1

Propaganda Network CNN Gets Upset About Propaganda

|

Written by Peter Heck

How he managed to say it without choking on his own tongue I will never know. As President Trump began to dress down the hostile press that was attempting to use his Monday White House briefing to smear him as negligent, CNN cut away immediately to anchor John King who managed to prattle out these words without even a sniff of irony:

“To play a propaganda video at taxpayer expense in the White House briefing room is a new — you can insert your favorite word here – in this administration.”

For anyone at CNN to feign objection over “propaganda” is as convincing a testimony you will ever see to the staggering lack of self-awareness capable by seemingly coherent human beings.

This is, after all, the network of Jake Tapper, who just days ago allowed socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez to repeat without correction the now widely debunked rumor that President Trump called coronavirus a hoax. Tapper actually defended his own silence saying that while he knew it was a lie, he let it slide by because President Trump lies about other things. Seriously:

Tapper also allowed Democrat Speaker Nancy Pelosi to accuse Trump of “fiddling” without ever holding her to account for “fiddling” herself when she single-handedly delayed the coronavirus relief bill for a week.

This is the network of Brian Stelter who anchors a program unironically called “Reliable Sources,” and utilizes that platform to peddle misinformation on behalf of the Democrat Party:

It is also Stelter who turned disgraced lawyer and convicted felon Michael Avenatti into a mainstay on his program in order to attack Trump, and even encouraged the Stormy Daniels attorney to think about running for president himself. With Avenatti in jail now, Stelter fills his time regularly attempting “gotcha” moments with President Trump that end just about as well. Like this:

Yes, let it. Because there’s a name for the concept articulated in that quote, of course. It’s called “federalism,” the central pillar around which our constitutional order and system is constructed. Let the fact that CNN’s chief media corresponded didn’t realize that sink in for a minute.

Besides, it isn’t too difficult to figure out what Stelter and company would be saying if Trump had seized power and claimed emergency authority to dictate nationalized policies to “move ahead.”

This is the network of Don Lemon, an activist masquerading as a newsman who is so sharply partisan that long-time journos cringe at the damage he continues to do not only to CNN’s credibility, but the industry itself.

This is the network that breathlessly covered every potential angle of every perceived accusation against U.S. Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh during his confirmation hearings, yet now remains the only major news organization that has not even mentioned the credible allegations of sexual misconduct leveled against presumptive Democrat presidential nominee Joe Biden by one of his former employees.

This is the network that at the very same press briefing that John King couldn’t bear to air another second of, allowed a staffer manning the chyron machine to post these on-screen Democrat talking points with the apparent blessing of both editors and producers:

Incredible. As in, lacking in all credibility.

After recently surviving a bout with COVID-19, CNN host Christopher Cuomo made some startling remarks, indicating that he was re-evaluating his career at the network. Among other things, Cuomo called out CNN for trafficking in “ridiculous things.”

He not wrong in that assessment, even though I’d choose a different, more precise term for what this low-rated televised rumor mill peddles: propaganda.

This article was originally published at Disrn.com.



February 2020 Prayer Alert

|

The 2020 session of the Illinois General Assembly is now underway in Springfield. Our state lawmakers are introducing new proposals, adding to the 6,000+ bills that were introduced in the first half of the session (2019). IFI’s top concern is stopping the effort to repeal the Parental Notice of Abortion Act. In a recent email, the anti-life Personal PAC told their supporters that their

key goals in 2020 will be repealing dangerous anti-choice legislation and safeguarding reproductive rights for future generations. With that in mind, in the next few months, Personal PAC will be focused on:

  • Repealing the Parental Notice Act of Abortion (PNA) and
  • Expanding the Illinois General Assembly’s pro-choice majority

Opposing this horrific agenda must be a prayer priority for all pro-life Christians in the state. It must also become a tier one call-to-action for us all. Our local state representatives, state senators and Governor J.B. Pritzker must hear from us loud and clear. They must come to understand that we will not remain silent as they work to usurp our God-given parental rights so they can pursue an agenda of death.

In addition to that, ethics reform is once again making headlines in the wake of multiple FBI corruption investigations and numerous indictments. Chicago’s ABC7 I-Team recently aired a report identifying Illinois “as the most corrupt state in America.” Political pundits speculate that there will be more indictments coming in the weeks and months ahead. As if that weren’t enough, Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan is at the center of a rape cover-up scandal that may have far reaching consequences.

We also have critically important primary campaigns going on now through election day, March 17th.

To say we have much to pray about is an understatement. Our state government is immersed in chaos and corruption. This is a reflection of the character of the men and women serving in Springfield over the past several decades. We are to pray for  all those in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet lives in all godliness and holiness, (1 Timothy 2:1-2).

Please Pray:

  • That God will open the eyes of policy-makers and candidates for office to the sanctity of life. Pray that they will become defenders of innocent human life and not enablers of sexual immorality and death.
  • That state lawmakers will uphold parental rights and reject attempts to repeal the basic protection young women have in the Parental Notice of Abortion Act.
  • That federal and state investigators will root out all corruption at the Capitol and among our legislators and that self-serving lawmakers will be replaced by honest and wise public servants.
  • That in the 2020 election season, pro-life candidates will have the time, energy and funding needed to saturate their districts with their campaign messages and materials.
  • That God will give wisdom and discernment to the honest public servants in Springfield who must work in the swamp of corruption and that they have courage to serve the Lord with fear and trembling and not shrink back from calling out every form of wickedness. (Psalms 2:10-11)
  • That many godly counselors and advisers will surround our elected officials and that local pastors and Christian leaders will intentionally seek opportunities to visit and minister to these men and women. (Proverbs 11:14)
  • That God will work in the hearts and minds of our state lawmakers and governor and that He will draw them to Him and His truth. (Proverbs 21:1-8)
  • That God will work in the hearts of key federal officials, including President Donald Trump, U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, U.S. Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer, U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and U.S. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy.
  • That efforts to indoctrinate children in government schools–especially the new law that mandates teaching about homosexuality and the “trans” ideology positively in government schools–will fail and that local school boards will reject this agenda for their students in kindergarten through 12th grade.

Personal Prayer Request:

Last week, my wife and I were blessed with the birth of our son, Owen. He was born with Down Syndrome and has significant medical challenges. We learned that Owen had an imperforate anus and an AV canal defect in his heart. Owen had surgery on his second day of life and spent the next six days in the PICU. He is facing three additional surgeries in the next several months.

Owen has also been diagnosed with transient abnormal myelopoiesis (TAM). We were told that twenty percent of Downs Syndrome kids develop Leukemia but 80 percent outgrow it. Further blood tests will indicate more.

We would greatly appreciate if you would keep baby Owen in your prayers over the next several months. We praise God for the technology and science and the amazing medical team that has worked to save Owen’s life and help him overcome these health hurdles.

God is stretching the Smith family in new and exciting ways. We are walking in faith, trusting in God’s plan for Owen while trying not to rely not on our own (finite) understanding. I can honestly say that we cannot wait to see how God is going to use this boy in our family and beyond.

Subscribe to the IFI YouTube channel
and never miss a video report or special program!



The Scourge of Human Trafficking Demands Another Appomattox

|

The bloodiest war that the United States ever fought did not take place on a foreign battlefield but raged on American soil, as brother took up arms against brother over the issue of slavery. The war began with the bombardment of Fort Sumter, South Carolina on April 12, 1861, and ended in the Spring of 1865, when Robert E. Lee surrendered the Confederate Army to Ulysses S. Grant at Appomattox Courthouse. The modest brick structure standing forlornly in a field in central Virginia belies the magnitude of the human tragedy, with an estimated 620,000 killed—almost as many as in all foreign wars combined.

The war led to the passage of the Thirteenth Amendment (Amendment XIII) to the United States Constitution, which abolished slavery and involuntary servitude. But while the facts of this violent conflict are familiar to students of American history, what is less-known is that the practice of slavery continues unabated. According to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), every year millions of men, women, and children are the victims of trafficking, which involves the use of force, fraud, or coercion to compel an individual against their will to perform some type of labor or commercial sex act.  The DHS estimates that many billions of dollars per year are generated by human trafficking, which is second only to drug trafficking as the most profitable transnational crime.

Traffickers seek those who are susceptible because of psychological or emotional vulnerability, economic hardship, or in many cases children who are unable to protect themselves against predators.  Doctors Without Borders reports that two-thirds of migrants traveling through Mexico to the United States experience violence, including theft, torture, and rape. As the DHS notes, “The trauma caused by the traffickers can be so great that many may not identify themselves as victims or ask for help.”

Responding to the crisis, President Donald Trump has proclaimed January as “National Slavery and Human Trafficking Prevention Month.” Referring to human trafficking as “a modern form of slavery,” the president pledged to “actively work to prevent and end this barbaric exploitation of innocent victims.”

The president noted that the lack of an impregnable barrier has enabled traffickers to transport their victims into the United States with virtual impunity. Accordingly, “I have made it a top priority to fully secure our Nation’s Southwest border, including through the continued construction of a physical wall, so that we can stop human trafficking and stem the flow of deadly drugs and criminals into our country.”

Trump refuses to sign a spending bill that does not contain funding for a border wall. Seemingly oblivious to the dangers of an unsecured border, Speaker of the U.S. House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) calls a wall “an immorality between countries; it’s an old way of thinking.” U.S. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) agreed, stating: “This president just used the backdrop of the Oval Office to manufacture a crisis (and) stoke fear.” Meanwhile, in 2018 almost 400,000 people were apprehended after illegally crossing the border.

The battle is also raging in cyberspace, as human traffickers recruit their victims through websites.  In April 2018, the FBI shut down the nation’s largest child-sex trafficking website, Backpage.com. The FBI alleged that Backpage.com encouraged the posting of ads for prostitution and the human trafficking of minors. As a result, Backpage.com CEO Carl Ferrer was convicted on charges of facilitating prostitution and money laundering.

While the bill signed in April led to the closing of an estimated 87 percent of human trafficking sites, the demand is such that other players in the lucrative online sex-for-hire market have since moved in to fill the void. The software company Marinus Analytics reports that in a one-month period after Backpage.com was shut down, 146,000 online sex ads were posted every day.

The horrors of human trafficking in our day rival the slavery of a bygone era. One can only hope that sufficient numbers of those who possess the determination of an Abraham Lincoln will arise to at long last bring the horrors of human trafficking to an end at a modern-day Appomattox.

Take ACTION: Click HERE to contact U.S. Senators Dick Durbin, Tammy Duckworth and your own U.S. Reprsenative to ask them to support federal legislation – including a border wall – to help combat this horrific practice of human trafficking into the United States.

Alternatively, you may phone the U.S. Capitol switchboard at (202) 224-3121. An operator will connect you directly with the legislative office you request.

Subscribe to the IFI YouTube channel
and never miss a video report or special program!



New Year Call to Prayer

|

As we begin 2019–with new federal lawmakers being sworn in to office last week in Washington D.C. and new state lawmakers being sworn into office this week–it is vital that we are intentional about praying for those in authority. Although we may disagree with the political philosophy of many of our elected officials, we must not neglect God’s instruction to pray for them (1 Timothy 2:1-3) or ignore the power of prayer to change hearts and minds (Proverbs 21:1; James 5:16).

It is important to regularly appeal to God for the well-being of our state and nation. It is essential to ask Him to work in the hearts and minds of each one of our local, state and national our leaders. Let’s ask the Lord to help our officials understand what is good and true. Ask Him to give them wisdom and to open their eyes to those who are trying to mislead or deceive them. Let’s pray that God would bring into their lives a Daniel or a Paul to be trusted godly influences who will not shrink back from telling them about God’s standards of right and wrong.

Additionally, here are some other ways to pray this week and throughout the year:

  • Thank God for this new year in which we can serve Him. Thank God for what He has done in our lives during the last year, and what He will be doing this year in not only our lives but also in the lives of our family members and in His church worldwide. Throughout history we can see how His hand has been upon the nations.
  • Thank God that He is making all things new (Isaiah 43:18–19; Revelation 21:5; Isaiah 65:17).
  • Pray that He would prompt us to stay in His Word, reading it daily so that we are fully equipped for what He is calling us to do.
  • Pray that He would train us in righteousness and give us wisdom to know how to respond to the growing immorality and unfaithfulness in our culture.
  • Pray for a successful and peaceful March for Life Chicago next Sunday. Pray that our culture would come to understand the preeminence of the sanctity of life.
  • Pray for key federal officials–including President Donald Trump, U.S. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, U.S. Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer, U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, and U.S. House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy.
  • Pray that federal officials would be serious about military readiness, national security, border protection and the importance of defunding Planned Parenthood.
  • Pray for key state officials–including Governor-elect JB Pritzker, Illinois Senate President John Cullerton, Illinois Senate Minority Leader Bill Brady, Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan, and Illinois House Minority Leader Jim Durkin.
  • Pray that the effort to legalize recreational marijuana fails. Pray that state lawmakers would understand the alarming consequences and high costs of approving this legislation and not be swayed by the potential of a new tax revenue source.
  • Pray against efforts to indoctrinate children in government schools–especially the legislation to mandate the teaching about homosexuality and the “trans” ideology positively in government schools (SB 3249) from kindergarten through 12th grade.
  • Pray that God would increase our reverence and love for Him and His Word and that we would be effective servants.

Download the IFI App!

We now have an IFI mobile app that enables us to deliver great content based on the “Tracks” you choose, including timely legislative alerts, cultural commentaries, upcoming event notifications, links to our podcasts, video reports, and even daily Bible verses to encourage you. This great app is available for Android and iPhones.

Key Features:

  • It’s FREE!
  • Specific content for serious Christians
  • Performs a spiritual assessment
  • Sends you daily Scriptures to encourage and equip you
  • You determine when and how much content you get


How The ‘Revolution’ Is Eating Its Own

|

At a forum at the College of William & Mary on Sept. 27, the ACLU got a sample of what conservatives have been experiencing on campuses for years.

As Claire Gastanaga, executive director of the ACLU of Virginia, began speaking to a small audience, a group of demonstrators marched in with a large banner that said, “Blood on Your Hands.” They lined up in front of the stage, holding placards.

Apparently clueless about what was about to transpire, Ms. Gastaaga said, “Good. I like this. Good.”

She went on to say that she was going to inform the students about their right of protest, “which this illustrates very well.”

No, it didn’t. The students shut her down. They began loudly chanting inane slogans, including “ACLU, you protect Hitler, too!” and “ACLU, free speech for who?” and “The oppressed are not impressed!” The ACLU is also apparently guilty of perpetuating a system of “white supremacy” for not defending jackboot tactics like those seen at Berkeley and Middlebury College against conservative speakers.

What was supposed to be a #blacklivesmatter event was populated almost entirely by white students, presumably many from the W&M’s tony Williamsburg campus. Oppressed, they are not, unless you count the unbearable minutes when they can’t find a parking space for their Audis or Beamers.

For a taste of what Ms. Gastanaga endured for more than an hour and a half, you can see a brief video by an American Civil Rights Union (ACRU) team that filmed the event. It’s strangely satisfying. (See below)

Since the French Revolution, when it was famously observed that “revolutions devour their own,” the progressive left always seems surprised when the forces they have unleashed turn on them. Think back to the 1968 Democratic National Convention in Chicago, when old-line liberals like Vice President Hubert Humphrey were stunned by the street violence of the extreme left.

More recently, U.S. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi had that deer-in-the-headlights look when the antifa crowd, like the Occupy movement a few years ago, turned utterly violent. To her credit, she finally denounced their tactics.

In a more serious venue than campus playpens, the ACLU had another sobering experience this past week. During arguments on Tuesday in Gill v. Whitford, several U.S. Supreme Court justices indicated a reluctance to plunge into what Felix Frankfurter in 1946 called the “political thicket,” which is where the ACLU wants them to go. It’s part of the ACLU’s vision to do away with the state and local powers that still hamstring the federal government’s relentless growth.

A split federal panel had invalidated Wisconsin’s redistricting plan for its state legislature, calling it an unconstitutional gerrymander because the Republican-controlled legislature had drawn districts favoring the Republican Party.

The ACLU filed an amicus brief in the case, arguing essentially that legislatures, being composed of politicians, should not have the authority to create voting districts. It’s time to change the rules of the game since the vast majority of state legislatures are now controlled by Republicans.

The ACLU had no such problem when Maryland’s Democratic legislators in 2011 drew a bizarre district that meandered from the conservative Western part of the state to liberal Montgomery County. This was intended to unseat outspoken conservative Republican Rep. Roscoe Bartlett. It worked. Mr. Bartlett had won the 6th district by 28 points in 2010, but lost his seat by 21 points to Democrat John Delaney in 2012.

In progressive California, the politically-drawn district maps are so squiggly that they resemble Rorschach blots. But any court-ordered “solution” for redistricting would be an ongoing nightmare, with unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats in control.

Who would appoint the “non-political” panels? How would they determine exactly how many voters of either party or no party should be included in each district? Would distinct communities be split for numerical balancing? Would they do this after every election? How much politics is too much politics? Apart from the difficulties, the whole thing would be unconstitutional.

On August 4, the American Civil Rights Union submitted an amicus brief in Gill, noting that the Constitution gives Congress the power to determine the “Times, Places, or Manner” of holding federal elections but leaves to the states the power to determine who votes. Therefore, establishing districts comprising voters is a state function, not a federal one.

Since the 1960s, the courts have variously waded into the issue, solidifying the principle that there is no place for racial bias in districting, but avoiding a sweeping “solution” to political gerrymandering.

On May 22, in a dissent in Cooper v. Harris, Justice Samuel Alito alluded to Frankfurter’s famous statement and warned against making federal courts “weapons of political warfare,” which would “invite the losers in the redistricting process to seek to obtain in court what they could not achieve in the political arena.”

Speaking of losers, as the ACLU ramps up its campaign against voter ID laws, traditional districting methods and other obstacles to its goal of fundamentally transforming America, its unruly children will be out in the streets in black masks, trying to intimidate anyone who disagrees with them.

When the ACLU itself comes under attack for not joining the mob, it’s a sign that the revolution has begun nibbling on its own.

This article first appeared on The Washington Times’ website.



A Question of Lawful Authority

|

Baseball season gets underway this week, a welcome distraction from the political battles in Washington.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Senate is warring over the confirmation of Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch.  The Republicans say he’s a stellar nominee, a judicial umpire who calls balls and strikes as he sees them.  Democrats, led by New York’s Charles Schumer, however, say the judge is a creature of “special interests” who would slide into a base with spikes up and who deserves to be filibustered.

Who are those “special interests” you might ask? Well, they would be anyone who disagrees with progressives, which the November election indicated is at least half the country if not more.

The Republicans say Judge Gorsuch will help the Court return to constitutional principles.  Democrats claim that he will “undo the gains” made by decades of liberal jurisprudence.  We can only pray that they’re both right.

Over the years, federal courts – especially the U.S. Supreme Court – acquired an out-sized role in the nation’s affairs, especially during Franklin Roosevelt’s administration.  Think of the federal government as a three-bodied creature, with one of the bodies in a black robe towering over the others with a giant Nancy Pelosi gavel.

Restraining the U.S. Supreme Court’s power, even slightly, has been a non-starter.  Congress is packed with lawyers who dream of serving on or before the highest bench someday.  It’s also an open secret that many politicians are relieved when hot button issues slide off their plates and directly onto the Court’s docket.

Nonetheless, given the Court’s near-omnipotence, the central question of what constitutes lawful authority will dominate public discussion in years to come, especially if there is a conservative majority.  Right now, “lawful authority” is in the eye of the beholder on many levels.

For example, progressives applauded a federal judge in Washington State in February for overruling President Trump’s order temporarily barring immigrants from seven terror-prone Muslim-majority nations.  The judge snapped his fingers, extending constitutional rights to foreigners not even in this country and accused Mr. Trump of racist motives for good measure.  Another judge in Hawaii piled on last week by ruling against Mr. Trump’s re-written order affecting six countries. Progressives again cheered.

On the other hand, when a federal judge in Texas ruled in 2015 that President Obama had usurped congressional authority with executive actions shielding five million illegal immigrants from deportation, progressives pledged resistance and urged people to take to the streets.

Progressives look with favor on the 500 or so “sanctuary” cities that refuse to cooperate with federal immigration laws and procedures.  Conscience, they say, overrides mere lawfulness.  Except, of course, when it comes to Christian bakers, florists, wedding planners and photographers. They must be forced by law to violate theirs.

Only a few months ago, progressives cheered an edict from the Obama Administration ordering all school systems in America to accommodate female-identified males in girls’ restrooms and locker rooms or risk losing federal funds.  Can’t these schools follow the rule of law?

And what about those scoundrels, the Little Sisters of the Poor, or Hobby Lobby and other Christian-owned businesses that don’t want to obey Obamacare’s abortifacient mandate?  What are they trying to do, provoke anarchy?

When the U.S. Supreme Court in Citizens United restored collective political free speech, President Obama pilloried the justices in person during the 2010 State of the Union address, badly misrepresenting the facts of the ruling.  Fellow progressives vowed to see the opinion overturned.

But when the U.S. Supreme Court in Obergefell v. Hodges invented a “right” to same-sex marriage in the penumbras of the Constitution in 2015, overriding state marriage laws – 31 of them constitutional amendments approved by voters – progressives instantly pronounced it “settled law.”

They said the same about the Roe v. Wade ruling in 1973 that struck down abortion laws in every state – “settled law.”

If these examples leave you confused about what is actually lawful authority, don’t worry.  We have an omniscient media to explain it to us.  If they feature lots of people “hailing” a ruling or order, you can bet it’s about another judicial or executive demolition job on America’s heritage, the Constitution, founding values and genuine civil rights.  If they quote lots of people condemning the ruling or order as an abuse of authority, it’s a clear victory for constitutional governance.

To progressives and the lockstep media, legitimate authority means only advancing progressive causes.  If so, it’s no big deal for liberal presidents or judges to run outside the baselines when they need to score some runs.

This article was originally posted at Townhall.com



Voters Don’t Want to Alter the Altar

|

Written by Tony Perkins

America may recognize same-sex marriage now — but not because voters asked it too! And if the Left thinks the Supreme Court has finally decided the issue, they’re in for a major surprise. Turns out, the court of public opinion has its own verdict on the subject — and new polling shows it’s anything but liberal.

A year and a half into this experiment in judicial activism, the opinion of most voters hasn’t budged. When asked by Wilson Perkins Allen Opinion Research if they agreed with this statement — “I believe marriage should be defined only as a union between one man and one woman” — a solid 53 percent agreed. That’s a 16-point difference between those who disagreed at 37 percent (another 10 percent were undecided). No wonder liberals had to win same-sex marriage through the courts. It isn’t nearly as popular as the Left insists it is! Sixteen months into this illegitimate ruling, nothing about the people’s opinion has changed. According to Wilson, the 53 percent support for natural marriage is identical to what it was pre-Obergefell. Even the five justices of the Supreme Court haven’t managed to move the needle on America’s views!

For once in her life, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) was right. If it weren’t for the U.S. Supreme Court forcing this decision on America, redefining marriage would have taken years for the Left to accomplish — if ever. “Legislatively, we couldn’t really succeed,” she admitted in May, “but from the courts and the rest… that victory has been won.” For years, the media managed to create this phony narrative of support — even when ballot boxes and state laws told another story. It’s encouraging to see that even when the laws change, people’s understanding of right and wrong do not. Obviously, voters — especially conservative Christians — are looking for politicians who will stand up to the cultural elites and their radical agenda.

That may be one reason why Donald Trump enjoyed such overwhelming support. As the poll goes on to say, nearly six in 10 Trump voters were swayed by the pro-life, pro-religious liberty planks of the GOP platform. And, as someone who served on the RNC Platform Committee, I can tell you that the 2016 document is the most conservative it’s ever been on every issue, including marriage. So when 66 percent of voters tell pollsters that the “Government should leave people free to follow their beliefs about marriage between one man and one woman as they live their daily lives at work and in the way they run their businesses,” it’s really no surprise that Donald Trump enjoyed the record-breaking evangelical support he did. He was the only candidate in the race that showed his commitment to religious freedom, especially when it comes to giving churches the ability to speak freely about politics from the pulpit (which 53 percent support).

As I told Fox News’s Todd Starnes, the Republican Party’s platform positions on the unborn and religious liberty were the bridge between Donald Trump and Christian conservatives. And he sealed that deal in the final debate when he vividly described a partial-birth abortion and pledged to appoint pro-life justices. If the liberal press had bothered to listen to what voters believe — instead of telling them what to believe — this election wouldn’t have been nearly as shocking. Because if there’s one overwhelming message everyone should have heard on Tuesday, it’s this: the media, the courts, and the Left don’t speak for the American people.

Tony Perkins is the president of Family Research Council.

This article was originally posted at the FRC blog.



Lawmakers in D.C. Looking to Pump up the Federal Gasoline Tax

|

Despite the bitter cold and snow that characterizes this time of year, we always manage to find ways that warm our hearts. Lately all you have to do is look at the gas prices.

According to the AAA, gasoline prices are starting to increase after dropping to the lowest levels since 2009.  Today, the national average now sitting at $2.11 (as of 2/04/15).  The lower cost for gasoline has placed an additional $14 billion of disposable income in consumer’s hands. Yes, there is joy to be found amidst the cold—that is until the politicians take notice.

Jumping at the first opportunity, top Congressional lawmakers in Washington D.C. are now proposing a raise of the federal fuel tax. Currently, the tax stands at 18.4 cents per gallon, as it has been since 1994.

Ironically, such calls are now being heard from the Republican Party, a group that just promised to cut taxes and spending this past election.

U.S. Senator James Inhofe (R-OK), the new chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, said, “I just think that option is there, it’s clearly one of the options.”  Other top ranking U.S. Senate Republicans such as U.S. Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and U.S. Senator John Thune (R-SD) have also expressed interest.

Leading Democrats, including U.S. Senator Dick Durbin (D-IL) and U.S. Representative Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), have been waiting for the right opportunity. Pelosi stated at a recent press conference, “If there’s ever going to be an opportunity to raise the gas tax, the time when gas prices are so low—oil prices are so low—is the time to do it.”

U.S. Representative Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) has proposed H.R. 680 — a bill that would raise the gasoline tax from the current rate of 18.4 cents a gallon to 33.4 cents a gallon.  This legislation would phase in the 15 cent increase to the gas tax over a period of three years and then the tax would rise with inflation.  Illinois’ U.S. Representative Jan Schakowsky (D-Evanston) is one of two dozen federal lawmakers co-sponsoring this gasoline tax.  The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the AFL-CIO, the American Trucking Association and AAA are also actively supporting this legislation.

Federal legislators say that the increase in revenue will go to the Highway Trust Fund for the purpose of rebuilding crumbling roadways and bridges, though there are also considerations for more funding for public transportation systems and even additional subsidies for oil companies.

To be fair, a tax on gasoline for the funding of infrastructure is in principle, a positive policy. Those who use the roads the most should pay a larger share of the upkeep cost. However, the economy is still in a fragile state, unemployment is slowly inching down, there are no signs of serious cuts in government spending, and the voters have just sent a strong message this past November that the tax and spend policies must stop.

Furthermore, the U.S. Congress has exerted little effort in ensuring that the current funds are properly spent. As the Heritage Foundation has pointed out, the Highway Trust Fund spends around 25 percent of its budget on ventures outside of that jurisdiction such as subways, streetcars, buses, bicycle and nature paths, and landscaping—all at the expense of road and bridge projects.

Just because gas prices are currently low, there’s no guarantee that they will continue as such.  This definitely does not warrant yet another tax increase on American families.

TAKE ACTION: Click HERE to send a message to Illinois’ U.S. Senators Durbin and Kirk as well as your own U.S. Representative.  Tell them to stop any attempt to increase the gasoline tax.  Let them know that working families cannot afford to give the government more of our hard-earned money on a daily necessity such as gas.



Hope for the Preborn

|

It’s been a revolting year on the fetal front.

Recently, pro-abortion activists chanting “Hail Satan” in the Texas State house worked feverishly to protect the ghastly legal right of women to kill their preborn babies even after these babies can feel pain.

A few months back Kermit Gosnell’s filthy fetal abattoir was exposed, forcing feticide-facilitator Nancy Pelosi to try to distance herself from Gosnell with a completely incoherent statement:

What was done in Philadelphia was reprehensible, and everybody condemned it. For them [those proposing pro-life legislation] to decide to disrespect the judgment a woman makes about her reproductive health is reprehensible….As a practicing and respectful Catholic, this is sacred ground to me when you talk about this. I don’t think it should have anything to do with politics, and that’s where you’re taking it, and I’m not gonna go there.  [Emphasis added.]

Let’s see if we can untangle the miasmic confusion that animates Pelosi:

  • She believes that killing a live baby who’s just exited the womb is “reprehensible,” but opposition to killing a live baby yet in the womb is reprehensible.
  • As a “practicing Catholic,” the issue of prenatal life is sacred to her, but she endorses abortion, a practice which the Catholic Church views as an unmitigated evil.
  • She believes that the sacred ground of prenatal life shouldn’t have anything to do with politics, but she supports legislation that secures the legal right of women to destroy prenatal life.

Nope, can’t untangle it.

Light, however, is beginning to pierce the darkness. It’s possible to imagine a world in which more babies will be lucky enough to survive the treacherous waters of the womb. Maybe we can even hope for a day when the genocide being perpetrated against Down Syndrome babies who are murdered for no reason other than their physical imperfections and cognitive limitations will end. 

And maybe this father’s inspiring story of transformation can contribute in some small way to the transformation of the culture: 



Affluence and Elected Office

|

The Democratic Party and liberal pundits are trying to make the case that because Mitt Romney is extraordinarily wealthy, he can’t relate to the struggles of average or economically disadvantaged folk; and if he can’t relate to their struggles, he doesn’t care; and if he doesn’t care, he is unworthy of the office of president.

History demonstrates that that argument fails miserably.

In 2010, the Wall Street Journal published a list of the inflation-adjusted net worth of past American presidents. Some of our finest presidents and some presidents that the Left love were also men of considerable means. Some inherited their wealth, some made it themselves.

  • John F. Kennedy (according to WSJ, “Although he never inherited his father’s fortune, the Kennedy family estate was worth nearly $1 billion”)
  • George Washington ($525 million)
  • Thomas Jefferson ($212 million)
  • Theodore Roosevelt ($125 million)
  • Andrew Jackson ($119 million)
  • James Madison ($101 million)
  • Franklin Delano Roosevelt ($60 million)
  • Bill Clinton ($38 million)
  • James Monroe ($27 million)
  • John Quincy Adams ($21 million)
  • John Adams ($19 million)
  • Dwight Eisenhower ($8 million)

And let’s not forget the extraordinarily wealthy Democrats who have served or are serving in Congress (some of whom sought to be president). Information comes from Roll Call and The Center for Responsive Politics :

Democratic U.S. Senators:

  • John Kerry ($193.07 million)
  • Jay Rockefeller ($81.63 million)
  • Ted Kennedy ($43-163 million)
  • Mark Warner ($70.30 million)
  • Frank Lautenberg ($55.07 million)
  • Richard Blumenthal ($52.93 million)
  • Dianne Feinstein ($45.39 million)
  • Claire McCaskill ($17 million)
  • Tom Harkin ($10.28 million)
  • Herb Kohl ($9.23 million)
  • Jeff Bingaman ($7.41 million)
  • Kay Hagan ($70.6 million)
  • Ben Nelson ($6.56)

Democratic U.S. Representatives:

  • Nancy Pelosi ($35.20 million)
  • Jared Polis ($65.91 million)
  • Nita Lowey ($15.46 million)
  • Carolyn Maloney ($10.14 million)
  • Shelley Berkeley ($9.29 million)
  • Lloyd Doggett ($8.53 million)

If being raised by wealthy parents or possessing wealth renders people unable to relate to the poor and unable to be compassionate, are George Clooney, Bill Gates, and Warren Buffet callous men unable to feel the pain of the disadvantaged? Are they unable to provide solutions to the problems that plague those with fewer material blessings?

What about Obama’s daughters? They have never known poverty. They are being raised in privilege and affluence, attending the most expensive private schools in the country. Are their characters being deformed by such affluence and privilege? Will they become callous young women unable to relate to the disadvantaged, lacking in compassion, and unable to contribute to solutions for those who have far fewer privileges?

Chelsea Clinton was raised in affluence, attended the best schools in the country, and married a wealthy Wall Street hedge fund employee who previously worked as an investment banker at Goldman Sachs. Is she a heartless, selfish elitist unfit for serving the less privileged?

According to CNBC , Hillary Clinton’s current net worth is $85 million. What will Democrats say about that if she decides to run for president in four or eight years?

If wealth renders people compassionless and unsuitable for elected office, Democrats need to tell Americans how much wealth disqualifies a person for the office of president. And does wealth equally disqualify someone for fitness for Congressional office?

The truth is that one doesn’t have to “relate” to those who are poor to have deep sympathy and empathy for their suffering.  Wealthy people often have the luxury to travel and read deeply about the world. Through these experiences, their eyes, minds, and hearts are opened to the suffering around the world and here at home. It’s true that among the wealthy there can be found greed, self-absorption, and cruelty, but there can also be found thankfulness, selflessness, generosity, and kindness. Sometimes people who have been given much or earned much are acutely aware of their blessings and believe that to whom much is given, much is required.

There is ample evidence that those who have been raised in privileged circumstances and those who have worked doggedly to be successful are fully capable of feeling compassion, demonstrating service, and finding solutions to even the most challenging social problems.  The argument that wealthy people cannot serve the poor is foolish, dishonest, and—as is so often the case with liberal arguments—inconsistently applied only to conservatives.