Is Anyone NOT Racist? Twitter Spirals out of Control Following Jeff Sessions AG Announcement

/0 Comments/in , /by

After Senator Jeff Sessions’, R-Al (C, 78%) nomination to the position of Attorney General was announced Friday, the nomination was immediately met with cries of “RACIST!” on social media.

Self-described Republican strategist Ana Navarro (who voted for Hillary Clinton) had a small meltdown on Twitter over Sessions’ appointment.

Now, let’s be honest here, those throwing “-ist” terms around are lacking in the imagination department calling yet another Republican a “racist” for the zillionth time.

While turning a blind eye to the Left’s own controversial figures.

(For more from the author of “Is Anyone NOT Racist? Twitter Spirals out of Control Following Jeff Sessions AG Announcement” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Obamacare ‘Insurer Bailouts’ Become Less Likely Under President Trump

/0 Comments/in , /by

Insurance companies hoping for relief in the form of changes to two Obamacare programs may end up disappointed now that President-elect Donald Trump is preparing to take the White House.

Obamacare’s risk corridor and reinsurance programs sunset at the end of the year, but conservative groups are worried that Congress would attempt to give insurers more money through the programs during the lame-duck session.

Insurance companies spent millions lobbying lawmakers on the two programs, which distributed money to insurers that lost money and enrolled populations that were sicker and more costly. But the election of Trump to the presidency makes it less likely that Congress will alter the two programs—referred to as “bailouts” by conservatives—to benefit those insurers.

“The lessons that we’ve learned from the election is people clearly don’t like [Obamacare] and are harmed by the law. They want it repealed,” Nathan Nascimento, a senior policy adviser at Freedom Partners, told The Daily Signal.

“I think President-elect Trump is looking at a bunch of different scenarios, and if he were smart, which I think he is, and he’s trying to be the voice of the people, then he should heed their call and make sure the taxpayers are made whole before giving preferential treatment to insurers,” he continued.

The risk corridor and reinsurance programs were intended to help mitigate insurers’ risks during the first few years of Obamacare’s implementation. The programs haven’t been as successful for insurers, which caused some small companies to close their doors and others to leave Obamacare’s exchanges.

In response to action from Republicans in 2014 and 2015, which left insurers with less money in risk corridor payments than anticipated, more than a dozen insurers sued the Obama administration over the program.

Conservative groups like Freedom Partners and Republican lawmakers have cautioned that the Justice Department could attempt to settle with insurance companies and tap into the Judgment Fund, an indefinite appropriation created by Congress and administered by the Treasury Department, to pay out those settlements.

In an effort to prevent that from happening, Republican Sens. John Barrasso of Wyoming, Mike Lee of Utah, Marco Rubio of Florida, and Ben Sasse of Nebraska introduced legislation Friday prohibiting the government from using the Judgment Fund or other federal funds to pay settlements related to the risk corridor program.

“We are going to repeal and replace Obamacare, but in the meantime, the last thing Americans need is for the Obama administration to sneak in one last bailout on its way out the door,” Sasse said in a statement Friday.

With Trump in the White House next year, health policy experts say it is doubtful the president-elect will settle with insurers.

I would imagine once the Trump administration takes office, settlement would be very unlikely,” Timothy Jost, a law professor at Washington and Lee University School of Law and a supporter of the Affordable Care Act, told The Daily Signal.

Still, Trump won’t be inaugurated until Jan. 20, so there remains a possibility that the Obama administration would attempt to settle with insurers before leaving office.

“It’s still a legitimate threat,” Nascimento said. “There are lawsuits that are pending, and the concern is whether or not the Obama administration will still move forward with trying to settle out of court claims.”

Like the risk corridor program, Obamacare’s reinsurance program transferred money from insurers that enrolled sicker populations to those that enrolled healthier populations.

Over the last few months, insurance companies and related organizations have pushed lawmakers to extend the reinsurance program beyond 2016, which would provide insurance companies with costly customers with an infusion of cash.

Under the reinsurance program, the Obama administration was supposed to prioritize payments to the Treasury over the insurance companies. But GOP lawmakers have accused the White House of diverting $5 billion intended for the Treasury to those insurers.

A September legal decision from the Government Accountability Office found the Department of Health and Human Services broke the law in giving this money to insurers before the Treasury.

Republicans in the House and Senate, led by Sasse and Rep. Mark Walker of North Carolina, are urging the government to repay the $5 billion to the Treasury, and a bill from Sasse and Walker would cut the Department of Health and Human Services’ budget if the money isn’t recouped.

Insurers, though, are lobbying Congress to oppose the bill, and America’s Health Insurance Plans, a trade group, said changes need to be made to both the reinsurance and risk corridor programs.

With Republicans maintaining control of the House and the Senate, Nascimento said Congress should attempt to recover the $5 billion in 2017.

“That’s where Trump really should throw down a marker,” he said, “and say, ‘Look, we’re not bailing out insurance companies. We’re not doing the sue-and-settle, and these dollars need to go back into the Treasury, and we’re going to make sure it goes back there.’”

“Those dollars need to go back into the Treasury. They were illegal given, and the Treasury needs to be made whole,” Nascimento continued.

Insurance companies haven’t received their reinsurance payments for 2016—they will be disbursed in 2017—and if Congress or the Trump administration forced the Department of Health and Human Services to repay the $5 billion to the Treasury, insurers would lose out, Jost said.

“The effect is going to vary from insurer to insurers,” he said. “It’s possible some will go insolvent and for most, it’ll be a big loss. For some, it might make it less likely they’ll continue to participate in the program for 2018, which is a decision they’ll have to make.” (For more from the author of “Obamacare ‘Insurer Bailouts’ Become Less Likely Under President Trump” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Why Jeff Sessions, ‘an Advocate for the Constitution,’ Has Conservatives So Excited

/0 Comments/in , /by

As attorney general, Jeff Sessions could go a long way toward reversing the politicization of the Justice Department that occurred under the Obama administration, Republican senators and conservative activists said Friday, after President-elect Donald Trump announced he is nominating the Alabama Republican senator for the nation’s top law enforcement job.

“Sen. Sessions’ solid understanding of the Constitution and firm commitment to the rule of law is exactly what the Justice Department needs,” Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said in a statement. “I have worked closely with Sen. Sessions on the Judiciary Committee over these past six years and I have every confidence that he will make a great attorney general for all Americans.”

Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, commended the Sessions nomination and excoriated the Justice Department under the controversial leadership of Attorneys General Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch.

“A principled and good man, he will restore honor to a department that, under President [Barack] Obama, perpetually pushed a political agenda while neglecting to enforce the law,” Cornyn said in a statement.

“For nearly eight years the Justice Department has twisted the Constitution and the laws passed by Congress to further the president’s liberal agenda, eroding our liberty in the process,” said Cornyn, also a Judiciary member. “It has put politics ahead of national security, and demonized those who protect us. It’s time to end the politicization of the Justice Department and start defending the rule of law, and I’m confident that as our top law enforcement official Senator Sessions will do that.”

During the Obama administration, Holder fended off an investigation into the Operation Fast and Furious gunwalking program, and was found in contempt of Congress for refusing to provide thousands of documents to congressional investigators.

Holder and Lynch also launched controversial investigations into police departments across the country. More recently, Republicans questioned potential Justice Department interference into the investigation of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private email server.

Bumpy Confirmation Ahead?

In the 1980s, Sessions was a U.S. attorney and was nominated but not confirmed to a federal judgeship. So, this will be the third time Sessions will face a Senate confirmation.

Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, is “confident he would be reported favorably out of the committee” because of his legal background.

“Sen. Sessions is a respected member and former ranking member of the Judiciary Committee who has worked across the aisle on major legislation,” Grassley said. “He knows the Justice Department as a former U.S. attorney, which would serve him very well in this position.”

However, this time it still might not be easy.

Among the liberal groups opposing the nomination is the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights.

“This nomination is deeply troubling to Americans who care about equal protection under the law,” the organization’s president Wade Henderson said in a statement. “Throughout his tenure in the Senate, Sen. Sessions has been one of the chamber’s leading antagonists of immigrants and the LGBT community, continuing his long record of obstructing civil rights that began in his tenure as U.S. attorney for the Southern District of Alabama.”

The confirmation hearing will be missing one Republican on the Judiciary panel—Sessions.

The committee’s top Democrat, Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said the hearing is of particular importance because Trump “has proposed religious tests, a return to torture, and a deportation force that threatens to remove millions of immigrants.”

“Sen. Sessions and I have had significant disagreements over the years, particularly on civil rights, voting rights, immigration, and criminal justice issues,” Leahy said. “But unlike Republicans’ practice of unprecedented obstruction of President Obama’s nominees, I believe nominees deserve a full and fair process before the Senate. The American people deserve to learn about Sen. Sessions’ record at the public Senate Judiciary Committee hearing.”

The confirmation should be swift, said Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., who asserted he strongly supports Trump’s nomination, and noted Sessions’ record of working with Democrats such as Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin, and the late Massachusetts Sen. Ted Kennedy on major legislation.

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, was rumored to be under consideration for the attorney general’s job. However, Trump’s leading Republican presidential primary opponent expressed strong support for Sessions.

“Sen. Jeff Sessions’ nomination as attorney general is great news for all of us who revere the Constitution and the rule of law,” Cruz, a Judiciary member, said in a statement. “I have been honored to work with Sen. Sessions on many of our nation’s most important issues over the last four years. Sen. Sessions has had an extraordinary career in government and law enforcement. He has been an exemplary senator for the state of Alabama, and I am confident that he will be an exceptional United States attorney general.”

Conservative Activists Excited

A former Sessions colleague, Jim DeMint, now president of The Heritage Foundation, said Sessions will defend the freedom and safety of Americans as attorney general.

“No one will work harder than Jeff Sessions to defend the freedoms and safety of all Americans as attorney general. He is not intimidated by the liberal media or the Washington establishment,” DeMint said in a statement. “He has the courage and the proven record to take on special interests. He is passionate about defending the Constitution and the rule of law to protect the rights of everyone. Jeff has been such a great friend to me and many others, becoming one of the most respected leaders in the Senate and should easily be confirmed.”

Conservative activists, such as Tea Party Patriots co-founder Jenny Beth Martin, were also excited by the news, noting the DOJ’s leftward shift under the Obama administration.

“For eight years under President Obama, the Justice Department prioritized politics over the rule of law,” Martin said. “Under Sen. Sessions, we know the rule of law will finally be paramount again with our nation’s highest-ranking law enforcement officer. We look forward to supporting Sen. Sessions during his confirmation process and working with him once he takes the oath of office as our next attorney general.”

Sessions’ record as U.S. attorney, Alabama attorney general, and in the Senate makes him a strong nominee, said Penny Nance, president of Concerned Women for America. She added the nomination speaks well to Trump’s commitment to conservative principles.

“The thousands of members of Concerned Women for America around the country will urge senators to move quickly in the new year to confirm Sen. Sessions as the next attorney general, so that we may start rectifying many of the asphyxiating policies pursued by Attorney General Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch,” Nance said in a statement. “The attacks on religious freedom and freedom of conscience in general, for example, must be atop of the list.”

Sessions has been a strong conservative advocate and is an indicator potential future appointments, said Frank Cannon, president at American Principles Project.

“On life, education, religious freedom, sound money—really, across the board—Sen. Jeff Sessions has proven himself to be an advocate for the Constitution and for the hardworking people of this great nation. We expect he will do an excellent job as attorney general,” Cannon said. (For more from the author of “Why Jeff Sessions, ‘an Advocate for the Constitution,’ Has Conservatives So Excited” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

How Infantilized Campuses Threaten Our Nation’s Future

/0 Comments/in , /by

What are we to make of higher education when students and institutions respond to the recent presidential election with cry-ins, canceled exams, therapy dogs, Play-Doh, coloring books, group screams, Legos, bubble-blowing, and trauma counseling? Well, college “ain’t what it used to be.”

For some time, higher learning has been a political matter, one where the primary aim is to usher students into the club of elite (supposedly enlightened) progressive opinion. Gone is the formation of keen, analytical habits of mind and rational argument.

The result is not just a poorly educated student body, but an infantilized one. Mature discourse is out, and fragility, dependence, and bad temper is in.

Rather than cultivate habits of sustained and sober thought, we encourage manufactured outrage and self-indulgent victimhood. Anyone who has spent time with 2-year-olds recognizes the behavior. In our case, however, we appear to cultivate it on our campuses.

An infantilized campus is bad enough, but it becomes intolerable when these are the places where leaders of a self-governing republic are usually formed.

Regardless of party or position, a citizenry incapable of facing adversity or unwilling to reason about and discuss difficult, public things will not likely produce leaders who can do so. If college campuses steep our future leaders in habits of entitled fragility, the only politics they will be able to imagine is that of the tantrum.

Tellingly, this is exactly the kind of politics we have seen on campus, and, increasingly, off campus as well.

A darker view would regard our infantilized campuses as something more sinister than the accidental byproduct of politicized higher education. When the noise of a tantrum becomes a primary political instrument in place of reason, persuasion, and evidence, then volume, not thought, wins the day.

And volume is coercive. When 2-year-olds throw tantrums, they attempt to force matters and get their own way. A set of people taught not to reason but to huddle in safe spaces and throw the occasional tantrum is a people taught to impose their will. They have not been denied a voice; rather, they are intent upon being the only voice.

This is not to say that all post-election anxiety is necessarily irrational. But it is a lack of the aforementioned habits that makes aggression and extremism so common.

Genuine higher learning requires (among other things) time, intense application of thought, patient reflection, and maturity. Rather than an education in elite and coddled groupthink, real learning is an education in honed and sound thinking—thinking that is not victim to every fleeting passion.

This is precisely the kind of learning poet Robert Frost had in mind when he wrote, “So when at times the mob is swayed/ To carry praise or blame too far,/ We may choose something like a star/ To stay our minds on and be said.”

If we cannot restore the “higher” to higher education, if we cannot put down our Play-Doh and take up our Plato, it’s unlikely we’ll see a return of either to our politics or our learning. (For more from the author of “How Infantilized Campuses Threaten Our Nation’s Future” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Funding the Cult of Terror: Are American Taxpayer Dollars Paying for the Arafat Museum in Ramallah?

/0 Comments/in , /by

Last week, a new, $7 million museum opened in poverty-stricken Ramallah. Given the serial complaints by the Palestinian Authority and its backers about the hardships the Palestinian people endure due to oppression by the Israeli government (a weekly report can be found here), it seems a curious project on which to spend millions. Certainly, given the water crisis the PA has likened to a “crime against humanity,” there must be more pressing needs for these funds.

Until you learn that the museum is dedicated to the chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization —Yasser Arafat. In other words, it is a shrine to the cult of terror that is the PA’s stock in trade. And directly or indirectly it’s being paid for with American taxpayer dollars.

Indignation about the way the PA spends the relief funds lavished on it generally focuses on the outrageous and abhorrent practice of rewarding the waves of terrorists (and their families) that the PA has unleashed on Israel. This overt sponsorship of terrorism should and must stop, and donor governments are beginning to investigate ways to designate how their aid can be spent.

The PA’s first attempted dodge was to claim that the payments actually came from the PLO, over which it has no formal control. But even PA President Mahmoud Abbas couldn’t maintain this farce with a straight face, leading to increased scrutiny. American aid, for example, is now largely confined to cultural and construction projects — such as a museum — on the grounds that an actual museum containing local antiquities might spur tourism and improve civic life.

The Arafat museum project, however, reveals the PA’s determination to continue using even these funds to sponsor terrorism, as this institution is carefully crafted to incite hatred of Israel. For example, Arafat’s birthplace is proclaimed to be Jerusalem, suggesting an ancestral claim to the city. He was in fact born in Cairo.

The walls are festooned with a rogues’ gallery of his terrorism-sponsoring associates, from Fidel Castro to Muammar Qaddafi. Mr. Arafat’s widow, whose interactions with the PA turned ugly, is missing altogether. Unsavory episodes such as the bombing of Swissair Flight 330 in 1970 to the hijacking of the Achille Lauro in 1985 are glossed over. The tour ends with the unsubstantiated allegation that Arafat was poisoned by the Israelis, a claim dutifully echoed in the Palestinian media.

Sympathetic critics, notably The New York Times, have tried to explain these inaccuracies and omissions by proposing the museum “avoids conclusions” or poses “unanswered questions” in a willful denial of the clear and purposeful — if factually spurious — narrative it weaves.

The ongoing challenge the PA faces is that most humans do not get out of bed in the morning eager to carry out terrorist attacks on their neighbors that will leave them dead or in jail, even if there is a cash reward.

The Palestinian leadership has learned that a systematic program of incitement — extending from schools to media to cultural institutions — is also required. The mission of the Arafat museum, therefore, is to transform the squalid tale of a corrupt and violent terrorist into the heroic myth of a martyr to the Palestinian cause designed to inspire future generations to follow in his footsteps.

The Arafat museum thus presents a necessary if unpleasant reality check that even the best-intentioned aid to the PA will be used to fuel its grim determination to destroy the Jewish state. It is unconscionable that American taxpayer dollars are directly or indirectly funding this crusade. One of the first tasks of the new Congress should be to end this insidious practice until the Palestinian leadership can credibly demonstrate its goal is to make peace with its neighbors, not to annihilate them. (For more from the author of “Funding the Cult of Terror: Are American Taxpayer Dollars Paying for the Arafat Museum in Ramallah?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Trump Considers Two Former Generals for Defense Secretary

/0 Comments/in , , /by

Two former generals are in contention for defense secretary in President-elect Donald Trump’s administration: James Mattis and Jack Keane, who served as an informal adviser to Hillary Clinton, according to a person involved in the transition.

Trump is seeking to build out his national security team, having offered the job of national security adviser to retired Lieutenant General Michael Flynn, the former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency and a key military surrogate throughout his campaign, according to the person.

Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani remains the leading contender for secretary of state but Trump is considering others, including South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley and 2012 Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney, the person said on Tuesday.

Former Texas Governor Rick Perry is being considered for a range of positions, including agriculture secretary, energy secretary and secretary of veterans affairs, the person said.

Trump’s top strategists are trying to recruit leaders from across the Republican Party who represent a range of perspectives, including some who made negative remarks about Trump before he was elected. Trump’s deliberations will continue this weekend as he holds back-to-back meetings with potential candidates for posts in his administration at his home on his private golf course in Bedminster, New Jersey, the person said. (Read more from “Trump Considers Two Former Generals for Defense Secretary” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

DC City Council Approves Assisted Suicide Again, Sends Bill to Mayor’s Desk

/0 Comments/in , /by

The Washington, D.C. city council voted again to approve assisted suicide, sending the bill to Mayor Muriel Bowser’s desk.

On November 1, the city council voted 11-2 to pass Bill 21-38, the Death With Dignity Act. On November 15, the council approved the bill 11-2 again. The Death with Dignity Act would allow doctors to prescribe lethal drugs to patients who they think have less than six months to live.

The November 1 vote featured a heated discussion of the bill in which numerous pro-assisted suicide members of the city council became choked up describing how they had watched relatives suffer before death. In her arguments in favor of the bill, Councilmember Elissa Silverman recalled how her grandmother had been hooked up to a ventilator.

There was no debate before the November 15 vote. Councilmembers Brianne Nadeau and Yvette Alexander, the same councilmembers who opposed the bill on November 1, voted against it Tuesday. (Read more from “DC City Council Approves Assisted Suicide Again, Sends Bill to Mayor’s Desk” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

TRUMP DERANGEMENT SYNDROME: Democrats Believe in Democracy Only Until They Lose an Election

/0 Comments/in , /by

Like all dictators, the Democrats believe in democracy only until they lose an election.

And then they lose their minds.

The last time a national mental breakdown this severe happened was sixteen years ago when Bush beat Gore. The Democrats reacted gracefully to their defeat by insisting that they didn’t really lose because Bush stole the election. Psychiatrists were soon tending to lefties suffering from depression. Others protested outside the Florida Supreme Court, President Bush’s home and their parents’ basement.

Jesse Jackson accused Republicans of a “coup.” Congresswoman Eddie Bernice Johnson warned that “without justice there will be no peace.” Thousands protested Bush’s inauguration waving signs like, “We want Bush out of D.C.” and “You’re not our president.”

The Congressional Black Caucus tried to obstruct the certification of the Electoral College vote. Then when Bush won again in the next election, they did it all over again. Expect them to try it one more time.

Because they don’t believe in democracy. They believe in their own absolute entitlement to power. Any election that they win is legitimate. Any election that they lose is illegitimate.

But if Bush Derangement Syndrome was bad, Trump Derangement Syndrome is even worse.

#NotOurPresident on Twitter quickly gave way to riots in major cities. Democrats in the affected cities decided that the riots were a great idea even though it was their own police that were being attacked.

Mayor Bill de Blasio, New York City’s radical leftist boss, claimed that “more disruption… will change the trajectory of things”. Even though the only trajectory that the protests have changed thus far is New York City traffic. “The more people fight back, the more it takes away his power,” he insisted.

Wiser heads on the left recognized that messing up Manhattan traffic wouldn’t stop Trump from taking office. Instead they decided to abolish the Electoral College. Senator Boxer will introduce a bill to that effect. Bernie Sanders mumbled that it’s time to rethink it. Michael Dukakis fired off an angry email insisting that Hillary Clinton had won and that abolishing it should be a top Democratic priority.

Since Hillary lost, the Electoral College is, according to Slate, an “Instrument of White Supremacy—and Sexism”. And probably Islamophobic and Homophobic too. Time Magazine defaulted to the default lefty attack on anything by accusing the Electoral College of being racist. But if Hillary had won, then any attack on the Electoral College would be racist, sexist, homophobic, Islamophobic and claustrophobic.

Rank and filers weren’t interested in waiting to abolish it tomorrow. They skipped right to trying to rig it today. Over 4 million people have signed a petition titled, “Electoral College: Make Hillary Clinton President on December 19”. Because that’s just how they think elections should work.

Efforts were made to contact Electors directly urging them to hijack the election. Idaho Secretary of State Lawerence Denney said that the Electors were being harassed with “insults”, “vulgar language” and “threats”. One Elector reported that his cell, home phone, email and Facebook were targeted.

“They’re just trying to steal this thing,” he said.

The Electoral College is undemocratic. Unless you’re a Democrat asking it to undemocratically hijack the results of a state election while depriving its voters of political representation.

Some Democrats despaired of stealing the election and tried to steal the Supreme Court instead. There were revived calls for a Supreme Court recess appointment. There’s a petition, a Saturday Night Live punch line and a bizarre effort by Democratic Senator Jeff Merkley to move the nomination forward.

Merkley claimed that Trump has “no right to fill” that seat and that the Supreme Court seat was stolen. “We need to do everything we possibly can to block it,” he insisted.

What does that mean? How about a permanently deadlocked Supreme Court?

A Slate writer urged that, “the only way to answer nihilism is with nihilism of our own.”

“Obstruct the nomination and seating of any Trump nominee to fill Scalia’s seat,” she urged. “We will lose. But that’s not the point now… If Democrats can muster the energy to fight about nothing else, it should be this.”

A permanently deadlocked Supreme Court doesn’t sound like much of a plan. But Trump Derangement Syndrome means embracing nihilism. And it’s downright rational compared to the celebrity meltdowns as TMZ’s finest cope with the blow to their egos of an election that showed they didn’t matter.

Lady Gaga has been yelling at Trump on and off Twitter. Constitutional scholar George Takei demanded that Obama just appoint Garland. Honorary feminist Joss Whedon declared, “This is simple: Trump cannot CANNOT be allowed a term in office. It’s not about 2018. It’s about RIGHT NOW.”

What does that mean? It’s a tantrum. It means that baby wants his power and he wants it now.

And it only gets crazier from there.

The outer reaches of Trump Derangement Syndrome include calls to boycott three brands of toilet paper because they’re allegedly made by the Koch Brothers. Never mind that the Koch Brothers weren’t supporting Trump. Facts, like democracy, only matter when they happen to be on your side.

Then there are the ritual burnings of New Balance sneakers on YouTube and Instagram. Not to mention support for the secession of California from the United States of America.

A man has sued Donald Trump for $1 billion for having inflicted “great emotional pain, fear and anxiety on Election Day and beyond.” Students at Cornell held a “cry-in” to mourn the results of the election. The University of Kansas offered students therapy dogs. At the University of Michigan’s multi-ethnic student affairs center students took comfort in regressing to childhood with coloring books and Play-Doh.

John Hopkins recommended a healing circle. Stanford urged students to “take care of yourselves and to give support to those who need it.” Vanderbilt encouraged them “to take advantage of the outstanding mental health support the university offers.”

At the University of Maryland, an astronomy test was canceled to help students cope with “a personally threatening election result.” A Yale economics professor made his test optional because students were “in shock” over losing an election. A dozen midterms were rescheduled at Columbia.

One student complained, “Instead of studying for my exam, I was glued to the election update. It’s not fair to have a test the following day when something so monumental is taking place, especially when this event is threatening so many groups of people in our country.”

Under all the outraged rhetoric is a narcissistic sense of entitlement. Frustrate it and tantrums happen.

Trump Derangement Syndrome is the tantrum that happens when that sense of entitlement bursts. It’s not a new phenomenon. We saw it with Bush and with previous Republican presidents before him. But as the left’s power has grown, its insular ivory towers have become unable to imagine ever losing it.

Obama maintained the illusion that the opposition didn’t matter by ruling unilaterally. Then in one election the illusion collapsed. The left wasn’t really in charge. There were millions of people across the country in places they had never visited or even heard of who got to decide on all these issues.

That warm comfortable safe space of John Oliver and Samantha Bee viral videos, Buzzfeed stories and social media feeds filled with carefully curated people who agreed with them wasn’t reality. It had been an illusion all along. It was an elitist island that had little in common with that vast geography of people who get their say through the Electoral College. After two terms of getting their way on everything, they woke to a world in which they didn’t matter and which was suddenly no longer catering to their whims.

They don’t really want to abolish the Electoral College, to put Garland on the Supreme Court or to burn New Balance sneakers. What they really want is to get rid of democracy and replace it with a dictatorship. Trump Derangement Syndrome is the tantrum of tyrants.

It’s a real threat to democracy. But that’s what the left has always been.

The hysteria of Trump Derangement Syndrome is the flip side of Obama worship. Both reject democracy and embrace power. They are the illiberal attitudes of a totalitarian movement at odds with America. (For more from the author of “TRUMP DERANGEMENT SYNDROME: Democrats Believe in Democracy Only Until They Lose an Election” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Who Died and Made Facebook and Google Arbiters of ‘Fake’ News? Oh, Yeah, the MSM

/0 Comments/in , /by

For those who navigated the online minefield of 2016, there is no doubt that fake news sites have multiplied. Many are apparently run by teens in Macedonia looking to score a quick buck. Facebook, and Google have announced plans to rid the web of the scourge, but that opens a whole door to new problems. Including social justice warriors who think that opinion and facts they disagree with are “fake.” The Los Angeles Times unwittingly highlighted a Massachusetts assistant professor who doing just that. And that’s a problem.

Here’s what the LA Times wrote:

Melissa Zimdars, an assistant professor of communication at Merrimack College in Massachusetts, put together a publicly available Google doc cataloging “False, misleading, clickbait-y and satirical ‘news’ sources.” It’s been making the rounds on social media as people seek to cleanse their newsfeeds of misinformation.

So far, so good. Until you actually look at the list of sites. There are definite fake news sites, like The Onion (an aside if you believe The Onion you should probably just shut your computer and never get on the internet again), The Borowitz Report, MegynKelly.us, among others, on the list. But there are also real news and opinion sites that mad Zimdars list. These sites include, Glenn Beck’s The Blaze, Salem Media’s RedState, and Independent Journal Review (IJR). While these sites contain some clickbaity headlines from time to time — quite frankly what website doesn’t including the LA Times — they are certainly not “fake news sites.”

That is the problem people like Facebook and Google are going to face. Whom do you listen to when compiling your list of ‘fake news sites?’ Do you listen to your customers, or some panel of academics who believe that all opinions that are different from theirs, or facts that don’t feed into their own confirmation bias, are ‘fake?’ It is going to be a real problem.

I had a conversation with a very liberal relative of mine about this topic yesterday. The relative believes that only main stream media outlets should be allowed to proffer news. That partisan outlets, or those “spewing propaganda” should be throttled. Here’s the problem. To people that share the same ideological bend as my relative, a place like Conservative Review “spews propaganda,” but to a vast part of the nation — those that voted for Trump — the Main Stream Media is just a propaganda arm of the Left. One man’s facts are what another man sees as blatant partisan propaganda.

The 2016 campaign showed that in spades. Supposed “non-partisan” media fact checking sites often used the opinions of experts as fact. To those living in the Northeast Megalopolis and the West Coast, those opinions are fact. They can’t see how anything else but that can be true.

There’s another name for that, it’s propaganda.

While it is important to weed out the truly fake news sources that have proliferated, Facebook, Google, Twitter, et. Al. need to be open and transparent about how they are categorizing websites, and offer real meaningful avenues for people to challenge classifications.

One of the greatest developments of the past 15 years has been the rise of citizen journalism. As Andrew Breitbart was fond of saying, anyone with a smartphone is a reporter. Many significant stories have been broken by everyday people who have become fed up with what is going on in their own communities. We must all be vigilant that those who wish to classify those with whom they disagree as “fake” don’t succeed in sanitizing the internet of differing views. (For more from the author of “Who Died and Made Facebook and Google Arbiters of ‘Fake’ News? Oh, Yeah, the MSM” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Obama Used His Pen and Phone to Endanger America; Trump Can Use Both to Protect Us

/0 Comments/in , /by

Obama has unilaterally remade this country without the consent of Congress and has induced social transformation without representation. The good news is that a newly elected President Trump can shut down those edicts with the stroke of a pen, especially as it relates to immigration and refugee resettlement. And unlike Obama’s imperial abuse of executive orders, Trump would actually be following the spirit and letter of immigration statutes duly passed by Congress in doing so. He has a mandate to shut off refugee resettlement from the Middle East and can act upon it on day one of his administration.

In general, immigration statutes were crafted to give the president broad latitude to ratchet down immigration as needed, but not to expand it beyond the baseline law. Obama has blatantly violated immigration law by refusing to enforce these statutes and by creating numerous programs that never existed in the first place or exceeded statutory authority.

One area of frustration for conservatives in Congress has been the refugee crisis. As we’ve noted before, while the 1980 Refugee Act was sold to the public as a way of granting Congress and the states more input, it left the door open for a president who doesn’t respect his nation’s concerns to unilaterally bring in as many refugees as he desires. As I warned in September, Obama is front-loading refugee resettlement to lock in as many refugees for fiscal year 2017, even after he leaves office.

According to the State Department’s refugee database, Obama has brought in 15,125 refugees in just the first six weeks of this fiscal year alone. On an annualized basis, that is a pace not seen since the inception of the modern program in 1980, even surpassing the early ‘90s when we admitted record numbers of refugees following the collapse of the Soviet Union. And unlike those coming the former Soviet Union who yearned for democracy, this influx is primarily from parts of the Middle East that not only represent a security threat, but experience has demonstrated is hard to Americanize. Those admitted so far this year include 1,940 from Syria, 1,960 from Somalia, and 1,870 from Iraq. While individuals admitted in small quantities can be assimilated, the lesson of Europe and our growing Middle Eastern immigration over the past decade has proven that importing large quantities from a culture of Sharia is suicide of a nation.

Also, notice how 20 years after the collapse of Somalia, we are still bringing in thousands of refugees every year — even topping the amount from Syria? Just this week, the first Somalis in the Minneapolis ISIS cell were sentenced on terrorism charges and the federal judge presiding over the case warned that there is a broader problem. “This community needs to understand there is a jihadist cell in this community. Its tentacles spread out,” said Judge Michael Davis during the sentencing hearing on Wednesday.

We must not wait until next fiscal year or for Congress to act in order to slow down this dangerous social transformation. Trump ran unambiguously on stopping refugees from the Middle East and the good news is that he can now use the unilateral executive authority for the right purposes. The same way Obama was able to increase refugee resettlement to 110,000 without Congress, Trump can set that number at 0. At the very least, he can immediately suspend the refugee program from countries with a dominant culture of radical Islamism, such as Syria, Somalia, and Iraq.

Also, under § 212(f) of Immigration and Nationality Act, “whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.”

This power is universal, enforceable at the will of the president, and applies any time for any circumstance. In the coming days, I plan to outline other ways Trump can unilaterally protect American interests on immigration under existing authority. Obviously, for major transformational changes, it would be advisable to seek a permanent solution from Congress. But as it relates to refugee resettlement from the Middle East during a time of war, the voters expect Trump to fulfill his promise immediately and exercise his authority to its fullest extent.

As I outline in Stolen Sovereignty, Trump should call upon Congress to permanently reform the program so that the American people won’t be at the mercy of future Democrat presidents. Congress should set the Refugee Admissions Program to automatically sunset at least every other fiscal year so that by default there is no refugee resettlement unless Congress renews the program. Also, the House should immediately pass Rep. Scott Perry, R-Pa. (C, 77%) bill permanently requiring states to affirmatively ratify refugee resettlement before HHS can settle any refugees in their respective jurisdictions.

There are many policy initiatives that require much debate and circumspection before rushing to pass them. Shutting down refugee resettlement and preventing America from following in the footsteps of Europe is not one of them. Time is of the essence. Fortunately, Donald Trump is about to inherit Obama’s mighty pen and magic phone to promote American sovereignty. Except, this time the law will be on his side. (For more from the author of “Obama Used His Pen and Phone to Endanger America; Trump Can Use Both to Protect Us” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.