The Democrats’ unhealthy political platform

The DNC and mainstream media (MSM) are in a collaborative effort to commit treasonous acts against the United States of America in a coup attempt.  Their goal and intent are to transform America into a socialist-communist state.  This is not a banner for a fictional bestseller; it is the modus operandi of the Democratic Party and the MSM, backed by George Soros’s money.


While seemingly an impossible notion for America, consider the following as evidence to justify this assertion. 



Consider the comprehensive and automatic responses by all progressive left influenced news outlets.  This is right out of Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals, supplemented by the eight levels of control to create a socialist state.  All talking points are similar in nature to accuse conservative policies of Nazi-like actions and tactics.  In other words, accuse your opponents of what you are actually doing behind the curtain.


Consider these eight levels of control that must be obtained in order to create a socialist state:


  1. Health Care – Control health care, and you control the people.
  2. Poverty – Increase the poverty level as high as possible.  Poor people are easier to control and will not fight back if you are providing everything for them to live.
  3. Debt – Increase the debt to an unsustainable level.  That way, you are able to increase taxes, and this will produce more poverty.
  4. Gun Control – Remove the ability to defend themselves from the government.  That way you are able to create a police state.
  5. Welfare – Take control of every aspect of their lives (food, housing, income).
  6. Education – Take control of what people read and listen to.  Take control of what children learn in school.
  7. Religion – Remove the belief in the God from the government and schools.
  8. Class warfare – Divide the people into the wealthy and the poor.  This will cause more discontentment, and it will be easier to take from (tax) the wealthy with the support of the poor.


Consider Alinsky’s rules for radicals:


  1. Always remember the first rule of power tactics: Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have.
  2. The second rule is: Never go outside the experience of your people.  When an action is outside the experience of the people, the result is confusion, fear, and retreat.
  3. The third rule is: Wherever possible go outside the experience of the enemy.  Here you want to cause confusion, fear, and retreat.
  4. The fourth rule is: Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules.  You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.
  5. The fourth rule carries within it the fifth rule: Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.  It is almost impossible to counterattack ridicule.  Also it infuriates the opposition, who then react to your advantage.
  6. The sixth rule is: A good tactic is one that your people enjoy.  If your people are not having a ball doing it, there is something very wrong with the tactic.
  7. The seventh rule: A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.  Man can sustain militant interest in any issue for only a limited time, after which it becomes a ritualistic commitment, like going to church on Sunday mornings.
  8. The eighth rule: Keep the pressure on, with different tactics and actions, and utilize all events of the period for your purpose.
  9. The ninth rule: The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.
  10. The tenth rule: The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition.  It is this unceasing pressure that results in the reactions from the opposition that are essential for the success of the campaign.
  11. The eleventh rule is: If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counterside; this is based on the principle that every positive has its negative.
  12. The twelfth rule: The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.  You cannot risk being trapped by the enemy in his sudden agreement with your demand and saying “You’re right – we don’t know what to do about this issue.  Now you tell us.”
  13. The thirteenth rule: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.


When these 21 elements are combined, it is palpable what the progressive far left and its co-conspirators, the MSM, are undertaking to overthrow the republic.


This is not a free speech issue; it is a progressive left coup utilizing all means necessary to alter America.  One can go on and on with examples from the MSM and far-left progressives through their accusations, false claims, lies, and fake news.


The far-left progressives are the haters.  They are the bigots and racists.  They are the false accusers.  They are the ones who are intolerant.  Look at college campuses today: false fear-mongering.  Look at Antifa, themselves fascists; look at Black Lives Matter, themselves racist; look the border and illegal immigration issues, false narratives day in and day out.  What’s good is bad, what’s false is true, say it over and over and it all becomes obfuscated.


The enemies of our democracy are the policies of the progressive left and Democratic Party – all birthed from the Hillary Clinton-Obama era in a continued coup attempt.


And then Donald Trump happened.  Keep fighting the good fight, Mr. President.  Our country’s survival depends on it.


The DNC and mainstream media (MSM) are in a collaborative effort to commit treasonous acts against the United States of America in a coup attempt.  Their goal and intent are to transform America into a socialist-communist state.  This is not a banner for a fictional bestseller; it is the modus operandi of the Democratic Party and the MSM, backed by George Soros’s money.


While seemingly an impossible notion for America, consider the following as evidence to justify this assertion. 


Consider the comprehensive and automatic responses by all progressive left influenced news outlets.  This is right out of Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals, supplemented by the eight levels of control to create a socialist state.  All talking points are similar in nature to accuse conservative policies of Nazi-like actions and tactics.  In other words, accuse your opponents of what you are actually doing behind the curtain.


Consider these eight levels of control that must be obtained in order to create a socialist state:


  1. Health Care – Control health care, and you control the people.
  2. Poverty – Increase the poverty level as high as possible.  Poor people are easier to control and will not fight back if you are providing everything for them to live.
  3. Debt – Increase the debt to an unsustainable level.  That way, you are able to increase taxes, and this will produce more poverty.
  4. Gun Control – Remove the ability to defend themselves from the government.  That way you are able to create a police state.
  5. Welfare – Take control of every aspect of their lives (food, housing, income).
  6. Education – Take control of what people read and listen to.  Take control of what children learn in school.
  7. Religion – Remove the belief in the God from the government and schools.
  8. Class warfare – Divide the people into the wealthy and the poor.  This will cause more discontentment, and it will be easier to take from (tax) the wealthy with the support of the poor.


Consider Alinsky’s rules for radicals:


  1. Always remember the first rule of power tactics: Power is not only what you have but what the enemy thinks you have.
  2. The second rule is: Never go outside the experience of your people.  When an action is outside the experience of the people, the result is confusion, fear, and retreat.
  3. The third rule is: Wherever possible go outside the experience of the enemy.  Here you want to cause confusion, fear, and retreat.
  4. The fourth rule is: Make the enemy live up to their own book of rules.  You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.
  5. The fourth rule carries within it the fifth rule: Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.  It is almost impossible to counterattack ridicule.  Also it infuriates the opposition, who then react to your advantage.
  6. The sixth rule is: A good tactic is one that your people enjoy.  If your people are not having a ball doing it, there is something very wrong with the tactic.
  7. The seventh rule: A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.  Man can sustain militant interest in any issue for only a limited time, after which it becomes a ritualistic commitment, like going to church on Sunday mornings.
  8. The eighth rule: Keep the pressure on, with different tactics and actions, and utilize all events of the period for your purpose.
  9. The ninth rule: The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.
  10. The tenth rule: The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition.  It is this unceasing pressure that results in the reactions from the opposition that are essential for the success of the campaign.
  11. The eleventh rule is: If you push a negative hard and deep enough it will break through into its counterside; this is based on the principle that every positive has its negative.
  12. The twelfth rule: The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.  You cannot risk being trapped by the enemy in his sudden agreement with your demand and saying “You’re right – we don’t know what to do about this issue.  Now you tell us.”
  13. The thirteenth rule: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.


When these 21 elements are combined, it is palpable what the progressive far left and its co-conspirators, the MSM, are undertaking to overthrow the republic.


This is not a free speech issue; it is a progressive left coup utilizing all means necessary to alter America.  One can go on and on with examples from the MSM and far-left progressives through their accusations, false claims, lies, and fake news.


The far-left progressives are the haters.  They are the bigots and racists.  They are the false accusers.  They are the ones who are intolerant.  Look at college campuses today: false fear-mongering.  Look at Antifa, themselves fascists; look at Black Lives Matter, themselves racist; look the border and illegal immigration issues, false narratives day in and day out.  What’s good is bad, what’s false is true, say it over and over and it all becomes obfuscated.


The enemies of our democracy are the policies of the progressive left and Democratic Party – all birthed from the Hillary Clinton-Obama era in a continued coup attempt.


And then Donald Trump happened.  Keep fighting the good fight, Mr. President.  Our country’s survival depends on it.




via American Thinker Blog

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/

The Reason Democrats Are All Behind Mueller Witch Hunt Is Likely Hidden in the IG’s Clinton Email Report and It Will Make You Sick

Guest post by Joe Hoft

For more than a year the Democrat Party and their corrupt MSM have all been behind the phony Trump-Russia collusion scandal. 

Their efforts to frame the current President are so extreme, corrupt and criminal that one has to wonder why they would go through all this to frame President Trump?  What could be so devastating that liberals in politics and the media will do all they can to make up this bold and grandiose lie?  The answer may have been hidden in the recent IG’s report on the FBI’s actions with Hillary’s emails.

The IG’s report released a month ago reported numerous crimes and corrupt actions taken by many individuals in the deep state FBI and DOJ.  These fiends reportedly did all they could to cover up Hillary’s email crimes while setting up the current President on a phony non-existent crime of Russian collusion.  We now have more information that may be the reason for the extreme measures to take down the current President.

Hidden on pages 293-294 in the IG’s report is a discussion of some material found on Anthony Weiner’s laptop.  The discussion is between EAD Randall Coleman and FBI Director James Comey on October 4th, 2016.  Weiner was arrested for sexting a teenage girl which led to his email devices being confiscated and thousands of emails uncovered.  Weiner was also the husband of Hillary campaign aid Huma Abedin.  Apparently the emails were a problem for Obama’s corrupt FBI and DOJ because they were suspected of including all kinds of information that would be damning to the Clintons, Obama and the Democratic Party.

The following was noted in the IG’s report –

Comey’s Outlook calendar for October 4 contains an entry for “Morning Briefs” from 8:15 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. that is immediately followed by an entry for “Meeting w/EAD Coleman” from 9:00 a.m. to 9:30 a.m. Coleman told us that he could not recall this briefing with Comey. Coleman stated that staying behind to brief Comey would be consistent with normal practice, but added that he did not recall this specific instance. Coleman told us that it would be unusual to have a one-on-one meeting with Comey and told us someone else would typically be present at these briefings, such as the DD or ADD. While not remembering this meeting, Coleman speculated that this may have been a one-on-one meeting with Comey to discuss Coleman’s upcoming retirement from the FBI in December 2016.

Coleman told us that he kept regularly took notes in a journal. Coleman’s notes from October 4 contained the following entry:

(1) Anthony Wiener [sic]

(2) [Unrelated]

(3) Wiener [sic] – texting 15 yo – Sexually Explicit

9/26 – Federal SW – IPhone/IPAD/Laptop

Initial analysis of laptop – thousands emails

Hillary Clinton & Foundation

Crime Against Children

We asked Coleman about these notes and he told us that, given their placement in his notebook, the notes would most likely represent information he was briefed on first thing in the morning by his subordinates in the Criminal Investigative Division. Coleman stated that he may have passed this information to other FBI executives after the morning briefing with the Director, but he could not remember if that occurred here.

Comey told us that he did not recall the briefing by Coleman reflected in his calendar. We asked Comey if this briefing could have been the time in early October that he recalled being told about the connection between Midyear and the Weiner investigation. Comey stated:

It’s possible, possible this is what is knocking around in the back of my head, but I really, see I know the frailty of memory from having done a lot of this work, at least in my memory it’s much more of an informal than a meeting about it, but it’s possible.

We showed Coleman’s notes from October 4 to Comey. Comey did not recall being briefed on the information contained in the notes. When asked about Coleman, Comey said he “thought very highly of him” and described him as a “straight shooter.”

We asked Comey if this information was something that he likely would have “put out of his mind” after being informed of it in early October. Comey responded, “I don’t think so unless, unless the way it was passed to me was with some, you don’t need to do anything. We’re doing, we’re running it down or something. Something that pushed it down on my priority list.”

When asked if he recalled this meeting between Coleman and Comey, Rybicki stated that he did not. Bowdich told us that it is possible that he would have been at this meeting between Comey and Coleman, but he had no recollection of it. McCabe continued to be on travel and was not in Washington, D.C., on October 4.

It is absolutely inconceivable that anyone, let alone leaders in the FBI and DOJ could forget a discussion related to ‘crimes against children’.  The odds of this are none to zero.  As the report states, EAD Coleman and FBI Director Comey seldom if ever met one on one.  So the fact that they would both forget this also is not realistic.  It is absolutely shocking and disgusting that these men would forget about discussing ‘crimes against children’.

Is this what the Dems and their MSM are afraid of?  Is there some real seedy, disgusting and criminal material in the Weiner emails that would lead Hillary Clinton, Obama and all liberals to frantically cling to a fake story about Trump and Russia?

There has to be some major reason other than just losing the election to go to the lengths the liberals have gone to remove Trump from his Presidency.  Their crimes against children may be the story the Dems were willing to do anything to stop from reaching the public.  They really may be that sick.

The post The Reason Democrats Are All Behind Mueller Witch Hunt Is Likely Hidden in the IG’s Clinton Email Report and It Will Make You Sick appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.

via The Gateway Pundit

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.thegatewaypundit.com

Iran has completely stopped harassing US ships now that strong Trump replaced weakling Obama

For all the concessions President Obama was offering Iran for his “nuclear deal” — $150 billion, for instance – Iran treated the US with contempt, harassing and even taking into custody US ships in the Persian Gulf. The adage that weakness is provocative was proven true as (via the Daily Caller):


During the final years of the Obama administration, Iranian gunboats regularly harassed U.S. ships, with three dozen such interactions occurring in 2016. (snip)



The worst incident occurred in January 2016, when the Iranians captured two U.S. Navy riverine patrol boats and 10 sailors.



Riverine patrol boat of the type that was captured by the Iranians


(photo credit: Petty Officer First Class Peter Lewis)


But that’s nothing but a humiliating memory now that America has a president who won’t stand for it:


During President Donald Trump’s first year in office, the number of annual incidents dropped to 14, a decrease of about 60 percent. So far in 2018, there has not been a single case of harassment, the U.S. Navy told Fox News.


The change by the former bullies is completely understandable:


Trump commented on this issue on the campaign trail, saying, “With Iran, when they circle our beautiful destroyers with their little boats, and they make gestures at our people, that they shouldn’t be allowed to make, they will be shot out of the water.”


The first incident of the Trump administration occurred in July 2017. A U.S. Navy warship fired a warning shot at an Iranian gunboat that came within 150 yards of the American vessel.


The Navy publicly acknowledged the changes in Iran’s behavior in March.


“It seems like they’ve absolutely made a conscious decision to give us more space,” Navy Cmdr. William Urban, spokesman for U.S. Naval Forces Central Command, told reporters. “That is definitely a change in their behavior.”


“Peace through strength” is not an empty slogan, it is a strategy that works.


For all the concessions President Obama was offering Iran for his “nuclear deal” — $150 billion, for instance – Iran treated the US with contempt, harassing and even taking into custody US ships in the Persian Gulf. The adage that weakness is provocative was proven true as (via the Daily Caller):


During the final years of the Obama administration, Iranian gunboats regularly harassed U.S. ships, with three dozen such interactions occurring in 2016. (snip)


The worst incident occurred in January 2016, when the Iranians captured two U.S. Navy riverine patrol boats and 10 sailors.



Riverine patrol boat of the type that was captured by the Iranians


(photo credit: Petty Officer First Class Peter Lewis)


But that’s nothing but a humiliating memory now that America has a president who won’t stand for it:


During President Donald Trump’s first year in office, the number of annual incidents dropped to 14, a decrease of about 60 percent. So far in 2018, there has not been a single case of harassment, the U.S. Navy told Fox News.


The change by the former bullies is completely understandable:


Trump commented on this issue on the campaign trail, saying, “With Iran, when they circle our beautiful destroyers with their little boats, and they make gestures at our people, that they shouldn’t be allowed to make, they will be shot out of the water.”


The first incident of the Trump administration occurred in July 2017. A U.S. Navy warship fired a warning shot at an Iranian gunboat that came within 150 yards of the American vessel.


The Navy publicly acknowledged the changes in Iran’s behavior in March.


“It seems like they’ve absolutely made a conscious decision to give us more space,” Navy Cmdr. William Urban, spokesman for U.S. Naval Forces Central Command, told reporters. “That is definitely a change in their behavior.”


“Peace through strength” is not an empty slogan, it is a strategy that works.




via American Thinker Blog

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/

Gun Researcher’s SCOTUS Litmus Test Is Perfect, Pick the Person Dems Hate Most

Ever since it was announced that Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy would be retiring from his seat on the high court, Democrats and the liberal media have exploded with apocalyptic hyperbole about potential future court rulings.

That is because Kennedy’s replacement will be chosen by President Donald Trump and confirmed by a Republican-controlled Senate, and Democrats know that the eventual nominee — whoever it may be — will most likely be ideologically opposed to their progressive agenda.

But as talk of potential nominees circulate through the media and each one is portrayed as perhaps the worst possible jurist ever in the history of the court system, it can become easy to get lost in all of the various analysis and opinions that most people use to inform their decisions as to how they will view those potential nominees.

However, one rather simple rule of thumb has been proposed by preeminent statistician and gun-rights researcher John Lott, writing in Townhall, that should make the process of whittling down the potential nominees to find the best future justice a relative breeze.

“Here is a simple rule: You can judge the caliber of President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee by how angry the Democrats get,” Lott wrote.

TRENDING: James Woods Nails LA City Councilman Arrested at ICE Protest the Way Only Woods Can

Indeed, the angrier and more outraged liberals are by a potential nominee, the better that potential nominee will likely be as a sitting justice on the court.

“The smarter and more influential the nominee, in an important sense the more qualified they are, the angrier Democrats will get,” according to Lott.

Lott looked back at all of the nominees for the Supreme Court who have been put forward by various presidents over the past several decades, and he discovered the smartest and most achieved judges were the ones who endured the lengthiest confirmation processes.

Lott surmised that the increased opposition to incredibly smart nominees stemmed from the same sort of sentiment that often sees lawyers dismiss and excuse incredibly smart potential jurors, out of concern that they may be capable of influencing the opinions of others around them.

Will Trump be able to get a Supreme Court judge confirmed before the November midterms?

To wit, Democrats don’t want to see a smart and successful conservative originalist jurist on the Supreme Court because they may prove effective at swaying their colleagues to adopt their conservative constitutionalist positions.

Instead, Democrats would prefer potential jurists be of the “dumbed down” variety, as they would be more likely to defer to other justices already on the court and rulings from lower-court judges who have been on the bench for a while.

Thus, they fight tooth-and-nail against smart and successful Supreme Court nominees — just look at how hard Democrats fought against the nomination of Robert Bork, Clarence Thomas, Sam Alito and Neil Gorsuch — and how they really didn’t fight all that hard against nominees viewed as less intelligent or successful, such as Harriet Miers.

Lott said it makes sense from a partisan point of view for political parties to staunchly oppose the best and brightest nominees put forward by their opponents, but insisted that the current complexity of the laws seemingly required that only the best and brightest — no matter their ideological alignment — would be capable of performing adequately as a Supreme Court justice.

“Democrats will claim that they’re simply upset about the views of Trump’s forthcoming nominee, but what really worries them is the intelligence or influence of the pick,” Lott concluded.

RELATED: SCOTUS Decision Already Nuking Unions as Up to 400,000 May Ditch Public-Sector Unions

To be sure, there will be much ado about the eventual nominee’s stance on abortion, gun rights, the power of the administrative state and a host of other issues, but in truth the opposition to that nominee will be less about the actual issues and more about their ability to be an influence instead of being influenced.

So, as the handful of potential Supreme Court nominees are discussed among the many analysts and pundits in the liberal media, look for the one who freaks the left out the most, and there you will quite likely find the best candidate overall for the job.

Facebook has greatly reduced the distribution of our stories in our readers’ newsfeeds and is instead promoting mainstream media sources. When you share to your friends, however, you greatly help distribute our content. Please take a moment and consider sharing this article with your friends and family. Thank you.

via Conservative Tribune

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.westernjournal.com/ct

Cast and crew walking off ‘Roe v. Wade’ film after finding out it’s pro-life

Director Nick Loeb granted an exclusive interview with The Hollywood Reporter to provide an update on the progress of his secretive film about the 1973 Roe v. Wade Supreme Court case.

But with a cast that includes some high-profile conservative actors, Loeb is getting push-back from both individuals and institutions opposed to him creating a pro-life movie.

What kind of push-back?

Loeb told The Reporter that he and his production partner, Cathy Allyn, have not disclosed the true name of the film — out of worry that they would have trouble finding shooting locations. Turns out, according to the team, their concerns were valid.

When they made the request to film at Louisiana State University, Loeb said, “we were told we were rejected due to our content, even though it will be a PG-rated film. They refused to put it in writing, but they told us on the phone it was due to content.”

After one day of shooting at Tulane, the school shut down their production when the university’s newspaper reported that the film, dubbed “1973,” would express the pro-life perspective of the Roe v. Wade decision and what led up to it.  Loeb is an alumnus of Tulane.

The Tulane Hullaballo’s story quoted individuals both for and against “1973” being filmed on the school’s campus. But in the end, Tulane and LSU both refused production citing logistical issues.

A number of local actors have jumped ship once they found out the film had a pro-life bent. Crew members also left when they found out about the perspectives in the production, with an electrician for “1973” quitting on spot and telling Loeb to “go f***” himself because she refused to be involved.

Anything else?

Conservative actors Jon Voight, Stephen Baldwin and Stacey Dash star in the film, and co-executive producer Dr. Almeta King will make a cameo appearance. Filming began June 15 in New Orleans.

Further attention was brought to the production in past months by Fox News host Tucker Carlson, Breitbart.com and others, following reports that Facebook temporarily blocked Loeb’s Roe v. Wade film from crowdfunding.

On the film’s Facebook page, the feature is referred to as “A true story of the most corrupt court case in history that led to the murder of 60 million babies.”

via TheBlaze.com – Stories

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.theblaze.com

Trump Admin Letter Dismantles Obama’s Racist College Admission Guidelines

President Donald Trump’s administration on Tuesday rescinded Obama-era guidelines on how colleges should use students’ race in their admission decisions, changing the landscape of the fight over affirmative action and the role of race in how colleges select students.

In a letter released by the Department of Education Civil Rights Division, the DOE and the Department of Justice announced they were withdrawing a series of statements issued by the Obama administration between 2011 and 2016 that “purport to explain the legal framework that governs the use of race by elementary, secondary, and postsecondary schools under the Constitution…

“The Departments have reviewed the documents and have concluded that they advocate policy preferences and positions beyond the requirements of the Constitution, Title IV, and Title VI,” the letter states.

“Moreover, the documents prematurely decide, or appear to decide, whether particular actions violate the Constitution or federal law. By suggesting to public schools, as well as recipients of federal funding, that they take action or refrain from taking action beyond plain legal requirements, the documents are inconsistent with governing principles for agency guidance documents.”

The Trump administration’s move was first reported by The Wall Street Journal on Tuesday.

TRENDING: James Woods Nails LA City Councilman Arrested at ICE Protest the Way Only Woods Can

And liberals were complaining before the new policy even became public.

“The law on this hasn’t changed, and the Supreme Court has twice ruled reaffirming the importance of diversity,” Obama Justice Department official Anurima Bhargava, who led civil rights enforcement, told WSJ. “This is a purely political attack that benefits nobody.”

Actually, it’s a pretty good chance it’s going to benefit one party in a lawsuit that was just filed over affirmative action in college admissions, and how it might adversely affect the prospects of Asian students.

The Trump administration move comes amid a lawsuit filed by Students for Fair Admissions against Harvard University in June, alleging that the institution discriminates against Asian American applicants. The plaintiff asserted that the Ivy League university regularly docked Asian American candidates on the basis of their personality.

The Supreme Court has revisited race-based college admissions multiple times since the 1970s. The court upheld affirmative action by a 4-3 vote in 2016, with Justice Anthony Kennedy writing in the majority opinion that colleges must constantly review the “positive and negative” results of their affirmative action policies.

With Kennedy having announced his resignation from the court last week, a new justice could be in place by the time the court opens its next session in October.

And that makes the future look difficult for proponents of the Obama-era race-conscious approach to college admissions.

The Education Department did not respond immediately to Daily Caller request for comment.

However, conservative groups were trumpeting the news.

“The Obama guidance in this area was bad law and bad policy, and it’s good news if it is indeed being withdrawn,” Center for Equal Opportunity president Roger Clegg said in a news release.

RELATED: Obama Ed. Secretary: Don’t Educate Children Until Gun Control Achieved

“Being opposed to racial preferences is not being against diversity, which is what the critics will claim: It’s simply being against discrimination. The federal government should not be going out of its way to encourage such discrimination, which is what the Obama guidance did.”

A version of this article appeared on The Daily Caller News Foundation website. Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Facebook has greatly reduced the distribution of our stories in our readers’ newsfeeds and is instead promoting mainstream media sources. When you share to your friends, however, you greatly help distribute our content. Please take a moment and consider sharing this article with your friends and family. Thank you.

via Conservative Tribune

Enjoy this article? Read the full version at the authors website: https://www.westernjournal.com/ct