Excerpts from “2025 Mandate for Leadership” Part 3

Until it is privatized, TSA should be treated asa national security provider, and its workforce should be deunionized immediately. TSA could privatize the screening function by expanding the current Screening Partnership Program (SPP) to all airports. TSA would turn screening operations over to airports that would choose security contractors that meet TSA regulations and would oversee and test airports for compliance. Alternatively, it could adopt a Canadian-style system, turning over screening operations to a new government corporation that contracts screening service to private contractors.

……….

The ODNI [Office of the Director of National Intelligence] and CIA should fire or refer for prosecution any employee who is suspected of leaking information, and penalties should include the removal of pension benefits for those who are found guilty.

…………

An incoming conservative President can right the ship and return the IC [Intelligence Community] governance model to first principles by using a limited but empowered leadership and coordination design to serve the nation’s intelligence and national security needs while reclaiming the public trust with fiscal responsibility, political neutrality, personnel accountability, technological prowess, and necessary human capital needed to counter the immense nation-state and asymmetrical threats facing our country.

…………

For the sake of American children, Congress should shutter it and return control of education to the states.

………..

[T]he Secretary of Education should insist that the department serve parents and American ideals, not advocates whose message is that children can choose their own sex, that America is “systemically racist,” that math itself is racist, and that Martin Luther King, Jr.’s ideal of a colorblind society should be rejected in favor of reinstating a color-conscious society.

Source: "Project 2025: Mandate for Leadership" [pdf]

Trump signs executive order cutting off all taxpayer-funded benefits for illegal immigrants

From NY Post.com (Feb. 20):

President Trump signed an executive order Wednesday night barring illegal immigrants from receiving federally funded benefits.

“My Administration will uphold the rule of law, defend against the waste of hard-earned taxpayer resources, and protect benefits for American citizens in need, including individuals with disabilities and veterans,” read the text of Trump’s order.

The president noted that the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA) ostensibly prohibits illegal immigrants from obtaining most taxpayer-funded benefits, but he argued that in the decades since its passage, “numerous administrations have acted to undermine the principles and limitations directed by the Congress.”

Trump claimed that the Biden administration “repeatedly undercut the goals of that law, resulting in the improper expenditure of significant taxpayer resources.”

As a result, “taxpayer resources” have acted as a “magnet” for migrants, “fueling illegal immigration to the United States,” according to the president.

Trump’s order directs the head of every federal agency to “identify all federally funded programs administered by the agency that currently permit illegal aliens to obtain any cash or non-cash public benefit” and “take all appropriate actions to align such programs” with PRWORA and other federal laws.

The commander-in-chief further ordered government officials to “ensure, consistent with applicable law, that Federal payments to States and localities do not, by design or effect, facilitate the subsidization or promotion of illegal immigration, or abet so-called ‘sanctuary’ policies that seek to shield illegal aliens from deportation.”

Trump’s executive order also asked federal agencies to “enhance eligibility verification systems, to the maximum extent possible” in an effort to exclude illegal immigrants from taxpayer-funded benefits.

The president tasked the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), led by billionaire Elon Musk, with identifying “all other sources of Federal funding for illegal aliens” and recommending “additional agency actions to align Federal spending with the purposes of this order.”

The order demands that agencies refer any improper benefits going to illegal immigrants to the  Department of Justice and the Department of Homeland Security for “appropriate action.”

The move is part of the administration’s crackdown on illegal immigration, one of Trump’s key campaign promises.

The president has lauded Musk and DOGE for helping implement several of his executive orders that he argued would’ve been ignored by federal workers without the bureaucracy-cutting team in place. [source]

Good!  Americans don't need to pay benefits for illegals. Another win for the country.

More executive orders:

• Trump Order Adds Bite to DOGE's Cost-Cutting Efforts
• Trump signs order making English official language of America
• Trump Signs Order to Establish Strategic Bitcoin Reserve
• Trump signs executive order to cut size of 7 agencies, including one that oversees Voice of America
• Trump Orders Plan to Dismantle Ed Dept., While Keeping Some Core Functions
• Trump Declassifies FBI's Russia Investigation
• Sweeping Trump Order Overhauls US Elections, Including Citizenship Requirement
• Trump signs order outlining plans to make DC 'safe and beautiful'
• White House office moves to limit union rights for federal employees
• Trump signs executive order to protect Americans from 'exploitive ticket scalping' in entertainment industry
• Trump signs executive order targeting water pressure in showers
• Trump Signs Orders Targeting Two Ex-officials Who Criticized Him
  

How radical is Kamala Harris? Here are 13 things she personally endorsed

From The Blaze.com (June 24):

Vice President Kamala Harris has spent the last three and a half years in Joe Biden’s shadow spinning word salads and pretending to know what she’s talking about. In many ways, she’s been an afterthought – someone to roll our eyes at and poke fun at.

But now that she’s in the running for the Democratic presidential nomination, we’re obligated to take her more seriously. What exactly are Kamala Harris’ policies?

Glenn Beck delves into the VP’s political history to give you an accurate picture of what a presidency under Kamala would look like.

Here are 13 things about Kamala Harris that everyone should know.

1. “She was one of only 14 people that endorsed the Green New Deal,” says Glenn. Among those who signed it were Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, placing Kamala with “the radical of the radical.”

2. Harris “co-sponsored single-payer health care” (i.e. universal health care).

3. She advocated for “a complete transition away from fossil fuels in ten years” – which would have led to the “collapse of our economy,” says Glenn.

4. She supported a “universal government jobs guarantee.”

5. “She was also for government programs promising universal access to healthy foods.”

6. “She wanted to upgrade every single home and business building in the country for energy efficiency.”

7-13. Harris also supported “UBI – Universal Basic Income,” “new national living wage standards,” “more power for labor unions,” “free college,” “a whole new electric grid,” “the end of gasoline cars by 2030,” “and the transformation of U.S. agriculture, including the end of much of the cattle industry.”

“She’s a democratic socialist,” warns Glenn. “And incompetent.” [source]

So, Commie Harris picked drunk driver Minn. Governor Tim Walz for VP. Makes sense. She's a neo-Marxist and he's a big government socialist. So, much for the Cackler faking to the center as if she would anyway, but the lame-stream-press is going to portray her as a moderate anyway. Plus, Walz is not Jewish. So, that pleases her anti-Semitic base. It's a perfect political ticket made in hell which America is going to be in if those two get elected.

More articles on border czarina Harris:

• Dan Bongino: 9 Reasons to Vote for Kamala Harris
• Kamala Harris Had Hard-Left Voting Record
• Sen. Kamala Harris Heritage Action voting score
• Kamala Harris The New American lifetime freedom score
• Kamala Harris: A Berkeley radical
• Don’t Believe The Media's Lies: 5 Reasons Why Kamala Harris Is A RADICAL Leftist
• The Ministry Of Truth Is Proud To Present: ‘Kamala Harris’ For President
• The Real Kamala Harris
• The Myriad Projections of the 2024 Campaign
  
• The Stakes
• The Truth About Candidate Harris
• California Values
  
• Part 1: Everything you need to know about Kamala Harris.
• How Kamala Climbed the Peaks of DEI
• By the Way, Kamala Harris Is a Dangerous Authoritarian
• Kamala the extremist
• Rock solid proof that Harris/Walz is the pro crime ticket…
• Kamala Harris supported group that bailed violent rioters out of jail in 2020, but media now obscuring that fact
• Before She Was Border Czar, Kamala Misappropriated Millions in Federal Grants Meant To Combat Border Crimes
• The Harris-Walz Immigration Fantasy
  
• Kamalanomics
• ‘Kamalanomics’ is just ‘Bidenomics’ but dumber
  
• VICTOR DAVIS HANSON: Harris Is Recycling The 2020 Democrat Campaign
• Unearthed clip of Kamala Harris scolds people for saying “Merry Christmas” because illegals might not get to celebrate: “HOW DARE WE SPEAK MERRY CHRISTMAS?” [video]
• Kamala Bravely Fields Hard-Hitting Questions From Reporters About Where She Got That Adorable Blouse
• White House Assures Journalists They Only Have To Pretend Kamala Is Likable For A Couple More Months
• Meet the Al-Qaeda Lawyers Advising Team Harris
  
• Harris campaign's Google ads rewrite news headlines
  
• Harris campaign ID requirement at Arizona rally draws calls of hypocrisy
  
• Kamala Harris Hires Disgraced Russia Hoaxer Marc Elias for Election Legal Team
  
• Harris Shifts on Marijuana, Death Penalty, Fracking
  
• Kamala Proposes $6K Aborted Baby Tax Credit
  
• Kamala Agrees To Two-Hour X Spaces Conversation With Elmo
  

WHAT’S BEHIND THE DEMOCRATS’ IRS EXPANSION?

From John Hinderaker on Power Line Blog.com (Aug. 7, 2022):

Nearly half of the Democrats’ Inflation Promotion Act is devoted to increasing the budget of the IRS. Think about that: when has more IRS ever been popular? Never. So what are the Democrats up to?

Monica Showalter writes:

The other half [of the Inflation Promotion Act], some $300 billion, will be dedicated to IRS enforcement, surveillance upgrades, and audits against small businesses, who have now been re-labeled “the rich.”

$300 billion to the IRS? Seriously?

Sinema got her demand to not close the carried interest tax loophole which is what her hedge fund donors wanted. Democrats replaced that with a provision to tax businesses even more.

This is ironic. Democrats say the IRS will go after “the rich,” but the one provision in the Inflation Promotion Act that actually would have been bad for the rich–repeal of the carried interest treatment of income earned by hedge fund managers–is now out of the bill. A friend of mine who made a lot of money as a hedge fund manager describes the carried interest concept as “completely unjustifiable.” Yet Chuck Schumer has protected it against reform for many years, on behalf of Democratic Party donors.

Now, finally, the Democrats ostensibly were ready to turn on their hedge fund backers–Wall Street is not entirely a Democratic enclave, but almost–and what happens? Kristen Sinema rides in to save the day not only for her own hedge fund supporters, but for Schumer’s as well. Coincidence?

That was a digression. More on the IRS:

The [Washington] Post reports the IRS expects a much lower return on all those “rich” people they claim they are going to audit with those 87,000 new agents, which is an eightfold increase in their budget….

Wait! 87,000 new IRS agents? Can this possibly be right? And an eightfold increase in the IRS enforcement budget? What do you suppose the IRS will do with that massive influx of money and manpower?

Showalter and others think the Democrats’ IRS will attack small businesses in a major way. That probably is true. But, as the president of a conservative policy organization, I have another concern. We all remember how Barack Obama’s IRS went after Tea Party groups and other conservative organizations before and after the 2010 midterm wipeout. Mostly, they slow-walked the 501(c)(3) approval process. But imagine an IRS hostile to conservative principles, and emboldened by an eight-fold budget increase and 87,000 new agents. What would the IRS do in the liberals’ wildest dreams?

I think the liberals who run the IRS would sic their agents on every conservative nonprofit in the country. They would audit such organizations, looking for evidence that they somehow had violated the extremely vague regulations governing political activity. Such audits would require even squeaky-clean organizations like my own to hire lawyers to defend them. Government lawyers work for free–that is, courtesy of the taxpayers–while private lawyers have to be paid. Thus, a concerted attack by the IRS could largely disable conservative nonprofits, whose revenue would be dissipated by paying for lawyers, and whose energies would be dissipated in dealing with IRS attacks.

Call me paranoid, but I think this lies behind the Democrats’ sudden desire to drastically upsize the IRS. [source]

The IRS will go after middle class people and small businesses because they can’t afford high-price tax lawyers.

Other articles on the subject at hand:

• Congress Is Supersizing the IRS. Here’s Why That’s Bad News for Everyday Americans
• 87,000 New IRS Agents Will Join Union That Gives 100% Of PAC Funds To Democrats

Texas Flight Attendant Awarded Huge Amount in Abortion Dispute

From News Max.com (July 18):

A former Southwest Airlines flight attendant who was fired after conflicting with her union president over abortion won a $5.1 million jury verdict against the airline and the union, the The Associated Press reported.

Charlene Carter could collect $4.15 million from Southwest and $950,000 from Local 556 of the Transport Workers Union, mostly in punitive damages, the AP reported. The verdict came in federal district court in Dallas last week.

The Southwest flight attendant alleged she was fired in March, 2017, after complaining to the union president about flight attendants from Southwest going to a women's march in Washington, D.C. The march in the capital city was called shortly after the election of former President Donald Trump to protest his positions on abortion and other issues.

Carter, who is anti-abortion, disapproved that union dues were paying for Union President Audrey Stone and other union officials to attend the protest, and that union members who wanted to attend the march had been granted adjustments to their work schedules, Fortune reported.

She posted a series of Facebook messages to Stone, apparently some containing videos of aborted fetuses. "This is what you supported during your paid leave with others at the Women's March in D.C.," she wrote in one Facebook message, according to the Dallas Morning News. "You truly are despicable in so many ways."

Stone reportedly felt harassed by the flight attendant's posts and told Southwest. Carter was dismissed a week later, the AP reported. She filed suit soon afterward.

According to court documents, the airline said it fired Carter because posts on her Facebook page, where she could be identified as a Southwest employee, were "highly offensive" and that her private messages to Stone were harassing. The airline said she violated company policies on bullying and use of social media, AP reported.

But the jury found Southwest unlawfully discriminated against Carter because of her sincerely held religious beliefs, ruling that her termination was a violation of her right to advocate against her union.

Carter had actually exited the union in 2013, as she did not agree with the social causes it supported. However, she was still required by the airline to pay union dues as part of her employment.

Carter, who had worked 20 years for Southwest, said the union did not fairly represent her and retaliated against her for expressing her views. Her lead attorney is from the National Right To Work Committee, which campaigns against compulsory union membership.

Southwest said Friday that it "has a demonstrated history of supporting our employees' rights to express their opinions when done in a respectful manner." It plans to appeal. A lawyer for the union said jurors might have misunderstood the judge's instructions, and it also plans to appeal the verdict, AP reported. [source]

Good for her!

Flight attendant fired for pro-life activism receives $5.1M in damages

From Christian Post.com (July 15):

A flight attendant who alleges she was fired from her position due to her vocal religious opposition to abortion and union dues being used to support abortion-related causes has won a $5.1 million federal lawsuit against her former employer and union.

The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation announced in a statement Thursday that Charlene Carter, a pro-life Christian who formerly worked as a flight attendant for Southwest Airlines, prevailed in her religious discrimination lawsuit with the airline and the Transportation Workers Union of America.

Carter will receive $5.1 million in combined compensatory and punitive damages against TWU and Southwest as a jury deemed that both organizations played a role in an unlawful termination.

The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, which describes itself as "a nonprofit, charitable organization" working to "eliminate coercive union power and compulsory unionism," provided Carter with free legal representation.

"This long overdue verdict vindicates Ms. Carter's fundamental right to dissent from the causes and ideas that TWU union officials – who claim to 'represent' Southwest flight attendants – support while forcing workers to bankroll their activities," said National Right to Work Foundation President Mark Mix.

"No American worker should have to fear termination, intimidation, or any other reprisal merely for speaking out against having their own money spent, purportedly in their name, to promote an agenda they find abhorrent."

The verdict from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas comes nearly five years after Carter filed a lawsuit against the TWU of America and Southwest Airlines following her termination after more than 20 years of service.

While Carter joined the Transport Union Workers of America's Local 556 union in September 1996, she resigned her membership in September 2013 upon discovering that her union dues were funding causes that contradicted her religious beliefs as a pro-life Christian.

However, Carter was still forced to pay union dues even though she did not belong to the union because the airline and railway employees are subject to the federal Railway Labor Act requirements.

The Railway Labor Act supersedes state-level Right to Work laws that prevent employees from having to pay union fees as a condition of employment and permits the termination of employees for refusal to pay union dues or fees.

At the same time, the Railway Labor Act allows employees to refrain from joining a union, criticize union leadership and lobby for a change in the union leadership.

In the time between her 2013 withdrawal from the union and her termination, Carter repeatedly shared her concerns about Local 556's political stances with union leadership.

In January 2017, Carter learned that union dues were probably used to attend the "Women's March on Washington DC," which advocated for legal abortion and funding for America's largest abortion provider Planned Parenthood. Abortion and the funding of the practice stand in direct contradiction to Carter's religious beliefs.

Carter made clear her opposition to using union dues to support the Women's March in several Facebook groups for Southwest flight attendants and in a message to Local 556 President Audrey Stone.

When Carter sent another email to Stone expressing support for a National Right to Work bill, Carter was ordered to attend a meeting with Southwest leadership to discuss "Facebook postings they had seen."

In those posts, Carter expressed her pro-life beliefs. The lawsuit claims that superiors at Southwest characterized her social media postings as a form of harassment and fired her for violating the company's "Workplace Bullying and Hazing Policy" and its "Social Media Policy" by posting content deemed "highly offensive in nature."

In May, a federal judge rejected the attempt from Southwest and the Transportation Union Workers of America to dismiss the lawsuit. The organizations argued that Carter did not have a "private right of action" to enforce her rights under the Railway Labor Act and characterized her case as a "minor" dispute that the district court did not have jurisdiction over.

"Even with this basic right under the Railway Labor Act successfully defended, however, TWU union officials still enjoy the enormous government-granted privilege of being able to force airline workers to financially subsidize their activities as a condition of employment," Mix added. "While we're proud to stand with Ms. Carter and are pleased by the verdict, there ultimately should be no place in American labor law for compelling workers to fund a private organization that violates their core beliefs." [source]

Good for her!

Lucrative tax break for organized labor would cost taxpayers nearly $1.8 billion

From Washington Times.com (Nov. 4, 2021):

President Biden’s push to reward one of his biggest allies, organized labor, with a lucrative tax break will cost taxpayers nearly $1.8 billion over the next decade, according to a new analysis.

The Joint Committee on Taxation released an in-depth analysis of the tax proposals included within Mr. Biden’s 10-year, multi-trillion-dollar social welfare bill on Thursday. It found that allowing union members to write off some of their dues payments on their tax filings would wind up depriving the federal coffers of approximately $1.8 billion over the next decade, or $180 million a year.

As currently written, the provision would allow members of a labor organization to deduct $250 in union dues off their annual tax returns.

The Coalition for a Democratic Workplace, a pro-business group that represents more than 600 major private sector organizations, says the tax break amounts to an improper political payoff.

“Requiring taxpayers to subsidize union dues as part of the Democratic budget plan favors unions and their political allies over workers and small businesses,” said Kristen Swearingen, the chair of the coalition. “Congress should focus on policies that support all working Americans, including those that increase individual deductions related to job training, rather than pushing tax breaks for unions that support and fund Democratic politicians and causes.”

Democrats contend that the incentive is meant to reward workers, rather than union bosses.

The deduction comes at a time that union membership is on the decline nationally. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, union enrollment dropped by more than half between 1983 and 2019, falling from 20.1% to 10.3%.

Mr. Biden, who allied himself strongly with organized labor while running for the White House last year, has promised to arrest the overall union decline. Since taking office, the president has appointed several former union leaders to high-ranking administration posts. The White House has also championed a staunch union agenda, including pushing for the  “Protecting the Right to Organize (PRO) Act” now in Congress. [read more]

Another Dem payoff.

More labor union articles:

• Labor unions see rewards in Biden executive order on construction projects
• Democrats’ Big Labor Agenda
• Teachers unions worked with CDC to keep schools closed for COVID, GOP report says

BOOM! Sheet Metal, Air, Rail and Transportation Union (SMART) with 203,000 Members Announces Stand Against Forced Vaccines

From The Gateway Pundit.com (Oct. 14, 2021):

SMART, the International Association of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail and Transportation Workers, is one of North America’s most dynamic and diverse unions with 203,000 members.  The union consists of sheet metal workers, service technicians, bus operators, engineers, conductors, sign workers, welders, production employees and more.  SMART is the largest railroad operating union in North America, with more than 500 Transportation locals.

On Thursday SMART Union General Chairperson Roy Davis sent a letter to advise Union Pacific Company that the SMART Union strongly disagrees with the company’s “unilateral” requirement for COVID vaccinations.

SMART demanded an immediate response and demands that Carrier negotiates in good faith.

This is a huge move by America’s transportation employees union. [read more]

Good for them!

Other articles about vaccinations:

• New York Passes Bill To Throw People In FEMA Camps And Force Vaccinations- It’s No Longer A “Conspiracy” [VIDEO]
• Why Do They Want to Vaccinate Children?
• Vaccines: We are living in the Twilight Zone
• How to Win the Vaccine Wars
• WAYNE ROOT: What I Just Told New York Times About the Complete Failure & Disaster of the Covid Vaccine
• An Edgar Allan Poe horror story resonates in a time of COVID and vaccines
• Tech Giant To Fire All Unvaccinated Employees
• FDA Quickly Deletes Moderna Vaccine Data Showing Rate of Heart Inflammation Post-Vaccination is 2.6x HIGHER Than Previously Reported (VIDEO)
• Worst Fears Realized: Pfizer mRNA Integrates Into Your DNA
• DNA Transcribed From Pfizer mRNA Vaccine Contains MUTANT gp130 Tumor Gene
• Pfizer Giving FDA Data For Fourth Shot, Plans All-Variant Vaccine: CEO

Joe Biden’s Electric Vehicle Summit Excludes Tesla

From Daily Wire.com (Aug. 8):

President Joe Biden did not invite Tesla CEO Elon Musk to a summit about electric vehicles, and it may have been because the firm does not have unionized workers.

Executives from General Motors, Ford, and other firms joined Biden at the White House on Thursday as he unveiled a reversal of “the previous administration’s short-sighted rollback of vehicle emissions and efficiency standards.” News outlets — and Musk himself — were apparently surprised that Tesla, the world’s largest electric vehicle manufacturer, was not asked to be involved.

“Yeah, seems odd that Tesla wasn’t invited,” Musk commented via Twitter early Thursday morning.

During her Thursday press briefing, White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki was asked why Tesla was apparently snubbed. She heavily implied that Tesla’s lack of unionization was the primary factor behind the administration’s decision.

“Well, we, of course, welcome the efforts of all automakers who recognize the potential of an electric vehicle future and support efforts that will help reach the president’s goal. And certainly, Tesla is one of those companies,” said Psaki as recorded by Fox News. “Today, it’s the three largest employers of the United Auto Workers, and the UAW president who will stand with President Biden as he announces his ambitious new target, but I would not expect this is the last time we talk about clean cars, the move toward electric vehicles, and we look forward to having a range of partners in that effort.” [read more]

‘Time To Stop This Farce’: Rand Paul To Introduce Bill Lifting Federal Airplane Mask Mandate

From Daily Wire.com (July 8):

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) is planning to introduce legislation to revoke a federal mask mandate for travelers on airplanes.

The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has continued to mandate that all travelers wear masks on airplanes with limited exceptions as many state governments have rolled back COVID-19 restrictions. The current TSA mandate is in place until at least September 13.

“When the Senate returns to session, I will be introducing an immediate repeal of the mask mandate on planes. Enough! Time to stop this farce and let people travel in peace!” Paul tweeted on Thursday.

Paul has needled public health experts and the Biden administration for months over health restrictions put in place over COVID-19. Paul has argued against requiring masks for anyone who is vaccinated or who has already contracted and recovered from COVID-19.

In March, Paul grilled National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Dr. Anthony Fauci over his use of masks despite being vaccinated. At the time, Fauci had been acting in accordance with guidance from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The CDC later retracted their guidance and said that vaccinated people do not need to wear face masks. [read more]

Good for him! Masks (other than possibly the N95 mask) don’t stop viruses just like a chain-link fence won’t stop a gnat. Viruses are microscopic. If you watch the ads for masks they don’t even say they stop viruses. Just that they are comfortable like a hat or some piece of clothing.

Other mask articles:

• When It Comes To Masks, Physics Will Always Trump Politics
• Unmasking Masks
• Your mask may be giving you COVID eyes
• Get ready for your worst common cold ever, thanks to lockdowns and months of masking
• The Top Reason I Hate Masks Is They Force Me To Live By Lies
• Emails Show Biden’s CDC Caved To Teachers Union Pressure To Mask Students

A Plan to Get Divisive & Radical Theories Out of Our Schools

From Real Clear Politics.com (June 18):

As a candidate, Joe Biden’s number one promise was to “unite” America. Yet in his first months as president, his number one priority has been to divide our country by race and gender at every turn.

There is no clearer example than the Biden administration’s new effort aimed at indoctrinating America’s schoolchildren with some of the most toxic and anti-American theories ever conceived. It is vital for Americans to understand what this initiative would do, what drives it and, most importantly, how we can stop it.

For decades, the America-blaming left has been relentlessly pushing a vision of America that casts our history, culture, traditions, and founding documents in the most negative possible light. Yet in recent years, this deeply unnatural effort has progressed from telling children that their history is evil to telling Americans that they are evil.

In classrooms across the nation, students are being subjected to a new curriculum designed to brainwash them with the ridiculous left-wing dogma known as “critical race theory.” The key fact about this twisted doctrine is that it is completely antithetical to everything that normal Americans of any color would wish to teach their children.

Instead of helping young people discover that America is the greatest, most tolerant, and most generous nation in history, it teaches them that America is systemically evil and that the hearts of our people are full of hatred and malice. Far from advancing the beautiful dream of the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. -- that our children should “not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character” -- the left’s vile new theory preaches that judging people by the color of their skin is actually a good idea.

……………..

Here are the reforms that every concerned parent in America should be demanding.

First, every state legislature should pass a ban on taxpayer dollars going to any school district or workplace that teaches critical race theory, which inherently violates existing anti-discrimination laws. Inspired by my executive order last year, Florida, Texas, North Carolina, Oklahoma and other states have already taken steps to pass such laws. It needs to happen everywhere — and Congress should seek to institute a federal ban through legislation as well.

Second, each state should create its own 1776 Commission to examine the public school curriculum and ensure that students are receiving a patriotic, pro-American education — not being taught that the United States is an evil nation.

Third, parents have a right to know exactly what is being taught to their children. Last year, many parents had the chance to routinely listen in on classes for the first time because of remote learning. As students return to the classroom, states need to pass laws requiring that all lesson plans have to be made available to parents — every handout, article, and reading should be posted on an online portal that allows parents to see what their kids are being taught. Furthermore, in many places, there are rules preventing students from recording what teachers say in class. States and school boards should establish a “Right to Record.” [read more]

Other parts of the plan:

• [P]arents need to organize locally — in every school district in America — to eliminate “Action Civics” and other versions of the effort to contort traditional civics education into a vehicle for political indoctrination.
• [A]ny parent who objects to the material being taught to their child in public school should get an automatic voucher, empowering them to pick another school of their choice.
• [S]tates need to take back control of their schools of education and credentialing bodies to ensure they are not churning out radicalized teachers.
• [S]tates need to break the tenure monopoly in public K-12 schools. Tenure was originally supposed to protect competent teachers from being subjected to undue political influence; it has turned into a mechanism to protect incompetent teachers who themselves wield undue political influence over our children.

Good ideas.

Other school articles:

• Parent union forming to combat power of public school teachers unions
• How ‘Systemic Liberalism’ Failed Public Education in America

Amazon's Rejection of Unions In Alabama Is a Big Loss for Big Labor

From Real Clear Markets.com (April 20):

Big labor suffered a significant loss in its attempt to unionize employees at Amazon’s warehouse facility in Bessemer, Alabama. Of the workers eligible to vote, an embarrassingly small 16% voted to join the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union. It was the most recent in a series of high-profile losses for labor including failed attempts to unionize factories for Volkswagen, Nissan Motors, and Boeing. In each case, union leaders bet that they could convince workers it was in their best interests to be enrolled in a union that would stand up to management over wages and working conditions. In each case, they lost.

With private-sector union membership down from 24.2% in 1973 to 6.3% today, union leaders realize they are in an uphill battle. But the problems they face are nearly impossible to address absent a reassessment of their political affiliations – unless, that is, they can get the government to change the rules so that joining a union is less of a choice and more of a mandate.

One such problem is union leadership’s overwhelming support for Democrats and progressive political causes, which clashes with more varied political affiliations among rank-and-file union members.

As reported on the pro-union website Strikewave last October, polling data commissioned by the progressive think tank Data for Progress found that active union members were more strongly Republican (31%) than strongly Democrat (29%), though a slight majority lean Democrat. Yet, according to OpenSecrets.org, labor organizations contributed a whopping $27.5 million to President Biden’s campaign and groups that supported him, while President Trump took in a mere $360,000. [read more]

The Left likes big labor unless it hurts their business. Good for thee not for me.

Another article on the subject:

Bezos-Owned Amazon Opposes Mail-In Voting For Union Election

Biden’s Real Goal: Forced, Universal Unionization

From Dick Morris.com (April 6):

Everything President Trump warned us about and his supporters feared is coming to pass. Biden’s infrastructure bill was bad enough, spending $2.5 trillion on a wish list of Democratic and environmental projects.

He said it is becoming clear that Biden used the fear of Covid to deform our electoral system and is now using the terror of climate change to fundamentally alter the construction industry.

But worse, as a result of Democratic pressure from the left, he is now seeking to pass his PRO bill through the budget reconciliation process with just 51 votes as an add on to his infrastructure proposal.

This maneuver reveals the real purpose behind the infrastructure package: To force universal national union membership. With private sector unionization dropping dramatically over the last few decades (now down to 6% of the private sector workforce), Biden is determined to use the carrot of federal money to force contractors and other employers to unionize in order to receive federal funds.

Biden has explicitly stated that the Davis-Bacon Act requiring union wages and companies will govern the expenditure of federal construction money under the infrastructure bill. This includes just short of $2 trillion on building roads, bridges, airports rewiring and re-insulating private buildings and schools, renovating the electric power grid, replacing old water system pipes, building charging stations for electric cars and all manner of other construction. With that amount of money, no company can resist unionization if that is what is required to get in on the gravy train.

Essentially the infrastructure package shifts the task of constructing America’s infrastructure from the private sector and states to the federal government. The United States had $40 trillion in fixed assets in 2019. 65% of it was owned by the private sector 30% by the states and only 5% by the federal government. Biden’s infrastructure package will tilt the ownership overwhelmingly toward Washington.

The PRO Act itself is one of the most dangerous and disastrous pieces of legislation ever to be introduced in Congress. God help us if it passes. With Biden trying to ram it through with 51 votes, the prospect of it becoming law is terrifying.

It would make it illegal for any company to hire a consultant, contractor, or freelancer if that person’s work was related to the company’s main business. So a video firm could not hire a videographer as a consultant or a freelancer to shoot videos. They could hire him to sweep the floors and clean the toilet but not to film videos. [read more]

Yea, this bill would really sink the economy, not to mention against the Constitution (freedom of association).

More articles on the subject:

• 6 Ways a Union-Backed Bill Will Upend the Job Market
• Democrat-sponsored PRO Act would invalidate right-to-work laws in 27 states

The Flat-Earthers of Politics

From American Thinker.com:

In an 1877 essay entitled "The Ethics of Belief," British philosopher and mathematician William Kingdon Clifford argued that society has a "moral obligation" to believe only in what is supported by sufficient evidence. Clifford wrote, "it is wrong always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence."

In like manner then, dismissing as untrue what sufficient evidence proves to be true should also be avoided.  The problem is that in politics, progressives are like flat-earthers and embody the antithesis of the truth-seeking Clifford addressed in his centuries-old essay.

For the likes of Pelosi, Biden, Obama and Co., belief and disbelief depend solely on political expedience, not verifiable proof.  For example, the progressive left touts science while insisting that babies in the womb are incapable of feeling pain, that plastic drinking straws destroy the planet, that illegal felons contribute to society, and that gender is no longer limited to just XY and XX.  Progressives also ignore sound data in order to promote falsehoods like law enforcement indiscriminately murders Black men, the Second Amendment kills people, and Caucasian males are racist, illiterate hayseeds.

In leftist circles, evidence holds no authority over strong belief. Thus, progressives adhere to a mythical gospel whose inherency is altered based on partisan necessity. The left display what psychologists define as "cognitive immunization." Hence, it's not a COVID vaccine that needs to be fast-tracked, but a societal antidote to a virus that half the country has adopted via media inoculation, political indoctrination, and public education. [read more]

Another article on the subject matter:

• 'Trust the science,' until the science doesn't support the nanny state
• Teachers Unions Fail Science
• Science in an Age of Fear
• We Have Entered a Looking-Glass World

Dan Crenshaw highlights 10 radical bills the Democrat-led House passed, offers a look at what could happen if Joe Biden wins

From The Blaze.com (Sept. 30):

Republican Rep. Dan Crenshaw (Texas) warned in a video that Democrats would dismantle the country in a video highlighting radical legislation advanced by the Democratic majority in the House over the past two years.

"In two minutes, I'm going to tell you about all the radical Democrat policies that passed out of the House this session," Crenshaw said in the video. "Ever wonder what it would be like if they had all three branches of government?"

Crenshaw highlighted 10 bills that have passed in the House. If there were currently a Democratic majority in the Senate and a Democratic president, they could have become law.

Here are the 10 bills:

• H.R. 1, the For the People Act, would overhaul the U.S. election system. It would impose new restrictions on lobbying that are so severe the left-leaning American Civil Liberties Union blasted the bill as unconstitutional on First Amendment grounds. The bill also would provide public funding for political campaigns. "They're going to use your tax dollars to pay for political campaigns," Crenshaw said. "Six-to-one match for small-dollar donations. That ends up being billions of dollars in taxpayer funding for bad political ads.

• H.R. 3, the Lower Drug Costs Now Act, would impose foreign price controls on the U.S. market, lowering drug prices but also cutting into pharmaceutical company revenue that would otherwise be used to reinvest in research for new cures for disease. One study showed this policy would reduce the Medicare Part D revenues for U.S. companies by $358 billion over the next five years, a 58% reduction before interest and taxes. The study found that such a drastic reduction would reduce the number of new medicines brought to market by as much as 88% across the U.S. Crenshaw cited a Congressional Budget Office report that estimated eight fewer drugs would be brought to market in the U.S. between 2020 and 2029 and 30 fewer drugs over the subsequent decade.

• H.R. 8, the Bipartisan Background Checks Act, is a bill that would require universal background checks for gun purchases. Gun Owners of America has said the bill would criminalize private firearms sales that were not pre-approved by the government. The bill would outlaw the "transfer" of a firearm without a background check. "Transfer" is not defined in the bill, and Crenshaw suggested that borrowing your neighbor's gun may be a felony if this bill were law.

• H.R. 6, the American Dream and Promise Act, is legislation that would grant amnesty to as many as 2.5 million illegal immigrants brought to the U.S. as minors or who have been in the United States on temporary protected status. The legislation also would provide a path to citizenship and voting rights for those who qualify and cost $34.6 billion while providing no additional border security measures. [read more]

6 Things Every American Should Know About Congress’ Bailout for Select Coal Miners’ Pensions

From The Daily Signal.com (Nov. 8):

Americans lose when Congress is in the business of picking winners and losers.

Just this week, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell signed onto a bill, the Bipartisan American Miners Act of 2019, that would bail out one multiemployer, or union pension plan.

This Senate bill is similar to the combination of two bills in the House—H.R. 934 and H.R. 935, the Health Benefits for Miners Act of 2019 and the Miners Pension Protection Act—that the Energy and Natural Resources Committee recently passed.

There is a lot of misleading and false reporting about what these bills would do.

Here are six things you need to know:

1. This Is a Taxpayer Bailout.  Not one penny will come from the Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation Fund. The United Mine Workers of America already uses up the entirety of the available Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation Fund for its unfunded health benefits.
2. This Does Not Fix the Multiemployer Pension Crisis. The United Mine Workers of America pension plan represents less than 1% of multiemployer plans and participants and its $6.5 billion pension shortfall is roughly 1% of the entire system’s $638 billion deficit. Virtually every multiemployer plan is drastically underfunded and at risk of insolvency, but this bill would only protect benefits for one select and politically powerful group.
3. The U.S. Government Did Not Make a Promise to Coal Miners. The United Mine Workers of America and private coal companies made promises to coal miners, not the federal government. Proponents of a bailout point to the 1946 Krug-Lewis Agreement, which was established after the government stepped in to intervene in a coal strike and helped negotiate a deal between the coal companies and the United Mine Workers of America.
4. This Could Lead to More Bailouts. Unless Congress wants to pick winners and losers—bailing out coal miners and probably truckers, but not steelworkers, police, or firefighters—this bailout signals what Congress will do for the other nearly 1,400 multiemployer pension plans with $638 billion in underfunding. It also signals what it will do for state and local pension plans that have an estimated $4 trillion to $6 trillion in unfunded pension promises. A comprehensive union pension bailout could cost each household in America up to $52,000.
5. One Bailout Is Never Enough. When the United Mine Workers of America first received financial assistance for its health benefits in 1992, it was temporary and limited to interest on the Abandoned Mine Land Reclamation Fund. But that was not enough, so in 2008, Congress made the assistance open-ended and provided taxpayer funds. Then again, in 2017, Congress doubled the size of the bailout to cover about 45,000 retirees. The current proposals would add at least another 13,000 retirees and add to taxpayer costs, which have already totaled nearly $2 billion for the United Mine Workers of America’s unfunded health care benefits. There is a good chance that the $750 million provided in these bills will not be enough and that this bailout would have to be expanded in the future.
6. This Bailout Does Nothing to Fix the Problem. The problems that led to this crisis are pervasive as 96% of workers with multiemployer pensions are in plans that are less than 60% funded. Yet, this bailout does absolutely nothing to fix the issue and make sure that this never happens again.

Congress can help coal miners as well as 10 million other workers who are at risk of losing most of their promised pension benefits by: preserving the solvency of the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp., fixing the rules so that broken promises do not happen again, and providing tools for plans to minimize pension losses across beneficiaries. [read more]

Yea, Congress shouldn’t be picking winners and losers.

The Three Phases of the Progressive Plan: Phase I

PHASE I: INFILTRATION

Phase I was the genesis of the modern progressive movement in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. It was launched by the cast of characters….people such as Teddy Roosevelt, William Jennings Bryan, Margaret Sanger, Wayne Wheeler, John Dewey, and others.

…………..
It would be followed by three more waves, each of which shared the following goals of the infiltration phase:

• Goal 1: Organize groups for control. The collectivization of society began. Instead of focusing on individual rights and freedoms, progressives focused on organizing people into groups that set them apart.

• Goal 2: Infiltrate. Slowly but deliberately, progressives inserted themselves into key American institutions, including the government, the labor movement, academia, the media, the military, and the courts. Progressives not only ran for high office, but they also made a point of inserting their operatives into a permanent government bureaucracy.

• Goal 3: Weaken the social fabric. For the collectivization of society to succeed, the natural, organic fibers of our social fabric—faith, tradition, family, heritage—needed to be ripped apart. Progressives systematically drew wedges between different segments of society by collectivizing and organizing them against one another.

• Goal 4: Confuse the concept of right and wrong. Sometimes it feels as if we’re living in a moral house of mirrors—up means down, down means up, and everything is distorted. That is exactly how progressives want it. By preaching moral relativism and shaming us into thinking our traditions are wrong and outdated, by convincing us that our moral compass needs to “progress,” they can lead us ever closer to the final step of phase I . . .

• Goal 5: Bring society to a state of near crisis. At some point, the confusion becomes too great, and those who could stand up to bring some sanity to the public sphere are successfully shamed into silence. The nation is brought to the edge of collapse so that progressives can step in and take power, all in a false-prophet effort to relieve people’s fears and anxieties.

Source: Liars: How Progressives Exploit Our Fears for Power and Control (2016) by Glenn Beck.

#RedforEd Activists from Chicago Teachers Union Go to Venezuela in Support of Maduro’s Socialist Regime

From Breitbart.com (July 31):

A four member delegation from the Chicago Teachers Union (CTU), all active supporters of the #RedforEd movement, traveled to Venezuela earlier this month to provide support for the socialist regime of Nicolas Maduro.

The delegation consisted of Richard Berg,  a former Teamsters Union official who currently works for the CTU, and “rank and file” CTU strike captains Sarah Chambers, Fabiana Mariel, and V Voeta Vargas, according to press reports. [read more]

This sounds crazy, then again it is the Left.

Unions Keep Deducting Dues Without Consent, Teachers Say

From The Daily Signal.com (Apr. 29):

Just a few weeks before school let out last May, unexpected visitors showed up in Bethany Mendez’s classroom.

They didn’t come to discuss the nuts and bolts of education or the work the teacher was doing to assist young students with learning disabilities.

Instead, the visitors wanted to know why she was leaving the teachers union, and if she fully understood the ramifications of resigning her membership.

“This made me very angry and upset to actually have them come to my classroom during instructional time during the day,” Mendez told The Daily Signal in an interview. “I thought the meeting was regarding a student who might have to go into one of my classes. But these were union representatives who showed up in my classroom to question me as to why I was leaving the union.”

Mendez teaches elementary school students with learning disabilities in California’s Fremont Unified School District.

Since she had her own bouts with dyslexia when she was roughly the same age as her students, Mendez explains, she became motivated to become a teacher and devote herself to assisting children who require specialized instruction.

For union officials to interrupt her instructional time, Mendez thought, was inappropriate and overly intrusive.

………………….

“It would be fine to have a friendly conversation outside of class, but to actually have two people come to my class while I was teaching and ask these questions I thought was a little offensive,” she said. “They asked if I knew what I was doing and if I knew what I would be giving up. My answer is I think everyone should have a choice to either opt in or opt out of joining the union.” [read more]

Intimidation is the number one tactic of the Left. They didn’t like the teacher not following the party line. In actuality, the union could care less about the teacher herself but they cared more for the dues she was paying to them and now not paying to them.

Trump Puts an End to Taxpayer Subsidies for Unions

From The Daily Signal.com (May 29):

Government employee unions have enjoyed an absolute boondoggle in recent years, receiving hundreds of millions in taxpayer funds. But the boon could soon be over thanks to a new executive order from President Donald Trump.

Last Friday, the president signed an executive order requiring that federal government employees who work full-time for the public employee unions at taxpayer expense spend at least 75 percent of their paid time on the government’s business. The administration estimates this will save taxpayers $100 million.

This measure is one of three executive orders the president signed on Friday. Those orders do not eliminate taxpayer subsidies for public employee unions altogether—that is Congress’ job—but they do end the taxpayer subsidy of travel for union business; mandate that unions be charged fair market value for rents of government office space; streamline the public employee appeals process so that bad apples can be fired more rapidly; and force taxpayer-funded union workers to spend at least three-quarters of their time doing the people’s business.

Most people are shocked to learn that taxpayers have been footing the bill for public employee union salaries, but they become incensed when they learn that in 2016, union employees were paid $177 million by the federal government, not counting office space and travel expenses. [read more]

It’s about time. Now, Congress needs to get its act together and end subsidies for unions once and for all. The Dems would drop a load if that ever happened. To be fair, corporations don’t need subsidies either for that matter.