Categories
Corruption Economy How sick is this? Leftist Virtue(!) Politics The Law

Here he goes again: Newsome Signs ‘Most Aggressive’ Package of Green Laws

California Gov. Gavin Newsom on Friday announced a sweeping package of what he called the country’s “most aggressive” climate measures to “accelerate the state’s transition” to non-conventional energy sources.

The package includes 40 bills that appear to provide new green rules on laws related to things ranging from large-scale industry to the family home and private and public transportation.

The Democratic governor’s office said in a statement the package of climate change-focused measures aims to cut pollution and target “big polluters.”

It comes as America’s most populous state has struggled to provide stable electricity for residents amid a heat wave, which saw the state asking residents to use less power and suggest the best times to use air conditioners or charge electric cars.

“This month has been a wake-up call for all of us that later is too late to act on climate change. California isn’t waiting any more,” Newsom said in a statement. “Together with the Legislature, California is taking the most aggressive action on climate our nation has ever seen.”

“We’re cleaning the air we breathe, holding the big polluters accountable, and ushering in a new era for clean energy,” he continued. “That’s climate action done the California Way—and we’re not only doubling down, we’re just getting started.”

In July, Newsom called for “bold actions” to combat climate change. He declared his climate-focused vision for California involves a push to achieve 90 percent “clean energy” by 2035, “carbon neutrality” by 2045, “setback measures” to target oil drilling, carbon capture programs, and to “advance nature-based solutions” to remove carbon from “natural and working lands.”

40 “Green” Bills

Newsom’s office said his sweeping package of measures will create four million new jobs over the next 20 years, cut air pollution by 60 percent, and reduce state oil consumption by 91 percent.

How this would be achieved was not explained in the governor’s news release.

The package of measures, the governor’s office said, will save the state $23 billion by avoiding damage from pollution. It further aims to cut fossil fuel use in buildings and transportation by 92 percent and refinery pollution by 94 percent.

The governor named a list of the 40 new green bills, which touch on things from the broad scope of the climate to more everyday matters such as community air quality, electricity supply, vehicle permits, and gas pricing.

Some of the bills, which were all named in the governor’s news release, include:

  • AB 1279: “The California Climate Crisis Act”
  • AB 1389: “Clean Transportation Program: project funding preferences”
  • AB 1749: “Community emissions reduction programs: toxic air contaminants and criteria air pollutants”
  • AB 1857: “Solid waste”
  • AB 1909: “Vehicles: bicycle omnibus bill”
  • AB 2075: “Energy: electric vehicle charging standards”
  • AB 2622: “Sales and use taxes: exemptions: California Hybrid and Zero-Emission Truck and Bus Voucher Incentive Project: transit buses”
  • AB 2836: “Carl Moyer Memorial Air Quality Standards Attainment Program: vehicle registration fees: California tire fee”
  • SB 529: “Electricity: electrical transmission facilities”
  • SB 1063: “Energy: appliance standards and cost-effective measures”
  • SB 1205: “Water rights: appropriation”
  • SB 1230: “Zero-emission and near-zero-emission vehicle incentive programs: requirements”
  • SB 1322: “Energy: petroleum pricing”
  • SB 1382: “Air pollution: Clean Cars 4 All Program: Sales and Use Tax Law: zero emissions vehicle exemption”

How the package of new green laws and regulations might impact, for example, standards required for cars to be permitted on Californian roads; how and when homes can be cooled; the source of electricity allowed to be supplied to homes; the manufacturing of everyday appliances and products, etc., were not outlined in the governor’s news release.

This latest pronouncement comes on the heels of Newsom enacting regulation to phase out sales of new gas-powered cars by 2035.

Categories
Opinion Politics Reprints from others. The Law

The FBI Had Danchenko on Payroll as An Informant During the Russian Collusion Investigation

Justice must be served.

Johnathan Turley is a man who knows the law inside out. the article below is his article.

A filing by Special Counsel John Durham revealed that Igor Danchenko, who worked as a key contributor to the discredited Steele dossier funded by the Clinton campaign, was later put on the FBI payroll as an informant. The disclosure rocked Washington and raised additional questions of the FBI’s eagerness to pursue any allegations against Donald Trump despite being warned that the dossier appeared to be a vehicle for Russian disinformation.

 

Danchenko is facing five counts of lying to the bureau during that relationship. His trial is scheduled for next month in federal court in Alexandria, Virginia.

The filing states that “In March 2017, the FBI signed the defendant up as a paid confidential human source of the FBI. The FBI terminated its source relationship with the defendant in October 2020.”

The news shocked many of us who have closely followed the Russian collusion controversy for years. The FBI showed a zeal to investigate Trump and his campaign that seemed to border on the blind obsessive. It was not simply with the Steele dossier. On the baseless Alfa Bank allegations (also pushed by Clinton campaign through friends at the FBI)  the supervisory agent for the FBI’s Trump-Russia probe, Joe Pientka, sent a note to FBI special agent Curtis Heide, stating: “People on the 7th floor to include Director are fired up about this server.” Pientka then messaged Heide: “Did you guys open a case? Reach out and put tools on?”That description of the apparent eagerness of then-FBI Director James Comey and others only magnifies concern over the bureau’s alleged bias or predisposition on the Trump investigation. It was the same eagerness that led the FBI to pursue the Russian investigation for years despite being warned early by American intelligence that the Steele dossier contained not just unsupported allegations but possible Russian disinformation.

Indeed, Danchenko’s possible connections to Russian intelligence have been raised as a matter of concern. The filing states “During his January 2017 interview with the FBI, the defendant initially denied having any contact with Russian intelligence or security services but later — as noted by the agents, contradicted himself and stated that he had contact with two individuals who he believed to be connected to those services.”

What is particularly concerning is that the FBI also had former British spy Christopher Steele, on its payroll. Steele then assembled his dossier under the funding of the Clinton campaign which repeatedly denied such funding to the media. This money was funneled through the law firm of Perkins Coie and the campaign’s general counsel, Marc Elias. (The Federal Election Commission (FEC) fined the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign for violating election rules in hiding that funding).

So the FBI cut off Steele as a paid source after he allegedly worked with the media to spread these unproven claims. It then turned around and hired his principle source for the dossier.

The filing also states that Danchenko discussed an interest in obtaining classified information for possible sale to the Russians.

“As has been publicly reported, the defendant was the subject of an FBI counterintelligence investigation from 2009 to 2011. In late 2008, while the defendant was employed by a prominent think tank in Washington, D.C., the defendant engaged two fellow employees about whether one of the employees might be willing or able in the future to provide classified information in exchange for money.

According to one employee (‘Employee-1’), the defendant believed that he (Employee-1) might be in a position to enter the incoming Obama administration and have access to classified information. During this exchange, the defendant informed Employee-1 that he had access to people who would be willing to pay money in exchange for classified information. Employee-1 passed this information to a U.S. government contact, and the information was subsequently passed to the FBI.

Based on this information, the FBI initiated a ‘preliminary investigation’ into the defendant. The FBI converted its investigation into a ‘full investigation’ after learning that the defendant (1) had been identified as an associate of two FBI counterintelligence subjects and (2) had previous contact with the Russian Embassy and known Russian intelligence officers.”

The “prominent think tank” appears to be the Brookings Institution.  I have previously written about the prominent role of Brookings in spreading the Russian collusion claims and hiring an array of people who played critical roles in these investigations. That also included former FBI general counsel James Baker.  For some, it seemed like not just friends but “friends with benefits.” It seems that everyone in this scandal was six degrees from Brookings.

 

Categories
Corruption Economy Elections Faked news Politics

Duh! Democrats Will Continue to Play the ‘Not Trump’ Card in Midterms and Beyond: Strategists

Former President Donald Trump with Justice Samuel Alito. Alito briefly blocked a lower court order forcing the Biden administration to reinstate Trump’s “Remain in Mexico” policy, giving the Supreme Court a few days to consider the case. Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post via Getty Images
By Michael Washburn for Epoch Times September 16, 2022

Democrats believe their best hope is to position themselves as the only alternative to Trump

In the coming midterms, Democrats believe their best hope is to position themselves as the only alternative to Trump and his brand of Republicanism, according to political strategists.

Democrat candidates and their supporters, they say, are hoping that the furor around former President Donald Trump’s alleged storing of sensitive documents in Mar-a-Lago, as well as his alleged role in the events of Jan. 6 will not abate even slightly between now and the November midterm elections, and will distract voters from the Democrats’ shortcomings, particularly with regard to the economy.

Even in battleground states where a variety of Republican candidates competed in this week’s primary elections, Democrats are acting as if their best bet is to paint all Republicans as nascent or actual extremists and to capitalize on some voters’ dissatisfaction with the overturning of Roe v. Wade, the strategists argue.

President Joe Biden and his party have come in for severe criticism for their handling of the economy and for an inflation report credited with bringing about the stock market’s worst day of 2022 on Sept. 13, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average down nearly 1,300 points. Some economists view the highest inflation in four decades as a function of the Biden administration’s expansionist monetary policy, which they argue has led to too much money chasing too few goods. For fiscal year 2022 as a whole, the federal budget deficit is projected to be $1 trillion.

These dismal figures may motivate GOP voters as much as, or more than the court’s decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization will drive Democrat turnout, strategists predict.

In this context, Democrats are quick to seize on any potentially bad news for Trump as good news for their embattled party. Indeed, for some Democrats, the ongoing investigation of Trump’s alleged legal and financial violations may help cast the midterms as a referendum not only on the current president and his economic performance, but on Trump and those Republicans who, they claim, fit the same mold. Given the severity of Biden’s problems, Democrats will do their best to exploit charges and allegations against Trump to their fullest political advantage whether or not the attacks have merit, strategists say.

“Every day brings the risk of more bad news about Trump, which splashes mud on every Republican. The Dobbs ruling is known and GOP candidates either get on the right side of the issue or shift to the economy, which is a bigger deal for most voters,” Keith Naughton, a political consultant and the director of Germantown, Maryland-based Silent Majority Strategies, told The Epoch Times.

Epoch Times Photo
Donald Trump arrives at Trump Tower in N.Y. on Aug. 9, 2022, the day after FBI agents raided his Mar-a-Lago Palm Beach home, in Fla. (David ‘Dee’ Delgado/Reuters)

A Double-Edged Sword?

Mark C. Smith, a professor of political science and Director of the Center for Political Studies at Cedarville University in Ohio, acknowledges Trump’s continuing prominence within the GOP and his popularity with many Republican voters. This has helped make the coming elections, in large part, what some voters in either party would like it to be: a Trump-Biden rematch as much as a spate of House, Senate, and gubernatorial races.

“Unlike other losing presidential candidates, Trump has maintained a strong presence within his party. He is endorsing candidates, raising funds, and holding rallies. This changes the dynamic of the midterm,” Smith told The Epoch Times.

“Interestingly, the Democrats are happy if Trump continues to headline for Republicans. While popular within the GOP, Trump is toxic for independent voters, and he runs poorly with college-educated white voters, as well as suburban women. In light of his recent legal troubles, Democrats are fine with Trump’s expanded role,” Smith said.

But given the severity of the economic problems and other factors, Smith does not believe that the Democrats’ strategy of decrying Trump’s alleged extremism, and that of “Trump-y” candidates in local issues, will succeed.

“If we consider the political climate, this should be a huge election for Republicans. A relatively unpopular president and a struggling economy, in addition to foreign affairs instability, should put the GOP in a strong position,” said Smith.

While the electoral math of midterm contests varies, it is possible to identify a statistical mean when looking at long-term trends, Smith argued.

“On average, the party out of power picks up around 26 House seats, and five or six Senate seats. To the degree this election is normal, it will be good for Republicans and they will take both houses of Congress,” he said.

While turnout in midterm elections is often low compared to presidential elections, Lonny Leitner, vice president of the government affairs firm LS2 Group, which has offices in Iowa and Minnesota, believes that the Mar-a-Lago raid has backfired and that its findings will not dissuade GOP voters.

“I spent a few days out at the Minnesota State Fair, and I can count on one hand how many times someone brought up the fact that they were concerned about the FBI raid, which tells me it is yet another failed attempt by the Democrats to end Trump once and for all. When will they learn?” Leitner told The Epoch Times.

It was far more common for people he encountered at the fair to voice serious concerns over inflation, fuel prices, out-of-control crime, and the crisis at the border with Mexico, Leitner said.

grocery store
People shop at a supermarket in Montebello, Calif., on Aug. 23, 2022. U.S. shoppers are facing increasingly high prices on everyday goods and services as inflation continues to surge with high prices for groceries, gasoline, and housing. (Frederic J. Brown/AFP/Getty Images)

The Case of New Hampshire

To understand the Democrats’ approach, it is useful to look at one state in particular that has been fiercely contested in recent election years, namely New Hampshire, believes Andrew Smith, Director of the University of New Hampshire Survey Center and an expert on elections and electoral methodology.

Smith believes that New Hampshire is not as politically conservative as its reputation and famous license plate motto (“Live Free or Die”) might lead some people to believe.

“New Hampshire’s electorate is divided between Republicans and Democrats. Democrats generally have a little bit of an advantage in presidential elections, but it’s not that big an advantage in midterm elections with a Democrat president,” Smith told The Epoch Times.

“It’s also a state with higher levels of education and income than most states, and it’s a suburban state,” he said, noting a large proportion of its population lives in the suburbs surrounding Boston. “In that sense, it’s similar to other suburban areas of the northeast that lean Democrat. It’s not a Republican state, that’s a myth,” he added.

Generalizations

In the GOP primary elections held in New Hampshire on Sept. 13, Karoline Leavitt won the race for the first congressional district against a field of rivals including Matt Mowers, Gail Huff Brown, and Russell Prescott, with 34 percent of the vote compared to 25 percent, 17 percent, and 10 percent respectively. In the second congressional district race, Robert Burns scored a victory with 33 percent of the vote versus 29 percent for George Hansel, 25 percent for Lily Tang Williams, and smaller numbers for other competitors.

In the Senate primary, former military officer Donald Bolduc, who hopes to unseat Democrat Senator Maggie Hassan in November, barely edged out his GOP rival Chuck Morse, winning 37.1 percent of the vote to Morse’s 35.8 percent.

In the GOP gubernatorial primary, incumbent Chris Sununu easily trounced all his rivals, winning 78 percent of the vote.

Epoch Times Photo
New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu speaks during a ceremony in Manchester, N.H., on Sept. 2, 2020. (Scott Eisen/Getty Images for DraftKings)

The winning candidates come from a wide variety of backgrounds and have diverse views and ideologies. Leavitt is a former assistant press secretary in the Trump administration, Burns is an entrepreneur and former treasurer of a New Hampshire county, while Sununu has a reputation as a moderate Republican who helped secure funding for a cause championed by Democrats, namely state funding for full-day kindergarten.

While some in the media may wish to associate Bolduc with Trump, it is important to remember that he lost New Hampshire’s 2020 Senate primary to Trump-endorsed candidate Corky Messner, Smith said.

In spite of the eclecticism of these candidates and the impossibility of categorizing them all as strictly “Trump-y” figures, Smith argued, Democrats will treat the candidates in New Hampshire and other states as Republicans in the Trump mode in the hope of wooing the roughly 42 percent of voters in the state who register as independents. Smith said that the tactic put to use in New Hampshire is a microcosm of a broad political strategy.

“Democrats are going to use all these candidates’ connection with Trump—whether it’s there or not—as arguments to vote against them. But that’s true across the country. Democrats are running as if Trump is still in office,” he commented.

With the tricky position in which Democrats find themselves amid so much bad economic news, they place their hopes in controversies around a figure who remains powerful and influential within the GOP.

“All the Mar-a-Lago stuff, they’re praying that will go on until after the midterm elections, because they’re running at a moment when the president is not very popular, and that’s a difficult place to be, as we saw in 2010 and 2014,” Smith continued.

In the New Hampshire races in November 2010, Republican candidates won both the congressional districts contested in this week’s primaries, though they did not win the governorship, Smith noted. Looking at the 2010 midterm elections nationally, Republicans won a majority in the House of Representatives, which they held onto in 2014 in addition to winning majority control of the Senate.

Epoch Times Photo
President Joe Biden delivers a primetime speech at Independence National Historical Park Sept. 1, 2022 in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Biden described “MAGA Republicans” as being extremists who posed a threat to democracy. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

The ‘Extremism’ Charge

Since the spring, when predictions widely favored the GOP in the coming midterms, Democrats have found more opportunities to try to paint Trump and the GOP more broadly as extremist and will rely heavily on this political strategy all the way through the elections, believes David Bateman, a professor of government at Cornell University.***

***According to his own words and published books and articles, Bateman leaves hard left. (Pro-abortion,anti-conservative values, etc) –TPR

This strategy does not come at the expense of, but rather goes hand in hand with, a strong emphasis on the Dobbs ruling and other issues of concern to Democrat voters at the local level, he argued. To a certain extent, voters will decide in accordance with the narratives crafted by the party leadership as Democrat spokespeople try to link congressional and gubernatorial hopefuls to the 45th president.

“Elections are never about one thing, whether that is a referendum on presidential leadership, national economic or other issues, or the local performance and responsiveness of the incumbent. And voters make choices not only on the basis of their priorities, but on the basis of the choices and narratives presented to them by parties. Democrats probably want voters to make a choice on the basis of local issues—which tend to favor incumbents—and then on the extremism of the GOP, as showcased by Trump but as embodied locally by GOP candidates,” Bateman told The Epoch Times.

Though predictions about the likely outcome of the midterms have swung since the spring and do not monochromatically favor GOP candidates as much as before, Democrats still play to what they see as their strengths.

“I expect Democrats’ basic strategy remains the same: have their congressional candidates highlight how they have delivered locally for their districts as well as the extremism of their GOP rivals, while the larger party apparatus and the president emphasize GOP extremism nationally. The abortion decision has helped Democrats a lot, as has the continued attention to Trump,” Bateman said.

The Epoch Times has reached out to the DNC for comment.

Categories
Politics Reprints from others. Uncategorized

Trump Supporters CAMP OUT – LINE UP EARLY to See President Trump in Youngstown, Ohio At 7:00 pm Eastern

Live and in Person. GP Photo

Thanks to GP for this article.

Trump Supporters CAMP OUT – LINE UP EARLY to See President Trump in Youngstown, Ohio At 7:00 pm Eastern

By Margaret Flavin
Published September 17, 2022 at 9:00am
Gettr Gettr

President Trump will speak Saturday night in Youngstown, Ohio at a Save America rally to stump for U.S. Senate candidate J.D. Vance. Additional speakers scheduled to appear include Jim Jordan (R-OH) and Bill Johnson (R-OH) and congressional candidates Madison Gesiotto Gilbert, J.R. Majewski and Max Miller.

Trump’s Save American Super PAC said in a statement that the rally continues an “unprecedented effort to advance the MAGA agenda by energizing voters and highlighting America First candidates and causes.”

The President’s supporters began camping out ahead of the event.

There is already a line forming outside of the Covelli Center in anticipation of Trump’s visit.

TRENDING: BREAKING: DOJ Asks Appeals Court to Block Judge Aileen Cannon’s Mar-a-Lago Ruling – What Are They Hiding?

Watch the video below:

Real America’s Voice News talked to three black Trump supporters and asked them what they think of President Trump.

“Trump did a lot of doing and Biden did a lot of talking,” they responded.

Watch the video below:

 

WKBN reports:

A traveling group of supporters of former President Donald Trump has been camping out at the Covelli Centre ahead of Saturday’s rally.

They came from all over — Indiana, Tennessee, Connecticut, Florida and near Cleveland. Some have been in Youngstown since early this week.

“We come and hang out so we can get a good place in line,” said Sharon Anderson, of Tennessee.

Anderson is part of a group called the “Front Row Joes.” They head to the former president’s rallies early to tailgate, in a sense.

Libby Earle DePiero has been to more than 60, while Saturday will be Jared Petry’s 10th rally.

They say the experience is one of a kind.

“I just love being there. It’s like going to a rock concert, like from the old days when you used to travel around. It’s like the enthusiasm and the crowd, it’s just such energy, and it gives you such joy,” said Earle DePiero, of Connecticut.

“It’s incredible. It’s the most fun thing I’ve ever had, just the energy and the passion and the crowd. It’s just really a remarkable experience. Actually, it’s kind of addicting. You do one, and it’s so exciting and fun, you look on your phone, ‘Where’s the next one? Where’s the next one?’” said Petry, of Brunswick, Ohio.

“It’s incredible. It’s the most fun thing I’ve ever had, just the energy and the passion and the crowd. It’s just really a remarkable experience. Actually, it’s kind of addicting. You do one, and it’s so exciting and fun, you look on your phone, ‘Where’s the next one? Where’s the next one?’” said Petry, of Brunswick, Ohio.

You can watch the rally live at Right Side Broadcasting on Rumble.

Categories
Opinion Politics Reprints from others.

Joe Biden Repeats Charlottesville ‘Fine People Hoax’ at ‘Unity Summit’

Yes you did. Government overreach. FOX Photo.

I want to thank Joel over at Breitbart for this great article. I’ve spoken with Joel on several occasions when he’s filled in over at AM870. Same station Hough Hewitt is on.

President Joe Biden repeated the Charlottesville “fine people hoax” on Thursday at his “unity summit,” falsely claiming that then-President Donald Trump referred to neo-Nazis as “very fine people. Trump said they should be “condemned totally.”

Biden spoke after Susan Bro, the mother of Heather Heyer, the left-wing protester who was murdered by a neo-Nazi during the unrest in Charlottesville in August 2017.

 

 

There were peaceful protests on either side of the question of whether to remove a statute of Confederate general Robert E. Lee, but these were overtaken by right-wing extremist groups and left-wing rioters who clashed in the streets. Heyer was murdered when a neo-Nazi purposely drove his car into a peaceful left-wing protest.

President Trump issued three statements on the violence. In the first, he condemned violence on “all sides.” In the second, he specifically condemned neo-Nazi groups, white supremacists, and the KKK. In the third, during a press conference, he said that there had been “very fine people” in Charlottesville, but made clear he was referring to peaceful protesters like Heyer. He said specifically: “I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally.”

The “fine people hoax” has been publicly debunked several times: for example, by then-Vice President Mike Pence at the 2020 vice-presidential debate; and again during the second impeachment trial of (by then) former President Trump.

Nevertheless, Biden repeated the hoax again — a hoax that has, arguable, increased hatred and disunity in the country, since it falsely associates Trump supporters with neo-Nazis, white supremacists, and violent extremists, poisoning political debate.

 

 

Biden appeared to be repeating the same script he had used since his campaign launch — a standard text on Charlottesville that he memorized and repeated in speech after speech, even after he was confronted with the truth of what Trump actually said:

 

 

 

After he related his familiar description of the neo-Nazis, Biden said that after Heyer’s murder, “When the last guy was asked, ‘What do you think?”, he said he thought there were some fine people on both sides.” There were groans in the audience.

Biden also linked the January 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol to Charlottesville. He called the “unity summit” to rally supporters against so-called “MAGA Republicans,” whom Biden recently called a “threat to the country” in a prime-time address.

 

Categories
COVID Medicine Sports

17-Year-Old Student Suffers Heart Attack After Cross Country Race – Found 2 Bloodclots – Doctors Baffled on Exactly What Happened

Gabe Higginbottom (Source: Bartlett High School)
By Jim Hoft for The Gateway Pundit

High school officials in Tennessee said that a student and cross country runner suffered a heart attack following a race in Florida on Saturday, September 10.

Gabe Higginbottom, 17, a junior at Bartlett High School in Tennessee, participated in a cross-country race in Pensacola, Florida.

According to a Facebook post, Gabe didn’t bounce back following the race.

“Yesterday after the Pensacola race he didn’t bounce back,” according to a post published in the Bartlett High School Boys Cross Country Facebook group.

“After an hour he was taken by some of the dad’s and coach to the medical tent. His vitals were good. Out of an abundance of caution, the doctor on site said he should go to the hospital. At the hospital, his vitals were good until they weren’t. He was then airlifted with his mom to Gainesville Florida for further tests. Today he had surgery and it went well. Please pray for this family and our team,” the post concluded.

A healthy, athletic kid has a heart attack, doctors find blood clots. Hmm, I wonder if he got the Covid-19 experimental gene therapy clot shot.–TPR

The Bartlett City Schools also released a statement regarding the incident. According to the school, doctors found two blood clots after they performed a 3-hour surgery.

“On September 10th, after a race in Pensacola, FL, one of Bartlett High School’s Cross-Country runners suffered a heart attack. Gabe Higginbottom, 17, a junior at Bartlett High School was sent to Ascension Sacred Heart Pensacola Hospital at the advice of the on-staff medical team. Sacred Heart performed a CAT scan which revealed further action needed to be taken.”

“Gabe was transported to the UF Shands Heart and Vascular Hospital in Gainesville, FL by helicopter that night. In Gainesville, they found his right artery was completely blocked. The doctors performed an angioplasty to insert a balloon to open up that artery. Later, they performed a 3-hour surgery inserting two stents and found two blood clots.”

“Cross Country coach, Kris Harman, and Gabe’s mother, Edrika, remain by Gabe’s side, as he is currently recovering at the UF Shands in Gainesville, FL. A Go Fund Me page has been set up by the Cross Country Booster Club. The money raised will be used to offset any medical bills. No amount is too small. Please pray for Gabe and his family as he begins the rehab process,” the post concluded.

More from Kentucky.com:

Kris Harman, a team coach, told WREG something just wasn’t right with Gabe after competing.

“He started complaining about his chest hurting and kept complaining and we went to the trainer’s tent…everybody initially thinks it’s hot, it’s heat exhaustion so give him ice but he’s still complaining about his chest,” Harman told the outlet.

Harman told WREG that doctors found Gabe had a blocked artery and performed a procedure to fix it. “Now, they’re just trying to figure out what caused it,” Harman told the outlet.

Phil Clark, the athletic coordinator at Bartlett City Schools, told the Memphis Commercial Appeal that doctors said the heart attack wasn’t heat related and that they don’t know what caused it. “The doctor at the hospital he’s at, he told our track coach he had seen one (other) instance like this in his 11 years down there,” Clark said, the outlet reported.

He said Gabe is working toward recovery.

“They’re going to get him up and get him walking down the hallway this morning and they think everything is going to be fine,” Clark said Tuesday, Sept. 13, according to the Commercial Appeal. “He’s a strong, healthy young man, which surely helped in this situation.”

Categories
Crime Reprints from others.

FETTERMAN’S MURDEROUS CAMPAIGN AIDES: HOW IT REALLY HAPPENED Dr. Oz should never shut up about the Horton brothers.

A great piece from a co writer at substack Ann Coulter.

Dr. Mehmet Oz, Republican Senate candidate in Pennsylvania, recently attacked his opponent, the ridiculous Lt. Gov. John Fetterman, for a pro-criminal record that would embarrass George Soros. Specifically, he criticized Fetterman for employing as aides on his campaign Dennis and Lee Horton, who spent 27 years in prison for a horrific armed robbery murder.

Drunk on his own self-righteousness, Fetterman sanctimoniously responded: “Does Dr. Oz believe that the wrongfully convicted should die in prison?” He added that the brothers “spent 27 years in prison for a crime they didn’t commit.”

Members of the media, who fervently believe our prisons are just bursting at the seams with completely innocent men, didn’t need to hear more. Suddenly, the entire media-big tech-entertainment conglomerate was screaming at Oz: HOW DARE YOU, YOU MORALLY BANKRUPT DOUCHEBAG! THESE TWO MEN WERE PROVED INNOCENT!

Were they now?

Here’s how the media tells “the actual story,” as somberly delivered by MSNBC’s Chris Hayes, who majored in “Easily Fooled” studies at Brown University:

“According to brothers Dennis and Lee Horton [and who would know better?], on Memorial Day 1993, they were out for a joyride when they picked up their friend, a guy named Robert Leaf.

“What they did not know was that Leaf had just murdered Samuel Alemo and was currently being pursued by the police [sketch that scene for me, Chris]. They were pulled over and all three men were arrested.

“The police involved with the case were accused of using a whole host of problematic tactics during the investigation [yes, they were “accused” — accusations laughed out of court by Democratic judges]; eyewitnesses changed their story [they did not] after prosecutors tried to pin the crime on all three of them — the Hortons as well.

“And the district attorney’s case file, which was not made available till 2018 [I think we know why, Larry Krasner!], included a note stating Leaf is the shooter and a police note indicating Leaf acknowledged his role — all seeming to clear the Hortons. [total B.S.]

The Horton brothers, who are black, refused a plea agreement because they said they didn’t want to plead guilty to a crime they did not commit.”

Below, I have edited Hayes’ description to include only those parts that are relevant and actually true:

“on Memorial Day 1993 …

“a guy named Robert Leaf

“They were … pulled over and all three men were arrested.

“The Horton brothers … are black.”

Luckily for people interested in knowing the truth — a group that decidedly does not include Chris Hayes — the Horton brothers spent their years in prison clogging up the courts with frivolous appeals, so it’s possible to find out how these innocent lambs were somehow convicted of A CRIME THEY DIDN’T COMMIT!

In dismissing their most recent appeal, here’s how the Pennsylvania Superior Court summarized the “evidence adduced at trial” — that is, evidence presented in open court, supported by physical evidence and eyewitness testimony, subjected to cross-examination, and believed by 12 members of a jury:

“On May 31, 1993, [Dennis Horton], his brother Lee Horton (‘Lee’), and a co-conspirator Robert Leaf (‘Leaf’) robbed Filito’s Bar located at 5th Street and Hunting Park Avenue.

“During the course of the robbery, [Dennis Horton], who was carrying a rifle, shot Samuel Alemo multiple times. Alemo later died from his gunshot wounds. [Dennis Horton] also shot Luz Archella and her daughter Luz Martinez, injuring both. Leaf brandished what appeared to be a black pistol while Lee took money from bar patrons. After leaving the bar, the three men fled in a blue automobile.

“A passerby was able to supply police with a description of the vehicle and a partial license plate number. A radio call was sent out, which included a description of the three assailants, their vehicle, and the last four digits of the license plate. A police officer observed the vehicle a short time later only a mile from the crime scene, and placed [Dennis Horton] and his companions under arrest.

“Police recovered a .22-caliber semiautomatic rifle from the backseat of the car, as well as a black pellet gun under the front passenger seat. Ballistics testing identified the rifle as the same weapon used during the robbery at Filito’s. [Horton], Lee, and Leaf … were taken to the hospital where Martinez and her daughter, as well as another bar patron, Miguel DeJesus, identified them as the robbers.”

(The judges, incidentally, were all Democrats, including the only black woman on the 38-member appellate court, who subscribes to the theory that prison is “The New Jim Crow.”)

As you can see right away, one problem with the media’s version of events is: What the hell happened to the other two guys?

This was a daytime robbery of a bar, where two of the perpetrators walked around, taking the patrons’ wallets at gunpoint — not a nighttime mugging witnessed from 20 yards away. The victims had plenty of time to observe the perps. However much criminal defense lawyers attack eyewitness testimony, the patrons certainly knew it was three guys, not one; that they were black, not white; and they were male, not female.

But more important, right after the murdering thieves sped off, a passerby called the police with a description of the car, including four of six numbers from the license plate. Within minutes, that very car was stopped by the police a mile from the bar. And you’ll never guess what they found in that car … three black guys and a recently fired rifle!

Explain, again, how the Horton brothers happened to be in that car?

 

Right after their arrest, all three men were positively identified at the hospital by the people they’d shot at earlier that day. But even without that identification, again: They were caught in the getaway car, mere minutes after the crime.

So if I understand it correctly, the media’s theory of the crime is as follows:

Immediately after the robbery — and I mean immediately! — Leaf told his REAL accomplices: I’ve got a fantastic idea! You guys get out of the car. I know these two brothers — the Hortons — who look exactly like you and I’m pretty sure are wearing the exact same clothes. Also, their car is identical to yours and — you’ll never believe this — their license plate number is only off by two digits. I’ll just call them to come pick me up and wait here by the side of the road with the long-barreled — and easy to conceal! — rifle we just fired — OH CRAP! IT’S THE POLICE!

Look, it would be one thing if Fetterman defended his years-long PR campaign on behalf of the murdering Horton brothers by saying, They’ve served long enough! Everybody deserves a second chance. I would disagree, especially because the brothers continue to deny their guilt — but in that case, at least Fetterman would only be a gullible fool, and not a despicable, bald-faced liar.

     COPYRIGHT 2022 ANN COULTER

Categories
Corruption Crime Politics The Courts

Philadelphia DA Found in Contempt by State Lawmakers One Day After Judge Says He Made ‘False’ Claims to Court to Free Man from Death Row

NEW YORK, NY – JUNE 25: Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner speaks to a reporter at of the election party of public defender Tiffany Caban moments before she claimed victory in the in the Queens District Attorney Democratic Primary election, June 25, 2019 in the Queens borough of New York City. Running on a progressive platform that includes decriminalizing sex work and closing the Rikers Island jail, Caban narrowly defeated Queens Borough President Melinda Katz and scored a shocking victory for city’s the progressive grassroots network and criminal justice movement (Photo by Scott Heins/Getty Images)
Adam Klasfeld  For Law & Crime  Sep 14th, 2022, 7:03 pm

Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner (D), one of the first of a wave of progressive prosecutors elected on a criminal justice reform platform, made “false” claims that his office communicated with the family members of the victims of a man that he sought to free from death row, a federal judge found.

The following day, in what could only be described as a rough week for the top prosecutor, the Pennsylvania House of Representatives voted to hold him in contempt for failing to cooperate with the committee investigating his possible impeachment.

“Extremely Disappointed to Learn of the District Attorney’s Stance”

According to a scathing 28-page memorandum opinion, the district attorney’s office wrongly suggested the relatives of the Pennsylvania couple killed by Robert Wharton supported his release from death row. In fact, U.S. District Judge Mitchell Goldberg found, Krasner’s office did not even contact the sole surviving victim of the attack: Lisa Hart-Newman, who was an infant when Wharton killed her parents, turned off the heat, and left her inside the house to die.

“This Court (which only learned of the family’s opposition through the Attorney General’s Office) is not the only one who considered the District Attorney’s representations misleading,” the opinion states. “Lisa Hart-Newman, the infant, now age thirty-seven, who was left to die by Wharton after her parents were murdered, stated she was ‘extremely disappointed to learn of the District Attorney’s stance and very troubled that he implied that the family approved of his viewpoint.’ […] Michael Allen, one of the brothers of the deceased, also noted, ‘[I]t would appear that there was a substantially deficient briefing by the DA’s office regarding the significance and implications for vacating Wharton’s death penalty.’”

Krasner, who worked at the Federal Public Defender’s Office before becoming an elected prosecutor, is an opponent of capital punishment, and one of his early actions in office was to drop dozens of drug charges as the city braced to decriminalize marijuana. His office sided with Wharton in his federal habeas death penalty case on the grounds that his lawyer failed to properly investigate and present evidence of his positive adjustment to prison.

The DA’s office argued they did not they did not need to present a full investigation of the facts for and against Wharton, but Judge Goldberg noted that the Third Circuit gave prosecutors precisely the opposite instruction.

“Trial courts and lawyers take direction from appellate judges,” wrote the judge, who — ethics disclosure here — is the father of Law&Crime’s director of podcasting Sam Goldberg. “This is such a basic legal principle that no precedential or statutory citation is needed.”

“‘Egregious’ and ‘Exceptional’”

Finding Krasner’s office committed “egregious” and “exceptional” violations of the federal rules of procedure, the judge ordered the DA to “send separate written apologies” within 30 days of the ruling to victim family members Tony Hart, Michael Allen, Patrice Carr, and to victim Lisa Hart-Newman. Goldberg, who is approaching his 14th anniversary of his appointment to the federal bench by George W. Bush in 2008, also ordered more candor from the DA in future cases in his courtroom. He declined to impose financial penalties.

The day after Monday’s ruling, a committee of the GOP-dominated Pennsylvania House of Representatives voted to hold Krasner in contempt. Calling itself the Select Committee on Restoring Law and Order, the body was formed over the City of Brotherly Love’s rising crime and murder rates. One Republican lawmaker called for Krasner’s impeachment over what he called the top prosecutor’s “dereliction of duty.”

According to the New York Times, Krasner spurned the legislature’s investigation as antidemocratic and illegitimate. He was voted into office twice by significant margins. The Philadephia Inquirer reported that even large members of his party supported the contempt resolution over his refusal to comply with a subpoena, which passed by a 162-38 margin with almost all Republicans and some 49 Democrats.

The Times reported that the resolution could subject Krasner to a range of penalties — up to imprisonment, but the legislature has not decided upon what to pursue.

Krasner’s office did not immediately respond to Law&Crime’s email requesting comment.

Read the ruling below:

[photo by Scott Heins/Getty Images]

Law&Crime’s managing editor Adam Klasfeld has spent more than a decade on the legal beat. Previously a reporter for Courthouse News, he has appeared as a guest on MSNBC, BBC, NPR, PBS, Sky News, and other networks.

Categories
Corruption Economy How sick is this? Immigration Opinion Politics Reprints from others. Un documented.

Biden Grows Foreign-Born Population to Highest Level Ever. Two million more Democrat voters.

TOPSHOT - Honduran migrants taking part in a caravan heading to the US, leave Arriaga on their way to San Pedro Tapanatepec, southern Mexico on October 27, 2018. - Mexico on Friday announced it will offer Central American migrants medical care, education for their children and access to temporary jobs as long as they stay in two southern states. (Photo by Guillermo Arias / AFP) (Photo credit should read GUILLERMO ARIAS/AFP via Getty Images)

Thanks to our friends over at Breitbart.

Under President Joe Biden, the foreign-born population of the United States has grown to its highest level ever recorded, the U.S. Census Bureau reports.

Over the last year, the Biden administration added two million new foreign-born residents to the U.S. population — undocumented and legal immigrants on green cards and visas — serving as a boon for Biden’s billionaire donors in the financial industry who are some of the biggest beneficiaries of mass immigration and an ever-growing populace.

According to Steven Camarota at the Center for Immigration Studies, who analyzed the latest Census Bureau data, the foreign-born population hit nearly 47 million this year, which is the largest ever recorded by the agency’s Annual Social and Economic Supplement survey.

Since 1970, the nation’s foreign-born population has quintupled and since 1980, it has tripled in size. In 1990, the foreign-born population was just half of what it is today — with 1-in-7 U.S. residents having been born outside of the country.

“The foreign-born share of the U.S. population is approaching the record highs reached in 1910 (14.7 percent) and 1890 (14.8 percent),” Camarota writes.

Center for Immigration Studies

For America’s working and middle class, mass illegal and legal immigration depresses wages and is a drag on labor force participation among native-born Americans while also pushing American communities to the brink in terms of social services, infrastructure, and sky-high housing costs.

“Just the sheer number of people overwhelms communities,” Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) said this week. “This idea of mass immigration — whether it’s illegal immigration or whether it’s just mass immigration through the legal process like the Diversity Lottery or chain migration — that is not conducive to assimilating people into a civil society.”

For the wealthiest of income earners, mass illegal and legal immigration provides an endless stream of low-wage foreign workers as well as more consumers to sell to, more families needing housing, and billions in wider profit margins and reduced wages.

Though many Republicans running in this year’s midterm elections have gone silent on legal immigration levels — with more than a million being awarded green cards every year — GOP voters overwhelmingly continue to back drastic cuts to boost wages and job openings.

The latest Rasmussen Reports survey shows that a majority of 54 percent of likely Republican voters want to cut legal immigration levels by more than half to fewer than 500,000 admissions a year. Meanwhile, a majority of swing voters say they want legal immigration levels cut down to at least 750,000 admissions a year with a plurality supporting cutting levels by more than half.

 

 

Categories
Child Abuse Emotional abuse Leftist Virtue(!) Privacy Reprints from others. Sexual Abuse

A Plan to Transform America — How Homosexuality Has Been Promoted As Acceptable

NYC 2021 PRIDE PARADE -- A TAMER PHOTO

Introduction by The Phoenix Rises:

First off, this is not a hit piece on individual gays or lesbians. They have both good and bad people in their group, just like everybody else. Second, what knowledgeably consenting adults do behind closed doors is nobody else’s business. Third, being in a close relationship with someone of the same gender need not have anything to do with sexual activities. One obvious example: Frodo Baggins and Samwise Gangee. Another example: the Lone Ranger and Tonto.

That said, predators and groomers (of any sexual preference) deserve any backlash and/or punishment they receive for their unjust and immoral behavior in their treatment of others. Especially those too young to give informed consent.

Finally, what is objectionable is putting on a public show and demanding that everyone else should kowtow to your viewpoint. Again, this applies to ANY group, no matter what they profess to. This goes for BLM/Antifa, the KKK and other racist groups, ISIS, other rabid ‘religious’ groups, and so on.

While this article comes mainly from a Christian denomination’s article on the subject,  it almost bends over backward to counter any accusations of bigotry or bias. It is about morals. Morality is a separate issue from religious dogma, as many atheists will attest to.

__________________________________________________________

Originally by Charles Melear in Beyond Today – a United Church of God publication.

The startling shift in American attitudes toward gays and same-sex marriage is not the result of chance or random events. More than a quarter century ago, gay strategists laid out a plan to transform the nation—with astounding success.

Do you consider yourself an independent thinker? What is the source of your conclusions regarding right or wrong? How do you determine your opinions regarding the news and political events?

Professional marketers develop strategies to influence and persuade potential customers to purchase their products. Some are very successful, as you can probably hum or sing dozens of pithy jingles or recognize the logos of many companies.

But you should also realize that people are affecting our culture who you’ve probably never heard of. How about Dan Wieden, co-founder of the advertising agency Wieden+Kennedy? Have you ever repeated the Nike slogan “Just do it”? Wieden developed that in 1988.

How  abouter used the expression, “Where’s the beef?” Wendy’s hamburger chain profited from that slogan’s creator, Cliff Freeman, around 1984. You’ve probably never heard of him either.

You’ve also likely never heard of Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen. Nevertheless, these men have directly affected your life and American culture—strategically, gradually, subtly and definitely intentionally.

In the November 1987 edition of Guide, a magazine for homosexuals, the two men authored an article titled “The Overhauling of Straight America.” There Kirk, a researcher in neuropsychiatry, and Madsen, a public relations consultant, laid out a blueprint to fundamentally change Americans’ attitudes toward homosexuals and homosexuality. In 1989 they expanded that blueprint into a 398-page book titled After the Ball: How America Will Conquer Its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 90s.

The “bible” of the homosexual agenda

Their goal was to make homosexuality acceptable and to forge negative opinions of any who disagree. The article began by stating: “The first order of business is desensitization of the American public concerning gays and gay rights. To desensitize the public is to help it view homosexuality with indifference . . . She likes strawberry and I like vanilla; he follows baseball and I follow football. No big deal.” (We quote from the Guide article rather than the book, which at times is quite vulgar and graphic. Interested readers can find the article in whole or in part online.) Full text for THE OVERHAULING OF STRAIGHT AMERICA

One person described “The Overhauling of Straight America” as the “bible” of the homosexual agenda. It is quite a contrast to the Bible of Christianity.

The authors, relating to the culture of the late 1980s, were realistic. They continued: At least in the beginning we are seeking public desensitization and nothing more. We do not need and cannot expect a full ‘appreciation’ or ‘understanding’ of homosexuality from the average American. You can forget about trying to persuade the masses that homosexuality is a good thing. But if you can only get them to think that is just another thing . . . , then your battle for legal and social rights is virtually won.

To understand how startlingly successful their blueprint proved to be, consider this: In 1987, the year that article was published, Gallup polls showed that only 33 percent of those polled thought that same-sex relations between consenting adults should be legal, while 55 percent thought such action should be outlawed (numbers don’t total 100 percent because some offered no opinion). By 2015, the numbers were more than reversed—68 percent believed such sexual relations should be legal and only 28 percent were opposed.

Same-sex marriage was so off the radar that it wasn’t even asked about in Gallup polls until 1996, when only 27 percent approved and 68 percent were opposed. Today, Gallup polls show that 58 percent approve and 40 percent disapprove—another startling turnaround in attitudes.

Gallup polls in 1989 showed that only 19 percent of Americans believed people were born homosexual, with 48 percent believing it was due to environmental factors such as upbringing. By 2015 those numbers had dramatically shifted to 51 percent believing homosexuals were born that way and only 30 percent attributing it to other factors. (This is in spite of the fact that extensive genetic research and many studies of identical twins where only one was homosexual have disproven genetic determinism.)

Well-researched surveys (as opposed to some with markedly skewed samples and/or methodology) have consistently placed the homosexual population of America at around 2 to 3 percent—yet the influence of homosexuals on American culture is vastly out of proportion with their actual numbers. How did this come to be?

For those who remember what American culture was like in 1987 when the blueprint was first published, you can easily evaluate whether the six strategies they outlined have been successful. For those too young to remember the late 80s, consider how pervasive these things are in the culture you experience today.

What was their blueprint for overhauling American attitudes? Following are the six steps they advocated a quarter-century ago.

Step 1: “Talk about gays and gayness as loudly and as often as possible.”

Authors Kirk and Madsen say that almost any behavior begins to look normal if you are exposed to enough of it . . . The way to benumb raw sensitivities about homosexuality is to have a lot of people talk a great deal about the subject in a neutral or supportive way . . . Constant talk builds the impression that public opinion is at least divided on the subject, and that a sizable segment accepts or even practices homosexuality.

Consider this quote: And when we say talk about homosexuality, we mean just that. In the early stages of any campaign to reach straight America, the masses should not be shocked and repelled by premature exposure to homosexual behavior itself. Instead, the imagery of sex should be downplayed . . . First let the camel get his nose inside the tent—only later his unsightly derriere!

When we are exposed to anything repeatedly, it becomes routine and normal. What initially might shock someone eventually can become acceptable. And acceptability is the ultimate goal. What at one time was highly offensive to the vast majority of Americans is now no big deal. They’ve been lulled into complacency.

Where we talk is important, wrote Kirk and Madsen. . . . The average American household watches over seven hours of TV daily. Those hours open up a gateway into the private world of straights, through which a Trojan horse might be passed . . .

 So far, gay Hollywood has provided our best covert weapon in the battle to desensitize the mainstream.

So far, gay Hollywood has provided our best covert weapon in the battle to desensitize the mainstream. Bit by bit over the past ten years, gay characters and gay themes have been introduced into TV programs and films . . . On the whole the impact has been encouraging.

Have you noticed the number of homosexual characters appearing in TV programs and how they are overwhelmingly depicted positively? From a rarity on TV in the 1980s, such characters are now almost inescapable. A USA Today article last year reported 32 regularly appearing bisexual or homosexual characters in primetime network scripted series for the 2014-15 television season, with another 64 appearing in cable TV shows (Bill Keveney, “Yes, You Really Are Seeing More LGBT Characters on TV,” Oct. 1, 2014). 

If a child grows up hearing about the gay lifestyle and seeing it portrayed positively his entire life, won’t that make it seem normal?

Kirk and Madsen also described a strategy by which the homosexual movement could counter and largely nullify opposition from America’s churches. They wrote: When conservative churches condemn gays, there are only two things we can do to confound the homophobia of true believers. First, we can use talk to muddy the moral waters. This means publicizing support for gays by more moderate churches, raising theological objections of our own about conservative interpretations of biblical teachings, and exposing hatred and inconsistency.

This they have certainly accomplished—enlisting liberal scholars to explain away biblical teachings about homosexual practices, reinterpreting their plain meaning. 

They continued: “Second, we can undermine the moral authority of homophobic churches by portraying them as antiquated backwaters, badly out of step with the times and with the latest findings of psychology.”

Again, their strategy has succeeded remarkably well. Those who hold to biblical teachings about homosexuality and marriage are condemned as bigots, homophobes and backward thinkers who are a threat to progress.

Some who have stood up have been fined, ordered to attend pro-homosexual “sensitivity training,” lost jobs or had their businesses sued out of existence by government agents and agencies that support the homosexual agenda.

The next step in their stated strategy similarly turns truth on its head.

Step 2: “Portray gays as victims, not as aggressive challengers.”

In any campaign to win over the public, gays must be cast as victims in need of protection,” Kirk and Madsen wrote. Of course this does not address the issue of whether the gay lifestyle is right or wrong. It is an attempt to emotionally manipulate others with the motive of getting them to accept values they otherwise wouldn’t agree with.

If gays are presented, instead, as a strong and prideful tribe promoting a rigidly nonconformist and deviant lifestyle, they are more likely to be seen as a public menace that justifies resistance and oppression. For that reason, we must forego the temptation to strut our ‘gay pride’ publicly when it conflicts with the Gay Victim image, they wrote.

. . . This means that jaunty mustachioed musclemen would keep very low profile in gay commercials and other public presentations, while sympathetic figures of nice young people, old people, and attractive women would be featured.

They then add this caution for those who would want to push the gay agenda too far: It almost goes without saying that groups on the farthest margin of acceptability such as NAMBLA [the North American Man-Boy Love Association, which as its name suggests promotes adult-child homosexual sex] must play no part at all in such a campaign: suspected child-molesters will never look like victims . . .

Straight viewers must be able to identify with gays as victims . . . To this end, the persons featured in the public campaign should be decent and upright, appealing and admirable by straight standards . . . they should be indistinguishable from the straights we would like to reach.

It should be obvious that we are beyond this strategy today. The gay community should no longer be considered victims in the United States—and in reality those in the gay movement have become aggressive challengers of traditional values and biblical beliefs on many fronts.

This brings us to the next step in their strategic blueprint.

Step 3: “Give protectors a just cause.”

A media campaign that casts gays as society’s victims and encourages straights to be their protectors must make it easier for those to respond to assert and explain their new protectiveness. Few straight women, and even fewer straight men, will want to defend homosexuality boldly as such . . . Our campaign should not demand direct support for homosexual practices, [but] should instead take anti-discrimination as its theme.

The right to free speech, freedom of beliefs, freedom of association, due process and equal protection of laws—these should be the concerns brought to mind by our campaign.”

Again, this tactic is antiquated now. Law and due process should’ve always protected all citizens equally. The real issue is whether there is a true Creator God who authored the Bible and if that God has the right to determine right and wrong and what is best for those He’s created.

Step 4: “Make gays look good.”

“n order to make a Gay Victim sympathetic to straights you have to portray him as Everyman. But an additional theme of the campaign should be more aggressive and upbeat: to offset the increasingly bad press that these times have brought to homosexual men and women, the campaign should paint gays as superior pillars of society.

This approach can be considered mission accomplished. Kirk and Madsen also pointed out the benefits of “the celebrity endorsement.” It doesn’t matter whether the celebrity is straight or gay, the important thing is the endorsement of homosexuality as normal.

Of course, most celebrities are part of the entertainment world, where values are overwhelmingly liberal and opposed to biblical standards. Is it any wonder that so many celebrities have “come out of the closet” in recent years or proclaimed their support for gays? 

Step 5: “Make the victimizers look bad.”

Kirk and Madsen continued: At a later stage of the media campaign for gay rights . . . it will be time to get tough with remaining opponents. To be blunt, they must be vilified . . . Our goal here is twofold. First, we seek to replace the mainstream’s self-righteous pride about its homophobia with shame and guilt. Second, we intend to make the anti-gays look so nasty that average Americans will want to dissociate themselves from such types. (emphasis added throughout).

The public should be shown images of ranting homophobes whose secondary traits and beliefs disgust middle America, Kirk and Madsen wrote. To this end, they then suggested that those who oppose the homosexual agenda be linked with images such as the Ku Klux Klan, “bigoted southern ministers drooling with hysterical hatred,” thugs and convicts, and Nazi concentration camps.

This strategy—aided and abetted by sympathetic news media and government agencies—has led to us entering a stage of aggressive attacks by some in the gay community against those who sincerely believe that homosexual behavior violates the laws, instructions and principles of God. Bible-believing Christians are indeed “vilified” and branded as bigots and homophobes.

Do rights of freedom of speech, freedom of religious beliefs and freedom of association work both ways? We’re seeing a time in which constitutionally guaranteed citizens’ rights are being stripped away to accommodate new supposed rights invented by various court rulings and government policy.

Step 6: “Solicit funds: The buck stops here.”

Any massive campaign of this kind would require unprecedented expenditures for months or even years—an unprecedented fundraising drive, they acknowledged.

Yet at the same time, they made a statement showing that gays really aren’t the oppressed, victimized group Kirk and Madsen advocate they be portrayed as: “Because those gays not supporting families usually have more discretionary income than average, they could afford to contribute much more.”

If you’ve ever wondered why so many American businesses cater to a gay clientele, donate money to support homosexual causes and celebrated the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling legalizing same-sex marriage, it’s because they recognize this simple fact: Homosexual couples, who typically don’t have children, have substantially more discretionary income than families who do.

The impact of this is also being felt in the political arena, where wealthy gays help bankroll campaigns for sympathetic candidates who will advance their interests and fund ads attacking those who stand for traditional and biblical values.

Kirk and Madsen go on to praise the fact that homosexuals have been able to infiltrate American news media to advance the cause of issues important to them. Because most straightforward appeals are impossible, the National Gay Task Force has had to cultivate quiet backroom liaisons with broadcast companies and newsrooms in order to make sure that issues important to the gay community receive some coverage.

In the 26 years since they wrote that, most U.S. media has tilted even more to the left, so proponents of the homosexual agenda are usually assured of favorable coverage and free publicity for their cause. 

What is the right Christian response?

Those who believe the Bible and care about the future of America should be aware that today’s issues regarding the gay lifestyle have been orchestrated by activists for more than 25 years. This was no accident or chance course of events.

A gay person should not be afraid of a Christian as some hate-monger. True followers of Jesus Christ are to always show love toward others (Matthew 5:44), recognizing that all have sinned and need God’s mercy and forgiveness (Romans 3:23). But this does not mean excusing and accepting sin.

Recall that Jesus didn’t condemn a woman who was caught in adultery and brought before Him (John 8:2-11). But He didn’t say that what she was doing was acceptable either. He told her to “go and sin no more” (John 8:11). Moreover, He had to die to pay the penalty of her sin—and ours.

We should call sin what it is. And the Bible clearly labels homosexual activity a sin (Leviticus 18:22; Leviticus 20:13; 1 Corinthians 6:9-10). Of course, we must have compassion for those who don’t understand—and for those who do who struggle with this sin.

In communicating with others, Christians should be wise enough not to be trapped by phrases mislabeling the Christian approach. “Are you anti-gay?” can be a very misleading question. Understanding the definitions of someone you are having a discussion with is important. Acceptance, tolerance and inclusivity can be controversial and emotionally charged words.

Our culture has accepted two huge lies

Speaking on the issue of tolerance, mega-church pastor and bestselling author Rick Warren observed that our culture has accepted two huge lies. The first is that if you disagree with someone’s lifestyle, you must fear them or hate them. The second is that to love someone means you agree with everything they believe or do.

Both notions are nonsense. You don’t have to compromise convictions to be compassionate. Disapproval is not hate. Disapproval of what is wrong and harmful is a part of godly love.

Don’t let your life be controlled by the clever marketing of evil as good and good as evil.

__________________________________________________________

Afterword by TPR:

In the years since this was first posted (almost seven years to the day), we can see how other groups have adopted the same strategies to foist their <s>opinions</s> demands on the rest of the population. Those that doesn’t agree with them are smeared as various ‘-phobes’ and ‘-ists’ because they dare to disapprove of the group’s agenda.

As the article correctly points out, the far-leftists (true liberals are just as concerned about individual’s right to live their own lives as are conservatives) whole-heartedly support this agenda as one more tool to take over the freedoms of others. They talk about promoting a “live and let live” attitude — but only if that phrase is defined as “let me do whatever the Hell I want, no matter who else gets hurt in the process!”

Again, this isn’t about religious dogma, it’s about what as morally just.