My Local School Board May Begin Silencing Parents Over Transgender Agenda

In Fairfax, 10 parents have just three minutes each to give their views to the county school board each meeting.

Earning one of these coveted slots is like buying concert tickets: You get up early on the Monday before the meeting and click frantically, hoping to be among the first 10 when the school board opens its sign-up line.

Since the school board imposed its gender identity politics on unwilling Fairfax families nearly two years ago, it has heard from dozens of angry parents. More come forward every month.

For school board members on the receiving end of the discourse, this must be getting old. But that’s the price of freedom, right?

Maybe not. Parents have learned that bureaucrats on the Fairfax County School Board have had just about enough of this free speech, and are meeting to discuss how best to curtail it.

This week, board member Ryan McElveen, chief proponent of the transgender policy, is calling a meeting to discuss the public speaker process. Nothing good can come from that.

Last month, a citizen speaking before the Fairfax County School Board made the charge that nonresidents frequently appear at school board meetings—meaning people who do not reside in Fairfax County. He was referring to some who voiced criticism of school board action.

I’m a Fairfax County resident, and to my knowledge, all the speakers who have spoken out against the gender identity policies of the board have been Fairfax County residents. But if they want to require ID, I’m all for it.

But I wonder, do they also favor IDs for voting in Fairfax? Do you have to show proof of legal residency to receive school services? Those are good questions for the board, if I ever get the chance to ask them.

The gentleman who made the complaint claimed that Loudoun County residents were testifying in Fairfax County.

Perhaps he thought I was from Loudoun, since I testified before the Loudoun school board back in December. But I was speaking as a Fairfax County resident and as a sexual assault victim, to warn them that allowing men and boys into women’s and girls’ locker rooms, showers, and bathrooms is not only disrespectful, but dangerous.

Thankfully, Loudoun did not go the way of Fairfax.

I actually had to withdraw my daughter from her Fairfax County public elementary school over concerns for her personal safety and privacy. Her former school is currently allowing a biological boy to use the girls’ facilities, without any parental notification.

When Fairfax County School Board Chairman Sandy Evans says the transgender guidelines are “on hold,” she gives a false impression. The policy is being implemented right now, behind parents’ backs.

And now, a new speech policy against parents is being considered. This would affect parents who are not only constituents, but also the taxpayers who pay the school board’s salaries.

As a taxpayer, I am entitled to voice my concerns. I am a strong believer in giving both positive and negative feedback.

I called Fairfax County Interim Superintendent Steve Lockhard’s office this week to thank him for keeping schools open Wednesday—unlike our neighbor city, Alexandria, which closed schools for the leftist women’s protest, putting politics above children.

The Fairfax County School Board does not seem interested in listening to constituents who do not share their political views. When a single citizen makes the unfounded claim that non-Fairfax parents are speaking, McElveen shows deference and schedules a meeting to address it.

Yet when hundreds of parents and citizens with diverse cultural, religious, and ethnic backgrounds have gathered in one room to voice their concerns about adding “gender identity” to the so-called nondiscrimination policy, no meeting is ever called.

The school board hasn’t even shown us the courtesy and respect to acknowledge that we’ve been heard. All we’ve heard is their silence—and now they want to silence us?

The school board needs to develop some respect for parental input. Rather than shutting down citizens who would defend the privacy of their children, the Fairfax County School Board should make good on its commitment to openness, respect, and the democratic process. (For more from the author of “My Local School Board May Begin Silencing Parents Over Transgender Agenda” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Whistleblowers vs. The State

Immediately after WikiLeaks released thousands of documents revealing the extent of CIA surveillance and hacking practices, the government was calling for an investigation — not into why the CIA has amassed so much power, but rather, into who exposed their invasive policies.

“A federal criminal investigation is being opened into WikiLeaks’ publication of documents detailing alleged CIA hacking operations, several US officials,” reportedly told CNN.

According to USA Today:

The inquiry, the official said, will seek to determine whether the disclosure represented a breach from the outside or a leak from inside the organization. A separate review will attempt to assess the damage caused by such a disclosure, the official said.

Even Democratic representative Ted Lieu, who has been urging whistleblowers to come forward to expose wrongdoing within the Trump administration, has turned his focus away from what the documents exposed and toward determining how it could have possibly happened.

“I am deeply disturbed by the allegation that the CIA lost its arsenal of hacking tools,” he said while calling for an investigation. “The ramifications could be devastating. I am calling for an immediate congressional investigation. We need to know if the CIA lost control of its hacking tools, who may have those tools, and how do we now protect the privacy of Americans.”

According to Lieu’s statements, the problem isn’t necessarily that the CIA is spying on Americans and invading innocent people’s technology without consent. It’s that the CIA mishandled their spying tools, and in doing so, endangered Americans’ privacy by exposing the tools to presumably ‘bad actors.’ The problem isn’t the corrupt agency violating basic privacy rights, but that they weren’t skillful enough to keep their corruption under wraps.

So goes the familiar whistleblower narrative in the United States. Whistleblowers step forward to expose wrongdoing on the part of government — something the government claims to support — and immediately, establishment institutions and the media bend the conversation away from the wrongdoing in order to focus on the unlawful release of secrets.

Putting aside the fact that, according to popular American mythology breaking the law is a patriotic duty, the government and politicians’ reactions are both hypocritical and habitual.

When Chelsea Manning revealed damning evidence of U.S. war crimes in Iraq, including soldiers directly targeting Reuters news staff, the response was not to investigate who allowed those crimes (in fact, a later Pentagon manual went on to describe instances in which it’s permissible to kill journalists; that version was later retracted after outcry from reporters). Rather, Manning was subject to a military tribunal and issued multiple life sentences, a cruel and unusual punishment reversed only in President Obama’s last days in office amid his attempts to salvage his abysmal human rights, transparency, and whistleblower record.

When Edward Snowden revealed the extent of the NSA’s warrantless mass surveillance of American citizens and millions of others around the world, the government’s response was not to investigate why those programs existed in the first place. Rather, they thrashed and flailed around the world, ordering the plane of Bolivian President Evo Morales to be grounded in the hopes of catching the whistleblower. Congress later passed the deceptive “USA Freedom Act,” which codified continued surveillance.

Edward Snowden remains in exile, and establishment politicians repeatedly call him a traitor for exposing the crimes of his government. Some, including Trump’s CIA Director Mike Pompeo, have called for his execution. Mass surveillance continues, and the president himself is seeking to retain those powers as he condemns former President Obama for allegedly spying on him.

And so on and so forth. The same was true for John Kiriakou, Thomas Drake, William Binney, and Jeffrey Sterling. The government is exposed for wrongdoing, and rather than prove themselves to be representatives of the people by remedying those transgressions, they point fingers and divert, all the while refusing to relinquish the unjust power any given agency is exposed for having.

Many people are already aware that the government does little to actually serve them (Americans’ trust in political leaders and government, in general, is abysmally low). Rather, government agents and agencies operate to advance and concentrate their own interests and power. This is why penalties against killing government employees are more stringent than killing civilians. It is why stealing from the government is perceived as more outrageous to the State than stealing from a civilian. The government considers “crimes” committed against itself to carry the utmost offense, yet often fails to deliver justice to the people who provide their financial foundation.

s a result, the State does not even try to show remorse for its violative policies, even when they are exposed and splattered across social media for the world to see. Instead, with the help of corporate media, the debate is shifted to whether or not WikiLeaks is a criminal organization, or whether or not Edward Snowden is a traitor.

As White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer said of the leaks:

This is the kind of disclosure that undermines our country, our security. This alleged leak should concern every American for its impact on national security. … Anybody who leaks classified information will be held accountable to the maximum extent of the law.

Meanwhile, we’re supposed to accept the government’s investigation of itself, which (surprise!) usually finds little or no wrongdoing on their own behalf and often consolidates and extends the very same power whistleblowers exposed in the first place. (For more from the author of “Whistleblowers vs. The State” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Border Crossings PLUMMET as Trump Remains Tough on Illegal Immigration

President Trump’s approach to illegal immigration appears to be working so far, if early numbers are any indication.

A story published Wednesday at the Washington Times highlights Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly’s announcement the same day that, only a month into Trump’s new administration, illegal border crossings are plummeting at an “unprecedented” rate:

All told, 23,589 people were caught trying to enter without permission at the border in February. That was the lowest number for the month in years and a 40 percent drop from the 42,504 caught in January.

In fact, it’s the lowest number for any month dating back at least to 2012, when monthly statistics were first released.

Additionally, the numbers are also surprisingly low for a winter month, when desert border crossings are typically higher than the warmer months. The decrease in overland passage has, however, led to increased prices for black market coyote crossings, according to the same statement.

“The early results show that enforcement matters, deterrence matters, and that comprehensive immigration enforcement can make an impact,” Kelly went on, explaining the numbers drop. He echoed Obama critics’ objections to the previous administration’s laissez faire demeanor on immigration enforcement.

It would appear that enforcing the law while making it know that the law will be enforced actually deters people from breaking it. Who knew?!

The numbers are just from the first few weeks of President Trump’s term, but they serve as a stark rebuke to critics of the Trump’s strong public stance on illegal immigration during and after the campaign.

They also serve to counter the protests of Obama boosters who held up the former president’s deportation stats as evidence of a viable policy to combat illegal immigration.

Sure, he sent millions back; but by failing to effectively communicate anything serious about immigration to his citizens and those that sought to enter the country without consent, he may as well have left out a great welcome mat along the southern border, begging people the world over to disregard our laws and our sovereignty.

If people think they can get away with breaking a law and benefit from it, some (many) are going to do it. It’s that simple. In this specific instance, failing to enforce immigration policy in word perversely encourages people to put their lives and wellbeing at risk to cross a desert, all the while ticking people off and costing people national elections. The law has to be enforced, not only in deed, but in word.

For all the flak that Trump has gotten from the open borders Left about his tough talk on immigration, the numbers just don’t lie. Republican legislators, take note. (For more from the author of “Border Crossings PLUMMET as Trump Remains Tough on Illegal Immigration” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Mark Levin: There Is Something Horribly Immoral About RINOcare

Thursday on the radio, Conservative Review Editor-in-Chief Mark Levin gave the rundown on the press conference of Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wisc. (F, 51%), in which Ryan tried to give the hard sell to Americans on the Republican American Health Care Act “reform” plan.

Levin called Ryan’s proposal “repeal in name only.” Or, if you will, “RINOcare,” because the GOP plan keeps the core of Obamacare in place.

Listen:

Levin had a “number of questions” for the speaker, questions that so far remain unanswered.

“Now, here’s my question Mr. Ryan,” Levin said. “How much will the average American’s deduction go up, or down?”

Further, Levin asked, how much will the federal government be spending on subsidies for certain individuals? Will individuals be able to see the doctors they want? The specialists they need? Will individuals be able to go to the hospital of their choice? Will they be able to get the medicines they need to get?

At the end of the day, the problem with RINOcare, Levin explained, is it embraces the Left’s assumption that government involvement is needed to make health insurance affordable. It embraces progressivism; it embraces centralization.

“Republicans have blown it,” Levin said. “There is something horribly immoral about RINOcare.” (For more from the author of “Mark Levin: There Is Something Horribly Immoral About RINOcare” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Trump Made Cecile an Offer She Had to Refuse: Stop Aborting Babies or Lose $500 Million

I don’t like vague language and euphemisms. They’re the weapons of the dishonest and manipulative. Say what you mean and say it clearly.

For a long time now I’ve been cringing every time I hear the weasel words “abortion providers.” I’m begging prolifers to stop using the other side’s pet euphemisms. Stop saying Planned Parenthood “provides abortions” or “is the nation’s largest abortion provider” or any other such combination of those two words.

No one provides an abortion. It is not a beneficial, or necessary service, but an act of violence. It can only be committed. Planned Parenthood is the nation’s largest perpetrator of abortion. It does not provide the deaths of millions of unborn children; it causes those deaths. Planned Parenthood commits violence against the child in the womb, and against women, every single day.

The only thing being provided is the obscene profit these medical hitmen rake in for perpetrating the violence of abortion. As George Orwell warned, fuzzy language can obscure horrendous crimes, so let’s be precise in ours, for the sake of the truth.

Just How Much Do You Love Abortion?

This brings me to President Trump’s recent offer to Planned Parenthood: Want to keep your funding? No more abortions.

Planned Parenthood president Cecile Richards replied on Twitter:

There it is. “Providing” abortions is just as important to the mission of PP as cancer screenings. (And again, for the record, for the umpteenth time, not a single PP in the nation can provide a mammogram. They may be able to do a Pap smear and an HPV test, but that’s about it.) The marketing of Planned Parenthood as a magnanimous and comprehensive health care provider for untold scores of women who will otherwise never see a real doctor and thus die of cancer … it’s all a lie. Women have thousands of other options – and far better ones.

The mission of Planned Parenthood is not cancer screenings. It’s abortion. If tomorrow Planned Parenthood could no longer commit abortions, they would close their doors. It’s that simple. The organization exists for the purpose of profiting from abortions. And at least now Cecile is finally admitting it. She wants that half a billion in taxpayer dollars, all right, but to keep it she’s not about to melt down Planned Parenthood’s golden calf. Its mission is abortion.

Cancer screenings are not lucrative. Abortion is a monumental golden cash cow. No doubt Cecile is quite fond of her nearly $600,000 annual salary, so she’s determined to keep the bloody lucre flowing. She knows that so far, no administration has had the fortitude to cut Planned Parenthood off and withstand the cutthroat retaliation she would unleash. She’s counting on that to keep our lawmakers obediently underwriting her “mission.”

Drop the vague, specious language that anesthetizes the conscience. We are talking about bloodshed, not health care. There is no possible definition of health care that can include deliberate violence against a tiny child.

It is not in the interests of a woman’s health to kill her defenseless child. Chopping tiny humans into pieces cannot be considered “care.”

The Euphemisms in Our Mouths Leave Blood on Our Hands

Amazingly, many Americans, including our lawmakers, still refuse to admit that abortion actually involves literally tearing a baby apart. We have convinced ourselves that the Reproductive Freedom Fairy comes and makes the baby disappear, with no body, no blood, no harm, and no foul. We will not even take abortionists at their own word that babies are strategically dissected so as not to crush the really valuable body parts like brains, hearts, kidneys and tiny eyes that can be sold for still more profit.

We console ourselves by clinging to the statistic that most abortions are committed before the baby’s heart or brain is big enough to be profitable. “Fetal tissue” or better yet, “clumps of cells” are simply flushed away like a bad menstrual period. It’s “terminating a pregnancy,” which is just a weird condition that happens to women sometimes but is totally unrelated to a developing baby in the womb.

People may rant about health care and choices and autonomy and “reproductive justice” (oh, the irony of that word!), but we are no better than pagan Romans, who left infants exposed on rocks to be picked apart by crows. In fact, we are worse because we cloak our “exposure” in lab coats and euphemisms, and protect the predators with the force of law. Then we top it all off with a $500 million dollar annual tithe to Margaret Sanger’s Moloch.

Planned Parenthood has admitted that it really isn’t interested in anything other than abortion. Is that what we want to pay for? Let’s at least be honest and admit it. (For more from the author of “Trump Made Cecile an Offer She Had to Refuse: Stop Aborting Babies or Lose $500 Million” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Air Force Says Words Like ‘Boy’ and ‘Girl’ Could Be Offensive

The Air Force fears that words like boy, girl, colonial and blacklist might offend people, according to an email sent to Airmen at Joint Base San Antonio.

An outraged Airman sent me a copy of the email — as evidence the military is still infected with Obama-era political correctness. The email included an attachment that listed a number of words and phrases that might be construed as offensive.

Now, to be fair there were some legitimately offensive and racially charged words and phrases on the list. But also included on the list were the words boy and girl.

The email was written by a senior Air Force leader and was sent to an untold number of personnel at Lackland Air Force Base. Airmen were advised to study a list of words and phrases that “may be construed offensive.” (Read more from “Air Force Says Words Like ‘Boy’ and ‘Girl’ Could Be Offensive” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Most College Humanities and Social Science Programs Have Become Enemies of Freedom and Reason

In the wake of the riots that have silenced free speech on one campus after another, it is clear that few colleges or universities still offer a real liberal arts education. Nor have most even lapsed into simple careerism, aiming solely at getting students ready to support themselves and their families. That would be bad enough, a grim decline from the reason that the Church created the first universities back in the Middle Ages: forming the “whole person,” as West Point still aims to do.

No, things are much worse than that. The reason that most students go to college is grimly careerist — it’s like getting a green card that permits you to work at most jobs in America. But the schools have kept the infrastructure of old-fashioned Western liberal arts institutions, adding on the apparatus of 19th-century quasi-sciences like sociology and history. However, the ideas about human nature, politics, economics, morality and culture that have captured most humanities and social science departments are aggressively hostile to the culture of the West, especially Christianity, limited government, and economic freedom. Even the unique value of human life is no longer taken for granted, thanks to the explosion of ecological fundamentalism in the name of “sustainability.”

So we have the worst of both worlds: schools that keep up the pretense of forming young people in humanistic disciplines, while the teachers who’ve grabbed control of the relevant departments are doing exactly the opposite. So students pass statues of Homer, Dante, Milton, Shakespeare and Washington, en route to classes whose teachers and texts sneer at every value any of those men would have treasured.

Your average humanities department is thus like a seminary whose theology department has been captured by tenured atheists. Even in schools that still retain a Western core curriculum, there are influential teachers like the late Edward Said of Columbia, who boasted that he taught the “canon” of Western literature as a means of exposing our culture as the oppressor of most of the world.

Rejecting Reason, Freedom and Objectivity

Even worse than that, whole disciplines have turned against ideals of reason, free discourse and objectivity, and rest their conclusions instead on untestable, aggressively political dogmas whose premises are unquestioned. In fact, if a student or teacher attempts to question them, he will simply be punished, academically or professionally. Thus they operate less as intellectual fields of inquiry than intolerant, man-made religions — or ideologies. That word means more than just “worldview.” It’s a term for a set of intellectual rationalizations for positions you chose for non-rational reasons, such as the craving for money, power, privilege, or revenge. An ideology is a half-baked idea with a fully loaded pistol.

The great critic of Nazi and Communist totalitarianism, Eric Voegelin, explained how to distinguish a legitimate, grounded worldview from an ersatz religion, or ideology. In The New Science of Politics, he noted that ideologues defend their systems not by anticipating objections and answering them, but instead by forbidding the questions.

Marx allowed no room in his system of materialistic determinism for the possibility of God. When students asked him about that, he told them that in a future socialist paradise, the question of God would never come up. (Indeed, future Marxist governments would send the secret police to make sure of that.) Of course that is not an answer but an evasion. It’s the response not of a philosopher but of an ideologue.

Whole Disciplines Without Dissenters

Women’s studies professors, almost to a person, take for granted the right to abortion. How many “queer theory” teachers are willing to entertain the natural law objections to same-sex marriage? Will they let students defend that position in papers in their classes, without subjecting them to classroom shaming and punitive grading? Would students who end up in one of these classes have the nerve to make the experiment? I don’t advise it. I advise not taking those classes, and if they are required I advise transferring colleges.

Can we really take seriously the claim that these are legitimate academic fields, when the answers to complex questions that are widely and justly debated — not just across America, but around the world and throughout the centuries — are so blithely taken for granted that there are simply no dissenters? Worse still, these disciplines poison other departments, as history professors adopt the “consensus” of women’s studies “scholars” on one issue, and philosophers, theologians, even chaplains accept the queer theorists’ party line.

It’s not just that classes infused by such corrupted, politicized disciplines indoctrinate students with pat, false conclusions, and encourage them to wield them self-righteously as cudgels. Nor even that students are being robbed of the chance to appreciate thinkers, artists, and statesmen of the past with any sympathy or pleasure. All that is bad enough.

Lazy Thinking Makes Snowflakes

Even worse, in the long run, are the intellectual laziness and emotional fragility that such an education produces. Can you imagine college Democrats in 1952 reacting to the election of immigration hawk Dwight Eisenhower as today’s “snowflakes” responded to Donald Trump’s win? Even the self-righteous and often violent radicals who took over campuses in the 60s didn’t have melt-downs, public crying fits, and apparent nervous breakdowns when Nixon beat McGovern. Whatever crackpot ideologies they might have adopted, they had been through the training in rigorous, critical thinking that Western education has prided itself on since the ancient Greeks. Our current generation wouldn’t know rigor from rigor mortis.

All these are excellent, and to my mind decisive, reasons to shutter most humanities and social science departments, and reduce English faculty to teaching remedial reading, correct grammar, and the basics of business writing. Let universities and colleges shrink down to their icy, pragmatic core: preparing future taxpayers, without poisoning their minds with toxic ideologies founded on crass intellectual sloth. First do no harm.

But who will pass on the really important traditions of humanistic learning, which our current crop of “humanists” has poisoned like a virus yet clings to like a tapeworm? Tomorrow I’ll grope toward an answer at how to replace the wrecked infrastructure of liberal education in our current tough conditions. (For more from the author of “Most College Humanities and Social Science Programs Have Become Enemies of Freedom and Reason” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Youtube, Amazon, HBO, Even the American Library Association Are Part of the ‘Dirty Dozen’

“No corporation should profit from or facilitate sexual exploitation,” but many do, and every year twelve make the “Dirty Dozen” list. Created by the National Center on Sexual Exploitation, the list is intended to “to name and shame the bad corporate actors in America that perpetuate sexual exploitation — whether that be through pornography, prostitution, or sex trafficking.”

This year’s “Dirty Dozen” are (in alphabetical order): Amazon, the American Library Association, Amnesty International, Backpage.com, Comcast, Cosmopolitan, EBSCO, HBO, Roku, Snapchat/Snapcash, Twitter and YouTube.

The NCSE, founded in 1962, describes itself as “the leading national organization opposing pornography by highlighting the links to sex trafficking, violence against women, child abuse, addiction and more.” Until 2015, it was named Morality In Media. It also directs the Coalition to End Sexual Exploitation. The Coalition’s members include the American Family Association and many of its state branches; Alliance Defending Freedom; several Catholic dioceses, including the Archdiocese of Washington; the Family Research Council; and 96 other organizations.

The Dirty Dozen

Some are obvious choices, like Backpage.com, Cosmopolitan and HBO. The NCSE describes Backpage.com as bringing “the seedy street corners of America’s red-light districts to home computers.”

As a classified advertising website known as ‘the hub’ for prostitution advertising, Backpage.com serves as a virtual auction block where sex buyers can shop for human beings for sex from the privacy of their home, office, hotel room, or cell phone. Many of those bought and sold via the website are sexually trafficked women and children. The website facilitates this activity by editing ads to conceal the illegality of underlying criminal activity

The NCSE does praise Backpage.com for blocking the ads for prostitution in the U.S., while noting that doing so was “arguably a publicity stunt.”

Other choices are not so obvious. The American Library Association, for example, is included because it “zealously encourages public libraries to not install Internet filters on public-access computers, thereby granting patrons — including children — the opportunity to view obscene material.” The ALA appears on the list for the fifth straight year.

Amnesty International is included for supporting “the full decriminalization of prostitution [which] prioritizes the special interests of pimps/sex traffickers and sex buyers over the human rights of people in prostitution.” The policy Amnesty International supports would let pimps and brothel-keepers operate “as mere ‘sex business operators,’ and creates a de facto right for men to buy people for sex. Amnesty also views prostitution as ‘sex work,’ transforming the violence inherent to prostitution into an ‘on-the-job’ requirement.”

The library resource company EBSCO supplies online resources to schools. Some of its products, according to the list, “provide easy access to hardcore pornography sites and extremely graphic sexual content. Innocent searches provide pornographic results. Via a system that bypasses school Internet filters, EBSCO brings the dark world of XXX to America’s elementary, middle, and high school children.”

Amazon, Comcast, Roku, Snapchat/Snapcash, Twitter and YouTube are all included for providing easy access to pornography and sex products (which we will not list here). The anti-pornography group Fight the New Drug recently highlighted Twitter’s “Massive Porn Problem.” This includes over 14,000 active accounts “involved in the creation and distribution of child porn.”

The Contenders and the Victories

The Dirty Dozen list includes three “contenders” on the “Watch List.” The Watch List includes corporations that might join the Dirty Dozen and those who have made some but not enough progress to stop their participation in sexual exploitation. This year the three enterprises included are Hyatt Hotels, the Department of Justice and Verizon.

Hyatt and Verizon are praised for making some progress. The DOJ is cited for its failure over the last eight years to “enforce existing federal obscenity laws (hardcore pornography) despite the fact that these laws have been upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court and previously enforced. This gross negligence gave a free pass to producers and distributors of pornography and enabled the culture of sexual exploitation to flourish.” The Family Research Council noted that Attorney General Eric Holder dissolved the Obscenity Prosecution Task Force.

Some in the Dirty Dozen and on the Watchlist also appear in NCSE’s list of “Victories” for making real steps to reduce their involvement in sexual exploitation. These are Backpage.com, Comcast, Hyatt, Snapchat, Verizon and Youtube.

Other “Victories” — a list that covers the last several years — are American Apparel, the Department of Defense, Google, GooglePlay, Hilton, Marsh and Walmart. The DoD is praised for having “stopped the sale of pornography in all Army and Air Force base exchanges” and also for ordering “regular search and removals of all sexual materials in public and workspaces … all military branches.” (For more from the author of “Youtube, Amazon, HBO, Even the American Library Association Are Part of the ‘Dirty Dozen'” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

‘Man-Made’ Famine Leaves Millions Facing Starvation in Africa

Years of internal conflicts and poor governance are not the only problems facing the African countries of South Sudan, Nigeria, and Somalia.

The United Nations recently declared famine in parts of South Sudan and Nigeria. Judging by current conditions, it won’t be long before Somalia follows suit.

The number of people affected is staggering. In South Sudan, 100,000 people are on the verge of starvation with another 5 million at risk. That number of at-risk people totals 6.2 million in Somalia—half of its population—and 4.4 million in Nigeria.

Across all three countries, roughly 1.4 million children are at imminent risk of death. Those numbers are unlikely to decrease anytime soon and could even increase in the coming weeks.

This is not the first time these three nations have faced famine and starvation. The semi-arid climates in parts of their countries make them prone to drought.

But this current famine was brought on by more than below-average rainfall. Humanitarian aid organizations and the U.S. State Department have called the famine in South Sudan “man-made.”

It is not difficult to understand why. Weather conditions may cause drought, but poor governance and instability quickly turn a drought into a humanitarian crisis.

Take South Sudan as an example.

After 25 years of war, the country gained independence from Sudan in 2011. Only 18 months later, tensions within the government plunged the South Sudanese nation into a crippling civil war that cut off South Sudan’s trade routes with neighboring countries, prevented farmers from growing and harvesting food, and caused remaining food prices to skyrocket.

A famine was narrowly averted in 2014 thanks only to a massive international humanitarian effort. However, famine looms again. Various countries have pledged help for this latest hunger crisis, but this relief may never reach the people who need it most.

Despite the South Sudanese government promising “unimpeded access” for aid workers in the country, the South Sudanese security services and aligned forces frequently block the delivery of humanitarian relief.

The government has delayed agencies’ paperwork that would allow them to distribute aid. Soldiers have instituted military checkpoints around famine stricken areas and are preventing relief workers from crossing them.

The government is blocking aid for a number of likely reasons. It has for years stirred up anti-Western and anti-U.N. sentiment over the international community’s pressure on the government to halt its campaign of war crimes and ethnic killings. It may be blocking humanitarian aid in an attempt to retaliate.

The government is also likely blocking aid to rebel-controlled or influenced areas to punish those communities for what the government believes is their support for the rebels.

Poor governance and internal conflict have similarly contributed to the hunger crises in Somalia and Nigeria. Internal conflict has wreaked havoc in Somalia for nearly three decades, and the internationally-backed government has been mired in corruption and bickering.

Furthermore, the government has been unable to extend its authority to much of the country.

Nigeria’s government is relatively stable, but for years it has mismanaged the fight against the ISIS-aligned Boko Haram terrorist group that at one point controlled much of northwest Nigeria. Now, that same northwest region—torn by violence and terrorism—faces the worst of this famine crisis.

As the current humanitarian crisis grows, the international community will continue to offer emergency relief, and it should. But without better governance and stability in these countries, there is only so much these efforts will achieve. (For more from the author of “‘Man-Made’ Famine Leaves Millions Facing Starvation in Africa” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

5 Reasons the GOP’s Obamacare Plan Isn’t Real Repeal

Republicans have promised time and again to repeal Obamacare—not fix it, not try to make it better—they promised to repeal it.

Here are five reasons the American Health Care Act put forward by GOP leadership does not fulfill that promise.

1) The bill does not fully repeal Obamacare. If you have a faulty foundation, nothing you build on top of it is stable or sustainable. Tweaking a little here and there is not going to get the job done. Obamacare should be completely repealed before any replacement or reforms are introduced.

Republicans already have the model for this in their 2015 repeal bill. Every single GOP senator voted for that legislation. There was just one problem at the time: Barack Obama was president. Now, under a President Donald Trump, there’s no impediment to finishing the job.

2) There is no real expectation that this bill will lower costs and make it more affordable for all Americans. It fails to correct the features of Obamacare, namely insurance regulations, that drove up health insurance costs and premiums in the first place.

And that means that the 25 million Americans who get their insurance on the private market or through small-employer plans will see little to no relief. Obama promised that you would be able to keep you doctor. Seven years later, we know that’s not true. Republicans said they would fix this by repealing Obamacare. Now, the very people who have suffered under Obamacare are at risk again of being on the losing end of the deal—again.

3) The bill does not repeal Medicaid expansion. In fact, it encourages states to sign up even more people over the next three years. The costs of this policy are not sustainable without driving states and taxpayers further into debt. But equally wrong is that this bill does not address the problem of states increasingly steering Medicaid dollars originally intended for the truly needy and disabled to able-bodied adults.

4) The tax treatment of health care should be at the center of true reform, but this bill fails to tackle that issue head on or to ask and answer the hard questions.

Should tax credits be used to finance the purchase of health insurance on the individual market?

If so, who gets these tax credits and who will pay for them?

That’s a debate we can have after Obamacare is fully repealed and we are starting from square one. But we are not starting from square one and the current bill runs the risk of expanding our already massive health care entitlement programs.

5) Unlike previous attempts to repeal Obamacare, there is serious concern that the current bill does not adequately prevent the use of taxpayer dollars from being used to pay for abortions.

Obamacare is a faulty foundation and Congress should not attempt to build anything on top of it.

For the past four elections—2010, 2012, 2014, and 2016—voters sent a message and consistently elected Republicans to Congress because they promised to repeal and replace Obamacare.

Unfortunately, it appears this Congress is trying to treat the symptoms of a failing program as opposed to going after the cause of the disease.

The time for full repeal is here. No more excuses. (For more from the author of “5 Reasons the GOP’s Obamacare Plan Isn’t Real Repeal” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.