Is Google Working With Liberal Groups to Snuff out Conservative Websites?

Google revealed in a blog post that it is now using machine learning to document “hate crimes and events” in America. They’ve partnered with liberal groups like ProPublica, BuzzFeed News, and the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) to make information about “hate events” easily accessible to journalists. And now, there are troubling signs that this tool could be used to ferret out writers and websites that run afoul of the progressive orthodoxy.

In the announcement, Simon Rogers, data editor of Google News Labs, wrote:

Now, with ProPublica, we are launching a new machine learning tool to help journalists covering hate news leverage this data in their reporting.

The Documenting Hate News Index — built by the Google News Lab, data visualization studio Pitch Interactive and ProPublica — takes a raw feed of Google News articles from the past six months and uses the Google Cloud Natural Language API to create a visual tool to help reporters find news happening across the country. It’s a constantly-updating snapshot of data from this year, one which is valuable as a starting point to reporting on this area of news.

The Documenting Hate project launched in response to the lack of national data on hate crimes. While the FBI is required by law to collect data about hate crimes, the data is incomplete because local jurisdictions aren’t required to report incidents up to the federal government.

(Read more from “Is Google Working With Liberal Groups to Snuff out Conservative Websites?” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Can You Feel It? America Thrust Into Spiritual Darkness

What happened in Charlottesville last week was disgusting. Our hearts grieved as we watched folks marching in our streets who actually believe their race is better than others’. No one should have anything to do with that filth from Satan’s floor.

So this rally that took place ran against every grain of our being . . .

And since then, all the lawless insanity that has followed – including the media’s huge power grab to lump men and women of faith in with these supremacist nut jobs – is grieving, too.

Hearing Antifa (the hard left fringe group fomenting much of the violence) call for an escalation in tactics to stop Republicans or right-wingers from assembling or voicing their opinions is crazy. Antifa activists even labeled right-leaning speech violence, and now say they have a right to use self-defense or physical violence in return.

The bottom line is, it doesn’t matter if it’s the “alt-right” (white supremacists) or hard-left (Antifa), any American with a soul abhors these groups. But what these groups – and the ongoing conflict we’re watching daily now – reveal to us is that we as a nation have entered a period of spiritual darkness, a darkness that can be felt. (Read more from “Can You Feel It? America Thrust Into Spiritual Darkness” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Google Insiders Warn ‘Outright Censorship’ of the Internet Is Google’s Top Priority… and Everyone Has Been Intimidated Into Silence

If the right to bear arms is the most important right outlined in the United States Constitution, then the freedom of speech is a close second. The Founding Fathers understood better than anyone that those who are in positions of power ought to be distrusted to a certain degree, and that tyranny will come to America unless those with authority are restrained. One way we restrain these authoritarian figures (namely the politicians in Washington DC) is by practicing our First Amendment rights to speak about, praise or criticize the direction in which the country is going. The freedom of speech allows us to hold politicians accountable, elect leaders that will govern in our best interests, and expel those who don’t. Without the ability to speak freely and openly, none of this is possible.

Currently, and sadly, the freedom of speech is under attack in America. The mainstream media, Hollywood and leftists on college campuses across the country have been the main culprits of the assault on free speech, however recently it has also been undermined on the Internet. More and more frequently, stories are emerging of conservative voices being suppressed or even silenced by various social media websites, search engines, and even Google.

Recently, a Google employee who goes by the alias “Hal” spoke to Breitbart News about the political bias that allegedly runs rampant throughout the company. Hal’s interview with Breitbart is the first in a series entitled “Rebels of Google,” which will be published in full within the next few days.

In the interview, Hal, who understandably chose to use a fake name out of fear of losing his job, spoke about the ongoing effort within Google to suppress certain content that the company doesn’t want the public to have easy access to.

“Many people now fear that Google, Facebook and other companies are moving to control and censor their content. Are these fears justified?” asked Breitbart reported Allum Bokhari. “That is absolutely what Google is trying to do,” Hal replied. “The pro-censorship voices are very loud, and they have the management’s ear. The anti-censorship people are afraid of retaliation, and people are afraid to openly support them because everyone in their management chain is constantly signaling their allegiance to far-left ideology. Our leadership (Sundar in particular) is weak, so he capitulates to the meanest bullies on the block.”

The news is particularly damning to conservatives, who in recent years have been working to establish a stronghold on the Internet considering the fact that all other outlets, from the mainstream media to Hollywood, are run by leftists. A prominent example of this is Mark Levin’s LevinTV, which is an Internet-based conservative program launched last year that puts out new episodes every weeknight. If Google is actively working to censor ideas and information that do not align with the progressive ideology, conservative voices on the Internet could be in serious trouble. Related: Google and Facebook algorithms create a whole new kind of censorship, warns News Corp CEO.)

Another area of the Internet where widespread censorship is occurring is on the Google-owned video sharing website, YouTube. Just days ago, YouTube revealed on their official blog that they would be taking action to censor what they consider to be “hate speech” and “violent extremism.” YouTube also plans on launching a “trusted flagger” program, which will help the video sharing website identify videos that contain hate speech and extremism. Unsurprisingly, one of the organizations tasked with identifying which videos are to be censored is the left wing No Hate Speech Movement, as well as the Anti-Defamation League.

With liberal censorship running rampant in the mainstream media, in Hollywood, on college campuses and across the Internet, our country needs pro-First Amendment voices now more than ever. Once the freedom of speech is gone, it is only a matter of time before an all-powerful authoritarian state is established and individual liberty in America ceases to exist. (For more from the author of “Google Insiders Warn ‘Outright Censorship’ of the Internet Is Google’s Top Priority… and Everyone Has Been Intimidated Into Silence” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Ben Shapiro Exposes the Media Agenda to Make You Scared of Trump

Filling in on “The Mark Levin Show” Thursday, Daily Wire Editor-in-Chief Ben Shapiro exposed how the mainstream media is attempting to scare the American people in order to discredit President Trump with voters.

Shapiro played a clip of MSNBC’s Brian Williams admitting, “Our job tonight actually is to scare people to death.” The media agenda is to make people panic, to make people think President Trump cannot rationally handle nuclear weapons and the North Korean situation, Shapiro explained.

Listen:

“They’re trying to make it seem like the real villain in this entire scenario is President Trump,” Shapiro said.

Why? Because they hate the president … and that is all they care about. (For more from the author of “Ben Shapiro Exposes the Media Agenda to Make You Scared of Trump” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Insurance Cartel Making RECORD Profit. WHY More Illegal Bailouts?

The medical insurance industry subsists on more government favors than any other industry. Between the requirement to purchase insurance, the requirement that companies offer the insurance industry’s product, and the $275 billion tax exemption to offer their product (four times the size of mortgage interest deductions!), the insurance cartel is essentially a government-sponsored entity or public utility. It has done nothing for society, but has destroyed the patient-doctor relationship, prevented medical innovation, and raised costs astronomically.

Now that same medical insurance industry is asking for a bailout.

The answer must be a resounding “No!”

Last week, the top six health insurance companies (UnitedHealth Group, Anthem, Aetna, Cigna, Humana, and Centene) reported $6 billion in combined adjusted profits for the second quarter of this year. According to CNBC, that’s up “29 percent from the same quarter a year ago — far outpacing the overall S&P 500 health care sector’s growth of 8.5 percent for the quarter, according to Thomson Reuters I/B/E/S data.”

As an unapologetic capitalist, I have no problem with the earning of record profits built off of free markets, innovation, and competition. Nobody begrudges the success of Apple and Amazon. But in medical insurance, prices are at a record high and the quality of the actual care is in the toilet — all thanks to venture socialism, not free markets. To quote Barack Obama and Elizabeth Warren, “You didn’t build that.”

What is the source of their profit? You got it: taxpayers and public debt!

“The core business, which is providing coverage to large and mid-sized employers… and the established government programs, Medicare Advantage and Medicaid managed care, have all done well.”

Many people forget that most of Medicare and Medicaid are not purely “public.” These programs are managed by “private” companies that line their pockets with unconstitutional government interventions and then use their rent-seeking status in the market to demand more subsidies lest they threaten higher prices. As CNBC explains:

Aetna now derives more than half of its revenue from government plans, and after abandoning its merger deal with Humana, the insurer is focused on growing its Medicare Advantage market share on its own in 2018 and 2019.

“The general trend is growing the portion of health care claims that are directly or indirectly paid by the federal government,” said health care ratings analyst Deep Banerjee, a director at S&P Global Ratings.

This is the literal meaning of venture socialism, when private companies earn their entire market share based on government capital, leaving the consumer in the lurch. They no longer need to compete for consumer satisfaction when government is the true consumer.

And let’s not forget the ill-conceived concept of employer-sponsored medical insurance, driven by $275 billion tax pork. Yes, $275 billion worth of lost wages — doing nothing but lining the pockets of the insurance cartel.

Imagine what would happen if the government mandated that everyone not only own a firearm, but purchase a specific type of firearm produced only by a few companies. Then employers would be required to purchase them for employees, and they’d get a collective $275 billion tax cut for doing so. In addition, the entire personal security for all the elderly and poor would be managed by those companies and their services, through $1.6 trillion in combined federal and state spending! They’d be pretty darn wealthy and have all the power in the world to lobby for endless subsidies. That, in a nutshell, is the exact situation in our critically ill health care system.

In addition, these same companies had the nerve to lobby for the insolvent Obamacare regulations and vociferously blocked any effort to repeal them. They are willing to go along with the regulations because 1) They keep new competitors from entering the market; 2) They have a vested interest in keeping the price of health care and insurance high; 3) They have a guaranteed flow of government subsidies to some consumers, states, and insurers to sugar-coat their price inflation; and 4) Unlike any other industry, they get to engage in price fixing — all enabled and sponsored by government tilting the playing field away from direct primary care and toward the insurance cartel.

In many respects, our system of venture socialism is worse than single-payer, because it combines socialism with the greed of capitalism. However, unlike capitalism, in venture socialism, government shields the private entities from market forces. It guarantees them an endless flow of public funds, consumer mandates, and regulatory favors (no anti-trust laws, but onerous coverage burdens to keep out new competitors) to remove any need to innovate and compete. Health care ratings analyst Deep Banerjee, as reported by CNBC, put it best:

“Even with a single payer in a public-private partnership, insurance companies are very involved in managing the costs, and actually running the program for the state or the federal government.”

The government has essentially handed the entire medical care field to the insurance and Big Health Care administration cartels. They would have never amassed their monopoly without government favors at every turn.

That is why the worst thing we can do is give into their tantrums and offer them more cost-sharing subsidies. We must move in the opposite direction entirely: Cut out insurance altogether from any special government favors and make insurance companies compete in the market like any other industry.

Even without fully or partially repealing Obamacare, there are a number of ways we can repair health care in this country and sever the stranglehold of the government-sponsored cartel on our health. We must place direct primary care and alternatives to insurance on an equal playing field. President Trump should explore the following reforms and put the insurance cartel on notice that he will no longer treat them as wards of the state:

Allow health-sharing associations to prosper and compete with insurance as a fully viable alternative. This model has proven extremely successful with health-sharing ministries. All we need to do is expand Section 5000A(d) of the ACA and exempt all new associations and non-religious sharing associations from the individual mandate penalty. Additionally, they should be afforded equal tax treatment through HSAs and the employer tax exclusion. This must be a centerpiece of any tax reform proposal. Watch the insurance cartel be forced to compete or die. (For more details, listen to podcast 130.)

Marshal true market forces by encouraging price transparency and ending price fixing. The reason health care is so expensive is because the insurance cartel is allowed to price-fix. Given that more than half of their revenue is from government and the other half is indirectly sponsored by government, there is no reason Congress could not prohibit any insurance contracts that inhibit providers from offering self-pay discounts to patients. Under current practice, given that the Medicaid and Medicare contracts are funneled through the insurance cartel, insurers prevent providers from offering discounts to those who self-pay. It is fundamentally unfair for the government programs to hurt private citizens who want to shop around like a regular market. Ending the price fixing would naturally lead to price transparency, which is the lynchpin of reducing charges and fostering competition. (For more details, listen to podcast 135.)

Cut out the cartel entirely from Medicaid and give the money directly to poor consumers in the form of regulated HSA accounts. This way we could provide them with better quality, more choices, and less stigma — all without self-perpetuating a death spiral of eye-popping debt and price increases that destroy the market for everyone else.

By enacting these true health care reforms, much of the debate over Obamacare and the repeal of Obamacare will become moot. We only have a health care problem because the federal government has elevated the insurance cartel to a status it would never have attained on its own. The Freedom Caucus should demand real health care reform in return for any debt ceiling increase, because the government focus on lining the pockets of the insurance cartel is the biggest driver of personal and national debt. Let’s level the playing field and see if a true free market would actually sustain the insurance companies’ Solyndra-style business model. (For more from the author of “Insurance Cartel Making RECORD Profit. WHY More Illegal Bailouts?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Obama’s Legacy: A Nuclear North Korea. Will Trump Channel Reagan?

Your dog is hungry and has decided to employ the often-used strategy to get what he wants. He’s going to bark, for hours if necessary, until you finally relent and give him a biscuit. The yapping drives you crazy, so you figure the easiest thing to do to quiet your canine friend is to continue to reward him with treats. You probably realize that from the beginning, you should simply have ignored the dog’s howls, and he would likely have given up on the tactic long ago. But you didn’t want to have to deal with him. Now, instead of having trained the dog, the dog has trained you.

North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un is the dog, and he’s barking louder than ever. He’s relying on past precedent, knowing that over the years, America has eventually given Pyongyang the biscuit, in the form of billions of dollars in assistance.

Through the past several administrations, Republicans and Democrats alike have rewarded North Korean saber-rattling with generous sums of financial aid. And time and time again, North Korea goes back to the well, using its nuclear program as a bargaining chip to receive massive amounts of cash. Since the 1990s, the United States government has sent the North Korean regime billions of dollars in exchange for the promise of dismantling its nuclear program.

Though humanitarian in principle, this aid allows the North Korean regime to continue allocating resources toward its military — in particular, to advance its nuclear weapons program.

It started with the “North Korea deal,” which was negotiated by at least one of the same individuals who bargained over the nuclear deal with the terrorist regime in Iran. In October 1994, President Bill Clinton approved a deal to send $4 billion in “energy aid” to North Korea. In return, the Stalinist regime was supposed to “dismantle its nuclear weapons development program,” the New York Times reported at the time.

What Clinton officials naively overlooked was that they were creating an incentive for North Korea to continue, not halt, its nuke program, seeing billions more in potential aid over the horizon.

In 2007, the Bush administration celebrated a “deal” that delivered millions in “economic aid” to North Korea in exchange for Pyongyang’s agreement to “dismantle all of its nuclear facilities.”

Not all were convinced that it was the right play, including Donald Trump. Former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton warned at the time:

“This is like Lucy and Charlie Brown and the football. How many times are we going to go through this with them?”

But the aid continued into the Obama administration.

In 2012, under President Barack Obama, White House officials again rejoiced that the North Koreans were “suspending nuclear activities.” In exchange for 240,000 metric tons of food aid, North Korea “agreed” to suspend its nuclear programs. That program was cut short, but the Obama administration continued to send aid to North Korea up until the week Donald Trump was elected president.

Now, North Korea is back at it again, rattling the saber as usual under the Millennial leader Kim Jong Un.

On Tuesday, President Trump warned Pyongyang against more threats against the U.S., saying the regime would be met with “fire and fury.” Kim then threatened to bomb the U.S. territory of Guam. It’s difficult to determine whether the threat from Kim is serious. But what history does tells us is that Kim is engaging in the time-tested, proven strategy employed by his predecessors.

Due to the 20+ years of misguided capitulation by previous administrations, President Trump has a serious inherited challenge on his hands. Pyongyang is reportedly producing missile-ready nuclear weapons. Will this induce the Trump administration to deliver to North Korea what it wants, continuing to bolster the regime? Or instead, will Trump chart his own path and embrace the time-tested principles of “peace through strength” articulated by President Ronald Reagan? (For more from the author of “Obama’s Legacy: A Nuclear North Korea. Will Trump Channel Reagan?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Repeal 17th Amendment to Revive the 10th

Between 1913 and 1920, Progressives were feverishly rewriting the U.S. Constitution. Within a seven-year period, they enacted four Constitutional amendments – for the federal income tax, Prohibition, women’s suffrage and direct election of senators.

Before the 1914 elections, U.S. Senators were elected by the 48 state legislatures. That sounds bizarre to the modern ear after a century of direct election of U.S. Senators. But it was part of the genius of the Founding Fathers to give the states powerful political leverage in the law-making branch of the national government. It was one of the original checks and balances.

The reason all the states got two senators apiece, regardless of population, is that the U.S. Senate was originally intended to represent states, not populations. Now that it’s directly elected, it represents populations.

But is California’s population sufficiently represented in the U.S. Senate? Their two senators represent a lot more people than Wyoming’s two senators. California’s registered voters now outnumber the population of 46 states, combined. Shouldn’t California have more U.S. Senators than those states?

Yes, if the Senate is just another chamber of directly-elected national legislature, like the House of Representatives. No, if the Senate is a bulwark of states’ interests, a barrier to runaway central government authority.

Thus the 17th Amendment, which voided and replaced the original language in the third section of Article I, introduced structural schizophrenia into the elegant Constitutional scheme. We now have a system in which states have no say-so in the membership of the U.S. Senate, which is designed and empowered to frustrate popular legislation on their behalf.

The Constitutional provision for election of U.S. Senators by state legislatures played a crucial role in ratification. It reassured Anti-federalists like Patrick Henry that the Constitutionally empowered central government could be prevented from running roughshod over states, swallowing up their powers and prerogatives.

It’s clear today that Henry’s darkest suspicions were justified. The 10th Amendment, proposed in 1789 and ratified in 1791, is in tatters. It guarantees that “powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” That means that if the Constitution doesn’t grant a power to the national government, it doesn’t have that power. It belongs to us, in the states.

The 10th Amendment remains in the Constitution as a quaint remnant, but perhaps no Constitutional provision has been more thoroughly and stubbornly disregarded in 20th and 21st Century practice. Whether it’s Obamacare or the federal Department of Education or the EPA, most modern presidents and U.S. Senators have never met a 10th Amendment violation they didn’t like.

Although the federal judiciary claims the mantle of Constitutional protector for itself, it has abdicated any meaningful role in defending the 10th Amendment. If Patrick Henry were alive today, he might tell us that the doom of the 10th Amendment was sealed when the 17th Amendment stripped it of institutional protectors.

I’m with Mark Levin and Mike Huckabee, who have called for repeal of the 17th Amendment. Paradoxically, indirect election could make the Senate more democratic, more sensitive to the grass roots, less beholden to shadowy cash-flushed PACs, less reliant on big media buys and therefore less preoccupied with campaign fundraising. Washington insiders would lose their grip on Senate campaigns, which would revert to pragmatic, down-to-earth state legislatures.

It’s time to end this reckless Constitutional frolic that second-guessed the Founding Fathers, and guessed wrong. It’s debatable whether repeal would give us our country back, but at least it might give us our states back.

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

The Most Important Time to Make English the Official Language

We have room for but one flag, the American flag … We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language …” ~Teddy Roosevelt, January 3, 1919

Nothing binds us together as Americans more than the English language. For most Americans outside of the Acela corridor, the expectation that immigrants learn English cuts across partisan lines as a common-sense imperative to sustain our civilization. Yet left-wing reporters think there is something hateful and revolutionary about the principle established in the RAISE Act that immigrants who speak English should be awarded priority status in a merit-based system. After all, as CNN’s advocacy director, Jim Acosta, would tell you, the Statue of Liberty, which of course is the law of the land on immigration, doesn’t list English as a criterion for admission.

Our true history of immigration and Americanization

There was a time when the initiative to make English the official language of the country was a moot point. Until recent decades, the culture, government, and education system never catered to the balkanization of America or accommodated different languages, and thus, the de facto language was always the American mother tongue. Sure, those who immigrated as adults didn’t always know English immediately, but their children immediately learned the language as proficiently as children from native-born families. There were no other options. The school system was pure red, white, and blue.

As former Democrat Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan once wrote, contrary to the nostalgic revisionism of some of his colleagues regarding the poem on the Statue of Liberty, the immigrants of the Great Wave “were not the wretched refuse of anybody’s shores.” Moynihan described them in stark contrast to many from today’s massive wave, as “extraordinary, enterprising, and self-sufficient folk, who knew exactly what they were doing, and doing it quite on their own, thank you very much.”

At the time when Teddy Roosevelt made his comments about immigrants learning English, our nation stood at the end of the largest wave of immigration until that point. He wanted to make sure those timeless values continued and that Americanism persisted. This was a bipartisan and universal view expressed by all major political leaders at the time. In fact, as I note in “Stolen Sovereignty,” when Congress decided to shut off immigration on February 22, 1921 (temporarily, until the long-term bill was developed in 1924), the bill passed the Senate 78-1 and passed the House without a recorded vote!

It was obvious at the time that a cool-off was in order, and history, along with the success of assimilating the Great Wave immigrants, proved them right.

Fast-forward to a century later, and the second great wave has dwarfed the first one in numbers, diversity, lack of assimilation, balkanization, and duration. Yet it continues unabated. And now, unlike in Roosevelt’s day, when a group of senators, backed by the president, are suggesting we cut our record immigration in half and strengthen the English language, it is viewed as against our history and traditions!

The proliferation of bilingualism

In reality, now more than ever, we must ensure that English becomes the official language of America once and for all. Our school system is spending money like there’s no tomorrow catering to bilingual education. These “ELL” (Emerging Language Learner) programs, which receive grants from the federal government, have identified 4.9 million children enrolled as limited English proficient (LEP), according to the Migration Policy Institute. That is nearly 10 percent of the entire K-12 enrollment in the country, and those are only the ones officially identified as part of an ELL program. Eleven states have ELL enrollments comprising more than 10 percent of total K-12 student population, and in California that number is 24.5 percent! One in every four children in the entire massive state of California is not proficient in English! And this is the state average. Some urban areas, such as the Anaheim City school district, have a 60 percent ELL enrollment rate.

Most disturbing is that 77 percent of the LEP children are native-born children of immigrants. Which demonstrates that assimilation into the language and culture is nothing like it used to be, most likely because our culture and government cater to and in encourage balkanization. Consider the following:

A record 63.2 million, or one in five U.S. residents, speak a language other than English at home. According to the census, in six states that number exceeds 30 percent and is as high as 44 percent in the state of California. Thirty-four of the major metropolitan areas in the country have a third or more of residents who speak foreign languages at home; sixty-seven metropolitan areas top 25 percent population of foreign language speakers.

Thirty-seven million residents speak Spanish at home, and there are 708 counties where more than 10 percent of the population speaks Spanish at home. That is almost one in four counties. There are now more Spanish speakers in America than in Spain.

In one Wichita, Kansas, school district, 81 languages are spoken as a result of the massive influx of immigrants and refugees. In south Seattle schools, 167 languages are spoken.

There is immigration, and then there is balkanization. That is what distinguishes this wave of immigration, which is slated to explode even further under the current trajectory, from past waves. And for immigrants from which we’ve had mass migration, there is almost no momentum to assimilate, because they are able to live their own languages and cultures on our shores. Pew has found that Mexican immigrants decide to naturalize at a much lower rate than other immigrants, in part because they don’t speak English as well as immigrants from other countries.

Simply put, when everything can be in Spanish, there is no pressure to learn English. Every year we hand out roughly 150,000 green cards to Mexican nationals, twice the number of the second highest group. And this has been going on for decades! We have never done this in our history. As I observed in “Stolen Sovereignty,” more people have come from Mexico than from any other country in our modern history. Over the past forty-four years, 6.65 million people have emigrated from Mexico legally (not including the 6 million or so illegal immigrants) compared to 4.5 million who emigrated from Italy—the previous record-breaking country of origin—from 1880 to 1929.

Within this reality, it is easy to see why prioritizing English proficiency in the merit-based system for immigration should be one of our foremost objectives now more than ever.

Moreover, it’s time to go a step further and codify English as the official language for government business, programs, and grants. Congress should also re-introduce the 1996 bill that passed the House, which would have repealed the requirement to offer bilingual ballots. It should also remove any mandates on the states that either directly force them to cater to the balkanization agenda or open them up to private litigation. Some of this can be done administratively.

It’s funny how, when leftists want us to agree to an amnesty proposal, they speak incessantly about a requirement to learn English and assimilate. Yet whenever we propose a true immigration reform measure with those principles in mind — without addressing their amnesty obsessions — they begin with the name-calling. It’s time to call their bluff.

Justice Louis Brandeis, a son of immigrant parents, explained that the most important manifestation of Americanization is when the immigrant “substitutes for his mother tongue, the English language as the common medium of speech.” Those who truly support the values of immigration should champion the movement to restore the English language to its proper role in our society. (For more from the author of “The Most Important Time to Make English the Official Language” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Sick Twist: American Left Is Now Part of Fascism

We hear the word “fascist” a whole lot these days: Trump is a fascist if not a Nazi; the Republican Party is the fascist party. As for the left, the Democrats, they present themselves as the anti-fascists, the people fighting fascism. We can see this in the names of leftist groups like Antifa, which stands for anti-fascism.

Yet, when we look around and we see the Democratic and leftist protesters who are disrupting the inauguration, who are organizing violent rallies around the country, who are stopping campus speakers from speaking – these are people who seem to be using fascist and Nazi tactics. The masked Antifa thugs carrying weapons seem eerily similar to the fascist Blackshirts and the Nazi Brownshirts.

So isn’t it strange that the people purporting to fight fascism resemble the fascists in shutting down speech and disrupting democratic debate through the use, or threats, of violence? We need to look at fascism more closely and ask: Is fascism really a phenomenon of the left or of the right?

Let’s begin with remarkable statement by Adolf Hitler in a 1927 speech. “We are socialists,” he said. “We are the enemies of today’s capitalist system of exploitation and we are determined to destroy the system under all conditions.” Does that sound like Donald Trump? Actually, it sounds a lot more like Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders . . .

In ideology and in tactics, the American left today is the party of fascism. The only difference is that it denies its true pedigree. Their big lie is to blame their own sins on Trump and the Republicans. In a sick twist, the real fascists in America pretend to be anti-fascists and accuse the true anti-fascists of being fascists. (Read more from “Sick Twist: American Left Is Now Part of Fascism” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Are These Stories From 1896 Actually Prophecies About Trump?

A 19th century American novelist’s work is attracting more notice in 2017 than it did in his day because of striking similarities to current events.

Ingersoll Lockwood, an attorney and political writer, wrote several books, including children’s stories featuring the name “Baron Trump” . . .

Ironically, Lockwood’s final novel arrived in 1896, titled “The Last President.”

The story begins with a scene from a panicked New York City in early November, describing a “state of uproar” after the election of a widely controversial outsider candidate.

“The entire East Side is in a state of uproar,” police officers shouted through the streets, warning city folk to stay indoors for the night. “Mobs of vast size are organizing under the lead of anarchists and socialists, and threaten to plunder and despoil the houses of the rich who have wronged and oppressed them for so many years.” (Read more from “Are These Stories From 1896 Actually Prophecies About Trump?” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.