Trump Says “Adios” to Birthright Citizenship

Ending birthright citizenship, better known as dropping the anchor baby, is the most significant illegal immigration reform the President Trump has announced. With a single executive order, he unplugs a beacon that attracts scammers from the world over. He also attacks a visible manifestation of the Foreigners First mindset that has infected the State Department, and the rest of the federal bureaucracy, since the 60s.

Gary McCoy, Shiloh, IL

For those late to the discussion, birthright citizenship is the GPS theory of national allegiance. If your pregnant wife was sitting in the stands at Lambeau Field and she got so excited she gave birth, the resulting baby would not be entitled to season tickets for the rest of his life. But if your wife, Consuela, was an illegal alien in a sanctuary city, who gave birth in a sanctuary maternity ward, your new child would be a Yankee Doodle Dandy. An instant US citizen with all the welfare rights that come with the birth certificate.

Trump will end that.

As is customary in these situations the left and its propaganda arm the Opposition Media instantly sprang to the defense of this devaluing of US citizenship. Even worse, the OpMedia had no trouble recruiting reflexive anti–Trumpers like Paul Ryan (R–INO). Ryan evidently liberated by his banishment to private life, stabbed Trump in the back using his favorite tactic of preemptive surrender. He claims anchor babies aweigh will require an amendment to the Constitution.

The left’s defense of birthright citizenship relies much on sentiment and sad stories and is light on facts. The talking points read like Shotgun Joe Biden wrote the memo. Here are the main defenses of this nonsensical geography theory of national obligation:

  1. The plain language of the 14th Amendment guarantees birthright citizenship.
  2. Birthright citizenship has been a part of the US since the beginning.
  3. The Supreme Court has ruled illegals are entitled to birthright citizenship.
  4. Throwing anchor babies overboard required amending the Constitution.

Each point is factually incorrect. Here is the plain language of the 14th Amendment: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” The key phrase is “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” The author of the citizenship amendment, Sen. Jacob Howard, who ought to know what he meant, explained, “This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the government of the United States, but will include every other class of person.”

This was tested in the case of Elk v. Wilkins where an Indian sued, contending he had birthright citizenship. Elk lost. The court ruled, “No one can become a citizen of a nation without its consent.” It took passage of a law in 1924 to grant birthright citizenship to American Indians.

The Supreme Court has never addressed the question of birthright citizenship for illegals. The case defenders cite, Wong Kim Ark, concerned two Chinese diplomats who were in the country legally and had a child. In their wisdom, the judges used subjectship under English common law, which the Founders had specifically rejected in the Declaration of Independence, to arrive at a decision that would be overturned today. The case said nothing about aliens in the country illegally.

Mark Levin said, “Not until the 1960’s [was] the Constitution …interpreted to convey birthright citizenship on the children of illegal aliens. And not due to any congressional statute or court ruling, but decisions by various departments and agencies of the federal bureaucracy.”

The federal bureaucracy is controlled by Trump, intermittently at least, so he can tell the executive branch to close the border maternity ward. An amendment isn’t necessary.

Trump should make the order retroactive to the first day of the administration. Certainly, the left will file a lawsuit and fall into a trap of their own making. This is the defining case that can overturn Wong and restore the original intent to the 14th Amendment and not the Hallmark Card legal philosophy that the government has followed for over 50 years. That’s a victory that will last long after the Trump administration.

Finally, Paul Ryan’s back–stabbing response when asked about Trump’s most important policy reinforces my advice to conservatives. Go on strike when you vote in congressional races. Conservatives should vote for every Republican candidate except Representatives. On that line write “On Strike.” Without the conservative base, always taken for granted, Republicans can’t win. In 2020, after the country club conservatives who survive have learned their lesson, resume voting as normal.

Conservatives will never see change in Congress until they change who’s in Congress. Going on strike is the place to start.

Advertisements

The Real Conspiracy Against the Working Man

I’ve been resisting the temptation to write about the latest ‘Walk for the Cash’ — the slow–motion invasion that’s gradually approaching our border from Latin America. Illegals have already taken over large swaths of our country, instituted Central America’s wage scale in construction, eliminated high school kids as a viable lawn–mowing alternative, flooded our schools, made hit–and–run a popular pastime and annexed California.

So I was darned if I would allow them to dominate my column, too.

Adam Zyglis: The Buffalo News, NY

But maintaining my willpower is a constant struggle. Particularly when it looks like there are blue–state attorney’s general ready to defend the illegals’ right to take jobs from citizens — regardless of whether the job is with Chipotle or MS–13.

It’s a shame both Democrats and Republicans aren’t as eager to defend citizens who have jobs.

Jay Shambaugh and Ryan Nunn, writing in The Hill, explain that although the economy is booming and unemployment is down, “real wage growth has drifted toward zero. …it has been just 0.4 percent in 2017–18.”

Two of the reasons for the lack of wage growth are systemic and a product of the vast imbalance in power between the job seeker and employer. Regular readers know I’m a conservative and resist government interference in the market. That doesn’t mean I believe individual workers should be at the mercy of soulless Human Resources drones hiding behind the hiring dictates of the executive floor. Currently employers have a de facto union that protects them from employees.

Government at the state level can play an important role in returning competition to the hiring process, which will increase wages as employers are forced to bid for workers. Unfortunately, to date all blue states have done is force nonsensical “ban the box” measures on employers, while red states sleep in the bosom of their corporate donors.

Leftists pushing “Ban the box” want to prohibit employers from asking applicants if they have ever been convicted of a crime. This is a sideshow affecting a small portion of the population.

The question Republicans and Democrats should be banning is the one asking the salary of the applicant’s previous job. This invasion of privacy question gives the employer an insurmountable advantage during salary negotiations. The question immediately sets a ceiling on the salary offer and leaves the applicant has no recourse.

If he refuses to answer the salary question he may as well have put “murder” as his answer in the banned box, because neither he, nor a real murderer, will be offered a job.

This collusion has a major impact on worker’s economic lives and helps to reduce wages. And that’s only one of the ways employers conspire together at the expense of job seekers and job holders.

Another way employers limit competition and keep wages artificially low are industry–wide, no poaching agreements where employers informally agree to avoid hiring workers from competitors in the same industry. No poaching edicts bar an employee from seeking a job with another employer in the same industry where he already has all the relevant experience and expertise and is the most valuable.

It’s as if the industry is running its own NFL, where employees are pledged to a single company, only without cheerleaders and kneeling during company functions.

A great employee, working for a lousy widget manufacturer, is stuck without any hope of moving to better working conditions, because none of the competing widget makers will hire someone from within the industry. Changing jobs forces them to look outside the industry where their experience is discounted. The situation has all the disadvantages for the employee, of an H1–B visa without the airplane trip.

The best part is instead of torturing the law to help gangs cross the border, leftist AGs can use existing statues to prevent employers from ganging up on employees and Republicans can demonstrate their “bi–partisanship” by joining the movement.

The best avenue for leveling the employment playing field is the legal concept of ‘tortious interference.’ Wikipedia defines this as “when one person intentionally damages someone else’s contractual or business relationships with a third party causing economic harm.” That’s a perfect description of a no poaching agreement that prevents an employee (the third party) from changing jobs within an industry and improving his salary and job conditions.

Eliminating the salary question is harder. At the state level, government could expand the definition of privacy to include salary. That would solve one problem, but I fear mission creep in the future.

Results for employees would begin to be felt after the first subpoenas arrived in Human Resources. How about it attorneys general? Why not stop chasing headlines and start chasing employee equality?

Sanctuary Maternity Wards a Leftist Success Story

Some readers may have thought my recent column on anchor babies was more alarmist than the situation warranted. After all, many pregnant women complain when they have to get up from the TV to go to the bathroom. So how many illegals are realistically going to waddle across the border to give birth on the Sammy side of the street?

Daryl Cagle, CagleCartoons.com

The Center for Immigration Studies provides timely context regarding the issue. According to Breitbart’s analysis of the report, “There are an estimated 28,000 births to illegal aliens every year in the Los Angeles metro area, exceeding the total number of U.S. births in 14 states and the District of Columbia.”

Illegals don’t have to be in labor when they sneak across the border, they can begin the anchor baby manufacturing process when they are already in the States. Since Los Angeles is a sanctuary city there’s little danger of being deported if the illegal confines herself to identity theft and an EBT card or two.

Once the baby’s due, the senorita calls the sanctuary ambulance for a ride to the sanctuary maternity ward where a crack sanctuary medical staff delivers a brand new anchor baby. This bebé ancla is not only the key that unlocks city, state and federal welfare programs for our new madre, the nino is also future deportation prevention, since sending mom back would mean “breaking up the family.”

(Isn’t it strange no one ever asks what kind of mother would abandon her baby rather than take it home with her?)

California’s total for anchor babies is 65,000 a year, followed by Texas’ 51,000 and Florida’s 16,000. Birthright citizenship in the US is a government–endorsed scam that allows Latin American mothers to sign their children up for the best welfare programs, much like wealthy New Yorkers put their infants on the waiting list for the best schools.

The entire grift could be ended tomorrow if either President Trump issued an executive order ending citizenship for illegals born on our side of the border or if our so–called Republican Congress passed a law mandating the same. The fact nothing has been done gives you an idea of how important discouraging illegals is to Congress.

Today’s other follow–up involves food. If food bureaucrats had any honor they would acknowledge the war on hunger has been won, put current programs on auto–pilot and then go make the millions in the private sector we’re assured they could make, if the ‘pubic servants’ weren’t so dedicated.

You can judge the size of the victory over hunger by going to the nearest shopping mall and counting the people who aren’t fat. Bonus points if you can find someone who’s not chewing.

Instead of celebrating their victory the calorie–pushers instead went looking for more enemies. Instead of hunger, they now fight “food anxiety.” This is a slippery term that covers essentially everyone that has ever wondered if the drive through at McDonalds will still be open when he gets there. The term can’t be quantified so there is no danger of the bureaucrats winning this war and seeing a consequent reduction in jobs and funding.

The second enemy was the “food desert” and it’s also part of the mission creep cavalcade. Food deserts don’t describe an actual desert where there’s no food. Instead it’s a geographic area devoid of grocery stores where government elites would feel comfortable shopping. It’s a snob’s wasteland where the man–on–the–street can’t pronounce “quinoa.”

The Washington Post was on this crisis like green on cilantro. Beverley Wheeler, director of DC Hunger Solutions, warned readers, “Grocery-store access is a racial equity issue that must be dealt with, and it’s a health issue. We can no longer pretend we don’t see what we see.”

What that means is that food deserts caused obesity. This never made sense to me. It would stand to reason inhabitants be thinner since the hungry had to walk farther to find food, just as one doesn’t find fat camels in the Sahara. Government jumped on this scam, too.

Crony capitalists used it to subsidize grocery store companies to build in favored areas. The non–profit parasite crowd started advocacy groups that would cause food deserts to bloom after being given only a few million tax dollars.

And then guess what happened? As Tamar Haspel, WaPost food columnist, recently wrote, “No, food deserts don’t cause obesity.” Tamara Dubowitz, admitted “because access was a social justice issue. [The belief] wasn’t based on evidence because there wasn’t any evidence.”

The War on Food Deserts began because it would produce more government spending and the term generated sympathy. That’s all that was needed to commence hostilities, because for the left emotion always trumps evidence.

If you don’t believe me, ask Justice Kananaugh.

Nov. 6th Is the Day Conservatives Go On Strike

Republican incumbents are getting nervous as election day approaches. And for good reason. The political party of the left, Democrats, has energized its base while the country club conservatives in the GOP have euthanized theirs.

Sean Delonas, CagleCartoons.com

Evidently the strategy is to rely on muscle memory to get conservatives to the polls, because the so–called accomplishments certainly won’t.

Confirming Supreme Court justices who are rumored to be conservatives isn’t a Senate accomplishment, it’s Trump’s accomplishment. Curator of the Senate Mitch McConnell had nothing to do with Trump’s victory. McConnell was one of those incumbent nose–holders who viewed Trump as something of an embarrassment when compared to DC’s refined caretaker conservatives.

Which is also McConnell’s attitude toward the conservative base.

Without Trump there are no justices for McConnell — head of Senate human resources — to rubber stamp. The other ‘accomplishment’ is the tax cut. Tax cuts are not why Trump was elected. All the GOP candidates claimed to back a tax cut.

Trump won because he pledged to stop illegal immigration and reform what passes for legal immigration.

Here’s the Republican Congress’ record on issues that matter to conservatives:

No funding for the wall.

No expedited deportation of illegals

No requirement for E–verify

No English as official language.

No end to funding Planned Parenthood

No repeal of Obamacare

No cuts in federal spending

Here’s what Sen. Chuck Schumer (D–Antifa) says about the GOP Congress, “If you would’ve told me this year that we’d be standing here celebrating the passage of an omnibus bill, with no poison pill riders, at higher [spending] levels …than even the president requested, I wouldn’t have believed it. Almost anything the Republican leadership in the Senate achieved this year, they achieved on Democratic terms. … Democrats had an amazingly good year.”

The housebroken conservatives’ record these past two years is so abysmal that even the very polite Christians at First Things magazine have noticed. Phillip Jeffery quotes from a series of interviews, “We’re tired of being treated like our issues are of secondary concern.” If an issue ‘can’t be solved with a new tax rate,’ the establishment seems not to care.” “By her account, the electoral power of the pro-life movement does not match the level of attention it attracts from conservative leaders.”

That’s putting it mildly. And now comes a last gasp attempt to save their jobs that proves just how stupid the cocktail conservatives in Congress think we are. Paul RINO plans to introduce a bill that fully funds construction of the wall, contains Kate’s Law and targets sanctuary cities.

The best part is they plan to vote on it AFTER the mid–term elections. Leadership says this makes the election a “referendum on immigration policy.” I call it a cynical ploy to save their candy behinds. These clowns have been in office almost two years. Only the specter of looming defeat motivates them to act on Trump’s number one agenda item.

If they were serious about illegals, the House would pass a hardline bill today and send it to the Senate.

McConnell would stop dusting the furniture long enough to bring the bill up for a vote. Then he brandishes his dust mop and forces Schumer to conduct a traditional filibuster if Chuckie wants to block passage. Voters would see the left is prepared to stop government to protect illegal alien criminals at the expense of taxpayers.

That would make the mid–terms a genuine referendum on immigration. Under the gutless, craven ‘leadership’ we now have in Congress this will never happen.

It’s high time the conservative base did something that will attract “attention …from conservative leaders.” That means going on strike on election day. Conservatives are at least 30 percent of the GOP base. They can’t win without us.

When you go to the polls, or vote absentee, vote for whatever wretch is on the Republican line for Senate. For the House — unless your representative is a member of the Freedom Caucus — cast a write–in ballot for “On Strike.”

Yes, this means some acceptable GOP incumbents will be defeated, but their loss will send an unmistakable message to the RINOs in the Senate: Conservatives expect action now!

Nothing will change in Washington until we change the composition of the Republicans in Congress and put the fear of God into the barnacles that manage to hold on to their seats. Losing the House in the short run will be a victory in the long run.

In 2020 conservative voters can return and vote for new conservatives and chastened conservatives of convenience. We can take back the House and continue to control the Senate. But only in 2020. In 2018 Republicans don’t deserve your vote. They deserve your contempt.

Illegal Aliens Regularly Granted Lawless Benefits

Michael Anton is amazed by housebroken conservatives that support an immigration position that will eventually remove any chance for conservative government. Anton is the author of ‘The Flight 93 Election’ that outlined the stakes facing conservatives in stark terms, making him one of the first respectable conservative intellectuals to come out in support of Donald Trump.

Gary McCoy, Shiloh, IL

Lately he’s been involved in an internecine fight with country club conservatives at The National Review over birthright citizenship. For those unfamiliar with the term, birthright citizenship treats becoming a citizen of the United States with the same gravity and respect afforded a participation trophy from your 8–year–old daughter’s ballerina ball league.

Birthright citizenship is more of a cartographic theory than a governing philosophy. Supporters contend that any illegal alien who manages to cross the US border and give birth at taxpayer expense is not only producing a new niño, they have also just welcomed a US citizen into the world.

Our border is a finish line in another area of pre–natal care, too. If the illegal can worm her way across, she can demand an abortion so taxpayers are on the hook coming and going.

This anchor baby, instantly dropped into a foreign household, is also a lottery ticket that’s a guaranteed winner. ‘Experts’ never tire of assuring us that illegals cannot collect welfare, because it’s against the law. What the experts never add is Citizen Baby can collect on every welfare program known to US taxpayers and the administrator of all this largess is the illegal parent.

Conservatives supporting birthright citizenship are the equivalent of Gen. Sam Houston sending a messenger to Col. William Travis informing him that after some consideration it appears the Texas Declaration of Independence gives Santa Anna property rights. Therefore, open the gates and let the Mexicans inside the Alamo.

Restoring sanity and accuracy to the discussion of birthright citizenship was the topic of a panel at the Heritage Foundation where Anton was joined by Dr. Edward J. Erler, senior fellow of the Claremont Institute and John Fonte, director of the Center for American Common Culture.

Erler points out the Supreme Court decision that began sprint for finish–line citizenship is just as incorrect as the Dred Scott or Plessy v. Ferguson decision. In Wong Kim Ark two Chinese diplomats who were legally inside our borders and who, by treaty, could not become US citizens had a baby.

The child turned out to be a ‘blessed event’ for leftists and cheap labor importers, too.

The court ruled that since the Declaration of Independence and Constitution were based on English common law, and common law specified children born within England were pledged to the Crown, then presto! Mrs. Wong now has her own Yankee Doodle Dandy.

To arrive at a decision that backwards, one would think the judge was a product of modern government schools.

Common law doesn’t mention citizenship. It discusses permanent, perpetual subjectship and allegiance to the king, based on the feudal system of master and serf. “There are no citizens under English common law,” Erler said.

The Declaration of Independence rejected English common law, saying our nation was built on a social compact between consenting citizens. A Supreme Court decision that completely misreads the Declaration and rules that rejection is really acceptance, is a decision ripe for being overturned.

What’s even worse is the unelected, administrative state has taken a decision by the Supremes that only addressed non–citizens legally in the US and applied it willy–nilly to illegals in the US unlawfully. The Supreme Court never said children born to illegals in the US are citizens. But bureaucrats did.

The US and Canada — which can afford a handful of anchor babies, because it shares a southern border with the US and a northern border with planet’s freezer compartment — are the only two developed nations in the world that grant birthright citizenship. The United Kingdom ended the practice, as did India, New Zealand and Australia. When given a chance to vote on the issue, Ireland did, too.

What is absolutely infuriating is that birthright citizenship for illegals could end tomorrow. All President Trump has to do is issue an executive order. Or Congress could end it permanently by passing a law. The fact this has not been done is due to an unholy alliance between country club conservatives in thrall to cheap–labor businesses, the open–borders left and the administrative state.

Certainly the left would sue, but that’s a trap of their own making. If the case made it to the Supreme Court, there is a good chance Wong would be overturned and birthright citizenship ended. Trump needs to refill his executive order pen and start writing. It’s time to toss concept of anchor babies overboard, right after the mid–term election.

¡Ay, Caramba! US Illegal Count Just Doubled

I should have known something was up when soccer team owners felt confident enough to put the squeeze on cities to help foot the bill for new stadiums.

Ballerina ball holds the record for the longest period of being The Next Big Thing, without ever becoming the next big thing. Starting back in the 60’s the sport was supposed to sweep across America. Sure little kids played, but most of them left Scooby Doo and soccer behind when they grew up.

Rick McKee, The Augusta Chronicle, GA

That’s why for the past 50 years mayors would sooner subsidize the WNBA than a ‘footie’ team.

Now the Atlantic complains Cincinnati, Detroit, Nashville and Sacramento are all willing to pony up between $25 million and $75 million tax dollars to subsidize their local fútbol stadium.

Colin Kaepernick — founder of Millionaires Against Jim Crow — may have driven football fans out of NFL stadiums, but I don’t think the alienated were so desperate for a dose of patriotism that they would attend a game just to watch illegals wave Mexico’s flag.

This new popularity didn’t originate domestically. Just as the vast majority of soccer balls are made overseas and imported into the US, soccer fans are bred overseas and imported, assuming ICE is looking the other way. Quartz discovered the last time soccer was this popular was during the 1920’s when waves of immigrants came to take factory jobs citizens didn’t want to perform for Bologna wages.

The foreign–born population was nearly 14 percent, a hard number because none of those immigrants were ‘hiding in the shadows.’ Today’s number is also supposed to be 14 percent, but the number is soft like my daughter’s elementary–school soccer ball. The real foreign–born number is so much larger it inspires rich capitalists to demand tax dollars to subsidize their hobby.

Two Yale professors recently completed a study that undermines all the numbers the nice men at the Chamber of Commerce have used to lull the citizen population to sleep. Edward Kaplan and Jonathan Feinstein were skeptical of population estimates for the number of illegals in the US. They believed the 11 million number, was too large and only excited MAGA deplorables.

These academics were convinced a more rigorous analysis would give a greatly reduced total.

Yale Insights reports the team, along with Mohammad Fazel–Zarandi, began with “parameters intentionally aimed at producing an extremely conservative estimate.” Kaplan was astonished by the result, “Instead of a number which was smaller, we got a number that was 50 percent higher.”

“After running 1,000,000 simulations of the model, the researchers’ 95% probability range is 16 million to 29 million, with 22.1 million as the mean (or average).” This total is twice as large as the generally–accepted figure and was arrived at through a conservative approach.

This means the US has imported the equivalent population of Honduras, El Salvador and Nicaragua, if you accept the average, and if you’re a pessimist you can add Paraguay to the total.

It’s a testimony to the intellectual integrity of the Yale team that the research was published, instead of being given a decent, Christian burial. The only reason the team isn’t currently asking Sen. Ted Cruz for suggestions on safe places to eat is because the dishonest Opposition Media has taken it upon themselves to inter the findings.

Little India may have covered the heck out of the groundbreaking report, along with Fox News and the Washington Times, but there was zero mention in the Washington Post, the failing New York Times, the Wall Street Journal or any of the TV networks.

And no wonder, when you consider the implications. The number doesn’t mean just the population of illegal aliens in the US today is wrong by at least a factor of two, it means all the other numbers and estimates derived from the original faulty number are also wrong by a factor of two or more.

Here are only a handful of the costs and burdens illegals impose on citizen taxpayers that should be revised sharply upward.

The estimated $11.9 billion in yearly healthcare cost that taxpayers must cover might be $24 billion.

The $135 billion in federal, state and local taxpayer dollars that’s spent on illegals each year might be $270 billion.

The 4.2 million illegal alien children crowding our schools might be 8.4 million.

And the 1.8 million DACA illegals demanding citizenship in return for their crime might be 3.6 million.

Compared to those numbers, $75 million to subside a sport that snuck into the country on the backs of illegals looks like a bargain. The future of North America may indeed be found inside a subsidized soccer stadium, but if conservatives don’t wake up, it won’t be the future of the United States.

The Left’s Do–It–Yourself Authoritarianism

There’s a new meme circulating that Trumpistas have found very pertinent. It’s a stark black–and–white photo of a seated Trump. One elbow is on his left knee and his other hand is gesturing toward the viewer as he leans forward.

The president has an expression on his face not unlike the famous ‘Uncle Sam Wants You’ recruiting poster. The headline is: “In Reality They’re Not After Me. They’re After You. I’m Just in the Way.”

The meme’s is popular because Trump supporters know who’s in the on–deck circle if Trump strikes out.

Claremont Review of Books editor Charles Kesler observed the anti-Trump position boils down to two mutually exclusive alternatives. One “he’s a buffoon, a clown…who is, by temperament and experience, unfit to be president.” The alternate attack is “he’s a monster, racist and tyrant in waiting.”

Kesler’s wry judgment is “the two arguments are, however, in some tension.”

The intrinsic self–contradiction of the attacks hasn’t forced the left to settle on one or the other. Today unfit for the presidency is getting a lot of media play. An unholy tag–team of Bob Woodward, sage of the Eastern establishment, and Omarosa, the buffoon of Walmart shoppers, is accusing the president of being too senile or unstable to have access to the White House Christmas Party guest list to say nothing of the nuclear attack codes.

The Hitler–in-waiting argument doesn’t resonate with Kesler or me. I think Trump is simply too old. The fact he decided to throttle back on the likes of Stormy Daniels is an indication his stamina isn’t what it used to be. And becoming a dictator takes a lot of energy.

Kesler’s skepticism has its origin in Trump’s philosophy. “There are not many similarities between ‘Mein Kampf’ and ‘The Art of the Deal,’” Kesler explains. Trump doesn’t think the government is run by Jews, he thinks it’s run by idiots.

Running an authoritarian regime requires an authoritarian government. Trump can’t even prevent shoplifters from making off with government documents in the Oval Office, to say nothing of rounding up dissenters.

Operating a ‘papers–please’ police state at a minimum means you have the power to demand people show their papers, and Trump can’t even make illegals do that.

China is what a genuine 21st Century authoritarian state looks like and a Trump government that’s divided against itself doesn’t compare. What’s ironic here is the left has begun an ad hoc system of social control that resembles China’s, but it’s being run by the private sector.

China assigns its subjects a “social credit” score. The score is calculated based on observations from the state’s 200 million surveillance cameras, a person’s bill paying habits, web browsing history, political soundness and observance of even the most minor of laws.

ABC reports the score is “dependent on the person’s behavior but they can also be affected by people they associate with.”

We don’t have this level of granular government control in our lives yet, but that doesn’t mean citizens who fail to adhere to the left’s thought standards or associate with the wrong people, don’t face consequences.

In China people with low scores can’t get a government job. Here people with Trump administration ties are rejected by universities.

In China journalist Liu Hu can’t get a job because his stories angered the government. Here a conservative hired by The Atlantic was fired less than a week after being hired because his Twitter feed angered a leftist reporter.

In China a low score gets social media accounts suspended. Here conservatives are shadow–banned by Twitter and Facebook if their posts offend some backroom pencil–neck.

In China corporations toe the party line or they lose access to loans. Here Citibank and Bank of America unilaterally decide if gun manufacturers don’t toe the gun–grabbers line on the 2nd Amendment, the manufacturers can use the barter system for transactions.

In China associating with the wrong people means you are shunned. Here you can ask Sarah Huckabee Sanders how hard it is to find a good restaurant.

In China the power of the state causes the majority of the people to fall in line. Here leftists control the culture and currently only 48 percent of the people are still willing to even feebly resist.

And these victories come while the left is out of power. Where life gets really serious for Trump supporters, and the meme comes true, is if the left takes power again. Already our overlords in the Opposition Media are starting to claim that “Trump is only the symptom.” This means citizens who voted for Trump are the disease.

And in the long run, you know what the government does to diseases.

Transgenderism’s Recruiting Plans Include Your Kids

Ryan T. Anderson, the author of ‘When Harry Became Sally: Responding to the Transgender Moment’, gave a speech last week at Catholic University of America.

It was all very dignified and featured a walking–on–eggshells atmosphere. Yet under Anderson’s proper and decorous message was a stark warning for parents: Gender Red Guards are seizing the curriculum in government schools and they are coming for your kids.

Rick McKee The Augusta Chronicle

Or as Anderson has tweeted, “transgenderism is a belief system that increasingly looks like a cultish religion…being forced on the public by the state.”

“Today the focus [of transgenderism] tends to be on children,” Anderson warns. There are already 45 clinics that specialize in children and essentially function as recruitment depots.

“The standard of care is self–reinforcing” in a children’s gender jumble clinic. These clinics make sure that once a child has expressed even the most tentative misgivings regarding their “assigned gender” the staff makes sure there is no backsliding on the part of the child or the parents.

Left to their own devices 80 to 95 percent of the boys and girls who are gender–confused will happily revert to their gender before they become adults. Transgenderists can’t tolerate that level of attrition. A movement to normalize the abnormal can’t succeed if the numbers remain just a miniscule fringe of the total population.

These children’s clinics are a sexual Checkpoint Charlie. Once the child crosses over he’s behind the Berlin Gender Wall, never to be allowed to return.

Here the power of the state enforces transgender conformity. Many child welfare commissars consider it child abuse to send the kid to counseling that seeks to have them accept reality and accept their real gender. Instead a boy who is too young to experiment with a new pack of Virginia Slims can be encouraged by the government to start down the road to a new vagina.

This transgender ideology and its implementation by ‘child welfare’ bureaucrats is “systematically undermining parental authority.”

Inside the clinic parents are presented with a Trans for Tots regime where one size fits all. A three–year–old that just finished toddling, but is sexually wise beyond his years will begin “social transitioning.” The child gets a new name, new gender and starts playing for a new team as he lives as the opposite sex.

As the child approaches puberty it’s unthinkable that he undergo the process in the wrong body. The child is given a drug cocktail for life that blocks the onset of puberty and as Anderson terms it, “traps the child in a pre–pubescent body.” That’s an ideal development for ‘caregivers’ who also happen to be pedophiles.

Then as early as the freshman year of high school the process of producing the right body begins. Puberty blockers are traded for hormone treatment. As the 18th birthday approaches — earlier for some particularly zealous surgeons — surgical reassignment is possible. Although the new euphemism for this is irreversible body vandalism is “gender affirmation surgery.”

Anderson describes the ideology snaring these children as, “Radical expressive individualism combined with ruthless paternalism.”

And make no mistake these children’s gender clinics are practicing Mengele Medicine. Physicians and good Germans on the staff are experimenting on helpless children to advance an ideologically–driven medical theory with no basis in fact.

The parents are not told there are no long–term studies of the effects of this treatment on children. “The treatment is entirely experimental,” Anderson notes. Doctors don’t tell parents they are making it up as the go along.

If parents or the child has second thoughts, the lies begin. They’re told puberty blockers are reversible. “What they mean is the doctor hopes normal puberty will commence if the drugs are stopped,” Anderson explained. “They don’t know. There’s no ‘Pause’ button for puberty.”

Even worse the drugs parents are told to give the children are not FDA tested or approved for use in gender experimentation. The drugs are being used off label without government approval.

Even after ‘successful’ surgery that’s supposed to solve the problems of these deeply disturbed and programmed children, 41 percent will still attempt suicide after their operation. Even the Obama administration admitted in 2016 no study has found a long–term benefit from ‘gender affirmation’ surgery.

How can you protect your children from being swept up in this malign mania? Home schooling is a surefire solution. If that’s not possible, ask your school board if schools use the ‘Gender Unicorn’ or otherwise discuss transgenderism. If the answer is ‘yes’ have your kids opt out of the class.

Teach your children a biblically–based orientation to sex. Yes, it’s awkward. And yes, the kids may whine. But I guarantee if you don’t do it, the government schools will, and you may not like the outcome.

We Put a Hand Over Our Heart, Nike Puts Thumb in Our Eye

Failed NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick continues to stay culturally relevant by depending on the kindness of strangers. If it weren’t for white folks, beginning with his foster parents, Kaepernick might just be another player who peaked early and disappeared.

The first white person who bailed him out was — of all people! — President Donald Trump. Colin began his ‘take a knee, look at me’ protest with an example of bad timing that should have rendered him a joke from the beginning. He protested black “injustice” during Barack Obama’s second term.

Rick McKee, The Augusta Chronicle, GA

Now I won’t deny there are still jerks who like nothing better than disparaging black folks while burning a cross in their backyard fire pit. Still, it’s a pretty ramshackle variety of “institutional racism and oppression” that lets a black guy slip through the net and become president.

Cognitive dissonance has never been a feature of the Opposition Media, so the contradictions of Kaepernick’s genuflection were ignored. Colin’s problem was the public was starting to ignore him.

Then Trump came to his rescue. The president’s flag protest tweets made him sole proprietor of the opposition to flag disrespect. Instantly, Kaepernick is relevant again.

Then comes the off season. David Hogg doesn’t play the national anthem at his anti–gun rallies, so no role for Kaepernick there. The same goes for the other America Last functions with which Colin is now allied. Trying playing the Star Spangled Banner at a Black Lives Matter rally and Kaepernick’s knee wouldn’t have time to hit the dais before the violence begins.

Colin needs football more than football needs him. His summer media mentions were boring updates regarding his lawsuit against the NFL for not being willing to pay millions to a self–absorbed customer alienator. Kaepernick was running the risk of sliding into the ‘Disgruntled Employee Sues Former Employer’ pigeonhole with Stormy Daniels.

Then the white folks at Nike came to the rescue.

Kaepernick is now the face of the ‘Just Do It’ campaign. Colin’s acceptance was a certainly. Nike’s making the offer is what’s curious. Decades of Nike marketing is based on an immature, high school rebellion philosophy.

Which means there’re plenty of other Americans who risked all to stand up for their beliefs, but I don’t think Nike will be featuring Masterpiece Cakeshop owner Jack Phillips or former Rowan County Clerk Kim Davis any time soon.

Nike prefers to put its corporate thumb in the eye of 63 percent of white America and 26 percent of black America that is opposed to insulting the flag. This could prove to be a bad financial bet, since I’m not sure how much money the Ultimate Frisbee demographic spends on sports equipment.

Insulting the flag is the short–term damage, but the decision has dangerous long–term implications. Nike has decided to put its corporate weight behind dividing the country in service of lies and propaganda that harm the black community it purports to be supporting. And the campaign has no terminus because It’s impossible to solve a problem that doesn’t exist.

Philippe Lemoine did an analysis of the Police–Public Contact Survey, a 70,000 sample of US residents. He found “just 16 unarmed black men, out of a population of more than 20 million, were killed by the police…These figures are likely close to the number of black men struck by lightning in a given year.”

The case for routine police harassment is equally fraudulent. Black men have less yearly contact with police than whites: 17.5 to 20.7 percent. And as for injury, protesters in the stadium have a greater chance of getting a rug burn at the hands of Monsanto than they do a bruise at the hands of the cops.

Patriots lit up social media with photos of burning Nike products. This seems self–defeating to me since it limits our wardrobe choices without damaging the corporation.

A better option is wealthy collegiate athletic donors informing athletic directors that if Nike isn’t dropped, then their donations to the program certainly will. This type of punishment may make a difference in the Beaverton boardroom. Individuals can save matches and stop buying future Nike products.

My son thinks it’s a big deal about a small affront because he likes Nike Rugby cleats. He’s wrong. The culture is in this situation today because people who love this country sat back in their comfortable chairs and let the insults accumulate.

It was only an ad, or a statement or a single policy. Time after time after time. The result of our indolence is mainstreaming Colin Kaepernick. It’s time to demonstrate that putting a thumb in the eye of middle America is not a cost–free exercise. If for no other reason than we’re running out of eyes.

Democrats, Still the Party of Voter Suppression

Democrats and the rest of the left have a somewhat bifurcated approach to the vote. During their Jim Crow regime in the South, Democrats specialized in retail vote suppression. When a potential black voter attempted to register that brave individual was met with literacy tests, poll taxes and other extra–constitutional roadblocks placed by a Democrat government between a minority and the voting booth.

Gary McCoy, Shiloh, IL

And if that wasn’t enough for the black man to take the hint, there was always outright violence as a fallback position.

Today Democrats have donated their voter suppression identity to an unwilling Republican party. They claim the GOP’s tentative, Tinder–like approach to matching names with faces is “vote suppression” and racism.

When Democrats were the suppressors they applied their genuine vote reduction efforts only to the subset of the population that was non–white. Accommodating Democrats often let White folks vote from the cemetery.

Republicans are much more even–handed. Their goal is to apply perfectly reasonable Voter ID efforts to anyone who wants to vote, whether he’s white enough to join the Klan or dark enough to be fleeing the Klan.

Matching a photo to the individual attempting to vote is for the left tantamount to giving the Gestapo control of America’s polling places. Recently defeated Maryland gubernatorial candidate and former NAACP Director Benjamin Chavis has screamed that Republicans were trying to “lynch democracy” by instructing voters to show ID.

The concern these leftists show for poor ignorant voters who can’t make their way to the DMV for a free ID, are too poorly educated to understand election rules and probably shop at Walmart is particularly touching when one remembers that’s also the left’s description of Trump voters.

But making voting free and universal, like STDs at Burning Man, is only half of the left’s approach. Elections are great. The Voice of the People and all that. As long as the outcome of the election meets with the left’s approval.

If it doesn’t, then that’s where the other half of the left’s modern approach to democracy appears.

Last June the addled electorate in Washington, DC (Hillary 91 percent; Trump 4 percent) approved Initiative 77 by a margin of 56 to 44 percent. The initiative was a typical redistribution scheme that took money from people who had it and gave it to people who wanted it, without costing voters a dime. Ballot box theft, in other words.

The text of the bill, according to The Washington Post, “phases out the ‘tipped wage’ that allows D.C. employers to pay workers as little as $3.89 an hour and count tips toward the standard minimum wage of $13.25 an hour. Under the initiative, employers are required to gradually increase hourly wages for tipped workers until they reach what will be the uniform minimum of $15 an hour by 2025.”

Passage of the initiative by uncontrolled voters didn’t sit well with the DC city council. So, in a unique twist, they’ve applied a literacy test to the initiative after the election, “…After it passed, some lawmakers insisted there wasn’t a clear voter mandate because of record-low turnout in the June 19 primary and confusing language on the ballot.”

Now the council is going to nullify the result. Seven of the 13 members of the city council have introduced a bill that would overturn Initiative 77 when the bill is voted on this fall. The fact the initiative passed in every one of their districts didn’t deter the Suppression Seven for an instant.

Council member Jack Evans, who’s been on the public teat for 30 years, and whose level of arrogance rivals that Creating the News Network’s Jim Acosta claims he’s carrying out the will of the people, if they were smart enough to know what they thought. “I represent the people; I was elected,” Evans pontificated, overlooking the fact Initiative 77 passed in his district.

Council member Trayon White Sr., who President Trump agrees makes Don Lemon look like a Nobel Laureate, claims the “vote is irrelevant.”

And don’t think this is the first time the council has nullified the will of the people. Since the 80s the politicians have overturned initiatives four times. The most egregious being a 2001 rejection of term limits and an earlier disposal of limits on local campaign contributions.

‘Woke’ Washingtonians who are talking about “flat–out voter suppression” and “openly ignoring votes” haven’t quite made the connection that the only elected officials and bureaucrats that are actively working to nullify or overturn elections are their own beloved leftists.

Trump is still Hitler. Even though Initiative 77 voters and the president have much in common. Both are fighting entrenched politicians, lobbyists, contributors and bureaucrats whose power is threatened by outsiders like grassroots initiative supporters and former reality TV stars.