginia and a near-death experience in deep-blue Democrat stronghold New Jersey, Ferguson said the results represent “a very strong pushback against government socialism.… I believe [Tuesday’s results] will eat away at [Democrats’] chances of passing the Build Back Better Act.… I think you saw the repudiation of their policies last night.”

The Biden agenda consists of two bills: one that has already passed the House, the so-called infrastructure bill costing $1.2 trillion; the other which remains in limbo even after being cut in half, the social-welfare monster estimated to cost $1.75 trillion.

Republicans are already licking their chops. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (D-Calif.) announced that more than a dozen Democrat-held seats are being added to those the party thinks are vulnerable, suggesting that Republicans might be able to flip as many as 60 House seats next November.

Pollsters agree. Sabato’s Crystal Ball at the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics moved three Senate seats currently held by Democrats (Arizona, Georgia, and Nevada) from “lean Democratic” to “toss-up,” while Dave Wasserman with the Cook Political Report tweeted that Tuesday’s election results portend both houses of Congress turning Republican “comfortably” next November.

Democrats are defending 14 Senate seats, but Republicans need only to keep those they have and add but one more to regain control of the upper house.

Tuesday’s results are likely to dampen Democrats’ appetite for more spending, in light of the Virginia election results. Exit polls there showed voters were primarily concerned about the economy, schools, and crime. Low on their list of concerns were those of the Democrat agenda, namely Critical Race Theory and COVID-related mandates.

 

Senator Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), who has already proven to be a stumbling block to the Biden agenda (along with Senator Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona), reiterated his concerns on Wednesday: “I’ve been saying this for many, many months: People have concerns. People are concerned.”

 

Voters are seeing through the fraud that the bills will “pay for themselves” without raising taxes or causing inflation. Added Manchin, “We’re talking about revamping the whole entire tax code. That’s mammoth. We’ve had no hearings, no open hearings. [Voters] are scared to death.”

In some Wednesday-morning quarterbacking of Tuesday’s Democrat disaster in Virginia, James Pindell, writing for the ultra-liberal Boston Globe, said “Democrats should absolutely be freaking out” over the results, adding that “the future is, in fact, pretty bleak for Democrats.”

He cited three reasons: 1) “Running against Trump may not work anymore.… Democrats are going to have to find another boogeyman [to run against]”; 2) “Democrats have no message”; and 3) “The results on Tuesday may embolden hold-out Senators from passing big pieces of legislation.”

The latest Harvard Caps/Harris Poll, taken a week before Tuesday’s election, should have warned Democrats about the debacle in advance. Fifty-eight percent of those polled were opposed to the big spending bills being pushed by the Democrats, and 56 percent of them said they wouldn’t vote for anyone who voted to pass them.

On virtually every other issue — from the health of the economy to jobs to terrorism to immigration to foreign affairs to COVID mandates to running the government to crime and Afghanistan — Biden’s approval ratings were consistently and significantly underwater. The poll confirmed what other polls are showing: Approval of the Democrat Party has fallen precipitously, from 55 percent to 38 percent, in just the last month.

And the poll showed that congressional approval, with Democrats in control, has likewise dropped off a cliff: from 54 percent approval in June to 31 percent approval currently.

Perhaps most troubling to Democrats is the answer to the question, “If the election were held today would you vote for a Democrat or a Republican for Congress?” Republicans beat Democrats 45 percent to 42 percent.

Democrat anxiety is also being fueled by what happened in 2009, when Democrats suffered defeats in both the Virginia and New Jersey gubernatorial races: Their party lost six Senate seats and 63 House seats in 2010.

Not only does the Biden “agenda” appear to be dead, but the Democrat Party could also suffer terminal political emasculation inflicted by voters next November.

Virginia Lieutenant Governor-elect Winsome Sears Enjoys Many “Firsts”

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Wednesday, November 3, 2021: 

Winsome Sears made history Tuesday night: In winning the election for Lieutenant Governor, she became the first black woman in Virginia’s history to win a statewide race.

But this wasn’t the first of her “firsts.” Born in Jamaica in 1964, she emigrated to the United States where, after obtaining degrees in English, economics, and organizational leadership, she ran a Salvation Army homeless shelter.

In November 2001, she became the first Jamaican female Republican, the first female veteran, and the first naturalized citizen to serve in Virginia’s House of Delegates.

She also, unintentionally, became the first political candidate in recent Virginia political history to run on a photo taken of her while she was at a shooting range. She was holding a semi-automatic rifle. Her campaign staff turned it into an effective political tool by adding the phrase, “Battle Tested Conservative. Semper Fi.”

When asked about the photo, Sears was surprised. After all, she said, “I’m a Marine. I know how to use a gun.” She added, “But let’s think about this: the Second Amendment tells us we have a right to do so. We have a right to own guns.” She added, “I won’t ever support a red flag law! The Second Amendment says ‘shall not be infringed!’”

In an interview with the Washington Times she explained, “They [guns] are for our protection, and the fastest gun-owning segment [of the population] are Black women.”

During her appearance on Fox & Friends on Tuesday night, she gave God the credit for her win, exclaiming that her victory was “a God thing.”

This fits well with newly elected Governor Glenn Youngkin, who also has strong faith. He met his wife, Suzanne, shortly before obtaining an MBA from Harvard Business School, and they were married shortly after his graduation. According to Youngkin,

She actually said: “You know, I really need to have our faith be in the middle of our marriage. I didn’t really fully appreciate the journey she was going to put me on.”

It’s entirely appropriate for the newly elected governor and lieutenant governor to give credit to God. The country’s first president, George Washington, was the first to proclaim Thanksgiving Day, in 1789, declaring:

Now therefore I do recommend and assign Thursday the 26th day of November next to be devoted by the People of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being, Who is the beneficent Author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be. That we may then all unite in rendering unto Him our sincere and humble thanks, for His kind care and protection of the People of this Country previous to their becoming a Nation, for the signal and manifold mercies, and the favorable interpositions of His providence, which we experienced in the course and conclusion of the late war, for the great degree of tranquility, union, and plenty, which we have since enjoyed for the peaceable and rational manner, in which we have been enabled to establish constitutions of government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national One now lately instituted for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed; and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge; and in general for all the great and various favors which He hath been pleased to confer upon us.

Founding Father Benjamin Rush (who signed the Declaration of Independence and founded Dickinson College) was even more explicit about the importance of a strong faith, especially among leaders:

Without religion there can be no virtue, and without virtue there can be no liberty, and liberty is the object and life of all republican governments.

It’s reassuring to know that Virginia will shortly be able to celebrate the inauguration of two individuals to lead the state whose faith allows them to declare His preeminence in their lives.

Alabama Latest State to File Lawsuit Against Biden Vaccine Mandates

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Wednesday, November 3, 2021: 

The lawsuit filed by Alabama Attorney General Steve Marshall on Tuesday is just the latest in an increasing number of efforts to restrain the federal government over its COVID vaccine mandates. Marshall said the mandates are “flagrantly unconstitutional” and represent “contemptible infringements on individual liberty, federalism, and the separation of powers.”

Nowhere among the few enumerated powers given to the federal government in Article I, Section Eight of the U.S. Constitution is found anything that gives the government the power to issue or enforce such mandates. The founders made sure that, if not enumerated, such powers are reserved “to the states respectively, or to the people.” (See 10th Amendment).

Marshall is ready to file another lawsuit if Biden issues a “private sector” mandate.

The flurry of recent efforts to restrain the federal government began on October 25 when Alabama Governor Kay Ivey signed an executive order demanding that her state’s agencies do not comply with the federal mandates. The language was clear:

Effective immediately, no agency, department, board, commission, or other entity within the executive branch of state government shall … seek to impose a penalty on any business or individual for noncompliance.

Ivey was defiant, writing:

The federal government’s outrageous overreach has simply given us no other option, but to begin taking action, which is why I am issuing this executive order to fight these egregious COVID-19 vaccine mandates.

 

Alabamians — and Americans alike — should and must have the choice to roll up their sleeves to get this shot and certainly not forced by government….

 

I am adamantly opposed to federal mandates related to the COVID-19 vaccine and adamantly opposed to state mandates related to the COVID-19 vaccine, plain and simple.

 

As long as I am your governor, the state of Alabama will not force anyone to take a COVID-19 vaccine.

On October 28, Missouri Governor Mike Parsons signed an executive order with similar purposes. Said Parsons:

When President Biden announced his initial plans to force unconstitutional vaccine mandates, we immediately began aligning state resources for legal action. While we hoped the Biden Administration would recognize these mandates as the abuse of authority that they are, they have not, and we must now use every tool we have available to fight this federal intrusion.

He defended the Constitution:

The Constitution and its historical interpretations clearly leave public health decisions to the states. The federal government has no authority to issue COVID-19 vaccine mandates. The Biden Administration acting alone to dictate and mandate health requirements represents the kind of federal power grab the founding fathers warned us against.

On October 29, 10 states filed a lawsuit jointly against the mandates:

We [the States of Missouri, Nebraska, Alaska, Arkansas, Iowa, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, South Dakota, and Wyoming] bring this action to challenge [the Biden administration’s] use of federal procurement statutes to create sweeping new power to issue decrees over large swaths of the U.S. economy and take over areas of traditional state power.

The 10 plaintiffs relied on the separation of powers built into the Constitution to prevent such overreach:

Through Executive Order 14042, President Biden has arrogated to the Executive Branch the unilateral power to mandate that all employees of federal contractors be vaccinated.

 

This power grab is sweeping in its scope. Employees of federal contractors constitute one-fifth of the total U.S. workforce. And the mandate goes so far as to demand vaccination even from employees who work entirely within their own home.

 

That is unconstitutional, unlawful, and unwise.

Some applaud the Founders with uncommon foresight in crafting the Constitution in such a way as to limit the powers of the federal government. On the contrary, they knew the nature of man. As British historian Lord Acton famously said, “All power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

Ben Moreell, an author at the Acton Institute, wrote in 2010 of what citizens in 2021 are now seeing flowering in Washington, D.C.:

 

The more restrictions and compulsions [a governor, a president, a czar] imposes on other persons, the greater the strain on his own morality. As his appetite for using force against people increases, he tends increasingly to surround himself with advisers who also seem to derive a peculiar pleasure from forcing others to obey their decrees….

 

If the benevolent ruler stays in power long enough, he eventually concludes that power and wisdom are the same thing. And as he possesses power, he must also possess wisdom.

 

He becomes converted to the seductive thesis that election to public office endows [him] with both power and wisdom. At this point, he begins to lose his ability to distinguish between what is morally right and what is politically expedient.

NAACP Urges All Free Agents to Boycott Texas

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Friday, October 29, 2021:  

In its press release announcing it had sent a letter to every professional sports league in the country urging all free agents to boycott Texas, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) attacked the state, its legislators, the state’s governor, and its attorney general:

As we watch an incomprehensible assault on basic human rights unfold in Texas, we are simultaneously witnessing a threat to constitutional guarantees for women, children and marginalized communities.

 

Over the past few months, legislators in Texas have passed archaic policies, disguised as laws, that directly violate privacy rights and a woman’s right to choose, restrict access to free and fair elections for Black and Brown voters, and increase the risk of contracting coronavirus.

 

If you are a woman, avoid Texas. If you are Black, avoid Texas. If you want to lower your chances of dying from coronavirus, avoid Texas.

Nothing was said about protecting the rights of unborn black children or the rights of people, including black and brown people, to decide for themselves about accepting masks and vaccines. Nothing was said about making voting laws safer, protecting the rights of all Texans, including all people, including those of color.

It didn’t matter. The letter was pure propaganda:

The Texas government has … empowered vigilantes with the authority of the law, going to far as to offer a $10,000 incentive to sue all who aid women in exercising their constitutional right [to murder their unborn child]….

 

As a result … Texas families will not receive the care they deserve.… By passing this law [SB 8, the “heartbeat” law], Texas legislators have created a healthcare institution that isn’t safe for anyone.

Even though free agency won’t apply to most professional athletes until after the season ends, the NAACP continued, “We are pleading with you — if you are a free agent and are considering employment in Texas, look elsewhere.… Texas is not safe for you, your spouse, or your children.… Texas isn’t safe for anyone.”

The letter was delivered to the National Football League Players Association, the Women’s National Basketball Players Association, the National Basketball Players Association, the Major League Baseball Players Association, and the National Hockey League Players’ Association.

 

Manning Johnson would recognize the ploy immediately. A black man born in 1908, Johnson joined the Communist Party USA in 1930 and left the party in 1939 after seeing its true purpose: to divide the country by race.

In his book Color, Communism and Common Sense, published in 1958, he called out the NAACP:

The fact that the reds have never contributed anything tangible to the progress of the Negro is overlooked though the reds have collected millions of dollars as a result of race incitement.

 

Like the Communist Party, the N.A.A.C.P. has collected millions of dollars through exploitation of race issues. The bigger the race issue, the bigger the appeal and the bigger the contributions.

 

Yet one cannot find any report of any of this money being spent for factories and shops to provide jobs, land and home construction, specialized training for talented youth, hospitals, convalescent homes, classes in sanitation and personal hygiene, care and upkeep of property, combatting crime and juvenile delinquency, centers to aid Negro youth in preparing to meet stiff employment competition in science and industry.

 

It is then no accident that the N.A.A.C.P. is dubbed “The National Association for the Agitation of Colored People.” The record speaks for itself. Millions for agitation; not one cent for those things that win the respect and acclaim of other races and national groups.

Since its founding by communist W.E. Burghardt DeBois in 1909, the NAACP has remained true to its purpose: to incite division as part of the overall agenda to turn the American Republic first into a democracy and then into a communist dictatorship. The present letter is just more proof.

More Polls, More Bad News for Biden and the Democrats

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Friday, October 22, 2021:  

When pollsters describe Joe Biden’s approval ratings as “sinking like a ship” (Haisten Willis at Yahoo), “underwater” (Paul Steinhauser at Fox), and in a “death spiral” (Bob Unruh at WND), Democrats have reason to be concerned about the upcoming midterm elections.

When one of the Democrat Party’s own pollsters — Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer’s Senate Majority PAC — agrees, the Democrats are in serious trouble.

A new Quinnipiac University poll showed Biden’s disapproval rating increasing by another percentage point over the one the group just conducted two weeks earlier: 52-37. That’s 52 percent disapproving of the job Biden is doing compared to just 37 percent who think he’s doing just swell.

The real damage is reflected among independents, with just 28 percent thinking Biden is doing great compared to 56 percent who do not.

When it comes to the country in general, the numbers from Quinnipiac offer no comfort to Democrats: by a 52- to 41-percent margin, Americans say that the country is worse off now than it was a year ago.

A poll done by Grinnell College reports the same percent of unhappy respondents: Biden’s approval rating is a scant 37 percent compared to 50 percent who disapprove of his job performance. Grinnell went on to report that while 54 percent of independents reportedly voted for Biden last November, today that support has cratered, to just 28-percent approval.

A poll conducted by McLaughlin and Associates of 1,000 likely voters in the upcoming midterm elections confirmed the bad news for Biden and friends:

Nearly six in 10 voters, 59%, now say America is on the wrong track.

 

That pessimism includes 66% of independents, 56% of Hispanics, 61% of women … and even 31% of 2020 Biden voters….

 

Moreover, almost one in five 2020 Biden voters, 18%, now disapprove of the job he’s doing as president.

Swing voters — those without significant party loyalty — hold the key to next November. Among them, independents score Biden at -59 percent, suburban voters at -57 percent, Hispanics at -48 percent, and blacks at -18 percent.

Things are so bad, according to McLaughlin, that “55% [of those polled] say that they are worried about the future of America with Joe Biden as president. That figure includes … 54% among independents, 26% among African Americans, and 22% among 2020 Biden voters. Talk about buyer’s remorse!”

In a private meeting held for Democrats in Washington earlier this week, the results of Schumer’s PAC were revealed. The poll focused on Senate battleground states — Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Florida, North Carolina, New Hampshire, Georgia, and Nevada — and, wrote Politico, “the survey paints a bleak picture for Democrats.” Biden’s approval rating across those states is a dismal 41 percent, with 52 percent disapproving.

The poll focused on “persuadable” voters, those who are on the fence but could be convinced to vote Democrat, and it wasn’t pretty: Just 18 percent of them say that the economy is getting better.

Once again, in the words of James Carville, Bill Clinton’s political advisor in his run against President George H. W. Bush in 1992, “It’s the economy, stupid.” And with signs increasing that the economy, under heavy attack by the Biden administration, is reaching a tipping point into recession in time for the November midterms, McLaughlin concluded:

The coming primaries and midterms are likely to be a political massacre for the Biden Democrats.

Wyoming to Hold Special Session to Push Back Against Vaccine Mandates

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Tuesday, October 19, 2021: 

The Wyoming state legislature has voted to hold a special session next week to consider two bills pushing back against Biden’s vaccine mandates. Republican Governor Mark Gordon has repeatedly said he would fight against the mandates, even threatening to sue the Biden administration if necessary.

The special session would consider two bills being drafted: 1) a bill sponsored by Representative Chuck Gray of Casper that would ban vaccine “passports” and impose a heavy fine on any company using an employee’s vaccination status to hire, fire, promote, or demote him or her; and 2) a bill sponsored by Representative Tom James of Rock Springs that would impose fines and possible imprisonment for any state employee who attempted to enforce Biden’s mandates.

Wyoming is far from alone. At least 19 governors have issued public statements opposing the administration’s declarations, and several have vowed to fight them.

Southwest Airlines is still recovering from pilots’ pushback that virtually shut down the airline last weekend. Amtrak had to cancel trains because of a similar “staffing issue.” Workers for the shipbuilding company Huntington Ingalls are protesting demands from the company’s president that they get vaccinated or else they will lose their jobs.

The union representing pilots for American Airlines has warned the company it will face similar disruptions in service as Southwest if it doesn’t soften its vaccination demands.

Parents in Nevada, New Jersey, California, Pennsylvania, Arkansas, New York, and South Carolina are protesting school boards’ demands that students, even in grade school, wear masks or face disciplinary action.

Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot is facing rebellion from the police union’s members who are refusing to go along with her vaccine demands. Members of police departments in San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Denver are also protesting the demands.

So, Wyoming is not alone.

However, in covering the issue in Wyoming, both the Casper Star Tribune and The Epoch Times got it wrong. Wrote Victoria Eavis for the Star Tribune: “State statutes can’t supersede federal law, according to the U.S. Constitution.” And Isabel van Brugen, writing for The Epoch Times, also got it wrong: “The U.S. Constitution prohibits state statutes from superseding federal law.”

First, the mandates declared by Biden were not law, but executive orders. Under the Constitution (See Article I, Section 1) only Congress can make laws. Second, any law that violates the U.S. Constitution automatically is null and void.

The Supremacy Clause (Article VI, Clause 2) makes that clear:

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof, shall be the supreme Law of the Land.

Any law that violates the Constitution, in other words, is null and void. That would allow Wyoming to declare Biden’s executive order as null and void and unenforceable in the state. As President George Washington noted in his farewell address in 1796: “Let there be no change [in the Constitution] by usurpation; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument for good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed.”

Influential Democrat Political Analyst: His Party’s Clout Will Shortly Disappear

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Monday, October 11, 2021:  

David Shor, perhaps the Democrat Party’s leading political analyst and forecasting guru, believes that unless his party’s messaging changes significantly, and soon, it will lose in 2022, lose badly in 2024, and runs the risk of disappearing altogether by 2032.

Shor, once a pariah for telling the truth, is now back in vogue. And his message is getting attention at both The New York Times and Politico.

Shor, at age 30, has been heavily involved in Democrat Party polling since he was 16. Through his computer models he predicted the outcome of Barack Obama’s presidential campaign in 2012 within tenths of a percentage point. But when, following the death of George Floyd in 2020, he tweeted that the riots that followed would reduce the Democrat Party’s clout in the next election, he was fired.

He has come back from the dead, but not in a way Democrats want to hear. Ezra Klein, writing for the Times on Friday, declared that not only is “Biden’s agenda … in peril … Democrats are on the precipice of an era without any hope of a governing majority.”

Shor’s current model shows the Democrats losing seven seats in the Senate in 2024, giving Republicans the advantage: 57-43. Noted Kline:

The heart of Shor’s … work is the fear that Democrats are sleepwalking into catastrophe….

 

The Power Simulator [his current computer model] keeps telling him the same thing: we’re screwed in the Senate.

The problem, according to Shor, is that the Democrat Party is listening primarily to liberal college graduates for its messaging, and that message is greatly missing the mark: The party focuses on issues and agendas that the average working-class voter cares little about. As Ian Ward noted in Politico:

They probably majored, or are majoring, in political science or public policy….

 

They are … the foot soldiers of the Democratic Party’s permanent reserve army….

 

Democratic candidates hail these young people as a major political asset, pointing to them as proof of the party’s growing base of support among the next generation of leaders and voters.

But Shor disagrees. The agenda items that stir their hearts are at the very bottom of the list among those who actually vote. He noted that “the people the Obama campaign had hired to win over swing voters were seismically out of touch with the people they were meant to persuade … as a result their engagement with those voters may have hurt Obama’s chances more than it helped them.”

As an example, in 2015, nearly a quarter of Obama’s staffers believed that “income inequality” was the single most important issue facing the country, “whereas,” noted Shor, “fewer than one percent of all voters listed ‘the gap between rich and poor’ as the most important issue.”

Steve Phillips, founder of Democracy in Color and senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, agrees: The demographic composition of the Democratic Party’s staff does not reflect the demographic make-up of its key voters.

But the problem, according to Phillips, can be remedied by getting more of them to come to the polls to vote. Shor thinks the message needs to change instead. Absent a change — a substantial change — in the message the Democrat Party is delivering, the party is in desperate trouble.

Ward ends his Politico article:

Shor says that Democrats’ expectation that long-term demographic shifts would give the party a semi-permanent majority has fallen flat, and the rural bias of the Senate and the Electoral College will soon make it practically impossible for Democrats to win a governing majority without winning back at least some rural swing voters in key purple states.

 

Unless the party’s messaging changes, the highly educated young liberals who serve as the standard-bearers of the party’s platform are leading Democrats down a path toward political obscurity.

 

Unfortunately, for Democrats, this cadre of young people isn’t likely to disappear anytime soon.

For Republicans, this is good news. Will they take advantage of it?

Biden’s Approval Rating Hits All-time Low

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Friday, October 8, 2021:  

The headline from Quinnipiac Unversity’s poll results released on Wednesday says it all: “Americans Give President Biden Lowest Marks Across The Board.” Specifically, Biden scored a 53-percent job disapproval rating among the 1,326 citizens who were polled last week, compared to just 38 percent of them who approved. That’s a spread of minus 15 percentage points.

Three weeks ago, Quinnipiac showed Biden with a 50-percent job disapproval rating, and a 42-percent approval rating, a spread of minus eight points. In other words, Biden’s negative spread has doubled in just the past weeks!

His disastrous disapproval rating is in every category:

• Response to COVID: 50 percent disapprove;

• The economy: 55 percent disapprove;

• As commander in chief: 58 percent disapprove;

• On immigration: 67 percent disapprove; and

• On the crisis on the southern border: 67 percent disapprove.

When it comes to overall competency in running the government, Biden scores another low: 55 percent think his administration is not competent for the job.

As Quinnipiac’s polling analyst, Tim Malloy, expressed it:

Battered on trust, doubted on leadership, and challenged on overall competency … Biden is being hammered on all sides as his approval rating continues its downward slide.

This poll merely confirms polls from Gallup and Associated Press. Especially notable is Biden’s loss of faith among independents. Three weeks ago, 52 percent of them disapproved of Biden’s job performance. It now stands at 60 percent.

This is also confirmed by Gallup (independents’ approval rating down to 37 percent from 61 percent at the beginning of his presidency) and AP (independents’ approval rating at 38 percent, down from 62 percent in July).

This is making it increasingly difficult for Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer (the leading Democrats in the House and Senate, respectively) to pass Biden’s “legacy” bills, including the enormous pork-laden $3.5 trillion plan to turn America into something like Europe. As the midterms draw ever closer — just over a year away — Democrats don’t want to go down with the Biden ship. Those leaders have been forced to postpone votes on this monstrosity as the votes increasingly aren’t there to pass it.

There’s increasing angst among Democrats and their pollsters about them being obliterated next November. Political analyst and consultant to top Democrats Douglas Schoen nervously declared that “Democrats [are likely to] suffer the most substantial midterm loss of any party in recent history.”

Recent history is useful in attempting to measure the potential loss facing Democrats in November 2022. In 1994, President Bill Clinton had a disapproval rating of 42 percent, and Democrats lost 52 House seats in the midterm election.

In 2010, President Barack Obama had a disapproval rating of 41 percent, and Democrats lost 64 seats in the House.

Today, Biden is suffering from a disapproval rate of 53 percent and climbing. Readers can do the math and draw their own lines: Schoen’s prediction could be too conservative for the November 2022 Democrat disaster.

Biden either isn’t aware of the impending disaster, or he doesn’t care. He continues to push on issues Americans don’t want: his vaccination agenda (everyone gets the jab, or else!) and his gargantuan spending bill (it will cost “zero dollars”).

Assuming Republicans retake the House and the Senate next year, the real work of repairing the damage and restoring the Republic begins. That work will only be successful if enough constitutionalists replace the spendthrifts and revolutionaries presently in the Congress. And if they are held to their oaths of office by the informed electorate who put them there.

As President Abraham Lincoln said: “I am a firm believer in the people. If given the truth, they can be depended upon to meet any national crisis. The great point is to bring them the real facts.”

COVID Tyrant Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer Backs Off on Mask Mandates in Response to Falling Approval Polls

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Friday, September 24, 2021:  

Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer agreed earlier this week to back off on enforcing her mask mandates. The reversal came in a budget compromise reached with the state’s legislature which has been at odds with Whitmer ever since she violated the state’s rules regarding COVID mandates.

As Thomas Lifson, writing in American Thinker, noted acidly: “The reason for Whitmer’s reversal is not hard to figure out. Her polls stink.”

There is nothing more threatening to an elected tyrant than to risk losing her position as tyrant. As The New American reported last fall, Whitmer continued to exercise her unconstitutional authority even after the state’s supreme court ruled against her. The court wrote:

The sheer magnitude of the authority in dispute, as well as its concentration in a single individual [Whitmer], simply cannot be sustained within our constitutional system of separated powers.

Nevertheless, Whitmer defied the court and continued to extend her mask mandates and other rules. She added to her state’s citizens’ discontent as a “pandemic hypocrite” when her husband was caught violating one of her rules. This was followed up by she herself being caught violating her own rules.

When James Craig, who retired as Detroit’s chief of police in June, announced he was running as a Republican to replace her in next November’s election, his poll numbers immediately reflected Whitmer’s discontent among registered voters: they were neck-and-neck according to polls released right after his announcement.

On Tuesday those polls were confirmed by Trafalgar Group, which reported that when asked “If Gretchen Whitmer and James Craig were the candidates for Governor in the 2022 general election, for whom would you vote?”, registered voters showed the former police chief beating Whitmer by a gaping six full percentage points, 50 percent to 44 percent.

Craig’s leap was no doubt helped by efforts of a Marxist group called Detroit Will Breathe which interrupted Craig’s initial announcement, forcing him to move to another location. Meshawn Maddock, co-chair of Michigan’s Republican Party, thanked the group on her Twitter account. She posted a photo of a protestor holding a sign that said “defund DPD,” adding:

See the sign? These leftists want to defund your police. Republicans are the only sanity left in the country. Gov. Whitmer is finished. Thank you BLM for reminding us what your world looks like.

Whitmer indeed appears to be finished. The Trafalgar Group polled 1,097 likely voters, with Democrats making up 53 percent and Republicans just 35 percent. When your own party disowns you, your career – even that of Governor of a dark blue state – is over.

As The New American noted, the COVID tyranny in Michigan “will only end when the virus ends, or she is removed from office.”

Democrat Strategist Declares His Party Will Suffer “Blowout Defeat” in 2022

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Wednesday, September 15, 2021:  

Political analyst and consultant to A-list Democrats Douglas Schoen self-identifies as a Democrat and sees his party losing massively in November 2022. In The Hill he wrote:

The marked decline in support for President [sic] Biden and his administration nationally and in key states indicates that the Democratic Party could endure a blowout defeat in the 2022 midterm elections.

Comparing where Biden is with where Presidents Bill Clinton and Barack Obama were at the same time in their administrations “suggests,” wrote Schoen, “that Democrats could suffer even more substantial losses in 2022 than the party did in 1994 and 2010.”

In 1994, with Clinton’s disapproval rate at 42%, Democrats lost 52 House seats and eight Senate seats.

In 2010, with Obama’s disapproval rate at 41%, Democrats lost 64 House seats and six Senate seats.

According to the latest poll from Civiqs, taken from Biden’s inauguration in January through September 13 and capturing responses from more than 100,000 registered voters, Biden’s national disapproval rate is 50% and climbing.

Drilling down into the data from the Civiqs poll Schoen laments that in five key swing states – Georgia, Florida, Arizona, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania – registered voters disapprove of Biden’s job performance by ten full percentage points or more. In reliably Democratic Michigan and Wisconsin voters there disapprove of Biden’s performance by margins of 7 and 8 points, respectively.

He concludes that “the current outlook for Democrats is grim – and it could be even worse,” adding:

If the Biden administration continues to push unnecessarily big government spending initiatives and tax increases, along with weak immigration policies and an incoherent foreign policy strategy, Democrats could suffer the most substantial midterm loss of any party in recent history.

Schoen’s analysis confirms what The New American wrote a week ago, that Biden’s falling approval numbers are putting Congress into play for Republicans next November.

But The New American asked: will it make any difference? Will those campaigning on Trump’s platform of “Make America Great Again” keep their promises and begin the long, arduous path to restoring the Republic?

C. Mitchell Shaw, writing for The New American magazine last March, answered those questions:

Too many Americans seem to believe that the right president will solve our country’s problems. The past four years — with a good, but imperfect, president who fought to “Make America Great Again” by resisting the Deep State and putting America first — shows that that is short-term thinking.

 

After four years of doing what he did, the establishment moved heaven and earth to burn him to the ground (as has now been confirmed by a Time magazine article, which tells about the actions of some of those involved), steal the election from him, and impeach him a second time under bogus charges. And the establishment succeeded in all of that.

 

The takeaway is this: Patriotic Americans need to stop looking for a hero to save America and be the heroes that save her. Real resistance requires an informed electorate.

Shaw, a member of The John Birch Society, writing for The New American which is sponsored by The John Birch Society, declared that “without the effective work of the JBS over past decades, full-blown, dystopian tyranny would already cover the globe.”

It will take more than just showing up once every couple of years to vote to “throw the rascals out” and replace them with other rascals making false promises. The awakening of the electorate as measured by numerous polls is heartening. The real work of restoring the republic begins, not ends, after the election by making sure the new crop of representatives keeps their promises and their oaths of office to preserve and protect the Constitution of the United States. Only citizens who understand their history and their present peril will be up to the job.

Biden Administration Sues Texas Over “Heartbeat Law”

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Friday, September 10, 2021:

U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland filed a lawsuit on Thursday challenging the legality and constitutionality of Texas Law S.B. 8, known as the Texas Heartbeat Law. His claim rests on the idea that somewhere, somehow, deep inside the Constitution of the United States there resides a right for a woman to kill her unborn child.

No such right exists. But Garland claims it does, through precedent. In announcing the lawsuit, he said:

The [Texas] act is clearly unconstitutional under longstanding Supreme Court precedent.… In the words of Planned Parenthood v. Casey, “a State may not prohibit any woman from making the ultimate decision to terminate her pregnancy before viability.”

Repeating a lie doesn’t turn it into truth. Nevertheless, the lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, Austin Division, claims it does:

It is settled constitutional law that “a State may not prohibit any woman from making the ultimate decision to terminate her pregnancy before viability.” But Texas has done just that. It has enacted a statute banning nearly all abortions in the State after six weeks.

This statement, all by itself, shows the flimsy nature of the complaint. First, laws are made by Congress, not by the Executive nor by the Judicial branches of the government. Second, rulings in Roe v. Wade and Casey are rulings — opinions — relating to the particular cases and are not law.

But the suit ignores these facts, declaring that

Texas enacted S.B.8 in open defiance of the Constitution … [it] clearly violates the Constitution….

 

Instead of relying on the State’s executive branch to enforce the law, as is the norm in Texas and elsewhere, the State has deputized ordinary citizens to serve as bounty hunters.

The lawsuit claims that the Texas law is unconstitutional because it violates the “Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution [which] mandates that ‘the Constitution and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof … shall be the supreme Law of the Land … any Thing in the Constitution or Law of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.’”

But Roe didn’t uncover a right of a woman to kill her unborn child. The court created the right out of whole cloth — and political ideology. As Ryan T. Anderson, McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence and director of the James Madison Program in American Ideals at Princeton University, wrote:

No such right can be found in the text of the Constitution, or in its structure, logic, or original understanding.

In referring to the Mississippi case pending before the Supreme Court, Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, Anderson noted:

Roe and Casey confected a “constitutional right” to abortion out of thin air. The majorities in those cases did not actually find such a right; they simply imposed their own moral-political opinions about the desirability of legal abortion.

The federal lawsuit ignored the conclusion of former Dean of Stanford Law School John Hart Ely, who declared that Roe was “bad because it is bad constitutional law, or rather because it is not constitutional law and gives almost no sense of an obligation to try to be.”

It also ignored the words of liberal, pro-abortion legal scholar Laurence Tribe, who said, “One of the most curious things about Roe is that, behind its own verbal smokescreen, the substantive judgment on which it rests is nowhere to be found.”

It ignored the dissent of Kennedy-nominated Supreme Court Justice Byron White, who concluded that Roe wasn’t about interpreting the Constitution, its text, or its history, but was instead “an exercise in raw judicial power.”

The lawsuit also claims the Texas law violates the 14th Amendment. That amendment guarantees the right to every person equal protection under the law. But history has made plain that, at the time the amendment was ratified, unborn persons were considered to be covered as well. As Ryan Anderson explained, “The best originalist reading of the 14th Amendment, we are convinced, would include unborn persons within the scope of the provision stating that no state may ‘deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.’”

There is a substantial risk of the lawsuit blowing up in the faces of Garland, Biden, and the entire pro-abortion culture: The high court just might use this lawsuit to address the underlying issues herein discussed, and rule that 50 years ago the court made a ghastly mistake that has cost the lives of millions.

Biden’s Falling Approval Numbers Are Putting Congress Into Play for Republicans in 2022

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Wednesday, September 8, 2021: 

Remington Research Group, a reputable GOP-aligned polling outfit with a “B” rating from FiveThirtyEight, discovered in its latest survey of seven “middle-of-the-road” congressional districts that “the left’s ‘Build Back Better’ agenda is toxic.” This downturn in approval will likely cost the seven Democrats presently representing those districts their jobs next November.

In every district polled, Joe Biden’s approval rating is underwater, averaging 46%. When matched against a “generic” Republican candidate, they are expected to lose by an average of six percentage points.

This is a microcosm of Biden’s approval rating nationally. The eight most recent polls recorded at RealClear Politics show Biden’s approval between 43 and 47 percent, the lowest of his administration so far. FiveThirtyEight’s poll averages similarly have his deficit at 4.1 points as of Sept. 8.

Most vulnerable is the razor-thin eight-seat Democrat majority in the House of Representatives. A loss of just five seats next November would turn control back to the Republicans.

According to Sean Trende, a political analyst at RealClear Politics, the party in power typically loses around 30 seats in the House and two to four seats in the Senate. But, says Trende, “the most important predictor of a party’s performance in a midterm is the president’s job approval rating … abysmal elections for parties in power have occurred when the president was generally unpopular.”

As Biden’s approval rating continues to drop, the likelihood of losses for Democrats in the midterms increases. At 50% approval, Democrats in the Senate would expect to break even. “At 46%,” wrote Trende, “Democrats … only retain control about four percent of the time.”

In the House, Biden’s continuing dismal performance would, per Trende, cost the Democrats upwards of 25 seats. “If he declines much further, however, it could turn into an ugly rout.”

In the Senate, there are five Republican senators with targets on their backs: Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), Richard Burr (R-N.C.), Rob Portman (R-Ohio), Richard Shelby (R-Ala.), and Pat Toomey (R-Pa.). They painted those targets themselves either by voting to impeach President Trump or supporting the “bipartisan” infrastructure spending bill. Each is taking the easy way out by retiring.

The vacuum in each case is being filled by what Politico calls “Trump acolytes”: those “who have made loyalty to the former president a cornerstone of their campaigns.” For example, former Republican Missouri state Senator John Lamping said that Senator Roy Blunt “is a super-super insider and that’s not what the base wants. No one is running to be a Roy Blunt senator. They’re running to be a Donald Trump senator.”

Three other Republican senators are in jeopardy as well: John Thune (R-S.D.), Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa). They have not yet formally announced their candidacies and could be replaced by Trump “acolytes,” turning the Senate an even darker red.

Biden’s approval ratings are dropping due to his Afghanistan withdrawal disaster, a southern border inundated with illegal immigration, and inflation. Add to that rampant crime in big cities and the economy struggling to find workers, and it’s not at all difficult to see why Biden’s numbers are flagging.

The GOP has other advantages going into the November 2022 midterms: the party controls the redistricting process for 187 House seats, with the Democrats controlling just 75. Biden is unlikely to be an asset on the campaign trail, and his hapless Vice President Kamala Harris is too toxic to put in front of a microphone.

Assuming the Republicans regain control of both houses of Congress in 2022, the next questions must be: will it make any difference? Will those campaigning on the Trump platform of “Make America Great Again” keep their promises and begin the long, arduous path to restoring the Republic? Will they hew to their oaths of office to support and defend the Constitution? Will they make serious efforts to reverse the damage being done by the Democrats? Or will they become invisible in the freedom fight currently raging across the land?

That’s the role of the John Birch Society: creating an informed electorate who will not only select statesmen who promise to keep their oaths but hold them to those promises when they fall away. For more information on how to get involved in the freedom fight, go to JBS.org.

Republicans’ Trust in Establishment Media Cut in Half in Five Years

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Tuesday, August 31, 2021:  

Barely a third of Republicans polled by Pew Research Center in June said that they trust the establishment media (ABC, NBC, MSNBC, CBS, CNN, Fox News, etc.) to provide them with unbiased, “fair and balanced” news. Five years ago, more than two thirds of them trusted the media as their primary news source.

Overall, fewer than three out of five Americans of all political persuasions have “some trust” in the mainstream media, down from 65 percent in 2016. There’s even been some substantial credibility slippage among Democrats as well, according to Pew. “This is,” wrote the group, “the smallest share over the past five years.”

Not surprisingly, Pew also reported that the percentage of those who don’t trust the media “at all” jumped from six percent five years ago to 14 percent currently.

This confirms what Statista.com reported on Monday: “The credibility of almost all the news media sources in [our] ranking was considerably lower in 2021 than in previous years, highlighting consumers’ growing concerns about reliability, bias, and trustworthiness in the news business.”

The media’s credibility has been slipping for years. In 2019, for example, ABC enjoyed a rating of 63 percent among those polled. Today it’s at 58 percent.

Similar declines are reported at CBS and NBC. The New York Times’ credibility has slipped from 53 percent two years ago to 50 percent at present, along with CNN. Fox News has slipped from 52 percent to 44 percent over the same period, while Huffington Post suffered the most grievous drop, from just 38 percent two years ago to 31 percent now.

Hugh Hewitt, a radio talk show host, law professor, and conservative political commentator, writes from inside the establishment media. He is a regular on NBC News and MSNBC and writes frequently for the Washington Post.

In May he declared in an article published by the Post that “the media has a big credibility problem”, adding, “Media bias has grown worse in recent years. From story selection to story framing, bias leaps off the page or screen and cannot be escaped. The hazard of this vast tilt left is the belief among millions — perhaps a majority — of Americans that [the] media cannot be trusted.”

That leaves those searching for reliable sources for their news in a quandary: where to go? Many are turning to The Epoch Times, which is enjoying a surge in popularity. So are Newsmax, OneAmerica News, and American Thinker.

The New American magazine and its website, TheNewAmerican.com, makes every effort to “tell the story behind the story.”

Missing from the conservation about media bias is the long and deep influence of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). Established in 1921 as a private organization whose purpose was to “awaken America to its worldwide responsibilities,” it has insinuated itself into every major part of the culture since its founding.

Richard Harwood, a former Washington Post senior editor, described the CFR as “the nearest thing we have to a ruling establishment in the United States”, adding that many members have enormous influence in the media:

The membership of these journalists in the Council, however they may think of themselves, is an acknowledgment of their active and important role in public affairs and of their ascension into the American ruling class.

 

They do not merely analyze and interpret foreign policy for the United States; they help make it. They are part of that establishment … sharing most of its values and world views.

Media personalities constitute only about five percent of the overall CFR network. Key members of the organization have included:

Several US Presidents and Vice Presidents of both parties;

 

Almost all Secretaries of State, Defense, and the Treasury;

 

Many high-ranking commanders of the U.S. military and NATO;

 

Some of the most influential Members of Congress (notably in foreign and security policy);

 

Almost all National Security Advisors, CIA Directors, Ambassadors to the U.N., Chairs of the Federal Reserve, Presidents of the World Bank, and Directors of the National Economic Council;

 

Many prominent academics, especially in key fields such as Economics and Political Science; and

 

Many top executives of Wall Street, policy think tanks, universities, and NGOs.

CFR insiders, including political journalist Richard Rovere, have revealed the influence of the CFR across the political, economic, educational, and cultural spectrum:

The directors of the CFR make up a sort of Presidium for that part of the Establishment that guides our destiny as a nation. [I]t rarely fails to get one of its members, or at least one of its allies, into the White House. In fact, it generally is able to see to it that both nominees are men acceptable to it.

This is what makes The New American unique: it reveals “the rest of the story” — that is, little happens domestically or internationally (e.g., Afghanistan) without CFR influence and direction.

In the instant case Pew Research merely reveals the awakening of the American consumer to the extensive bias toward collectivism but without explaining that it is a deliberate part of an agenda to lessen America’s influence in the world, preparing it for its role as a part of a world run by CFR elites and its friends in the media, the culture, government, education, and in Hollywood.

Public-school Enrollments Drop While Charter and Homeschooling Options Grow

This article appeared online at TheNewAmerican.com on Monday, August 30, 2021: 

Public-school officials are panicking over drops in enrollment going into the new school year. They’re going door-to-door to enlist students, planting yard signs pleading with parents to enroll their children, requiring bus drivers to call parents during their off hours, and asking that docents make calls to parents as well. They’re hosting “town halls,” inviting concerned parents to attend and to ask questions, hoping to reduce their anxiety over putting their kids back into public schools.

For instance, Karla Loria, Adams County, Colorado, District 14’s new superintendent, went knocking on doors of parents who hadn’t enrolled their children. She talked the school board into funding a $43,000 marketing program that included five billboards asking them to enroll their kids.

She’s even reaching families outside of her district to come to her schools: “[We’re] asking, or inviting, our families outside of our district … to enroll so we can start capturing students.”

Despite all of that, enrollment in her district is down about five percent.

Dallas, Texas, Independent School District instituted a similar outreach program, yet about 12,000 students failed to show up on the first day of school.

The decline is hurting school funding. Wrote Barnini Chakroborty, Senior Investigations Reporter for the Washington Examiner, “Even with a billion-dollar federal government lifeline, public schools across the country are headed toward a financial cliff.”

Almost 60 percent of the decline is due to the growth in homeschooling. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, in a typical year a little more than three percent of the nation’s school-age children are homeschooled. By September 2020, the bureau reported that the rate of homeschooling had jumped three-fold, to 11 percent.

And it isn’t temporary, either. In Education Week’s Household Pulse Survey taken in April and May of this year, about 5.4 percent of U.S. households with school-aged children reported that they were being homeschooled.

Nebraska officials reported “significant increases” in the number of families who say they will be homeschooling their children this year. In North Carolina, more than 10,000 new families filed notices of their intent to homeschool, so many in fact that the computer system crashed. In Wisconsin, the number of families filing notice that they were going to homeschool jumped from 14,800 last year to over 23,000 this year, a 55-percent increase.

And it’s not just homeschooling that’s seeing huge increases. As Mike McShane, director of national research at EdChoice, wrote in Forbes, there have been “massive wins for the educational choice movement this year.” There are other attractive options including in-house pods where teachers are hired by families to instruct their youngsters, microschools, hybrid learning (where children attend class for part of the week and schooled at home the rest of the week), virtual learning through online classes.

All of which, says McShane, is helping “families looking outside the traditional [public school] system to provide a better education for their children.”

That’s a key point: Parents, thanks to the COVID-inspired restrictions, are being re-empowered with the concept that they, and not the public schools, are responsible for what their children learn.

This is especially true in black families. The census bureau reported a five-fold increase in the number of black homeschoolers this academic year, to more than 16 percent of the homeschooling population.

State legislators are being successfully pressured to provide more options and more funding for them. In Indiana, for example, two private, virtual-learning providers are now allowed to operate in the state, participating in the state’s school voucher program for the first time.

One of the more successful homeschooling options is FreedomProject Academy (FPA), which offers a fully accredited, Classical education for Kindergarten through High School. FPA is rooted firmly in the Judeo-Christian values as promoted in the Constitution by our Founding Fathers, who strove to guarantee the preservation of our God-given liberties.

Enrollment at FPA has closed for the fall term, but parents are encouraged to explore this particular program as a way to educate their charges and protect them from government schools as indoctrination centers for progressivism and collectivism.

The pressure to keep children away from public schools is growing, thanks in part to school boards themselves. Parents are increasingly outraged at the indoctrination being perpetrated through CRT (Critical Race Theory), along with demands that the young students be required to wear masks all day long.

McShane says this will be the “legacy” of COVID-19:

This will be the legacy of the coronavirus on the American education system.

 

It was finally made clear to a critical mass of legislators that families need options, and the one-size-fits-all nature of the contemporary public education system is not fit for purpose in an uncertain and changing world.

 

Funding a more diverse and decentralized system means creating a more resilient system and a system better tuned to the needs of the people it serves.

Judge Napolitano Asks, “Does the U.S. Still Have a Constitution?”

This article was published at TheNewAmerican.com on Thursday, August 12, 2021:  

In the Washington Times on Wednesday, Judge Andrew Napolitano asked rhetorically in the title above his column: “Does the United States still have a Constitution?“ Though he never explicitly says yes, it is clear from his analysis that his question refers to a de facto abandonment of, not de jure elimination of, the Constitution.

Despite being ignored and circumvented, the Constitution is still the law of the land, and still protects our freedom, needing only to be upheld and applied. Napolitano writes:

The Constitution does not permit the government to infringe upon personal freedoms, no matter the emergency or pandemic.

The founders crafted the Constitution “both to establish the government and to limit it.” Article 1, Section 8, of the Constitution specifies the powers of the Congress, the only branch of the federal government that may make law. But Congress may not make any law it chooses; in its law-making it is limited to exercising only its enumerated powers.

Others protections against the abuse of power are found in the first 10 amendments to the Constitution, collectively known as the Bill of Rights. For example, the First Amendment explicitly prohibits Congress from violating freedom of religion, speech, and the press, and “the right of the people peacefully to assemble and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” And the Second Amendment protects “the right of the people to keep and bear arms.” But in addition to the rights listed in the Bill of Rights, the people possess many other rights not articulated therein.

Napolitano explains:

The Ninth [Amendment] declares that the enumeration of rights in the first eight shall not mean that there are no other rights that are fundamental, and the government shall not disparage those other rights.

 

The Tenth [Amendment] reflects that the states have reserved [to themselves] the powers that they did not delegate to the [federal government.]

Without explanation or expansion the judge used the term “natural rights,” assuming that his readers would automatically know what he was referring to:

Natural rights collectively constitute the moral ability and sovereign authority of every human being to make personal choices – free from government interference and without a government permission slip.

In an interview with The New American magazine, Pastor David Whitney with the Institute on the Constitution gave a fuller description of the source of man’s rights by quoting from the opening paragraph of the Declaration of Independence:

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. [Emphasis added.]

The Declaration states clearly that

All men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights….

 

We, therefore, the representatives of the united state of America, “appeal … to the Supreme Judge of the World….

 

With a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor.

In other words, as expressed by Whitney’s Institute:

  1. There is a God.
  2. Our rights come from Him.
  3. The purpose of civil government is to secure and protect our God-given rights.

On the day the Declaration was signed Samuel Adams said: “We have this day restored the Sovereign to Whom alone men ought to be obedient. He reigns in Heaven and … from the rising to the setting sun, may His kingdom come.”

John Hancock wrote: “Let us humbly commit our righteous cause to the great Lord of the universe … let us joyfully leave our concerns in the hands of Him Who raises up and puts down the empires and kingdoms of the earth as He pleases.”

James Madison wrote: “Religion … [is] the basis and foundation of government … before any man can be considered as a member of civil society, he must be considered as a subject of the Governor of the Universe.”

John Adams wrote: “We recognize no Sovereign but God, and no King but Jesus.”

Napolitano’s article flowed naturally from the principle that all rights come from God — though again, he uses the phrase “natural rights.” All powers that temporal government might have come only “from the consent of the governed” who are themselves governed by their Creator.

Napolitano noted in his column that

interferences with the exercise of rights protected by the Bill of Rights devolve around travel, assembly, commercial activities, the exercise of religious beliefs, and your face. These infringements have all come from mayors and state governors who claim the power to do so, and they raise three profound constitutional issues.

He then raised three critical questions regarding these infringements. First, Napolitano asked:

Do mayors and governors have the inherent power to craft regulations that carry the force of law in an emergency?

 

The answer is no … the separation of powers [crafted into the Constitution by the founders gives] each [branch of government] a distinct core function that cannot constitutionally be performed by either of the other two.

What about state legislatures that give temporary powers to the governor to handle “emergencies”? Asked the judge:

Can state legislatures delegate away to governors their law-making powers? Again, the answer is no, because the separation of powers prevents one branch of government from ceding to another branch its core powers.

Lastly the judge asked:

Third: can a state legislature enact laws that interfere with personal liberties protected by the Bill of Rights, prescribe punishments for violations of those laws, and authorize governors to use force to compel compliance?

 

Again, the answer is no, because all government in America [federal, state, and local] is subordinate to the natural rights [emphasis added] articulated in the Bill of Rights and embraced in the Ninth Amendment.

Why did the founders limit governmental powers? Why did they separate those limited powers among three branches of government, and also divide powers between the national government and the states? Because men — including men who govern others — possess a sinful nature that must be held in check. John Emerich Edward Dalberg Acton, first Baron Acton (1834–1902), an historian and moralist who was otherwise known simply as Lord Acton, expressed this opinion in a letter to Bishop Mandell Creighton in 1887:

Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men.

Thomas Jefferson explained:

In questions of power, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.

Back to Napolitano. Referring particularly to those “dangerous people” who govern on the state level and “who are again threatening to take away our ability to make personal choices and use force to compel compliance,” he ended optimistically:

We must remind them that by using the powers of state governments to do this, they will make themselves candidates for federal criminal prosecutions when saner days return.

Acclaimed Yale Economist Shiller Declares U.S. Housing Market in a Bubble, Warns of Eventual Collapse

This article was published by TheNewAmerican.com on Friday, May 28, 2021:  

Robert Shiller, the Yale economist and inventor of the Case-Shiller Index, told Yahoo Finance Alive on Wednesday that the U.S. housing market has “aspects of a bubble to it.”

Shiller added:

This is not a market that collapses overnight … but you can see that we’re seeing price increases now that haven’t [been seen] since those years just before the [2008] financial crisis.

The Case-Shiller Index — now called the S&P CoreLogic Case-Shiller National Home Price Index — released on Tuesday showed that prices for the average home in the United States rose more than 13 percent since last April. Three major cities — Phoenix, San Diego, and Seattle — led the way, with annual gains of 20 percent, 19.1 percent, and 18.3 percent, respectively. Home prices in all 20 cities included in the index increased as well.

The reasons behind a housing-market bubble include:

Keep reading…

17 State Attorneys General File Brief Supporting SD Governor’s Suit Over Biden’s Mount Rushmore Fireworks Ban

This article was published by TheNewAmerican.com on Monday, May 24, 2021:  

Fourth of July celebrations at Mount Rushmore — the iconic carving of Rushmore Mountain in South Dakota celebrating four of America’s most revered past presidents — have been canceled. Predictably, COVID is being used as an excuse. Seventeen states are now suing to reopen the celebrations.

Under an agreement crafted in 2019, the state was allowed to celebrate Independence Day (independence, by the way, from overreaching government) with fireworks at the popular tourist site. But, using COVID as cover, Herbert Frost, a regional director for the National Park Service (NPS), pulled the plug in March for any plans the South Dakota Governor had for celebrating the event this year:

Keep reading…

Respected Democrat Pollster: Trump Loyalists to Lead the Country Starting in 2022

This article was published by TheNewAmerican.com on Wednesday, May 19, 2021:  

Stanley Greenberg, Democrat Party pollster and policy wonk for the party, was surprised at the results of a poll he took of 1,000 registered voters two weeks ago in key battleground states:

We were … surprised by how much Donald Trump’s loyalist party is totally consolidated at this early point in its 2022 voting, and how engaged it is….

 

With such high early engagement of Republicans and white working-class voters in this survey, it means the era of Donald Trump shaping the electorate is not over.

Greenberg hoped that the Trump era was over. In his book, R.I.P. G.O.P.: How the New America is Dooming the Republicans, published in 2019, he predicted that the thrashing Republicans took in 2018 would be repeated in 2020. No doubt he was surprised that he was wrong then, too.

The problem Democrats have, Greenberg opined after reviewing the results of his poll, is that Republicans “are deeply engaged [while] Democrats are barely following politics.”

Greenberg is smart enough to know why:

Keep reading…

Economic Growth Continues, But It Won’t Last Forever

This article was first published at TheNewAmerican.com on Monday, May 3, 2021: 

The melt-up in stock prices — increasingly being driven by the stampede of new investors operating out of fear of missing out (FOMO) — is breathtaking. The most commonly used indicator, the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index, has jumped more than 80 percent since its low last March.

Stockholdings among U.S. households have increased to 41 percent of their total financial assets in April, the highest level in history going back to 1952.

The rebound from the pandemic lows is historic:

Keep reading…

Many of the articles on Light from the Right first appeared on either The New American or the McAlvany Intelligence Advisor.
Copyright © 2021 Bob Adelmann