Republicans – praag.org

Letter: Wyoming, the White Zion

Wyoming is the ideal destination for any serious effort at a Northwest Migration. This post is a rough sketch at pitching the Wyoming heresy to “White zionists”.

(1) Aesthetic Beauty – If I were to ever move anywhere out West, I would pack my bags and head toward the Tetons, where Old Faithful blows and the buffalo roam. Few other places in North America can compete with Wyoming in terms of sheer natural beauty. The discovery of Yellowstone caused mankind for the first time in history to stop, pause, and preserve a piece of nature for the enjoyment of future generations.

(2) Population – Wyoming has the smallest population (544,270) of any state in America. It thus has the smallest hurdle to political power to clear for aspiring White Zionists on the make.

In the Wyoming House of Representatives, each district represents about 9,000 people. In the Wyoming Senate, each seat represents around 17,000 people. The number of registered voters who participate in Wyoming state elections is much smaller in each district. A simple majority is sufficient to acquire representation at the state level.

In Wyoming, White Zionists have their most favorable political map for a BNP-style breakout into mainstream politics. It is easier here than anywhere else. If White Zionists can’t win in Wyoming, they are far less likely to win on more challenging terrain in the Pacific Northwest.

Governor-Elect Matt Mead of Wyoming won the Republican nomination for Governor with only 30,272 votes. Wyoming has 2 U.S. Senators (the same as California and New York) and 3 votes in the Electoral College.

In Wyoming, each vote in the Electoral College represents 164,594 people. In California, each vote represents 627,532. Whether it be on the federal or the state level, White Zionists can have their greatest impact on the American political landscape in Wyoming.

(3) Favorable Demographics – Wyoming is the most conservative state in America. In Wyoming, 53 percent of residents identify as conservatives. By comparison, 53 percent of residents in Mississippi and 49 percent of residents in Alabama are conservatives.

Wyoming is effectively Alabama or Mississippi without blacks. It is Utah without Hispanics. In Wyoming, 86 percent of residents (2009 Census) are Non-Hispanic White. The concentration and political hegemony of “Reds” in Wyoming provides White Zionists with a far more receptive local population to work with than the SWPL-dominated Pacific Northwest.

52 percent of Wyoming’s population lives in 5 major cities. The population in Wyoming is more dispersed across the countryside than in other Western states like Nevada. This is one of the major reasons Wyoming has proven so much more resistant to leftwing ideas.

As of 2009, Washington is 74.6 percent White. There are roughly 25,903 blacks, 686,412 Hispanics, and 466,493 Asians living in that state with Harold Covington.

As of 2009, Wyoming is 86 percent White. There are roughly 7,619 blacks, 14,151 American Indians, and 44,140 Hispanics living there. Most of the Hispanics are illegal aliens that can be driven out with an Arizona-style immigration law.

Demographically speaking, Wyoming is clearly a more favorable state than Washington: there are far less total non-Whites, Whites are a higher percentage of the population, the Whites who live there are rock ribbed conservatives, not SWPLs.

(4) Nordic Reservoir – If you are a Nordicist, Wyoming is an attractive state to relocate to. By ethnicity, the White population of Wyoming is 25.9% German, 15.9% English, 13.3% Irish, 6.5% American, 4.3% Norwegian, and 3.5% Swedish. Wyoming is a healthy mix of Americans of Northwestern European ancestry.

(5) Taxes – Wyoming has far more attractive land prices and tax rates than Washington.

Property Taxes:

Wyoming – $1,012, 1.57% of income
Washington – $2,595, 3.52% of income

Excise Taxes – Cigarettes:

Wyoming – 60
Washington – 202.5

Excise Taxes – Beer:

Wyoming – $0.02
Washington – $0.26

Excise Taxes – Gasoline:

Wyoming – 14
Washington – 37.5

State Sales Tax:

Wyoming – 4.0
Washington – 6.25

State Income Tax:

Wyoming: No State Income Tax
Washington: No State Income Tax

Wyoming has lower property taxes, lower excise taxes, a lower state sales tax, and no income tax. Land is cheaper.

In Wyoming, there is no corporate sales tax. There is no sales tax on food or inheritance tax on estates. There is no tax on out-of-state retirement income. Personal property for personal use is tax exempt. There are no taxes on intangible assets such as bank accounts, stocks, or bonds.

Wyoming has the most “business friendly” climate of all 50 states. If you are a White Nationalist small business owner, it is relatively easier (and might actually be more profitable) to relocate to Wyoming.

Wyoming’s cost of living is 7.60% lower than the national average.

(8) Education – Under the Wyoming state constitution, the state government is prohibited from establishing curriculums and textbook selections. This is the prerogative of local schools boards. The public schools in Wyoming could theoretically be hijacked by migrating White Zionist families.

Wyoming public schools spend $7,447 per student. The average school expenditure in the U.S. is $5,678. Wyoming ranks last among the states in terms of students enrolled in private schools. The low numbers of non-Whites in Wyoming (combined with local control of school boards) translates into a stronger public sector.

(9) Low Crime – The Whiteness of Wyoming is reflected in its crime statistics and national ranking: 47 in total crime, 32 in crimes per 100,000 persons, 43 in violent crimes per 100,000 persons, 45 in murders per 100,000 persons, 36 in rapes per 100,000 persons, 49 in robberies per 100,000 persons, 30 in aggravated assaults per 100,000 persons, 43 in burglaries per 100,000 persons, 22 in larcenies and theft per 100,000 persons.

(10) Grievances – Wyoming has ready made grievances against Washington that can easily be exploited. 48 percent of land in Wyoming is owned by the federal goverment. 6 percent of land is owned by the state government. Over 50 percent of land in Wyoming is effectively closed to private development.

What’s more, Wyoming is an energy intensive state like West Virginia. It is America’s largest coal producer. It is the second largest producer of natural gas and the fifth largest producer of oil in the United States.

“Cap and Trade” is a mortal threat to Wyoming’s economy. In West Virginia, Joe Manchin literally had to shoot a target of Cap and Trade to get elected to the Senate. A future Democratic Congress even more in thrall to environmentalist groups would provide a useful foil in stirring up anti-government sentiment in Wyoming.

(11) Climate – The climate in Wyoming is not as bad as some have made it out to be. Wyoming is a dry state with warm summers. The wind could be harnessed as yet another energy source. It has a better water supply than California, Nevada, Arizona or other parched Southwestern states which are more populous. There is plenty of land for cattle ranching and growing wheat.

If White Zionists relocated to Wyoming, they would adapt to the climate like they have everywhere else: Iceland. Norway, Russia, Rhodesia, etc. It is far easier to live in Wyoming today than in the Deep South (with its hurricanes) during the nineteenth century before refrigerators and air conditioning.

(12) Anti-Blue – Wyoming is not a “fun state” with a lot of flashy cities like Seattle or Portland. Greg Johnson would never move there. This is another advantage that Wyoming has over Washington. Like Nebraska or Kansas, it has not yet become an attractive destination for SWPLs migrating out of California and the Heartland, who are adverse to the rural conservative mores of Wyoming.

(13) Successful Model – There is already a successful model of a White Zionist migration to the Interior West: the colonization of Utah by the Mormons.

If the Mormons can create a civilization in the Great Salt Lake Valley, why can’t White Zionist homesteaders enjoy similar success in Wyoming? Is the climate of Utah more or less hospitable to colonization?

(14) Ready Made Cities – Instead of carving cities out of the wilderness, there is nothing stopping White Zionists from relocating to Wyoming’s five largest cities or its smaller towns:

Cheyenne – 57,618 (population), 79.2% (non-Hispanic White)

Casper – 54,874 (population), 94.03% (non-Hispanic White)

Laramie – 28,850 (population), 90.81% (non-Hispanic White)

Gillette – 28,726 (population), 95.50% (non-Hispanic White)

Rock Springs – 20,905 (population), 91.75% (non-Hispanic White)

By way of comparison, there are 602,000 people in Seattle, 68.4% of whom are non-Hispanic White, 3,407,848 in the Seattle metropolitan area.

There are 529,121 people in Portland, 74 percent of whom are non-Hispanic White, 2,217,325 in the Portland metropolitan area.

It goes without saying that the vast majority of Whites in Seattle and Portland are SWPLs, not “Reds” like in Cheyenne or Casper, and that White Zionists would have a far greater impact in Wyoming than in Washington or Oregon because of the smaller, more conservative population.

In the second tier of Wyoming cities, you have Sheridan (population, 17,461), Green River (population, 12,149), Evanston (population, 11,781), Riverton, (population, 10,032), and Jackson (population, 9,806). Now how hard do you suppose it would be for White Zionists to get elected mayor, sheriff, or city councilman in those cities?

Undoubtedly, it would be a A LOT easier to raise your head above the water on that kind of political map.

(15) Attractive Neighbors – Wyoming’s neighbors share many of its favorable characteristics: Idaho, Montana, South Dakota, North Dakota. A successful White Zionist free state project in Wyoming could inspire a real Northwest Migration to Idaho, Montana, and the Dakotas.

(16) Jobs – As of September 2010, the unemployment rate in Wyoming was 6.2 percent, well below the national average. By comparison, the unemployment rate in Washington state (dominated by SWPLs who favor higher taxes and bureaucratic red tape) is 8.6 percent.

(17) Fiscal Responsibility – Wyoming has a small budget deficit of $31.8 million in FY 2010. It is in great shape compared to Blue States like California, Illinois, New York, and Connecticut which are tottering on the brink of a Greek style fiscal meltdown.

The same is true of North Dakota which has a budget surplus and the lowest unemployment rate in America. It is easy to imagine a future scenario where fiscally responsible states like North Dakota and Wyoming go their own way, repudiate the national debt, and refuse to bailout the Californias of America.

(18) The Jewish Question – Jews are 0 percent of Wyoming’s population. By comparison, Jews are 1 percent of Washington state, which translates into about 66,641 Jews on the ground. Ron Wyden, U.S. Senator from Oregon, is Jewish.

(19) Non-Religious – In terms of religion, 79 percent of Wyoming residents are Christians. 18 percent are non-religious. For White Nationalists who can’t get over their aversion to Christianity, Wyoming is a more attractive destination than the Deep South.

(20) Realistic Strategy – Wyoming is a more realistic destination for White Zionists. The definition of a tactic is what you can do with what you got. Decades of experience has shown the following:

White Nationalists are adverse to social ostracism and employment discrimination. They will not go public with their beliefs in a setting in which they are outnumbered.
Aside from unhinged vanguardist lone wolves like James von Brunn, White Nationalists are adverse to physical violence, and favor lawful methods of resolving their disputes. This fact alone rules out the fantasy of an IRA-style terrorist rebellion that Harold Covington advocates.

Taking these critical facts into account, a White Zionist migration to Wyoming could succeed where Harold Covington’s Northwest Migration is doomed to failure.

In the second tier Wyoming cities like Sheridan, Green River, Evanston, Riverton, and Jackson, the population is small enough to allow a critical mass of White Zionists to take over the public schools, city governments, and local law enforcement positions with a simple majority. In such a context where White Nationalists are an outright majority, the stick of social ostracism and employment discrimination wouldn’t work.

White Nationalists could seize power without firing a shot. Such an experiment (wholly theoretical and still highly unlikely) would be interesting to watch. It could potentially demonstrate the efficacy of the White Zionist model. If White Zionists are going to uproot themselves in pursuit of their racial ideal, it stands to reason they should at least go to the place where they are most likely to succeed.

(21) Objections – The most common objection to the Wyoming scenario is that the state is landlocked and that it is an unviable destination as a White homeland. This is not as persuasive a criticism as it seems at first glance.

SWPLs dominate the Pacific Coast. Any success that a Northwest Migration would have would be in Idaho or Eastern Washington and Eastern Oregon where the population is more conservative and receptive to pro-White ideals. In other words, where the population is more like that of Wyoming.

If every White Nationalist in America moved to Eastern Washington or Eastern Oregon, they would still be outvoted by the SWPLs in Portland and Seattle, and if they launched a rebellion (an even more unlikely scenario), the SWPL dominated state governments would quickly call for the White House to dispatch federal troops which have legal authority to suppress any insurrection.

This type of thinking is also symptomatic of thinking in terms of light years instead of inches, yards, and miles. The biggest problems facing the White Zionist model is that (A) most White Nationalists are not convinced it can work, (B) it is currently based on unrealistic vanguardist expectations (i.e., successful armed insurrection) and (C) the mainstream media is suffocating the White Nationalist movement through lack of positive publicity.

These are all problems where the Wyoming model shines through: (A) the small population of Wyoming, especially in the second tier cities, sets the lowest bar anywhere in America for White Zionists to achieve the small victories necessary to build confidence, (B) the method of acquiring power (voting with your feet and at the ballot box) is completely legal and can be done anonymously, and (C) the success of White Zionists in Wyoming (say, taking over a city and then parts of the Wyoming state legislature) would draw the publicity that is the indispensable, life giving oxygen that a Northwest Migration would require to succeed.

Within a matter of two or three years, White Zionists in Wyoming could show the White Nationalist movement that it is actually possible to acquire political power and live a healthy White life in a community setting in the Interior West. That would be a far more persuasive argument than browbeating people who live in Illinois and North Carolina to drop everything they are doing and uproot themselves to migrate to a SWPL-dominated Blue State in the Pacific Northwest.

Finally, if White Zionists by some miracle were successful in taking over the State of Wyoming, they could use the unparalleled energy resources of the state (coal, natural gas, petroleum, and possibly wind) as a bargaining chip to negotiate their sovereignty and independence in a decaying America living in the aftermath of Peak Oil.

By that time, the neighboring states of Montana, Idaho, North Dakota, and South Dakota would be overflowing with White Zionists. Wyoming is unlikely to go out alone. Its potential lies in demonstrating the success of the White Zionist model and building the critical mass of momentum necessary to propel White Zionists to victory.

(22) Perks and Political Representation – Aside from all the above advantages to White Zionists, Wyoming is already a solid Red State and a pretty good place to live out West (low taxes, low unemployment, low crime, good public schools, low cost of living, cheap land, few non-Whites, no Jews, fiscally responsible government, conservative neighbors, great scenery, favorable political demographics) if you just want political representation and a healthy environment (lots of wide open space outdoors) in which to raise White cowboys and cowgirls in masculine and feminine virtues.

Fantasy fiction aside, that’s enough to satisfy most White Nationalists.

Republicans have controlled both chambers of the Wyoming state legislature for decades. Cynthia Lummis, Wyoming’s lone representative in the House of Representatives, is opposed to amnesty. She has a “B-” from Numbers USA. Senator Michael Enzi and Senator John Barrasso both get an “A” on their report card.

Final Thoughts

If a White Zion is going to be created anywhere in America, Wyoming presents the most favorable map for making progress toward that goal. A few thousand White Zionists could migrate to Wyoming like the Mormons in Utah or the Jayhawkers in Kansas and demonstrate the success of the PLE model. That would provide the necessary catalyst and exposure to spark a real and sustainable Northwest Migration.

Personally, I think the State of Wyoming can make its own case. It doesn’t need me to convince you to move there. If an endangered species like the bison can be reborn in Wyoming, so can the White man.

— John Pelham, From The Provinces – 19 August 2017

Trump, Carson have Republican Jewish establishment worried

Longtime GOP Jewish donors and activists look on in dismay as the two presidential hopefuls lead the polls

The Republican Jewish establishment is watching the surge of political outsiders — like Donald Trump and Ben Carson — in the presidential primaries with dismay.

“It’s like we have a conference call every morning, and we ask, ‘What can we do to screw ourselves up today?’” said Fred Zeidman, a longtime fundraiser for Republican presidential candidates.

Zeidman’s exasperation pervades the Jewish Republican world: A party that has, in recent years, established a cozy relationship with Jewish conservatives seems to be careening — at least since the presidential race began.

Donald Trump, the billionaire reality show star, has lobbed rhetorical bombs at Hispanics, women and GOP rivals, and promised to deport 11 million illegal immigrants. Ben Carson, the retired world-famous neurosurgeon, said this weekend that a Muslim can’t be president.

“This election is proving that nobody really knows anything, including me,” said Seth Mandel, the Op-Ed editor of the New York Post.

It’s a disorienting experience for longtime Republican Jewish donors and activists, who have made inroads into the party’s establishment over the last two decades, and who have been at the forefront of advocacy for tolerance and pluralism within the party.

“The tone of what they’re saying, we get painted as a party of intolerance,” said Zeidman, who practices law in the Houston area and backs Bush’s candidacy.

The anti-immigrant rhetoric especially infuriates Zeidman, a past chairman of the US Holocaust Memorial Council, who was driving near his home during his phone interview with JTA.

“I think half the people I’m looking at doing roadwork in 100-degree heat are not legal — and they are working their tuchus off,” he said.

Mandel said online that white supremacist backing for Trump — who has suggested immigrants from Mexico are predominantly criminals — has been unsettling. “That will always make Jews uncomfortable, that’s why there’s so much pushback” among some Jewish conservatives against the Trump candidacy.

Tevi Troy, a deputy health secretary in the President George W. Bush administration who is not yet backing a candidate, said one plus that’s emerging from the debates is that the entire range of candidates — insiders and outsiders alike — are pro-Israel and have embraced the party’s skepticism of the Iran nuclear deal.

Contrast that with previous Republican primary seasons, when disruptive outsiders were cool on Israel – notably in the 1990s, when Pat Buchanan ran twice, Troy said.

“Fortunately, the outsiders this time, just about all are exceedingly pro-Israel and that’s a good thing,” he said.

Still, he noted, for a constituency that has cultivated the Republican establishment, the emergence of outsiders is discomfiting.

The Republican Jewish Coalition’s board is a who’s who of the party’s most generous givers — most famously Sheldon Adelson, the Las Vegas casino magnate.

Adelson has yet to come out for a candidate, the conventional wisdom being that he is waiting in order to avoid a repeat of 2012, when his bankrolling of long-shot Newt Gingrich ended up weakening the eventual nominee, Mitt Romney. But one of Adelson’s top allies, Mort Klein of the Zionist Organization of America, recently expressed concern over Trump’s behavior and lead in the polls.

“Trump is making many of us very nervous,” Klein told Talking Points Memo, speaking after Trump derided the black Carson’s skills as a physician. (Carson is a world-famous neurosurgeon.) “He doesn’t have the temperament to be president. I mean, really, to lash out at Carson as a talented doctor? You don’t know what you’re talking about.”

Source: Times of Israel

Trump tells Jeb to speak the language of the majority

2016 Republican frontrunner Donald Trump told Breitbart News that former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush should be speaking the language of the majority.

Jeb Bush spoke Spanish, the migrant language, to attack Trump in Miami this week—on the campaign trail.

Trump had harsh words for Sen. Marco Rubio as well and lit into the donor class, all while saying that the “silent majority” in America is waking up and fighting to take back the country from the corrupt political class.

Trump also predicted that he will not only win the White House in 2016, but that he will be re-elected in 2020–predicting he will be a two-term president–and that at the end of his eventual eight years in the White House he will be known to all as a “great conservative” just like Ronald Reagan.

“I like Jeb,” Trump said. “He’s a nice man. But he should really set the example by speaking English while in the United States.”

“El hombre no es conservador,” Bush said in Spanish of Trump in Miami, according to the Tampa Bay Times. That means, according to that newspaper, that Bush is saying of Trump: “The man is not conservative.”

“Besides, he tries to personalize everything. If you’re not totally in agreement with him you’re an idiot, or stupid, or don’t have energy, or blah blah blah,” Bush continued in English, according to the Times.

Trump, in his exclusive with Breitbart News, ripped that argument—that somehow he’s not a conservative.

“You know, Ronald Reagan wasn’t a conservative,” Trump said. “He became a great conservative. By the time I’m finished, people will say I’m a great conservative. By the time I’m finished with the presidency, after eight years of the presidency, people will say I’m a great conservative—far greater than Jeb would ever have the ability to be.”

Trump also fired back at Rubio for aiming to undercut his campaign slogan, “Make America Great Again.” The campaign slogan was used by Ronald Reagan in the 1980 campaign for the White House alongside George H.W. Bush, Jeb’s father.

According to the New York Times, this week Rubio—while campaigning in Carson City, Nevada—said Trump’s campaign slogan isn’t an accurate assessment of the country. Rubio argued America is “great” now.

Trump, in response, told Breitbart News that this means Rubio is complacent with where America is now—and doesn’t believe there is room for improvement in the country. Trump also called Rubio “Jeb’s plebe.”

Rubio was trained by Bush in Florida politics before the two, along with 15 other Republicans including Trump, started competing against each other for the GOP nomination this cycle.

Rubio and Bush have nearly identical political viewpoints on immigration and trade, and as Bush and his campaign keep slipping more and more, it’s expected the donor class paymasters will get behind Rubio down the road, because he would give them everything they want if he’s elected president, just like Bush would.

Trump said that the donor class paymasters who he says are controlling the politicians like Bush and Rubio “are looking to benefit themselves or their company, whereas I’m looking only to benefit the people of the United States.”

When it comes to the border, Trump again noted that he’d build a wall if elected president.

“There is a great silent majority, and the silent majority is not so silent anymore,” Trump said. “They want to see America become great again.”

Meanwhile the war on Trump continued with Jon Stewart, formerly from the Daily Show, attacking the GOP-frontrunner under the usual guise of humor.

The public, roaring with laughter, is never shown, because there are no people in Stewart’s unfunny show.

Jon is alone in a studio with a camera man.

The canned laughter is edited in later, as a service to the dupes, to indicate when the humor starts, which is not always obvious from the context.

According to the Jerusalem Post, Trump’s chances for the White House may also “hinge on Hezbollah”.

Trump did not take kindly in a radio interview on Thursday to being asked to identify the affiliations of various militant leaders in the Middle East, saying the host was asking “a gotcha question” since these groups change constantly.

Discussing the “War on Terror”, talk-radio host Hugh Hewitt asked Trump who the leaders of militant groups were, and to name the heads of Islamic State, Hezbollah, al-Qaida and its Nusra Front wing in Syria.

Source: Breitbart/Jerusalem Post

Trump dominates Republican field in New Hampshire

Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump is dominating the crowded GOP field in the early-voting state of New Hampshire, holding a 24-point lead over his nearest rival, according to a new poll.

Trump is supported by 35 percent of GOP primary voters in the state, followed by Ohio Gov. John Kasich (11 percent) and businesswoman Carly Fiorina (10 percent), according to the survey released Tuesday from the left-leaning Public Policy Polling.

Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker each take 7 percent, followed by retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson at 6 percent. New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and Florida Sen. Marco Rubio each have 4 percent, while Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul has dropped to 3 percent.

The new poll has found a drop in support for several candidates, including a major drop for Walker (17 points), who has similarly seen his Trump recently steal his lead in Iowa, another early-voting state.

Bush has accused Asians of abusing rules allowing infants born in the United States to be American citizens, amid a campaign row over immigration.

Bush has clashed with Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton over use of the term “anchor babies,” a derogatory description of children born in the United States to undocumented parents.

Source: The Hill

Trump widens lead

Republican Donald Trump is pulling away from the pack in the race for the party’s U.S. presidential nomination, widening his lead over his closest rivals in the past week, a Reuters/Ipsos poll showed on Friday.

Republican voters show no signs they are growing weary of the brash real estate mogul, who has dominated political headlines and the 17-strong Republican presidential field with his tough talk about immigration and insults directed at his political rivals. The candidates are vying to be nominated to represent their party in the November 2016 general election.

Nearly 32 percent of Republicans surveyed online said they backed Trump, up from 24 percent a week earlier, the opinion poll found. Trump had nearly double the support of his closest competitor, former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, who got 16 percent. Retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson was third at 8 percent.

Even when Trump was pitted directly in the poll against just his top two competitors, 44 percent backed him. Bush won about 29 percent of respondents, and Carson 25 percent.

Trump has driven the debate on the campaign trail with a hard-line immigration plan that calls for the deportation of undocumented immigrants, amendment of the Constitution to end automatic citizenship for all people born in the United States, and construction of a wall along the border with Mexico.

Trump’s campaign momentum has paid off with bigger crowds on the campaign trail. On Friday night, he moved a planned rally in Mobile, Alabama, to a football stadium seating more than 40,000.

Separate results found Clinton leading among Democrats, though support for her dipped below 50 percent to 48.5 percent.

Source: Reuters

The Donald towers in crucial state of Iowa

When Republican Scott Walker arrives Monday at Iowa’s state fair, he’ll land in an unfamiliar position: he won’t be the front-runner in the state that holds the first presidential nominating contest.

Like most every other candidate in the historically crowded field, the Wisconsin governor’s standing in state and national polls has been hurt by the summer surge of billionaire Donald Trump, the party’s front-runner.

No state is more critical to Walker’s future than Iowa, where media expectations about his candidacy have grown to the point that anything short of a win in the Feb. 1 caucuses is likely to be viewed as a serious momentum killer.

The governor, who has enjoyed a consistent lead all year in Iowa, dropped to third in the most recent CNN poll.

He was backed by just 9 percent of likely caucus participants, below Trump at 22 percent and Carson at 14 percent.

It’s a dramatic fall for a guy who led in a Bloomberg Politics/Des Moines Register Iowa Poll with 17 percent as recently as late May. That was approaching the level of support—roughly 20 percent—that most party insiders agree could win the caucuses in a 17-candidate field.

Walker is the man with the most to lose from Trump’s Iowa rise because he’s counting on a win in the state to provide momentum in subsequent contests where Trump and former Florida Governor Jeb Bush are almost certain to be better financed.

Walker hasn’t just lost his standing in Iowa polls. After the first Republican presidential debate on Aug. 6, he’s also lost traction in national polls.

Source: Bloomberg

Trump: ‘People don’t trust the media’

In an interview with CNN’s Anderson Cooper that was broadcasted tonight Republican candidate for president Donald Trump berated the reporter for continuing to address polls that shed him in a negative light instead of polls showing his upper-tier status.

“I am leading across the board,” Trump said in the interview. “And then you hit me with this poll that I didn’t see before, where oh, gee, it’s not even that kind of a poll. All i know is I have a very big group of support. And I think one of the reasons.”

“Let me tell you. The people don’t trust you and the people don’t trust the media. And I understand why,” Trump lectured Cooper.

Trump also said the American dream is “dead,” but he will revive it and “make it bigger, better and stronger than ever before.

“Let me tell you. The people don’t trust you and the people don’t trust the media. And I understand why. You know, I have always been covered, fairly, accurately because it was usually a financial press. And you know numbers are numbers and my numbers happen to be great. So, I was always sort of treated fair.

“With the media it’s, not all cases, some, some of the political media is great. And really honest. Even if they’ve don’t want to want to be, they’re really honest. But I find that 60%, 70% of the political media is really, really dishonest.”

The end of the Republican Party

Former American presidential candidate, Pat Buchanan, sees the end of the Republican Party:

On immigration, Pat Buchanan campaigned on securing the border in 1991-92, when there were only 3 million illegal immigrants in the United States.

But the Bush Republicans refused to seal the border.

Now there are 11 million to 12 million illegal immigrants and the issue is tearing the party apart. Now everybody is for “secure borders.”

We did urge a “moratorium” on legal immigration, such as America had from 1924 to 1965, to assimilate and Americanize the millions who had come. The [Wall Street] Journal Republicans called that xenophobia.

Since then, tens of millions of immigrants, here legally and illegally, mostly from the Third World, have arrived. Economically, they consume more in tax dollars than they contribute.

Politically, most belong to ethnic groups that vote between 70 and 90 percent Democratic. Their children will bury the GOP.

Consider California, which voted for Nixon all five times he was on a national ticket and for Reagan in landslides all four times he ran.

Since 1988, California has not gone Republican in a single presidential election. No Republican holds statewide office. Both U.S. Senators are Democrats. Democrats have 39 of 53 U.S. House seats. Republican state legislators are outnumbered 2-to-1.

Americans of European descent, who provide the GOP with 90 percent of its presidential vote, are down to 63 percent of the nation and falling.

By 2042, they will be a minority. And there goes the GOP.

Senator McCain suggests Israel ‘go rogue’ against Iran

As Iran talks appear to be coming to a close with a successful agreement that would both lead to the lifting of international sanctions and restrictions that would prevent the country from obtaining nuclear weapons, most in the international community are relieved.

Yet Republicans have teamed up with their counterparts in the Israeli political system to do everything they can to obstruct a deal – with tactics such as drafting new sanctions legislation and warning the Iranian leadership that the nuclear agreement will not outlast President Obama.

But this past week Senator John McCain (R-AZ) ratcheted up this sabotage to a new level. During a floor speech he gave on March 24th, the senator suggested that Israel “go rogue” and that if they don’t they may not survive the next 22 months of the Obama presidency:

The Israelis will need to chart their own path of resistance. On the Iranian nuclear deal, they may have to go rogue. Let’s hope their warnings have not been mere bluffs. Israel survived its first 19 years without meaningful U.S. patronage. For now, all it has to do is get through the next 22, admittedly long, months.

Recall that McCain is head of the Senate Armed Services Committee and a former Republican presidential candidate.

His call for a foreign state to openly obstruct U.S. policy and in the process initiate a catastrophic regional war is perhaps unprecedented for someone of his senior position.

Throwing Republicans under the bus for torture?

The United States committed war crimes when they tortured prisoners of war and Iraqi civilian internees.

Although it is common knowledge around the world and in America, it was President Obama who admitted at a press conference that America tortured detainees after 9/11.

The President’s remarks came ahead of a soon-to-be-declassified Senate report about the CIA’s “enhanced interrogation program”, a nicer way of saying “torture”.

In speaking about the CIA, the President said, “We tortured some folks. We did some things that were contrary to our values. A lot of those folks were working hard and under enormous pressure, and are real patriots. But having said all that, we did some things that were wrong.”

Why are these torturers not being prosecuted? Torture is a war crime; it does not matter if people were patriotic, afraid, angry, or following orders, torture remains a criminal offence.

Former vice-president and convicted war criminal Dick Cheney’s daughter does not think torture is a violation of international law, and is furious at President Obama.

Ms. Cheney has asserted that President Obama’s statement about the Bush-Cheney torture program “was an amazing and stunning display of a president, a leader, a Commander in Chief who seems to take no responsibility for anything that’s happened on his watch.”

Cheney is angry because her father’s culpability in ordering torture will be officially exposed in the upcoming Senate report. For the record, George W. Bush was president from 2001-2009. In 2002 Barack Obama served as an Illinois State Senator until 2005 when he was elected to the US Senate.

President Obama included his own administration when he told a press conference a while ago that “we” tortured detainees.

According to Liz Cheney, “This president is an utter disgrace. He’s expending more time, more energy, more passion, more aggressive activity in targeting and going after patriots, heroes. CIA officers and others who kept is safe after 9/11. He’s lying about what they did, he’s slandering them, he went to Cairo and did it in 2009. Today he did it from the podium of the Oval Office. It’s a disgrace. It’s despicable.”

Another report, incidentally, concluded the Bush/Cheney authorization of so-called ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’ of detainees in the wake of the 9/11 attacks was ineffective and yielded no critical intelligence. It might actually be the best indication yet that these detainees had nothing to do with 9/11.

President Obama admitted indirectly that America tortured detainees in 2011 when he told reporters that despite Republican presidential candidates praising war criminals who tortured prisoners, he believed, like international humanitarian agencies and the world court, that water boarding is torture.

In 2010 Dick Cheney admitted to authorizing torture, and just last March he told a sold-out crowd at American University he had no regrets and bragged that “If I would have to do it all over again, I would. The results speak for themselves.”

Cheney was lying, of course, and the Senate report will indeed say that the CIA torture was “ineffective and yielded no credible intelligence.”

Liz Cheney, a proud lesbian, nevertheless insists on calling her father a “hero”.

Cheney also said that despite being convicted of war crimes with Bush, Rumsfeld, and company, “the accusations he’s a war criminal for using torture are not true.”

The Obama administration has failed to prosecute anyone associated with the torture program, even though war crimes were prosecuted with extreme prejudice after World War II by the United States.

During war crime tribunals after World War II at The Hague, it was established that following orders was not a justification for torture.

America lost whatever standing it had in the world after Bush launched a regime-changing war against Iraq which left the country in ruins.

By throwing Bush, Cheney, and company under the bus, Obama and Democrats possibly hope to gain some of their lost moral standing and popularity after the Iraq disaster.

A large body of Democrats believe that while the Bush-Cheney cabal have already been convicted of war crimes in absentia, and they need to be arrested, sent to The Hague, and prosecuted for war crimes.

Politics of white destruction: Nevada speaker steps down

Nevada Assemblyman Ira Hansen will not take the State Assembly speaker position next year, he announced Sunday. The speaker-elect has faced criticism for a history of bigoted sentiments he expressed in a regular local newspaper column.

Hansen, a two-term assemblyman, first told his fellow Republicans in an email that he would not assume speaker duties, according to Nevada journalist Jon Ralston.

“Politics of personal destruction win,” Hansen wrote to his caucus. “I need to step down. I hope that you all know that the Ira that you have known through these years and weeks is the real Ira and not what the media is painting me to be. You are a great group that can hopefully do great things and my staying will harm the caucus. I wish you all the best. Thanks for hanging tough through these difficult past days. If this were just about ‘me’ I would fight this out to the bitter end, but it is going to harm all of you.”

For 13 years, Hansen wrote a column in the Sparks Tribune, a small local newspaper. The Reno News and Review reviewed his columns and published last week a number of racist, misogynistic and homophobic portions.

“The lack of gratitude and the deliberate ignoring of white history in relation to eliminating slavery is a disgrace that Negro leaders should own up to,” Hansen wrote in one instance.

“Today, when Army men look at women in the ranks with ‘longing in their eyes’ it very well may constitute ’sexual harassment,'” he wrote in another column. “The truth is, women do not belong in the Army or Navy or Marine Corps, except in certain limited fields.”

Hansen, a denier of evolution, also consistently linked homosexuality to pedophilia and claimed he proudly kept a Confederate flag in his home “in memory of a great cause and my brave ancestors who fought for that cause.”

Last week, Hansen became the target of intense scrutiny over the history of columns, which became available online only recently.

“No Nevada official has ever given the public a more detailed blueprint to his thinking than Hansen,” The Reno News and Review wrote. “For many years, starting on May 11, 1994, he wrote a column for the Sparks Tribune. The Tribune did not go online until relatively recently, so access to and knowledge of most of the Hansen columns has not been easy. We reviewed every column on microfilm for this piece, covering a period of 13 years, plus a few that did make it onto the Trib website. In these columns, his viewpoint evolved very little. In fact, some columns ran unchanged time and again as the years passed.”

Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval, a fellow Republican, denounced Hansen’s writings.

“I wholeheartedly disagree with Assemblyman Hansen’s past public statements on race, religion, gender and sexual orientation. This abhorrent kind of speech is unacceptable,” Sandoval said.

Hansen released a statement later Sunday that confirmed his resignation. He insisted that he was the victim of a media-led “character assassination.”

“For the greater good of the State of Nevada and the cause I support it is necessary for me to withdraw as Speaker Designee. The tens of thousands of people who both read my columns and listened to my radio shows through two decades in the media know this has been a carefully orchestrated attack to remove a conservative Republican from a major leadership role in State government. The deliberate character assassination and the politics of personal destruction have totally distorted my views and record. Ultimately, this whole attack has very little to do with my views. The powers that be are planning a massive, more than one billion dollar, tax increase and I stood in the way as Speaker. I have already served two terms as an Assemblyman without any of these vicious attacks. It was only when I had risen to leadership that this smear campaign occurred. That is the real reason for this and it is vital the public understands that.”

Whether Hansen will remain in his Assembly seat is unclear, according to Ralston.

Obama refuses travel ban on black ebola countries

Ann Coulter laments about Obama’s refusal to call a travel ban on black countries that export ebola:

There had never been a case of Ebola in the U.S. until a few months ago. Since then, thousands of people have died of the disease in Africa, and millions upon millions of dollars have been spent treating Ebola patients in the U.S. who acquired it there, one of whom has died.

But the Obama administration refuses to impose a travel ban.

This summer, the U.S. government imposed a travel ban on Israel simply to pressure Prime Minister Netanyahu into accepting a ceasefire agreement. But we can’t put a travel restriction on countries where a contagious disease is raging.

It’s becoming increasingly clear this is just another platform for Obama to demonstrate that we are citizens of the world. The entire Ebola issue is being discussed — by our government, not the United Nations — as if Liberians are indistinguishable from Americans, and U.S. taxpayers should be willing to pay whatever it takes to save them.

Maybe we should give them the vote, too! If Ebola was concentrated in Finland and Norway — certainly Israel! — we’d have had a travel ban on Day One.

She also singles out the head of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Dr. Tom Frieden, who likes to joke about ebola and zombies:

Dr. Tom Frieden justifies Obama’s refusal to prohibit flights originating in Ebola-plagued countries, saying, “A travel ban is not the right answer. It’s simply not feasible to build a wall — virtual or real — around a community, city or country.”

What is it with liberals living in gated communities always telling us that fences don’t work? THAT’S WHAT A QUARANTINE IS.

At the congressional hearing on Ebola last week, Republicans repeatedly pressed the CDC representative, Dr. Toby Merlin, to explain why Obama refuses to impose a travel ban.

In about 17 tries, Merlin came up with no plausible answer. Like Frieden, Merlin kept insisting that “the only way to protect Americans” is to end the epidemic in Africa.

Why, precisely, must we attack Ebola in Africa? Research on a cure doesn’t require cuddling victims in their huts. Scientists who discovered the AIDS cocktail didn’t spend their nights at Studio 54 in order to “fight the disease at its source.”

Until there’s a treatment, we can’t put out the disease there, or here. The only thing Americans will be doing in Liberia is changing the bedpans of victims, getting infected and bringing Ebola back to America. When there’s a vaccine, we can mail it.

Coulter believes American troops sent to Liberia are also in grave danger:

Naturally, Obama is sending troops from the 101st Airborne, the pride of our Army, to Liberia. Their general should resign in protest.

Merlin further explained the travel ban, saying that if West Africans can’t fly to America, “that would cause the disease to grow in that area and spill over into other countries.” So instead of infecting people in surrounding countries, our CDC wants them to come here and infect Americans.

But that won’t happen because the government assures us there’s nothing to worry about with Ebola. They’ve got it under control.

Unfortunately, everything the government says about this disease keeps being proved untrue — usually within a matter of days.

They told us that you’d basically have to roll in an infected person’s vomit to catch the disease. Then, nurses at two first-world hospitals in Spain and the U.S. contracted Ebola from patients.

With no evidence, the CDC simply announced that the nurses were not following proper “protocol.” The disease didn’t operate the way CDC said it would, so the hospitals must be lying.

The government told us that national quarantines won’t work, but then they quarantine everyone with Ebola — or who has been near someone with Ebola, such as an entire NBC crew. To me, this suggests that there’s some value in keeping people who have been near Ebola away from people who have not.

Quite obviously, the only way to protect Americans is to prevent Ebola from coming here in the first place. The problem isn’t that Ebola will leap across oceans to infect Americans; it’s that Obama doesn’t want to protect Americans.

At least he’s only putting expendable Americans on the frontlines of the Ebola epidemic — doctors, nurses, members of the 101st Airborne.

At the moment, more than 13,000 West Africans have travel visas to come to the U.S. Having just seen an Ebola-infected Liberian get $500,000 worth of free medical treatment in the U.S., the first thing any African who might have Ebola should do is get himself to America.

Of all the reasons people have for coming here — welfare, drug-dealing, Medicare scams — “I have Ebola and I’m going to die, otherwise” is surely one of the strongest. The entire continent of Africa now knows that this is a country that will happily spend half a million dollars on treating someone who just arrived — and then berate itself for not doing enough.

Thomas Eric Duncan’s family may be upset with his treatment, but they have to admit, the price was right. Medical bill: $0.00. Your next statement will arrive in 30 days.

And now we’re going to have to let in entire families with Ebola, because the important thing is — actually, I don’t know why. It’s some technical, scientific point about fences not working.

Coulter urges Republicans, as well as all Americans, to demand Frieden’s resignation.

Lying to go to war

The Christian Science Monitor uncovered evidence of Republicans lying in 2002 to go to war.

When George H. W. Bush ordered American forces to the Persian Gulf to reverse Iraq’s August 1990 invasion of Kuwait, part of the administration’s case was that an Iraqi juggernaut was also threatening to roll into Saudi Arabia.

Citing top-secret satellite images, Pentagon officials estimated in midSeptember that up to 250,000 Iraqi troops and 1,500 tanks stood on the border, threatening the key US oil supplier.

But when the St. Petersburg Times in Florida acquired two commercial Soviet satellite images of the same area, taken at the same time, no Iraqi troops were visible near the Saudi border just empty desert.

“It was a pretty serious fib,” says Jean Heller, the Times journalist who broke the story.

Shortly before US strikes began in the Gulf War, for example, the St. Petersburg Times asked two experts to examine the satellite images of the Kuwait and Saudi Arabia border area taken in mid-September 1990, a month and a half after the Iraqi invasion. The experts, including a former Defense Intelligence Agency analyst who specialized in desert warfare, pointed out the US build-up jet fighters standing wing-tip to wing-tip at Saudi bases but were surprised to see almost no sign of the Iraqis.

“That [Iraqi buildup] was the whole justification for Bush sending troops in there, and it just didn’t exist,” Ms. Heller says. Three times Heller contacted the office of Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney (now vice president) for evidence refuting the Times photos or analysis offering to hold the story if proven wrong.

The official response: “Trust us.” To this day, the Pentagon’s photographs of the Iraqi troop buildup remain classified.

Source: CSM

The week of whining womin

by Ilana Mercer

[followbutton username=’IlanaMercer’ count=’true’ lang=’en’ theme=’light’]

Like Ilana Mercer’s Facebook page

The logic is as simple as it is foolproof. An “air-tight free-market argument,” according to WND:

“If women with the same skills as men were getting only 78 cents for every dollar a man earns, men as a group would have long-since priced themselves out of the market. That entrepreneurs don’t ditch men en masse for women suggests that different abilities and experience are at work, rather than a conspiracy to suppress women.”

The logic is not, however, female proof.

It’s been the week of the weaker sex: filled with baseless whining. The Week of the Womin culminated with Facebook billionaire Sheryl Sandberg grumbling to Fox News millionaire Megyn Kelly: “I think it’s good that the president took some steps on equal pay, but it’s not enough.”

About women’s work Sandberg holds humdrum feminist views. She learned the hard way, having dared, at first, to share the aggregate reality she had encountered in the workplace: Men were wont to be as driven as demons. Women needed to be driven. For that observation, the Pussy Riot Sisterhood threatened to sandbag Sandberg. Facebook’s chief operating officer quickly corrected course. Ms. Sandberg started mouthing the only acceptable meme: Saddle “society” and the “patriarchy” for any and all female failures and preferences.

As her politically pleasing, mainstream opinion currently has it, society and the patriarchy have conditioned women to be nurturing and to apologize for any male-like, go-getter ambitions they harbor. While men will attribute their success to their own core skills; women “attribute their success to luck and help from other people,” carps Sandberg. The girls are too nice. They don’t take credit for their greatness. They don’t raise their hand enough. They don’t “Lean In”—the trite title of Sandberg’s serialized book. Yes, there’s a follow up for advanced nudniks.

While she should seldom be taken seriously, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi was perfectly serious when she too, in 2012, inveighed against the same debunked myth of “income disparity between men and women” that Democrat Sandberg is perpetuating.

For their part, Republicans will seldom deploy economic logic to dispel distaff America’s claims of disadvantage. To counter Pelosi, Republicans called on a teletart who is front-and-center on GOP TV because in possession of what TV takes: Big hair, big boobs and Chiclets for teeth—a pretty package that more than compensates for a lack of cerebral agility or originality. (Yes, why is it that nobody dares to comment on the overwhelming, overweening dominance the fair sex has in the anchor’s chair? Does anyone imagine that this advantage is bestowed at Fox Business, because “Kennedy” is more brilliant than Judge Andrew Napolitano? The reader doesn’t need me to spell out the profit-generating advantages women hold in visual media.)

Although this column did not name her at the time, one Michelle Fields, I believe, “pioneered” the tit-for-tat, rudderless case the Republicans excel at making on wage parity. Incapable of argument, Fields thus condemned Pelosi—not for her bogus theory of payinequality, but for her hypocrisy. Pelosi, it was revealed, had been silent about Democratic senators who were paying women staffers less than male staffers.

The lesson is equally applicable to the revelation, this week, that women working in the “executive mansion” are also getting paid less, on average, than their male counterparts. As this column advised in 2012 (well before Chuckie Krauthammer cottoned on), the T & A Republican TV contingent ought to have responded as follows:

“We’re glad that Barack Obama has finally understood that the length of time a woman has been in the workplace, her age, experience, education; whether she has put her career on hold to marry and mother—all factor into the wage equation. Good for you, Mr. President, for showing in practice that you comprehend that women are more likely than men to have had an interrupted career trajectory and to opt for part-time and lower-paying professions—education instead of engineering, for example.”

Now, Mr. President, please put down your pay-parity executive order and step away from that pen, slowly.

[followbutton username=’IlanaMercer’ count=’true’ lang=’en’ theme=’light’]

Like Ilana Mercer’s Facebook page