SOTU: President Trump Says USA Will NEVER Adopt Socialism. Bernie Sanders’ Face Is PRICELESS

President Donald Trump took on socialism in his State of the Union address, noting its failure in Venezuela and promising America that our country will stay free.

“Here in the United States, we are alarmed by the new calls to adopt socialism in our country. America was founded on liberty and independence, and not government coercion, domination, and control,” Trump said. “We are born free, and we will stay free.”

Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., a self-described “Democratic socialist,” was not thrilled.

That face is priceless.

(For more from the author of “SOTU: President Trump Says USA Will NEVER Adopt Socialism. Bernie Sanders’ Face Is PRICELESS” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Iron Alliance: U.S. To Purchase Israel’s Iron Dome Weapons Defense System

By Daily Wire. On Wednesday, the United States Army confirmed that plans have been finalized to buy two of Israel’s Iron Dome weapons system batteries for $373 million.

The two batteries will include 12 launchers, two radars, two battlement management centers, and 240 interceptors, the Times of Israel reports.

In a statement, U.S. Army Col. Patrick Seiber said that the Army will determine if the system can be used to protect U.S. military service members.

“The Iron Dome will be assessed and experimented as a system that is currently available to protect deployed U.S. military service members against a wide variety of indirect fire threats and aerial threats,” Seiber said, according to CNN. “While Iron Dome has been in operational use by the Israeli Air Force since 2011 and proven effective in combat, it should be noted that the U.S. Army will assess a variety of options for its long-term IFPC solution.”

“No decisions have been made regarding the fielding or experimentation of Iron Dome in specific theaters,” Seiber added. (Read more from “Iron Alliance: U.S. To Purchase Israel’s Iron Dome Weapons Defense System” HERE)

_______________________________________________

Netanyahu Hails U.S. Purchase of Israeli Iron Dome Batteries

By The Times of Israel. The Israeli Defense Ministry and US Department of Defense on Wednesday confirmed that the US Army will buy Israeli-developed Iron Dome batteries to defend deployed American troops.

Announcing the purchase, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who also serves as defense minister, said the deal was proof of the strength of the relationship between the two countries, before warning Israel’s enemies not to test the strength of the country’s “iron fist.”

“This is a great achievement for Israel and yet another expression of the strengthening of our powerful alliance with the US and an expression of Israel’s rising status in the world,” Netanyahu said in a statement. “Israel has an Iron Dome and an iron fist. Our systems know how to deal with any threat, both in defense and in attack. I would not recommend our enemies to try us.” (Read more from “Netanyahu Hails U.S. Purchase of Israeli Iron Dome Batteries” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Pope Francis Says Islam and Christianity Will Promote Common Values

Upon returning from his historic Apostolic Journey to the Arabian Penninsula, specifically the United Arab Emirates, Pope Francis said that the Islamic world and the Christian world will work together to promote “common values.”

Speaking before his general audience in St. Peter’s Square on Wednesday, Pope Francis discussed his meeting with the Great Imam of Al-Azhar and their signing of the document on the Human Brotherhood, which condemned all forms of religious violence, and the spreading of authentic values throughout the world.

“The Great Imam of Al-Azhar and I signed the document on the Human Brotherhood, in which together we affirm the common vocation of all men and women to be brothers in. As God’s sons and daughters, we condemn all forms of violence, especially those with religious motivation, and we commit ourselves to spreading authentic values and peace throughout the world,” Pope Francis said. “It gives so much pressure to move forward in the dialogue on human brotherhood.”

The Holy Father said the document was meant to give a “clear and decisive sign” that different religions can respect each other in dialogue. He also denounced the temptation to see a “clash between Christian and Islamic civilizations.”

“In an era like ours, in which the temptation to see a clash between Christian and Islamic civilizations is strong, and also to consider religions as sources of conflict, we wanted to give a further, clear and decisive sign that instead it is possible to meet, it is possible to respect and dialogue, and that, despite the diversity of cultures and traditions, the Christian and Islamic world appreciate and protect common values: life, family, religious sense, honor for the elderly, the education of young people, and others,” the Pope said. (Read more from “Pope Francis Says Islam and Christianity Will Promote Common Values” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

SOTU Review: The 6 Big Domestic Policies Trump Proposed

President Trump’s second State of the Union address was intended to lay out a legislative agenda for divided government. Knowing that the House of Representatives is under Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s control, Trump attempted to strike a unifying and bipartisan tone and invited Democrats to work with him to benefit the country.

“The agenda I will lay out this evening is not a Republican agenda or Democrat agenda, it is the agenda of the American people,” Trump said. He referenced broad campaign promises he claimed both Republicans and Democrats have made — implying that under divided government these are the deals Congress can make to move the country forward.

“Many of us have campaigned on the same core promises, to defend American jobs and demand fair trade for American workers, to rebuild and revitalize our nation’s infrastructure, to reduce the price of health care and prescription drugs, to create an immigration system that is safe, lawful, modern, and secure, and to pursue a foreign policy that puts America’s interests first,” Trump said. “There is a new opportunity in American politics, if only we have the courage together to seize it.”

Here are the big policies Trump proposed.

1) Immigration

After touting the successes of his administration over the last two years in growing the economy and the bipartisan work of Congress to pass prison reform and make the Department of Veterans’ Affairs more accountable, Trump addressed the imminent problem facing Congress: how to strike a deal to fund border security and avert another government shutdown on February 15.

“Now, Republicans and Democrats must join forces again to confront an urgent national crisis,” Trump said. “Congress has 10 days left to pass a bill that will fund our government, protect our homeland, and secure are very dangerous southern border.”

Trump made the case against illegal immigrants in moral terms. He called on Congress to put “ruthless coyotes, cartels, drug dealers, and human traffickers out of business,” a line that Democrats refused to clap for and 2020 presidential candidate Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., actually shook her head at.

“This is a moral issue,” Trump said. “The lawless state of our southern border is a threat to the safety, security, and financial well-being of all Americans. We have a moral duty to create an immigration system that protects the lives and jobs of our citizens. This includes our obligation to the millions of immigrants living here today who follow the rules and respected our laws.”

Trump called on Congress to pass his proposal for $5.7 billion to build a “steel barrier system” and additional funding for technology, personnel, and humanitarian aid to address the border crisis. His compromise also includes extending DACA amnesty and the Temporary Protected Status (TPS) program for three years — a compromise Democrats have already rejected.

Bipartisan committees in the House and Senate are working to craft a deal that Trump will sign. What conservatives need to demand in any border security deal is the removal of legal incentives inviting illegal immigration. Amnesty or DACA must not be the focus of a bipartisan immigration deal. Physical barriers, whether a wall or a fence, will not work if illegal immigrants continue to abuse U.S. asylum laws and catch-and-release policies.

2) Trade

Trump returned to one of his favorite topics, touting the $250 billion in tariffs he has levied on Chinese goods and declaring that the U.S. and China must come to a trade deal that includes “real, structural change to end unfair trade practices, reduce our chronic trade deficit, and protect American jobs.” The president plans to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping soon, but the details of this meeting have not been announced.

For policies at home, Trump called on Congress to pass the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), the North American trade deal negotiated by the president’s administration that will replace NAFTA. A Heritage Foundation analysis of the deal gave it a mixed review, finding that several provisions brought down trade barriers and modernized digital trade, while in other areas, regulatory barriers on automobile trade were increased — including a minimum wage requirement and labor provisions that tilt left with controversial sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) provisions. It is not likely that the Democratic House will pass this trade deal.

Trump also called for Congress to take up the Reciprocal Trade Act, “so that if another country places an unfair tariff on an American product, we can charge them the exact same tariff on the same product that they sell to us.” The bill, introduced by Rep. Sean Duffy, R-Wisc., would expand the president’s authority to impose new tariffs and import restrictions unilaterally. Conservatives may have reasonable disagreement on the effectiveness of tariffs, but Congress should not be delegating its lawmaking authority to the president. This is a separation of powers issue. Tariffs, which are tax increases, should be debated and passed by Congress, not imposed unilaterally by the executive branch.

3) Infrastructure

President Trump repeated his call for Congress to pass an infrastructure bill.

“I know that Congress is eager to pass an infrastructure bill — and I am eager to work with you on legislation to deliver new and important infrastructure investment, including investments in the cutting-edge industries of the future,” Trump said.

When Republicans controlled Congress, Trump proposed a $1.5 trillion infrastructure plan, claiming it would only cost the federal government $200 billion and arguing that the rest of the money would come from state spending and public-private partnerships. It was a bad idea then and remains so. It would drive up the debt and empower Washington D.C. to make infrastructure decisions for local communities. While Trump’s plan called for removing regulations and red tape that have stalled infrastructure projects in the past, he ought to go further by devolving authority to the states and letting each state decide for itself how to fund and build infrastructure.

4) Health care

Touching on health care, Trump called on Republicans and Democrats to work together to reduce drug prices and have hospitals and insurance companies post prices to be transparent with patients who are facing these costs. Trump also called for continued protections for people with pre-existing conditions.

The best way to make prescriptions more affordable is to reform the Food and Drug administration’s approval process. The burdensome regulations benefit large pharmaceutical companies that can afford to navigate the red tape and lock out smaller companies that don’t have the resources to get their lifesaving cures past government regulators. The costs to invent new drugs are staggering. Congress should also remove regulations that keep certain drugs from being sold over the counter, so people can pay out of pocket for the medications they need without going through an insurance company.

Price transparency is a commonsense reform that helps consumers know what they’ll have to pay for medical procedures and drugs before they buy them. When consumers know the price for services rendered, they can shop around for the best deal, which would foster competition and encourage health care providers to lower prices.

On pre-existing conditions, Trump and the Republican Party have made the mistake of accepting the Left’s premise that the only way to help people with pre-existing conditions is by forcing insurance companies to insure them. This defeats the point of health insurance and drives up costs for everyone else.

Conservatives need to go big on pre-existing conditions. President Trump should have called on Congress to free up the market and make health status insurance legal as an alternative to our current system of health insurance.

Conservative Review senior editor Daniel Horowitz explained how it would work:

One specific area of insurance that the federal government should leave completely free of regulation is any idea to solve the problem of pre-existing conditions through the marketplace. One proposed solution is health status insurance, broadly popularized by University of Chicago Professor John Cochrane.

These plans would work much like life insurance: Consumers purchase an insurance plan to cover potential changes in their “health status” that would otherwise jack up premiums or make it hard to purchase new coverage. Parents could take out plans for children before they join the workforce — or even unborn babies — at dirt cheap rates. Let’s say Tom and his family have health status insurance. Tom’s daughter develops asthma and his wife is diagnosed with high blood pressure. Their health insurance rates go up. But, health status insurance kicks in to pay the higher premiums. Alternatively, Tom would receive a lump sum payout to be managed in a trust-style account to directly pay the health care costs. He could purchase specific options or riders for varying health anomalies (diabetes, heart disease, cancer). The options are endless.

Health status insurance will encourage insurance companies to offer tailor-made health plans or multi-year contracts that will protect those who later develop chronic conditions. Health insurance will become portable and untethered to employment decisions, a change in health status, relocation, or young adults moving off their parent’s plan.

The current regulatory regime imposed by Obamacare to “protect” people with pre-existing conditions is causing health insurance premiums to go up every year. Health insurance is getting more expensive, not more affordable, and pre-existing conditions regulations are largely to blame.

5) Paid family leave entitlement

Returning to a a campaign promise championed by Ivanka Trump, President Trump called for the creation of a new paid family leave entitlement program.

“I am also proud to be the first president to include in my budget a plan for nationwide paid family leave — so that every new parent has the chance to bond with their newborn child,” Trump said. His proposal was met with loud cheers, with Rep. Ann Wagner, R-Mo., yelling “Yes!” in approval.

Some conservatives support this policy on pro-family grounds, and Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., has sponsored legislation to pay for this new entitlement by giving parents an option to put a portion of their Social Security benefits towards paternal leave. Though well-intentioned, the policy is a mistake. First, where in the Constitution’s enumerated powers does Congress have the power to pay for paternal leave? Second, who actually believes future administrations will not create a separate funding mechanism for this program once Social Security’s insolvency reaches critical mass? Third, it is not conservative to run up the national debt, and Republican hypocrisy on spending does not justify creating another irresponsible government program.

6) Abortion

After last week’s abortion controversies featuring Democrats in New York and Virginia embracing late-term abortions right up to the point of birth, President Trump told his staff he wanted to speak against this infanticidal extremism during the State of the Union. And so he did:

There could be no greater contrast to the beautiful image of a mother holding her infant child than the chilling displays our nation saw in recent days. Lawmakers in New York cheered with delight upon the passage of legislation that would allow a baby to be ripped from the mother’s womb moments before birth. These are living, feeling, beautiful babies who will never get the chance to share their love and dreams with the world. And then, we had the case of the governor of Virginia where he stated he would execute a baby after birth. To defend the dignity of every person, I am asking Congress to pass legislation to prohibit the late-term abortion of children who can feel pain in the mother’s womb.

Trump is referring to the Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, a bill that would ban abortions after the 20th week of gestation, when scientific evidence suggests the unborn baby can feel pain. This bill passed the Republican-controlled House in 2017 and was defeated in the Senate in 2018.

It is good that Trump wants Congress to keep going on record with this bill to expose the extreme position of Democrats on killing babies. The president should also support an effort by Rep. Steve Scalise, R-La., to force a vote on the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act in the House and support Nebraska Sen. Ben Sasse’s identical legislation in the Senate. On Monday, Democrats blocked Sasse’s bill, which would ban infanticide by requiring health care practitioners to provide medical care to a baby who survives an abortion attempt and is delivered. Trump should encourage Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., to force a vote in the Senate and have Democrats go on record with their opposition to an infanticide ban.

The president should also throw his support behind a federal heartbeat bill, which would protect life from the moment of a baby’s first heartbeat. And he should refuse to sign spending legislation that continues federal funding for Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion provider. (For more from the author of “SOTU Review: The 6 Big Domestic Policies Trump Proposed” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Fourth Democrat Gets Caught up in Virginia Scandals, Knew About Sex Assault Allegations for a Year

By Daily Wire. The series of scandals that have brought Virginia Democrats to their knees over the last week worsened after a new bombshell report was released on Wednesday night that alleges a Democratic lawmaker knew about the sexual assault allegations against Democrat Lieutenant Governor Justin Fairfax for over a year.

ABC News reports that Rep. Bobby Scott (D-VA) was made aware of the allegations directly from Fairfax’s accuser, Dr. Vanessa Tyson, “who on Wednesday released a statement detailing the alleged 2004 assault, which took place at the Democratic National Convention in Boston.”

“Allegations of sexual assault need to be taken seriously,” Scott said in a statement to ABC News. “I have known Professor Tyson for approximately a decade and she is a friend. She deserves the opportunity to have her story heard.”

Aides to Scott told ABC News that Tyson told Scott on October 20, 2017 that she was “not a fan” of Fairfax, who at the time was a candidate for Virginia Lieutenant Governor. . .

In December 2017, Tyson allegedly told Scott that Fairfax had a “MeToo allegation,” and over the next month, Scott’s aides learned that Tyson was the alleged victim. (Read more from “Fourth Democrat Gets Caught up in Virginia Scandals, Knew About Sex Assault Allegations for a Year” HERE)

_______________________________________

Vanessa Tyson’s Full Statement on Justin Fairfax

By The New York Times. On the night of Friday, February 1, 2019, I read multiple news accounts indicating that Virginia Lt. Governor Justin Fairfax would likely be elevated to Governor as an immediate result of a scandal involving Governor Ralph Northam. This news flooded me with painful memories, bringing back feelings of grief, shame, and anger that stemmed from an incident with Mr. Fairfax that occurred in July 2004 during the Democratic National Convention in Boston.

I met Mr. Fairfax on July 26, 2004, when he and I were working at the Convention. We struck up a conversation on the first day of the Convention and soon realized we had a mutual friend. We crossed paths occasionally during the first two days and our interactions were cordial, but not flirtatious. We commiserated about our long work hours, and on the afternoon of the third day of the Convention, July 28, 2004, Mr. Fairfax suggested that I get some fresh air by accompanying him on a quick errand to retrieve documents from his room in a nearby hotel. Given our interactions up to that time, I had no reason to feel threatened and agreed to walk with him to his hotel. I stood in the entryway of the room and after he located the documents, he walked over and kissed me. Although surprised by his advance, it was not unwelcome and I kissed him back. He then took my hand and pulled me towards the bed. I was fully clothed in a pantsuit and had no intention of taking my clothes off or engaging in sexual activity. In the back of my mind, I also knew I needed to return to Convention headquarters.

What began as consensual kissing quickly turned into a sexual assault. Mr. Fairfax put his hand behind my neck and forcefully pushed my head towards his crotch. Only then did I realize that he had unbuckled his belt, unzipped his pants, and taken out his penis. He then forced his penis into my mouth. Utterly shocked and terrified, I tried to move my head away, but could not because his hand was holding down my neck and he was much stronger than me. As I cried and gagged, Mr. Fairfax forced me to perform oral sex on him. I cannot believe, given my obvious distress, that Mr. Fairfax thought this forced sexual act was consensual. To be very clear, I did not want to engage in oral sex with Mr. Fairfax and I never gave any form of consent. Quite the opposite. I consciously avoided Mr. Fairfax for the remainder of the Convention and I never spoke to him again.

(Read more from “Vanessa Tyson’s Full Statement on Justin Fairfax” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Nancy Pelosi Reveals Her Repulsive View on Late-Term Abortion

By The Daily Caller. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi responded Wednesday to President Donald Trump’s call for legislation to ban late-term abortion by saying it’s a “sad thing.”

“It’s really quite a sad thing when you know that we’ll be talking about something that applies to the health and life — health and ability to have other children of women,” she said when asked by The Daily Caller. “I hope that in his family, he never has to face that crisis and apply his attitude toward it.”

During his State of the Union speech, President Trump expressed to lawmakers, “To defend the dignity of every person, I am asking the Congress to pass legislation to prohibit the late-term abortion of children who can feel pain in the mother’s womb.” (Read more from “Nancy Pelosi Reveals Her Repulsive View on Late-Term Abortion” HERE)

__________________________________________

On Abortion, Trump Agenda Likely Leads to Supreme Court, Not Congress

By Reuters. President Donald Trump urged lawmakers in his State of the Union address to put new limits on abortion, but partisan division in the U.S. Congress means the Supreme Court likely will set the agenda on the divisive issue, as it has for decades.

Bolstered by Trump’s appointment of two conservative justices, the nine-member court could soon begin to pare back abortion rights, starting with a major case from Louisiana that is one of several similar pending appeals.

The addition of Trump appointees Brett Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch could alter the conservative-majority court’s approach to abortion. Kavanaugh replaced Justice Anthony Kennedy, a conservative who backed abortion rights in key rulings in 1992 and 2016. (Read more from “On Abortion, Trump Agenda Likely Leads to Supreme Court, Not Congress” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

How Do Democrats Sleep at Night?

Kathy Tran, the Democrat state representative of Virginia’s 47th district who introduced the heinous abortion bill, fought back against allegations that her bill equals infanticide with a short video about the bill that doesn’t explain much.

Because of an honest response she gave to a pointed question in Virginia’s state House, Tran believed that the bill’s intent had been misconstrued and she wished to set it right. In the video, Tran said that late-term abortions are already available to Virginians under certain circumstances “with the approval of medical doctors.” Plural. She says her bill does nothing to change that. Then she said that her bill simply allows women to make these decisions “in a timely manner.”

Apparently the “timely manner” of murdering innocent life is hobbled by current Virginia law, which states that three doctors need to consent to murder before it is allowed. Apparently that either takes too damn long, or abortion advocates have a tough time finding three doctors who will consent to murder just because the mother said so. Tran’s bill drops the requirement for three doctors down to one. So much for no changes to the “doctors” requirement!

Now we read that Tran is “offended” by the blackface image in Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam’s medical school yearbook and is joining the Virginia Legislative Black Caucus in calling for the governor’s ouster. She is not upset at all that the governor, a pediatric physician, is okay with actual infanticide.

How in the world do Democrats sleep at night?

I’m not defending blackface or KKK hoods, but dammit, the cavalier discussion of taking the life of an innocent baby didn’t make this Tran woman even lift an eyebrow, but a thirty-some-year-old image of probably Halloween costumes drove her over the edge.

The Democrats like to say that wealthy billionaires control the Republican Party. In some instances that’s true; corporate welfare is certainly something that has not yet been thoughtfully discussed in the age of Trump and needs to be discussed, but it goes for both parties. Democrats neglect to inform people is of their own wealthy billionaires and industries that their bills of death support. Like the abortion industry, the human trafficking industry, the illicit drug industry, and the welfare industry.

The constant drumbeat of “for the children,” “for the little guy,” and the ultimate insult to God and our collective intelligence, “doing the Lord’s work,” that the Democrat propagandists repeat to pacify the dimwitted and the disturbed can only be true if turned upside down.

We’re told it’s a woman’s right to have an abortion in America, at the point of birth, without any second opinions. Is that “for the children” too? Maybe it’s for the “little guy?” Let’s hear about how late-term abortion is “doing the Lord’s work.”

Whenever a Democrat says that what they’re doing is “for the children,” it is most certainly for the exploitation of children.

Whenever a Democrat says that their focus is on “the little guy,” it means it’s for the mammoth drug cartels or the fat pigs at the labor trough.

And whenever a Democrat says they’re doing “the Lord’s work,” they mean Lucifer himself. (For more from the author of “How Do Democrats Sleep at Night?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

House Republicans Move to Force Vote on Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act

House Republicans are moving to put Democrats on the record on infanticide.

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., announced Wednesday that he will ask for unanimous consent to bring up the Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act for a vote, a House version of Nebraska Sen. Ben Sasse’s legislation to protect infants born alive after an attempted abortion. McCarthy tied his effort to President Donald Trump’s State of the Union address, in which Trump criticized the late-term abortion policies of Democrats in New York and Virginia.

One of the strongest statements [President Trump] made is for those World War II vets, who fought for the freedoms – that we will not have socialism in America. That he will stand up against it.

He also stood up for those who could not speak for themselves. The same that Ann Wagner is doing with her bill. This doesn’t have to be partisan, and it shouldn’t be. I applaud [Whip Scalise] for bringing out a discharge petition, but we shouldn’t have to get to a discharge petition.

That is why today I’ll ask for unanimous consent for the House to consider Ann Wagner’s Born-Alive Protection Act.

And you know what? If the Democrats object, we’ll ask again, and again, and again, because it is just right. It’s not a partisan issue; it’s an issue of saving a life that is already born. I think everyone can agree with that. It shouldn’t take time. We should actually solve this problem this week.

House Minority Whip Steve Scalise, R-La., and Rep. Ann Wagner, R-Mo., are moving to force a vote if Democrats object to McCarthy’s request. They will file a discharge petition to expedite consideration of the bill and bring it directly to the House floor for a vote.

To succeed, the discharge petition will need signatures from 218 members of the House. Republicans only hold 199 seats, so Democratic support is necessary to expedite the bill.

This is a smart move. Even if Republicans don’t get a vote in the House on this infanticide ban, any Democrat who does not sign this discharge petition announces his or her opposition to legal protections for infants born alive after a failed abortion attempt. (For more from the author of “House Republicans Move to Force Vote on Born-Alive Abortion Survivors Protection Act” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Poll Reveals How Americans Felt About Trump’s SOTU; Trump STUNS With Hardcore Pro-Life Stance

By Breitbart. A CBS News poll shows 72 percent of speech watchers said they approved of President Donald Trump’s immigration ideas presented during Tuesday evening’s State of the Union address, while 76 percent approved of his remarks overall.

In a snap poll conducted by CNN, 76 percent of speech viewers said they feel positive about the address. According to CNN analyst David Chalian, 59 percent believed the speech was very positive, while 17 percent said it was somewhat positive.

23 percent of viewers called it negative.

Trump delivered the belated annual address before a joint session of Congress in the House chamber, as he called on lawmakers to approve his “commonsense” proposal for an expanded physical border at the U.S.-Mexico border that was at the center of the government shutdown that pushed the address back a week. (Read more from “Poll Reveals How Americans Felt About Trump’s SOTU – Dems Will Hate This” HERE)

__________________________________________

Donald Trump Slams Northam’s Nasty Abortion Comments at SOTU

By Breitbart. President Donald Trump slammed Virginia Democrat Gov. Ralph Northam’s comments on late-term abortion in front of several conservative leaders at a State of the Union preview meeting Monday evening, according to a Tuesday report.

Politico reported that Trump spoke for five minutes with conservative leaders— including pro-life advocates Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins and Susan B. Anthony List’s Marjorie Dannenfelser— about how it was outrageous that public officials were thinking about including newborn babies in discussions about allowing late-term abortions.

In his comments, Trump referenced Northam’s remarks about “nonviable” newborn babies.

“When we talk about third-trimester abortions, these are done with the consent of obviously the mother, with the consent of the physician—more than one physician, by the way—and it’s done in cases where there may be severe deformities,” Northam said in a Wednesday radio interview with WTOP. “There may be a fetus that’s non-viable.”

According to Politico, attendees left thinking the president viewed Northam’s inflammatory statements on the same level as murder. (Read more from “Donald Trump Slams Northam’s Nasty Abortion Comments at SOTU” HERE)

__________________________________________

SOTU: Trump Recognizes Redding Family of Couple Slain in Nevada, Vows to Get Border Wall Built

By Reno Gazette Journal. About 40 minutes into his address, President Trump recognized the Redding family of a Nevada couple who were killed by a man who was in the United States illegally . . .

“Few can understand your pain,” said the president, speaking to the family as they stood and Debra wiped away tears.

“Thank you for being here. I will never forget and I will fight for the memory of Gerald and Sharon that it should never happen again. Not one more American life should be lost because our nation failed to control its very dangerous border,” said Trump. . .

Trump in his address vowed he would get a wall built on the southern border of the country. . .

“In the past, most of us, the people in this room, voted for a wall. But the proper wall never got built. I will get it built,” he said to applause in the House chamber. (Read more from “SOTU: Trump Recognizes Redding Family of Couple Slain in Nevada, Vows to Get Border Wall Built” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE

Infanticide Is the Historical Hallmark of a Pagan Culture

Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam, who just made deeply troubling comments on abortion, and New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who just signed the country’s most radical abortion law, have been the subject of intense ire in recent days. The outrage is coming not just coming from “radical” pro-lifers, but people from across the political spectrum.

Why? Because virtually no one but the far left believes it is morally acceptable to allow infants to be murdered seconds before birth, or to be left to die after delivery at the behest of the mother.

Yet the nation has been shocked by radical left’s boldness in their mission to define preborn human beings as disposable non-persons. Where is this evil coming from, and how do we stop it?

The Slaughter of the Young and the Elderly

Abortion and infanticide have historically been common practices. In the first century AD, infanticide was a common and culturally accepted practice across the world. The murder of infants was a regular occurrence in Europe into the Middle Ages and beyond, despite being condemned by both church and state.

The practice was not confined to the desperate, illiterate, impoverished masses, as if “enlightened” thinkers knew better. The Twelve Tables of Roman Law, admired by Cicero, contains the command that, “A dreadfully deformed child shall be quickly killed.”

Likewise, the wealthy first century Roman philosopher Seneca once wrote, “We doom scabby sheep to the knife, lest they should infect our flocks. We destroy monstrous births, and we also drown our children if they are born weakly or unnaturally formed; to separate what is useless from what is sound is an act, not of anger, but of reason.” This from a Stoic, who supposedly believed virtue to be the highest good. Notably, Seneca was Nero’s tutor.

Infanticide was an acknowledged option for any child who was deformed, sickly, of uncertain paternity, the wrong sex, or simply unnecessary to the household. Aristotle, revered by many a university professor, wrote that, “As to exposing or rearing the children born, let there be a law that no deformed child shall be reared,” and “if any people have a child as a result of intercourse in contravention of these regulations, abortion must be practiced on it before it has developed sensation and life.”

The Aztecs, Mayans, and Incans all practiced child sacrifice to appease their gods. The Chimú civilization, located in what is now Peru, sacrificed more than 140 children at one time some 550 years ago. The children’s chests were slashed open, presumably to remove their hearts.

The citizens of the powerful ancient city Carthage in Phoenicia ritually sacrificed their infants. Archaeologists believe the preferred age of sacrificial infants was less than three months old. According to the writing of early AD Greek biographer Plutarch, “But with full knowledge and understanding [the Carthaginians] offered up their own children, and those who had no children would buy little ones from poor people and cut their throats as if they were so many lambs or young birds.”

The residents of the broader region of Canaan (late second millennium B.C.) were condemned numerous times by the ancient prophets of Israel for their child sacrifice. The prophet Jeremiah, in his judgment against apostate Israel, foretold that the valley of Hinnom, where the Israelites were sacrificing children to Baal, would be called “the valley of Slaughter” (Jeremiah 19:5-6).

Evidence for both ritualistic and utilitarian murder can be gathered from around the globe. In times of famine, the Inuit would abandon the elderly (both with and without consent) or dispense of them by quicker means. The Bactrians of ancient Persia were reported to have fed their sick and elderly to dogs trained especially for this purpose. Nearby cultures were supposed to have had similar senicidal customs. Among the Massagetae, Herodotus wrote that, “Human life does not come to its natural close with this people,” but that the people sacrificed their elderly, boiled their flesh, and ate it.

Not every single community on earth had such evil practices, but the embrace of death as the first solution to a family or tribe’s problems has been wickedly banal, historically speaking.

Judeo-Christian Morality Has Saved Us from Much Evil

Northam’s endorsement of infanticide by exposure is only shocking because we have lived in a rare cultural moment in which infanticide is considered abhorrent. This extraordinary development is no accident. A sense of morality about life and death is not the product of evolution over the last 2,000 years. Rather, humanity’s progress out of death culture is due to nothing less than Judeo-Christian influence.

As formerly mentioned, the Christian God condemned child sacrifice through his prophets; Israelites were specifically commanded not to kill their children. The concept of bloodguilt is found throughout the Old Testament, even in cases where death was seemingly accidental.

Murder was an abomination. The blood of Abel, the first recorded murder victim in the Bible, “cried out” to the Lord from the ground. The gravity of taking a human life was no less firm among the followers of Jesus, who consider the Hebrew scriptures the word of God. As the gospel spread, so did the idea that all human life is precious.

The belief in the sanctity of life overrode even the commonly accepted practice of abortion. Contrast the evil of Aristotle’s belief with what Tertullian, an early church father, wrote in “Apologia”: “In our case, murder being once for all forbidden, we may not destroy even the foetus in the womb…To hinder a birth is merely a speedier man-killing; nor does it matter whether you take away a life that is born, or destroy one that is coming to the birth. That is a man which is going to be one; you have the fruit already in the seed.”

Elsewhere, he wrote: “Thus, you read the word of God, spoken to Jeremias: ‘Before I formed thee in the womb, I knew thee.’ If God forms us in the womb, He also breathes on us as He did in the beginning: ‘And God formed man and breathed into him the breath of life.’…Was it, then, a dead body at that stage? Surely it was not, for ‘God is the God of the living and not the dead.’”

As Tertullian recounted, believers in the early church would search through the heaps of refuse in Roman cities and rescue infants from among the refuse and broken pottery. There is archaeological evidence to support the fact that infants were thrown in the trash or into the sewer, sometimes deliberately killed instead of being out left to die by exposure. That children should never be trash was a revolutionary concept in the early centuries after Christ.

The fourth century Roman emperor Constantine, who is generally believed to have converted to Christianity and was at the very least influenced by it, considered infanticide a crime. Later, Emperor Valentinian, also a professed Christian, officially outlawed the practice by requiring that all children be reared.

Since that time, the belief that God made man in his own image and set him apart from the rest of creation for communion with his creator, that he is “fearfully and wonderfully made,” and that therefore God’s prohibition against murder is to be upheld, has been the basis for the protection of human life.

Christianity Deeply Shaped the Early Days Of America

Infanticide was outlawed in colonial America. The earliest recorded execution for infanticide was in 1648 in Massachusetts. Similar court cases from the 17th and early 18th century are found in Maryland, Maine, Virginia, and New York. Abortion was also a prosecutable offense. Between 1670 and 1807, there were 51 convictions of infanticide in Massachusetts.

The seriousness with which our forefathers considered the murder of children was not due to the influence of the “great” philosophizing of Aristotle, Seneca, or Cicero. It was due to the Christian faith. It is Christians who have historically run orphanages, adoption agencies, and pregnancy clinics. It is Christians who advocate most fiercely for heartbeat bills and abolition. It is Christians out on the sidewalk, day after day, begging women not to kill their babies and offering to connect them with church members who are willing to adopt. Christians take seriously the biblical command to “look after the orphan and widow in their distress.”

Where the kingdom of God* invades, death flees, both spiritually and physically. Where populations dwell in spiritual darkness, death finds favor. How can I know this for sure? How do I know our contemporary revulsion toward infanticide is not simply the result of human “progress” over the last two millennia? Because when Christianity is aggressively suppressed within a culture, as it has been under Communist and Socialist regimes, society chokes on the stench of death.

Recent Godless Regimes Did Not Value Human Life

Adolph Hitler’s genocidal socialist regime* practiced the euthanasia of “life unworthy of life” and murdered about six million Jews. Communist dictator Joseph Stalin had no qualms with mass starvation. A quarter of the Cambodian population died under Pol Pot. Altogether, godless collectivism led to the deaths of about 100 million people in the 20th century. Karl Marx’s philosophy implicitly assumed that some segments of the population must be “left behind” in the march toward utopia.

American culture has stood in stark contrast against this backdrop of death and misery, and it’s not because Anglo Americans are inherently better than any other people group. It is because this nation was founded on Christian principles, namely that we are endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights. First among those rights is life. The principles of Christianity have been deeply formative to American culture. Restraining evil and promoting prosperity bound us together with a common creed.

But as we are now witnessing, that influence is fading. Majority support for legal abortion has been steady for decades, and millennials are just as supportive of it as the previous two generations. We are less religious than ever, and it is no coincidence that the godless are some of the biggest proponents of late-term abortion and infanticide. Those who profess Christianity and publicly bless abortion clinics do so against the core teachings of their own faith––it is not an intramural dispute, but an aberration.

What we are seeing now is a return to a world that does not know God and does not want to know God. This is the consequence of our detachment from Christianity and its moral system. The truth is that you do not attain a culture where human life (albeit born life) is almost universally cherished without the knowledge of the one true God.

As the Apostle Paul reiterated from Old Testament writers: “None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God…Their feet are swift to shed blood; in their paths are ruin and misery, and the way of peace they have not known. There is no fear of God before their eyes.”

The fact that we are surrounded by a wealth of resources and still 13 percent of all pregnancies in America and 28 percent in the state of New York end in murder should tell you something. This is not a matter of inequality of rights between the sexes or inequality of resources. It is a matter of the heart, and a heart without God is “desperately wicked.” The god of Progress has led its worshippers to embrace death as easily as the Canaanite gods that surrounded the people of Israel.

Where idolatry is not directly involved, a perceived lack of resources has, for millennia, been the excuse to choose death, not the reason. In such a wealthy and technologically advanced society, it is perhaps more obvious a truth now than it was 2,000 years ago, but the truth has always been there.

*I am not talking about the political Christendom of Europe and the Crusades. I am talking about the spiritual kingdom of God as referred to by Jesus and the New Testament writers.

**Before you tell me, “Hitler was a Christian!” watch this video of a “Christmas tree” with a Swastika suspended over the top. Hitler also is reported to have said, “I’ll have my reckoning with the church. I’ll have it reeling on the ropes.” The Nazis who surrounded Hitler deeply hated Christianity and wanted to see it destroyed.

(For more from the author of “Infanticide Is the Historical Hallmark of a Pagan Culture” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE