53percenter's Blog

via Breitbart News

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

via American Thinker Blog

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

Former vice presidential candidate John Edwards was right when he said in 2004 that there are two Americas. The reaction to the targeting and death of ISIS leader Abu al-Baghdadi demonstrates the moral divide in this country between normal people and the “elites” more than ever.

Normal people who believe in good vs. evil, victim vs. criminal, and right vs. wrong reacted to the news yesterday the way it’s expressed in Proverbs 11:10: “When the wicked perish, there are shouts of joy.”

Those who believe that criminals are victims, babies should be executed, and murderers should be released from prison, aka progressives, have a difficult time with Trump celebrating the lowly death of one of the most brutal terrorists of this generation.

The Washington Post, in a roundly mocked obituary, titled its screed, “Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, austere religious scholar at helm of Islamic State, dies at 48.” They have since modified the title to “extremist leader,” refusing to mention which form of extremism.

Could you imagine such a headline from the media about Hitler’s death? For that matter, could you imagine a headline like this regarding a conservative they detest, such as Jesse Helms?

The media seems to have a fascination with humanizing people like Baghdadi, while President Trump rightfully depicts them in the dehumanizing way they acted. Bloomberg published a profile yesterday describing Baghdadi as a man who “transformed himself from a little-known teacher of Koranic recitation into the self-proclaimed ruler of an entity that covered swaths of Syria and Iraq” and said he “was killed along with a number of his followers.”

Rukmini Callimachi, who covers ISIS for the New York Times, in a profile piece at the Gray Lady, felt a need to quote local people who grew up with Baghdadi describing his pious devotion to his mosque and how he cleaned the building.

10. We are familiar with the atrocities his group carried out & are used to thinking of Baghdadi as a criminal & a thug. But those who knew him as a teen & as a young man described him as having a spiritual gift. The owner of the first mosque he attended described him like this: pic.twitter.com/bghskTyvUi

— Rukmini Callimachi (@rcallimachi) October 27, 2019

What exactly is the point in pushing this line of reporting now?

Even Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, the top Republican on the House Armed Services Committee, in response to a question about the president describing Baghdadi’s death as a “coward” and “dog,” said he felt “a little uncomfortable to hear a president talking that way.” CNN’s Jake Tapper bizarrely felt that there was something wrong with what the president said, although he never explained exactly why it was wrong for him to paint such a “vivid picture” of the terrorist’s demise.

Thornberry qualified his answer by noting that there was utility to Trump taking the glamour away from Baghdadi’s death as an inspirational figure in the eyes of young recruits to terrorism. But why did he need to preface his remarks with the fact that he felt “a little uncomfortable?”

I guess we should just be relieved the Ninth Circuit didn’t place an injunction on Baghdadi’s death.

In reality, this was one instance where Trump’s undisciplined and unorthodox way of speaking is just what the time called for. The entire draw of ISIS was its glamour in martyrdom. Trump did a superlative job dehumanizing him while playing up the bravery of the special operators – all without too much focus on himself. He was actually right on message.

Also, Trump took the time to explain in greater detail and clarity why he believes it’s wrong to have a permanent ground presence in Syria. He deftly explained how ISIS is a bigger problem for Russia and the other neighbors and how it’s not our job to have a permanent presence there, but rather to engage in quick strikes and maneuvers as necessary. Taking away the shine from ISIS recruitment speaks exactly to what threatens us here at home, thanks to all of the people we’ve admitted into our country over the years who subscribe to this ideology. Trump’s rhetoric following this operation did more to deter their actions than a permanent presence in the region, which does nothing but help Russia and the Shiites.

---

---

At the same time, Trump demonstrated that a lack of a permanent ground presence doesn’t mean we won’t step in as needed for a clearly defined mission in our interests. He might not have used these terms, but the president, for the first time, effectively explained the difference between “strike and maneuver” vs. “hold and build” on behalf of others, the plan I laid out a few weeks ago.

With so much that divides us as a nation, it’s a shame we can’t all join together with unvarnished joy that such evil has been rooted out and that our president did his job well and communicated it properly. Then again, what divides the elites from the rest of America is clearly too insurmountable to bridge even in a moment like this.

---

---

The post America’s moral divide extends even to the world’s most evil terrorist appeared first on Conservative Review.

via Conservative Review

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

via Breitbart News

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

One small town in Texas is growing because it refuses to do one thing: collect property taxes.

In 2014, Von Ormy, Texas, mayor Art Martinez de Vara issued his proposed 2015 city budget, which proposed eliminating property taxes. He told the Von Ormy Star, “In 2009 we established a goal of shifting the tax burden for operating the city from property taxes towards sales taxes.  We did this because over 95% of sales taxes are paid by non-residents and we understood that we could increase sales tax revenue much faster than property tax revenue.  Since that time we have increased sales tax revenue by over 400%.  In order to have achieved the same revenue, we would have had to increase them by 300% from where we were in 2009.” He added, “I believe that government should not spend every penny it collects, rather we should spend what is necessary to deliver high quality core services to our residents.  Excess taxation is unjust taxation.”

Von Ormy was not the first town in Texas to eliminate property taxes; others included Stafford, which eliminated property taxes in 1995 as far back as 1995. The Von Orly Star reported in 2017, “The Von Ormy City Commission unanimously adopted its fiscal year 2018 budget on September 29 and maintained the city’s property tax rate at zero percent.”

Writing in the Houston Courant, Grace Watson, a legislative fellow at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, noted that Von Ormy voted in 2015 to reduce property taxes by 10% a year, adding, “The city now gets its revenues from sales taxes, franchise fees collected from utility companies, and miscellaneous permits.” Watson also pointed out that the city retains enough funds “to fully cover maintenance and operations costs for a full year in the event of a sudden emergency” and that Niche ranked Von Ormy as the suburb with the lowest cost of living in the San Antonio area.

As the BBC reported, Jess Fields, a policy analyst for the Texas Public Policy Foundation who has fought for the  “liberty city” movement in Texas, stated in 2015, “The liberty city idea kind of goes back to the basic concept that people have a fundamental right to determine what kind of government they want to live under,”  arguing that the regulations in large Texas cities restrict personal liberties. He stated, “I don’t deny that some of these regulations are well intended to promote public health and safety, but there’s a point at which these good intentions are eclipsed by their clear, negative, unintended consequences. We don’t want the government to tell you how to do every little thing with your property and what to do with your life.”

In 2015, Texas state senator Konni Burton introduced SB710, which would have required any change in property taxes to be approved by at least 60% of constituents in a public vote. De Vara, who was Burton’s chief of staff at the time as well as serving as Von Ormy’s mayor, stated, “It’s a really good experiment in democracy.” He pointed out that Von Ormy had no gun restrictions, no smoking bans and no fireworks ban.He concluded, “We’re not anarchists. We just believe in limited government.”

via The Daily Wire

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

On Friday, the campaign of presidential candidate Kamala Harris announced the senator will skip a forum on criminal justice reform in South Carolina this weekend. Her reason for that decision was the equivalent of an adult woman throwing a toddler-style temper tantrum. She is angry that the organization holding the]]>

via Hotair

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

You may recall earlier this month when New York Governor Andrew Cuomo threatened utility company National Grid with massive fines if they didn’t start adding more natural gas hookups in New York City. This was done despite the fact that National Grid had told him that they]]>

via Hotair

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

The headline has changed already following an avalanche of criticism on social media, but this was WaPo’s read on the death of public enemy number one as of 11:15 a.m. ET. Good lord:

“John Wayne Gacy, children’s party clown, dead at 52.”

Even]]>

via Hotair

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

Hedge fund manager Michael Bills and his wife Sonjia Smith, the largest sources of individual political donations this cycle in Virginia, used a green energy PAC to push money to Democratic candidates.

Bills—a former Goldman Sachs VP who now runs the Bluestem Asset Management LLC hedge fund—and Smith have spent over $2 million on the Virginia elections. The donations came through direct contributions to Democratic candidates as well as large investments in the Clean Virginia Fund, a PAC purportedly focused on fighting energy monopolies that has given predominately to Democrats.

The couple has made more political donations in the past two years than in the previous decade.

From 2008 to 2017, Bills gave just over $1 million to Virginia candidates and causes while Smith gave about $1.5 million. In 2018 and 2019, Bills cut checks for slightly more than $2 million while Smith donated roughly $1 million, according to the Virginia Public Access Project, a website that tracks political spending in the state. Bills’s direct contributions to Democratic campaigns range from $2,000 to $90,000.

In addition to writing five-figure checks to Democratic candidates, Bills founded the nonprofit Clean Virginia, which operates in tandem with a political action committee, Clean Virginia Fund. Both organizations are focused on targeting the state’s largest energy provider, Dominion Energy.

Bills provided 90 percent of all donations to the PAC, while 25 other donors provided the remaining 10 percent.

"In 2018, I founded Clean Virginia in an attempt to offset the undue and harmful influence that Dominion Energy and other utility monopolies have over Virginia politics," a statement from Bills on the Clean Virginia website says.

"We are very transparent about our funding and Michael Bills’ involvement," Clean Virginia spokeswoman Cassady Craighill told the Washington Free Beacon by email. "Michael Bills launched Clean Virginia and an associated PAC to protect the environment and Virginians from utility monopolies abusing their power."

"We do not fundraise, but actively invite a list of more than 40,000 supporters to take action for clean government and clean energy including signing petitions and contacting their state representatives," she added later.

Clean Virginia, Bills, and Smith gave money to 88 Democratic candidates, all of whom pledged not to take donations from utility companies, the Virginia Mercury reported last week.

In mid-September, the Democratic Party of Virginia voted to swear off political donations from Dominion Energy. Less than three weeks later, Bills donated $200,000 to the party.

The Mercury reported that the group announced a single donation to a Republican, state senator Amanda Chase, but refused to endorse her. Clean Virginia listed Chase and three other Republican legislators among the officials who refuse to take donations from Dominion Energy. At time of writing, the Virginia Public Access Project does not list a donation from Bills’s PAC to any of the four Republicans.

Some Republican candidates say the electricity provider is something of a straw man, and that Bills is only concerned about flipping the balance of power to Democrats.

Republican state senator David Suetterlein, who has a history of challenging Dominion Energy during his legislative career, said a Clean Virginia donation to his Democratic challenger is telling.

"There’s no way they didn’t know about my record," he told the Mercury. "I think their only goal is to have a Democratic majority." Suetterlein is on Clean Virginia’s list of anti-Dominion officials.

Bills and Smith join a number of major Democratic donors and organizations pouring money into Virginia, including Tom Steyer, George Soros, and Michael Bloomberg’s gun control PAC. Democrats look to win majorities in both legislative chambers in the November election, in addition to having a Democratic governor. Democrats haven’t held all three levers of the state’s government for 25 years.

The post Dem Megadonor Using Clean Energy PAC as Front to Turn Virginia Blue appeared first on Washington Free Beacon.

via Washington Free Beacon

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

A recent immigration ruling from Attorney General William Barr takes aim at illegal alien drunk driving and how it is handled under federal immigration law.

According to the ruling, issued on Friday, multiple drunk driving convictions indicate that a removable alien lacks the “good moral character” needed get special permission to stay in the United States.

The case in question is that of a Mexican national who had been in the United States “without admission or parole since 1997″ and has three kids who are U.S. citizens. “He also has a criminal record,” the decision explains, noting two arrests for assaulting his wife, a public drunkenness charge, and a negligent driving conviction. He was also convicted of drunk driving in 2010 and 2012. He later participated in an alcohol safety program and start attending Alcoholics Anonymous meetings.

DHS began removal efforts against him in 2010, the document explains. He conceded that he was removable and asked to have his deportation canceled under federal law, which, among other things, requires that an immigrant show “good moral character” during the minimum 10-year period in the United States. The ruling explains that cancellation is “a coveted and scarce form of relief” which the attorney general can only issue to 4,000 aliens annually.

In 2016, an immigration judge granted the cancellation. According to the ruling, the judge said that though he was “troubled by [the illegal alien’s] alcohol-related convictions,” they were outweighed by multiple factors including his “rehabilitation efforts.”

The Board of Immigration Appeals, however, disagreed with the ruling and found that the immigrant failed to meet the requirement of good moral character as well as that demonstrating “exceptional and extremely unusual hardship” to a relative stipulated in the statute. The case was then referred for further review by acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker last year.

Upon his review, Attorney General Barr sided with the immigration review board and concluded in a ruling issued Friday that “when assessing an alien’s good moral character under [immigration law], evidence of two or more DUI convictions during the relevant period establishes a rebuttable presumption that the alien lacked good moral character during that time.”

The ruling adds, “An alien’s efforts to reform or rehabilitate himself after multiple DUI convictions are commendable, but they do not themselves demonstrate good moral character during the period that includes the convictions. Absent substantial relevant and credible contrary evidence, multiple DUI convictions require that the immigration judge deny cancellation of removal.”

Barr made the ruling in his role as chief immigration judge, as both the Board of Immigration Appeals and U.S. immigration courts are under the authority of the Department of Justice, rather than the judicial branch. A regulation put forward earlier this year cemented the attorney general’s ability to make binding, precedent-setting rulings on immigration cases like this one.

Drunk driving incidents involving illegal aliens are one of the high-profile public safety issues stemming from America’s illegal immigration crisis. In a single year of apprehensions in 2018, despite the agency’ very limited resources, Immigration and Customs Enforcement arrested 80,730 aliens with DUI charges and convictions.

---

---

The post AG Barr rules that illegal aliens with multiple DUIs lack ‘good moral character’ needed to stay here appeared first on Conservative Review.

via Conservative Review

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