Treason-In general, it is the offense of attempting to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance, or of betraying the state into the hands of a foreign power. –Webster’s 1828 Dictionary

 

Nobody likes to be lied to, but boy have we been lied to and how many times we have been lied to is beyond what can be numbered, I’m certain (Exodus 20:16). And for some reason or another, Americans will suffer the abuse rather than righting the wrongs (Proverbs 15:32).

 

The Declaration of Independence tells us:

 

“...and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind is more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.” You have heard that saying, “Fool me once, shame on you.  Fool me twice, shame on me.” How many times do Americans need to be lied to before they shame those who are lying to them?

 

 

Our forefathers taught us (Hebrews 13:17) through their example how we are to lawfully deal with corruption. Declaration of Independence once again teaches us as to how our forefathers dealt with corruption, “But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”

 

How many times one can warn a people that refuse to take heed to the warnings, I know not (Ezekiel 33:3).  However, one thing I do know is that regardless if one takes heed or not, it is still happening, and sooner or later, there is going to be consequences to those who refuse to listen and act accordingly (Ezekiel 33:5).

 

We find that in the American politic today that the “circus of politics” is just that, a circus filled with clowns who are willing to sell their souls (Luke 22:48) and their country, along with the people, to special interest groups (Isaiah 28:18).

 

This is where the actors, politicians, act out on behalf of their special interest groups in pushing a global agenda that the people would otherwise refuse to adhere. What do the powers that mean to rule do.  They create a likable and favorable politician, at least publicly, that the people will follow to do their bidding for them.

 

On May 6th I wrote, “Contrary to What You Have Been Promised, Your Country is Literally Being Handed Off to Foreigners,” in which I highlighted William Gheen’s findings on the Top 10 List of Trump’s Broken Campaign Promises.

  1. Trump reversed his campaign position of reducing legal immigration levels and now supports raising legal immigration levels according to his State of the Union Speech of Feb 5, 2019. Trump also signed a legal immigration increase of unskilled H2B visas in the Amnesty containing secret budget bill H.J.Res. 31. New reports indicate his son-in-law Jared Kushner’s new immigration legislation will contain more legal immigration increases that will harm American workers.
  2. Trump promised caravan illegals could not come into the USA. (Caravan illegals allowed to enter the US under Trump’s Catch and Release directives.)
  3. Trump promised to end Obama’s unconstitutional DACA Amnesty on his first day in office. (Trump continues DACA Amnesty giving deportation protection and jobs to more than 700,000 illegal aliens in violation of existing federal laws!)
  4. Amnesty Don: Trump promised to oppose Amnesty. (Trump endorsed Amnesty legislation HR 4760, signed Amnesty for illegal immigrant minors in the secret budget bill H.J.Res. 31Tweeted he is open to larger Amnesty on Jan 20, 2019, and has deployed his son-in-law Jared Kushner to cut a deal with Democrats to give Amnesty to millions of illegals.)
  5. Trump promised an Executive Order to end birthright citizenship for illegals to rally his base just before the 2018 elections. (No Order Issued.)
  6. Trump promised all illegals, including DACA recipients, would go home. (Trump now supports Amnesty via HR 4760 and HJ Res 31 which allows most illegals to stay.)
  7. Trump promised DHS would clean up elections fraud when he canceled the Kris Kobach led Commission On Elections Integrity. (No DHS Action.)
  8. Trump promised to end Sanctuary Cities. (No Action on that and now Trump delivers more illegal aliens to Democrat strongholds where they receive maximum taxpayer benefits and protection from deportation.) 
  9. Trump promised to end catch and release of illegals. (Catch and release continues.)
  10. (UPDATE FEB 18, 2019 TRUMP SIGNED EMERGENCY ORDER)– Trump said he would declare an emergency and have the military build the wall. (No action till Feb 18, 2019) Trump’s border wall promise remains 90% broken because a wall will not work as long as Border Patrol catches and releases illegals and escorts them into the USA.

 

Then on June 9, Tim Brown, Senior Editor at The Sons of Liberty Media reported, “This Is Not The Obama Administration: Homeland Security Releases 196,000 Illegal Aliens Into The Population, Many Receiving Work Permits.”

 

“As we’ve reported before, the Trump administration talks tough on illegal immigration, but what is actually going on rivals the impotence and downright criminal actions against the people that the administration under President Obama did in releasing illegal aliens, some of them convicted felons, into the US population.  in just the past week, the administration released 5,500 and in the past 5 months, they have released nearly 200,000 illegal aliens into American cities.

 

From John Binder’s June 6th Brietbart (a supporting outlet of President Trump) article, “DHS Frees 5.5K Illegal Aliens into U.S. in a Week; 196K Released in 5 Months.” Binder writes:

 

“The catch and release process often entails federal immigration officials busing border crossers into nearby border cities — as well as flying them into the interior of the country — and dropping them off with the hope they show up for their immigration and asylum hearings. The overwhelming majority of border crossers and illegal aliens are never deported from the country once they are released into the U.S.

Today, there are anywhere between 11 and 22 million illegal aliens living across the country — the majority of which are concentrated in states like California, New York, Florida, Texas, and Illinois.

 

In the last week, about 2,500 border crossers and illegal aliens of the 5,500 released were dropped off in El Paso, Texas. Another 1,100 were released by DHS in San Antonio, Texas and another 1,100 were left in 1,100 Phoenix, Arizona. Since December 2018, El Paso has been forced to absorb nearly 70,000 of these nationals, while San Antonio has had to take 73,100.

Roughly 800 border crossers and illegal aliens were dropped off in San Diego, California in the last week. ”

 

Adding to the agenda that is being rolled out, we find Mitch McConnell and Lindsay Graham are working behind the scenes drafting legislation to further benefit them that are illegally coming into this country. 

 

Criminal politicians, as well as illegal invaders, are endangering American lives.  Today, we are seeing this country literally being handed off to those who mean to get above you, while Americans are being brought very low (Numbers 32:23; Deuteronomy 28:15, 43, 52).

 

If this is not the definition of treason, then I do not know what it means.

 

--

 

Bradlee Dean is a guest contributor to GCN news. His views and opinions are his own and do not reflect the views and opinions of the Genesis Communication Network. Bradlee's radio program, The Sons of Libertybroadcasts live M - Sat here at GCN. This is an edited version of an op-ed originally published by Sons of Liberty Media at www.sonsoflibertyradio.com. Reprinted with permission. 

 

Published in Opinion

I’m not part of the conservative club any more than I’m part of the liberal club.  If I call them more conservative than liberal, that’s because it is the way I happen to see things.

 

The reason for that is my late father, Philip Weinberg.

 

He always taught by example, led from the front and encouraged me to act a little like Howard Cosell, telling it like it is and letting the chips fall where they may. So if you wonder why I don’t spout anybody’s party line except my own, it is because he taught me how valuable independence can be.

 

Included in that lesson was also doing the right thing no matter who you anger.

 

The older you get, the more that you realize Father’s Day may not just be a ploy by the greeting card manufacturers to sell more cards and retailers to sell more stuff but should just be taken at face value as an opportunity to thank and honor the man who raised you.

 

This Sunday will be the seventh Father’s Day since his death and those lessons he taught become clearer with every passing year. (Also becoming clearer is that getting old is not for sissies.)

 

Unlike the late Tim Russert I can never imagine calling my father, “Big Phil.” But he was.

 

Philip Weinberg’s public title on the day he died in 2012 was Professor Emeritus at Bradley University.

 

The title barely began to cover his career and his public life.

 

But growing up in his shadow gave me a perspective on life that many people, for many reasons, will never get.

 

He rarely lectured my sisters and me. His example was usually enough. He continuously taught by example that this is the United States of America and any little boy or girl could grow up to be President, or publish a newspaper, run a radio network or swing any bat you’re big enough to want to pick up.

 

He was the living embodiment of the concept that ordinary people can do extraordinary things by simply putting one foot in front of the other and moving forward. If that were all he taught me in 60 years, it would have been plenty. But he also taught me that when you do get where you want to go, grace and humility can take you even farther. And, trust me, that’s a difficult lesson to learn no matter who is trying to teach it.

 

It is possible—although I’m not sure he would have admitted it—that he learned some or all of these things as he was raising his children and that the Phil Weinberg when he left us was as much the product of having raised three children as those children are the product of having been raised by him and my mother.  It also occurs to me in hindsight that much of what he taught us was as difficult for him to implement as it was for us.

 

Kids don’t come with operating manuals and my father was an engineer by training. But the lessons he taught—intentionally or otherwise—have become so valuable that I can only hope that I’m capable of passing at least some of them on to my own millennial stepchildren.

 

As valuable as the lessons, are the memories. I vividly remember standing outside an apartment complex in Brooklyn with him telling me, “Son, there used to be a baseball stadium here and a real baseball team played there.” He never acknowledged that the Dodgers had moved to LA and abandoned Ebbets Field.  And, given the choice between the Dodgers and the Angels when I owned a Las Vegas radio station, I chose the Angels because he would have been horrified had I consorted with dem bums…

 

I remember him showing me my first mainframe computer in the early 1960s and his precise explanation of how the monster IBM System 360 worked.

 

I remember coming home one Friday in 1963 to the death of John Kennedy and his explanation that the country is bigger than just one man and things would be just fine because that is the genius of this nation’s founders. And I also remember the summer trips we were able to take so he could graphically illustrate exactly how big this nation is.

 

He might have missed a few little league games (I never got past the minors in the Richwoods Little League anyway) but he never missed a crisis. You could tell when something was relatively unimportant—he wouldn’t hesitate to yell at you. But when the chips were down, there was nobody you would rather have covering your back. Until almost the day he died, he was the first call I and my sisters made when there was a problem. However difficult the problem was, his calm analysis was always dead on and his advice and support were invaluable.

 

In the immortal words of Michael Corleone, “what better consigliore can I have than my father?”

 

Indeed.

 

----

 

Fred Weinberg is a columnist and the CEO of USA Radio Network. His views and opinions, if expressed, are his own and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of GCN. Fred's weekly column can be read all over the internet. You can subscribe at www.pennypressnv.com. His column has been reprinted in full, with permission. 

Published in Opinion
%PM, %06 %807 %2019 %18:%Jun

New Progressivism: statism: Part I

Progressivism was a set of related movements in the U.S. after the Civil War up to World War II.  Modern progressives emphasize movements related to government corruption, women’s suffrage, municipal administration, education, promoting abortion, child and pro-union labor laws, conservation, internationalism, culture and especially activist judges promoting a “living constitution” against originalism.  Also, aggressive economic regulation and anti-trust law, much of which has been discredited by experience. 

They studiously overlook as embarrassing progressivism’s first cause, eugenics (“scientific” racism); plus alcohol prohibition; and opposition to prostitution and voter fraud – because they’re not popular with today’s progressives.  But where they used to soft-peddle governmental coercion and socialism as unacceptably harsh, modern progressives now proudly trumpet them.

Prohibition of alcohol and prostitution were greatly rooted in traditional religion, but many other progressive causes – especially scientific racism and opposition to basic principles of America’s founding – were rooted in disdain for religion.  So, progressives experienced much cognitive dissonance.

The original progressive causes quickly found their natural partner, liberal statism. This 19th Century term stands for extensive government intervention in economic and social matters and not leaving much room for traditional and voluntary social, economic and political institutions and practices. Statism gave progressivism its key means: the mushrooming administrative state.

The movement was bi-partisan. Presidents Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson were the main leaders.

Progressivism was somewhat a reaction to the 19th Century rise of industrial and urban society.  It’s called a reform movement because it sought to create new social and political means to preserve the positions of many groups – especially labor, farmers and whites – against new developments. Hence, much populist progressivism is reactionary. 

An even larger part of the progressive movements was based on two related ideas.  First, that there is an arc of history moving society toward ever better practices, policies and institutions – ergo, progress.  Second and even more important, that the small socio-political elite fraction of the population, via the use of science (especially emerging social sciences) and their asserted natural intellectual and ethical superiority, would discern that arc of history and should therefore be given the power to effect their vision of it. 

Thus, the disdain for traditional democratic means and religion and for the founding principles based on them. 

A third key ingredient was arrogance due to their ignorance of possible unintended consequences and their stupidity in assuming they could remake the world and human beings, and everything would work just as they intended.  Racism is the most obvious part of their ignorance and stupidity.  But what we know today about their misplaced faith in rampant economic intervention (including labor law), internationalism and substitution of judicial for political means also drives home this point. 

Ditto, their belief that government action is inherently benign (because it will be guided by the progressives implementing the arc of history, of course), and government won’t be co-opted by predatory special interests to prey upon the people and the public interest.  The Founders understood the true nature and risks of government, so they designed a constitution to protect people and the public interest from them.  These ideas were anathema to progressives. 

Even more than FDR’s New Deal, LBJ’s Great Society was the apogee of progressivism and statism in the 20th Century. Then they subsided somewhat. 

However, in this century, they have gained a new life, now replacing the good early causes with identity politics; radical economic egalitarianism; socialism; political correctness and suppression of free speech; environmental catastrophe dogma; and opposition to real science. 

Classic failures of progressivism such as judicial activism are now joined by these predatory special interests as major parts of the sad legacy we’re leaving. Plus, of course, long-term slow economic growth and thus diminished human wellbeing and fairness. 

Next time, examples and a few solutions.

 

--

 

Ron Knecht is a contributing editor to the Penny Press - the conservative weekly "voice of Nevada." You can subscribe at www.pennypressnv.com. His column has been reprinted, with permission. 

 

Published in Opinion

Robert Mueller IS a hack.  

 

He proved it in nine minutes last week when he did exactly what prosecutors never do which is to say to the world that he wasn’t exonerating President Trump from obstructing the investigation of what wasn’t a crime in the first place.

 

Prosecutors have exactly one decision to make in the charging process.  Either charge or don’t charge.  And they can empanel a Grand Jury so they actually don’t have to make the decision themselves.  But they do NOT and CANNOT exonerate.  It is judges and juries who make decisions as to guilt.  And even there, “not guilty” simply means the prosecution couldn’t prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

The reason for that is because our legal system assumes you are innocent unless PROVEN guilty.

 

You never saw Jack McCoy in Law and Order (Sam Waterston) call a press conference and say that a defendant had been exonerated.  He (or his predecessors) might have, in 456 episodes, dropped the charges, but prosecutors do NOT exonerate.

 

Mueller was appointed to investigate Russian interference in the 2016 election and, specifically, did the Trump campaign collude with the Russians.  The facts now coming to light about the origins of that appointment are—to say the least—odd. In fact, President Trump appears to be right to say out loud that it was an attempted “take-down” of a duly elected President.

 

Mueller spent somewhere near $34-million, hired 19 lawyers (the “angry Democrats” as the President called them) used 40 FBI agents, empaneled a Federal Grand Jury and came up with bupkis where Trump, his family and his campaign were concerned.  If you don’t understand Yiddish, that means nothing, nada.

 

And now what is loosely called the “intelligence community” is outraged that President Trump has given the nation’s top law enforcement official the authority to declassify and investigate the sequence of events that led to Mueller’s investigation.

 

Well, here’s a reasonable question.

 

Assuming the Russkies did, in this country, what Barack Obama (actually his lackeys) did unsuccessfully in Israel—distribute fake information during election season—exactly what laws did they violate?  We do have a First Amendment in this country which protects everyone against government censorship.  A few Russians buying Facebook ads and distributing fake news?  How is that different from CNN International?  Or any number of US based shortwave radio stations aimed at other countries.

 

Is it now illegal to take sides in an election if you are not a citizen of the United States?

 

And then there is the hacking of DNC bigshot John Podesta’s email.  I never heard Podesta say he didn’t write them.  Yes, it’s illegal to hack someone else’s email, but it’s not like Mueller charged the Trump campaign or anyone connected with it.

 

Also suspect is Hillary’s lack of understanding that when you call half of America “deplorable” they may, possibly, vote against you.

 

Apparently, she failed to learn that little factoid during her time in Arkansas which happens to be a state where real people live waaay outside the beltway.

 

The problem with Democrats—with the left in general—is they have pioneered the concept of getting their way no matter what it takes.

 

If we in Middle America vote for Donald J. Trump, they say screw him.  They will use whatever they have—legal or illegal, logical or illogical—in an attempt to take him down.

 

The “Russian” investigation was just another piece of the game.

 

It’s hard to call yourself a patriot when you commit treason against America because you lost an election.  The 2020 election should remind the left, writ large, of that.

 

----

 

Fred Weinberg is a columnist and the CEO of USA Radio Network. His views and opinions, if expressed, are his own and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of GCN. Fred's weekly column can be read all over the internet. You can subscribe at www.pennypressnv.com. His column has been reprinted in full, with permission. 

 

 

 

Published in Opinion
%PM, %04 %723 %2019 %16:%Jun

We need to do more to serve our country

I hope everyone enjoyed their recent Memorial Day weekend.  Many Louisianans were vacationing over the long holiday or enjoying a cookout with family and friends.  Many stores held sales advertising for us to have a “Happy Memorial Day.”  All well and good, but what about the real purpose of this special day?

Many of us don’t even know the difference between Memorial Day (honoring those who died defending our country) and Veterans Day (honoring all service men and women).  Only 5% of Americans attended local military events or parades.  I joined a sparsely attended gathering Memorial Day at the USS Kidd in Baton Rouge.  Is it enough to holler USA at sporting events, or to say “Thank you for your service” when you see a service man or women in uniform?  Should Americans be required to do more?

In 1967, I was 27 years old and newly married with my first child on the way. So I was draft exempt, with no legal requirement to join the service.  Maybe I did not have a legal obligation, but what about a moral responsibility to serve my country in the time of war?

I come from a long line of distinguished military officers who never hesitated to serve their country. They did not try to find ways to sidestep such service like so many others, including most of our politicians today as well as several recent presidents.

Relatives on both sides of my family served their country with honor and distinction.  My first father-in-law Dick Campbell who was an ace fighter pilot, rose to the rank of full colonel in the Army, and twice escaped from German prison camps. My Dad stayed stateside coordinating military transportation coast to coast for the Army.  Second father-in-law Teddy Solomon was sent by the Army to the South Pacific. My younger brother Jack volunteered and joined the National Guard for a six-year hitch.

My mother’s brother had quite a navel military career.  In the final months of World War II, Commander Jack Gentry was flying a reconnaissance mission over the Pacific when his flight cameras captured photos of the Japanese flotilla. He made the cover of Life Magazine as his pictures allowed a direct attack on the enemy fleet that sped up the ending of the war with Japan. He went on to command the battleship USS Enterprise until his retirement from the Navy in the 1960s.

With this strong family military background, I felt an obligation to continue the service to my country. I make no bones about the fact that I feel every American should either serve in the military or perform voluntary service in the city or state where they live. The American flag flies outside my home 365 days a year. I wear my military dog tags while I broadcast my syndicated radio program each week (NG25520050).

 This is not an effort to pat myself on my back. Like so many other young men and women who love their country, it was something I felt a strong obligation to do. So despite the fact that I was draft exempt, I signed up for service in the Army, then stayed for ten additional years in the Louisiana National Guard.

Our nation has been at war in Iraq and Afghanistan going on two decades.  Yet many Americans look on war as a spectator sport.  So few have any real skin in the game.

 I recently read a book by military scholar George Wilson called “The Mud Soldiers,” where he laments over the problems with an all-volunteer army.  He quotes Vietnam veteran Col. Steve Siegfried who states: “Armies don’t fight wars. Countries fight wars….. Yes a country fights a war. If it doesn’t, then we shouldn’t send an army.

War should be every citizen’s business.  We should all perform some volunteer service, military or otherwise.  This should be an easy decision if we love our country and care about our freedom.

 

Peace and Justice

Jim Brown

 

---

Jim Brown is a guest contributor to GCN news. His views and opinions, if expressed, are his own. His column appears each week in numerous newspapers throughout the nation and on websites worldwide. You can read all his past columns and see continuing updates at http://www.jimbrownusa.com. You can also hear Jim’s nationally syndicated radio show, Common Sense, each Sunday morning from 9:00 am till 11:00 am Central Time on the Genesis Communication Network.

Published in Opinion

“The problem with lying and deceiving is that their efficiency depends entirely upon a clear notion of the truth that the liar and deceiver wishes to hide.”

My son recently was looking for a company to work with concerning content that was needed for the videos that he would soon create. As he was doing so, I told him to find a package deal so it will be all-inclusive with music, images, fonts, etc.

A short while later, and in his excitement, he said that he found a company with which to work. I asked him how much the package was and if it was all-inclusive?

He said, "Dad, it is only $29.95 a month."

I said, "For everything?"

He then went on to say that you could even cancel at any given time.

I said, "If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is."

I then told him to call the company and ask if there are any hidden costs and, again, does everything come with that $29.95?

Well, he called and the first mistake that the company made was that they didn’t have a real person answering the phones. When you see when companies that use computers to do their selling for them you can rest assured that they are on their way out. If a business wants to slap a customer in the face, this is usually the first thing that they do.

When he received his call back, he found that the deal of the century was a year contract!  Otherwise, the cost would be $69.95 and you can cancel at any time.

Friends, this is not what their page stated, at least not in big print.

The sad fact of the matter is that this country no longer operates under the banner of “Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you: do ye even so to them" (Matthew 7:17).

I have found that a good number of the companies in America today are not serving the customers, but rather the almighty dollar and themselves (1 John 5:2).

I ask, “For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?” (Mark 8:36)

Let me share some of my experiences with you.

About 15 years ago, I was in a health foods GNC store where they sold a large selection of vitamins. When I grabbed some ginseng and was going to check out, a man that was at the cash register was ready to pay for his items when the lady behind the counter said to him that he owed 2 times more than what it said on the price tag. The man told her that the price was right on the sticker while pointing at the items.  She replied that those prices were for members only. Right next to the big price numbers were little tiny numbers to the right of it where it said that these prices apply to members only.  How deceptive. The man was rightfully angry and he walked out, leaving the products on the counter.  I followed in close pursuit.

No one likes to be sold with deceptive and deceitful tactics.

The Bible says, “making the ephah small, and the shekel great, and falsifying the balances by deceit?” (Amos 8:5)

Another time, we walked into a local Midwest favorite called “Old Country Buffet.”  It was one of those restaurants in which you could eat and when you were done, felt like you got yourself a good deal.  You were treated like a favored customer and left feeling satisfied. About 5 years ago, we went in as usual, and right when we were going to pay for our food, the lady behind the register asked if we wanted something to drink, which by the way was always a part of the price when paying for the buffet.

I responded, "What about if we want something to drink?  Of course, we want something to drink.  That is why we just entered into your eatery."

She said that would be a separate charge and I responded, "Well, it is not going to be long before your place of business will be shut down. You are gouging, and people are going to catch on and that will be it for your restaurant."

Sure enough, 6 months later, they were done.

How prevalent this has become today: charge your customers more by separating the meal from the drinks. This applies to "business as usual" today in America across the boards.

The airlines have now been found guilty of this every step of the way, literally. You now pay a surcharge for handling on the phone when you purchase your ticket, and when you check in, you then have to pay for your bags. Before boarding, you now have to pay for your seating, and when you get into the plane, you have to pay for your drink and your food. Treating customers like they are now doing them a favor.

Another experience that I had was another place called “Timberlodge” restaurant in Minnesota. They started out right by giving bigger portions at a fair price.  However, soon after their food chain became big enough, they started to charge more with smaller portions.  I told my wife that they needed to quit this or they are going to be a thing of the past. In this particular situation, I called the management and told them people are seeing what they were doing in their restaurants and it wasn't good.

"I know that you are really doing very well with your food chain, but it is coming across as you only care about the money here," I told him.

I added that they needed to either get back to customer service first or they would be gone within a year.

A week later, they put up a sign at one of their stores that read “We're not going anywhere.” I'm not kidding.

I told my wife that they were done. Two weeks later, the restaurant was shut down.

Deceptive business owners can only take advantage of people for so long before people catch on.  People are not stupid. If people do not feel like service is being done on their behalf and that they are getting their money's worth and feel like they are being taken granted for, again, you can mark my words, that’s it for your business.

I can also tell you that when I and my family detect this with a business, we are done with that company in whatever capacity it may be. It usually is a good sign that a company's efforts to get a little more out of you means that it is no more about the customer, but about what they are getting from their customers.

Furthermore, if their product and service is everything that they claim it to be, then do they have to lie or deceive (Hidden costs) in the process of selling it (Proverbs 19:9)?

--

 

Bradlee Dean is a guest contributor to GCN news. His views and opinions are his own and do not reflect the views and opinions of the Genesis Communication Network. Bradlee's radio program, The Sons of Libertybroadcasts live M - Sat here at GCN. This is a shortened version of an op-ed originally published by Sons of Liberty Media at www.sonsoflibertyradio.com. Reprinted with permission. 

 

Published in Opinion

Since when did murder become a “political” issue?

 

Liberals tell us that in their phony baloney bleating about “climate change” they believe in “science”.  Many of those same libs want to deny that a fetus—a baby—with a heartbeat which can now—through real science—be detected, is somehow NOT a person and can be killed at the whim of the mother.

 

They still call this crap “reproductive rights.”

 

Roe v. Wade happened while I was still in college.  Every young male in college back then could probably tell you exactly what Planned Parenthood charged for an abortion.

 

Most of us have grown up since then.

 

Roe was a classic example of a Supreme Court which read the opinion pages of the Washington Post.

 

One of the differences between 1973 and today is that we have much more science—real science as opposed to the junk science “consensus” the climate folks believe in—which tells us exactly the development of a baby.

 

Once a baby has a heart and it is beating, how can you not call it a person?

 

And if you kill it, how can that not be murder?

 

OK, like the President, I get the health of the mother.  Maybe, under some circumstances, rape or incest.

 

But.

 

Murder is against the law in all 50 states. Following the twisted logic of Roe does a woman have a right of “privacy” to kill her three year old?  Her husband?

 

And to politicize this is simply moronic.

 

If you are a Democrat and you follow their political orthodoxy, you are, in my humble opinion, condoning, on the campaign trail, murder.

 

One of the problems in this debate is that there is simply no debating most supporters of legalized abortion. Their position is that it is a “right” and that’s that.

 

So to break that down, killing a baby is a right?

 

We don’t treat puppies like that.

 

We have plenty of ways to stop conception.  If you are not responsible enough to prevent conception, then you should have to carry the baby to term.  If you don’t want the baby, then there are plenty of people who are willing to adopt and raise the baby.

 

If the pregnancy takes nine months out of your life, then be more responsible.

 

But you do NOT have a “right” to kill a baby for your convenience. What you do have a right to do is to be responsible in your sex life. Which is why, in some circumstances, I’m sympathetic to rape and incest exceptions, since there was no choice in those situations.

 

Somewhere along the way, abortion proponents began branding themselves as “pro choice.”

 

What’s the choice?

 

Between felony murder and a baby?

 

Here’s a choice:

 

Don’t want a baby?  Have your tubes tied.  Then, you won’t be in a position to murder a baby.

 

----

 

Fred Weinberg is a columnist and the CEO of USA Radio Network. His views and opinions, if expressed, are his own and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of GCN. Fred's weekly column can be read all over the internet. You can subscribe at www.pennypressnv.com. His column has been reprinted in full, with permission. 

 

 

Published in Opinion
%PM, %24 %794 %2019 %18:%May

The long road to forgiveness

Louisiana Congressman Steve Scalise says he is still struggling over whether to forgive the man who shot him two years ago.  “I’ve never, internally, formally forgiven the shooter from the baseball shooting,” he said. “It’s something I’ve struggled with as a Catholic.”

 It would be hard for many, including me, to forgive such a transgression. I’m still personally quite bitter over wrongs that happened to me some years back. So I understand the reluctance to forgive.

But what about turning the other cheek, and forgiving one’s enemies as we read in scripture throughout the New Testament?  Can we suffocate our bitterness and a feeling that some form of retribution is unnecessary?  Does continuing anger and hostility become tantamount to suffocating oneself emotionally? “The effects on one’s health from bottled up anger and resentment can range from anxiety and depression to blood pressure and increased risk of heart attacks,” says professor of medicine Amit Sood at the Mayo Clinic. “Forgiveness, by contrast, allows one to focus on more positive thoughts and relationships. It allows you to free up the real estate in your brain taken up by negative thinking.”

Forgive and forget, so goes much of the conventional wisdom. Move on with your life and just chalk it all up to tough lessons learned.  But isn’t it possible to continue with the positive aspects in one’s life, learn from past mistakes, and continue to grow, putting aside the bitter feeling that you suffered a terrible wrong?  Simply put, don’t maintain continuing anger, but don’t forget.

 In the fall of 2015, Pope Francis sent the body of St. Maria Goretti on a limited U.S. tour.  The youngest canonized Saint has a compelling story of suffering and forgiveness.  St. Maria was born into poverty and raised in Corinaldo, a beautiful medieval village in central Italy. Maria, whose father died when she was nine, raised her five siblings when she was only eleven while her mother worked in the fields.  One day, a twenty-year-old neighbor accosted her and, as she fought him, he brutally stabbed her repeatedly.

Maria died the next day, but her last words were, “I forgive Alessandro Serenelli (her attacker) and I want him with me in heaven forever.” Alessandro was so overcome that he lived the converted life of holiness in prison and eventually became a Franciscan lay brother.

One of the stops on St. Maria’s U.S. pilgrimage was Baton Rouge, where the coffin with her remains was to be displayed in veneration at Lady of Mercy Catholic Church for three days. Crowds of worshipers were expected to visit the Saint from a number of states. The pastor there, Father Cleo Milano, has been a good friend and I called him to see if there was a possibility of any quiet time with St. Maria.  He suggested I come by the church close to midnight after the doors were locked down for the night.

As the sanctuary was about to be bolted and the lights were dimmed, I made my way down the center aisle of the church and sat beside the remains of St. Maria. I touched her coffin and prayed for my family. And then, I thought to myself, this beautiful child, now a Saint, was brave and open-hearted enough to forgive the cruel demon that took her life. Although I too was wronged in ways that I felt were so unjust, should I not be empathetic and compassionate enough to forgive those who so aggrieved me?

I thought about it for good while.  I guess I even prayed over the decision. After much contemplation, I quietly got up from my pew and walked out of the church. So what was my decision? Could I forgive those transgressions?

 Often, your adversaries, by their impertinence, bring themselves down and destroy their own reputations. In my case, nemeses that caused me harm have themselves been damaged and suffered humiliation.  So what to do? Forgive them? In my case, I decided just to wait them out.  They ended up destroying themselves. What’s the old saying:  If you stand by the river long enough, your enemies will come floating by.

  I’d urge the Congressman to take his time and be sure that forgiveness is something he really wants to give.  If not, just bide his time.  After all, revenge is a dish best served cold. 

 

Peace and Justice

Jim Brown

 

---

Jim Brown is a guest contributor to GCN news. His views and opinions, if expressed, are his own. His column appears each week in numerous newspapers throughout the nation and on websites worldwide. You can read all his past columns and see continuing updates at http://www.jimbrownusa.com. You can also hear Jim’s nationally syndicated radio show, Common Sense, each Sunday morning from 9:00 am till 11:00 am Central Time on the Genesis Communication Network.

 

Published in Opinion

If you ever want to see what a bunch of worthless pukes who inhabit the lamestream media produce, put the “news” app on your iPad and read it every morning.

 

It is SUPPOSED to be a compendium of reporting.

 

It IS a compendium of anti-Trump horse crap.

 

Fox News and the Wall Street Journal are the token sort-of-conservative news providers.  The rest are mostly designed to bring to mind the words “enemies of the people.”

 

The reason I read this crap is that one should always read what the other side is saying.  Even if it makes your head want to explode.

 

Washington is full of people—many in the media—who no matter where they come from lose their affinity with the average American—you and me—as soon as they arrive.

 

Back in the days we owned KTRT in Tulsa, we had a regular caller named Jack Jackson.  He used to tell our on-air hosts that once someone got elected to the School Board, the County Commission or the City Council, they arrived at the Courthouse, City Hall or the School headquarters, saw the receptionist with the 10 button phone, took a breath of that pink gas and they were never the same.

 

He was right.

 

And it applies even more to wannabes like “journalists” and staffers.  Those folks are even more dangerous because we can get rid of bad elected public officials at an election.  People who spread fake news and the faceless staffers who work in government seem to have lifetime appointments.

 

The cure for this is not more government regulation.

 

I’m a big believer in the First Amendment.

 

The cure for this is eternal vigilance.  We need to vote with our channel changer and our subscription dollars.  We need to question everything.

 

As an example, the other day Fox News Channel did a poll that they said showed that Joe Biden had widened his “lead” over the Democrat 2020 field. And that he would beat the President in a general election.

 

Here is what they didn’t tell you on TV.  In fact, you have to do a pretty thorough web search of their site to get:

 

“Interviews were conducted May 11-14, 2019 among a random national sample of 1,008 registered voters (RV). Landline (231) and cellphone (777) telephone numbers were randomly selected for inclusion in the survey using a probability proportionate to size method, which means phone numbers for each state are proportional to the number of voters in each state.”

 

In other words, this is the same crap that said Hillary was going to win by seven points the day of the 2016 election.  And, worse, it’s from FOX!

 

Did they exit poll 10,000 people leaving a big event?  No.  They look you in the eye and talk about this stuff like it is true.  They don’t even tell you the methodology on screen—just what they think is the “margin of error”.

 

Now one thing you need to know.  Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.  Occasionally, these guys get lucky.  But the science behind what they do has been rendered useless by the new digital landscape which makes it very difficult to find a real sample.

 

So thinking Americans—you and I—do our research at coffee shops, neighborhood gatherings, on Southwest Airlines and places where real people gather.

 

My best guess, from those sources, is that we are pretty happy with the President.  He should win handily in 2020.

 

That’s NOT an excuse for complacency.

 

----

 

Fred Weinberg is a columnist and the CEO of USA Radio Network. His views and opinions, if expressed, are his own and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of GCN. Fred's weekly column can be read all over the internet. You can subscribe at www.pennypressnv.com. His column has been reprinted in full, with permission. 

Published in Opinion
%PM, %16 %892 %2019 %20:%May

Don't blame student debt on capitalism

American college graduates are suffering financially under the weight of $1.5 trillion of student loan debt. The bulk of that debt stems from worrisome federal student loan practices and ballooning state tuition costs. Approximately 75 percent of college students attend a state university or college with tuition rates set by legislatures or state institutions. Over 85 percent of student loans are generated under the federal student loan program. In the past three decades, tuition at state colleges has increased by 313 percent.

Oddly, some seem to blame “capitalism” for the student loan predicament. Ray Dalio, billionaire investor, cited massive student debt loads in a recent article that made the case for reforming capitalism. Presidential Candidate John Hickenlooper penned an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal boldly proclaiming he is running for president to save capitalism. The very first point in his argument is that (public) high school education doesn’t provide adequate training for the modern economy. Anecdotally, we have heard the federal student loan predicament conflated with capitalism.

The Hardship Is Real

The pain of student debt is real. Sadly, there are many adults burdened by thousands of dollars in loan debt. Khalilah Beecham-Watkins, a first-generation college student and young mom, is one of many who feels as if they’re a prisoner to student loan debt. Khalilah has been working to pay down her $80,000 debt while helping her husband tackle his own loan obligations. In an interview last year, she said, “I feel like I’m drowning.”

As is well-reported, many young adults feel like Khalilah. In the United States, the average student loan debt is more than $37,000. As unsettling as that figure is, some graduates face even higher debt loads. About five percent of degree earners have student loan debt totaling $100,000 or more. Stories like Khalilah’s need to be told so that students don’t flippantly take on crushing debt without recognizing the gravity of such a decision.

This significant debt load is exacerbated by the fact that many graduates are finding it difficult to find well-paying jobs, which has spiraled into incredibly high rates of loan delinquency: More than one out of every 10 loan recipients is unable to keep up with payments. The Brookings Institute estimates that nearly 40 percent of borrowers will default by 2023. These are sobering statistics, and it’s important that borrowers be fully aware of the risks and benefits associated with debt of all kinds, including student loans.

The Benefits of Investing in a College Degree

Despite the burden that comes with debt, there are undeniable long-term benefits to earning a degree. In our skills-based economy, it is no surprise that a person with a bachelor’s degree will earn significantly more than a person with only a high school diploma. It has been estimated that a bachelor’s degree increases a person’s average lifetime earnings by $2.8 million.

And the more degrees someone holds, the more their earning potential increases. Studies indicate that earning a graduate degree could triple a person’s expected income. But in the near-term, the financial stress of loan delinquency, deferred consumption, and lower net worth is real.

While the buck ultimately stops with each of us when it comes to our own financial decisions, the student loan quagmire is chiefly the product of federal policy. Federal laws prohibiting sound commercial lending practices and states setting tuition rates high enough to guarantee they’re able to absorb all the federal money they can are complicit in this widespread problem.

Bad Diagnoses Lead to Bad Prescriptions

Rather than addressing the underlying problems of federal financial aid and rising public college tuition, politicians like Senators Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders are offering politically expedient ideas. Sen. Warren proposes debt cancellation of up to $50,000 to more than 42 million people.

Sen. Warren’s plan would eliminate debt for 75% of borrowers with student loans, and federal funding to ensure students attend state college for free. But nothing in life is free. Warren’s sleight-of-hand doesn’t make existing debt or future tuition magically disappear. Rather those costs are passed on to taxpayers. And since college graduates earn roughly twice as much as high school graduates and can expect to be in higher tax brackets, guess who would be paying the taxes for Sen. Warren’s plan.

Why Federal Loans Are Not Like Commercial Loans

To understand the federal student loan mess, it is necessary to understand some details about the loans that are at the center of the issue. The federal government provides a few types of loans, but the largest share of student debt comes from subsidized and unsubsidized federal loans.

In the case of a subsidized loan, the Department of Education pays the interest on the loan while the student is in school and for six months thereafter. A student can qualify for this type of loan whether or not they are creditworthy or have the ability to repay the loan.

In typical commercial lending, a bank would not offer a loan to an individual who didn’t hold a reasonable promise of being able and willing to repay it. This harkens back to 2008 when the US housing market collapsed because of irresponsible lending practices and the belief that everyone—no matter their financial situation—should own a home. It should be no surprise, then, that some economists predict a similar implosion of the student loan market. In other contexts, this would be called predatory lending.

The State’s Role in Tuition Inflation

The second contributor to these financial aid troubles is ballooning state college tuition rates. State legislatures and state institutions set public college rates, so these state officials should be held accountable to provide lower-cost alternatives. One lower-cost alternative to traditional on-campus programs would be to offer a basic skills-based college curriculum online at-cost, i.e., based on the marginal cost of providing downloadable lecture videos and similar programming.

While the total cost to a student of an online degree currently tends to be less than a traditional degree, the tuition is often the same. By offering video of select classes, schools could unlock the value of their existing educational resources and expand access to more students. However, state schools are largely immune from market discipline, which encourages cost-cutting and leveraging economies of scale. Instead of reducing operating costs and tuition prices, state schools soak up the flow of federal loan dollars.

On the finance side, state universities could offer their own alternative to federal student loans. Take, for instance, the market-oriented model of Purdue University and offer income sharing agreements (ISAs). Income sharing agreements allow consumers to pay off a debt by sharing a portion of the student’s income with the lender for a set number of years. Instead of a loan, ISAs allow investors to take “equity” in a student’s future earnings for a period of time.

The problem with the financial aid predicament is that market discipline has been eliminated from state college education and federal financial aid. Public colleges aren’t going to be privatized and run like for-profit businesses any time soon. However, by applying market-based innovations and lessons from the private sector to state colleges, it may be possible to expand access to state college, offer alternative financing arrangements (like income sharing agreements), and reduce the cost of college through technology and economies of scale.

 

Doug McCullough is Director of Lone Star Policy Institute. Brooke Medina is communications director at Civitas Institute in NC. Their opinions are their own. This article originally appeared on fee.org. Reptrinted in full, with permission. 

 

 

 

 

Published in Opinion
Page 1 of 16