Saturday, March 18, 2017

Philip Rose — White Genoicde Myth

White genocide conspiracy theory is a white nationalist conspiracy theory that mass immigration, integration, miscegenation, low fertility rates and abortion are being promoted in predominantly white countries to deliberately turn them minority-white and hence cause white people to become extinct through forced assimilation.


Friday, March 10, 2017

Yvette Carnell — Y'all Roasted Ben Carson, but Obama Thinks We Are Immigrants Too

Stephen L. Carter — The Ideology Behind Intolerant College Students

Stephen L. Carter is a Bloomberg View columnist. He is a professor of law at Yale University and was a clerk to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall.

(Bloomberg View) Here’s what’s scariest about the last week's incident at Middlebury College, where protesters shouted down the social scientist Charles Murray and injured a professor who was escorting him from the venue: It felt like an everyday event. So common has such odious behavior become that it's tempting to greet it with a shrug.

According to the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, 2016 saw a record number of efforts to keep controversial speakers from being heard on campus -- and that's just in the U.S. To be sure, not all of the attempts succeeded, and the number catalogued, 42, is but a small fraction of the many outsiders who give addresses at colleges and universities each year. The real number of rejected speakers is certainly much higher, once we add in all the people not invited in the first place because some member of this or that committee objects to their views, or because campus authorities fear trouble. But even one would be too many. 

Read more:

De-globalization and the arrival of Trump | Dambisa Moyo

"Maybe Trump is the shock we need so we can make more equitative decisions and not favor just a little group of people". Dambisa Moyo, renowned global economist and WOBI speaker, explains Trump's triumph in the light of de-globalization. 

Tuesday, February 28, 2017

The GOP’s Long History With Black Colleges Could President Trump actually win over the leaders of historically black colleges and universities

(Politico) Just hours after Donald Trump was sworn in as America’s 45th president, the tricky political relationship between Republican presidents and historically black colleges and universities was already on display.

Talladega College, one of the 105 black colleges dotting the United States, seized on the rare opportunity for its marching band to participate in a presidential inaugural parade, raising nearly $700,000 in the process. Its presence also served as a symbolic gesture of inclusion for a newly elected president who has faced persistent accusations of racial intolerance. On campus and beyond, Talladega’s decision was deeply controversial—even alumni were overwhelmingly opposed to the school participating—and spurred a debate over whether the exposure and experience was worth being viewed as a political prop.

In the tenuous relationship between Republican leaders and historically black schools, this is the way it has been for a long time. Politics makes for strange bedfellows—as is undoubtedly true of Trump and Talladega—but the blend of political expediency and areas of ideological overlap have proved a strong enough elixir to bring the two together and sustain a relationship over time. Together, they march to their own beat.

Of course, relationships forged out of expedience do not often lead to lasting bonds of friendship. But, to paraphrase Henry Kissinger, it’s not about friends, but interests—both political and financial.

A Young Cuban-American Speaks Out on Castro's Death & Cuba's Future

In which an old law school friend schools me about where Cuba's been and where it's going now that "The Beard" is dead.

Monday, February 27, 2017

The Black Conservative Intellectual Civil War

There is a civil war occurring between the intellectual, solution-driven black conservatives and the fame-oriented, pseudo-intellectuals on the black right. The winners of this war will determine the political future of black America.

The leftist assessment of the black conservative is that such a person is angered and frustrated at being born black, which leads to the adoption of conservative views in order to compensate for this perceived “congenital deficiency.” While this is a preposterous accusation to make against all black conservatives, it is intellectually dishonest to pretend as though this characterization of the black right came into existence wholly out of left field. Indubitably, there are some black conservatives whose proclamations and behaviors lend credence to the stereotypical leftist view of black conservatives.

Black conservatives are not intellectually monolithic, and we certainly do not read from the same script of talking points. Essentially, black conservatives can be divided into two groups: solution-oriented black conservatives and fame-oriented black conservatives. Solution-oriented black conservatives prefer to use their platforms to intellectually engage with people and offer serious ways to move black people forward. Inevitably, this encompasses astutely criticizing both the left and the right when criticism is required.

By contrast, fame-oriented black conservatives feign interest in issues regarding black progress, when, in reality, popularity among white conservatives and profit are their fundamental goals. Fame-oriented black conservatives never see an opportunity to bash black people and black liberal leadership that they do not take, but they conveniently manage to turn a blind eye to every shortcoming and malfeasance of white conservatives. Fame-oriented black conservatives are the right-wing versions of the Al Sharptons and Jesse Jacksons. They are people who care more about their bank accounts than bettering the lives of black people.

There is a civil war occurring between the intellectual, solution-driven black conservatives and the fame-oriented, pseudo-intellectuals on the black right. The winners of this war will determine the political future of black America. If the black conservative continues to be identified as a self-hating person who is simply a puppet for white conservatives, black people will never associate with the Republican Party or American conservatism. However, if this war is won by black conservative intellectuals who are truly about black elevation—and not the elevation of their personal bank account balances—black conservatism has a chance of truly permeating the inner cities and changing the voting behaviors of black people.

The most identifiable feature of fame-oriented black conservatives is their absurdist addiction to the inconsequential issue of whether or not blacks choose to identify as African American or just American. They call this the “unhyphenated American” movement. While this issue is unimportant to regular people, it is deeply important to pseudo-intellectual, fame-oriented black conservatives, because it is the key issue that they use to ingratiate themselves with white conservatives.

When “Rev.” Jesse Lee Peterson—a darling of the white right and “unhyphenated American”—argued that blacks being carried on slave ships is equivalent to traveling on coach airplanes, before earnestly thanking white people for slavery and removing his forefathers from Africa, he was not making an argument to reach out to other blacks. Rather, Peterson was talking to a certain white conservative audience that enjoys such rhetoric—particularly coming from a black man. It is no wonder why Sean Hannity comfortably sits on the board of Peterson’s organization dedicated to the supposed “advancement of black men.” 

Similarly, E.W. Jackson is another black conservative whose fundamental goal is to be seen as a black hero by white conservatives, rather than to be a serious thinker articulating ways of bettering the lives of black people. His political proclamations are more geared towards bashing President Obama and liberals with vituperative and exaggerated language. Jackson’s slash-and-burn approach to political rhetoric is not designed to appeal to the human capacity for ratiocination. It is designed to get headlines, which, in turn, will endear him to the white right.

Liberals are quick to promote black conservatives like Jesse Lee Peterson and E.W. Jackson, because they fit the stereotype of black conservatives that is beneficial to the left. When men like Peterson and Jackson are held up as the black conservative standard, liberals do not need to offer counterarguments. Rather, all they need to do is point and laugh. White conservatives, too, promote these black conservatives, primarily because they say the outrageous things that white conservatives have in their minds but dare not say. Meanwhile, solution-oriented black conservatives are marginalized because such black conservatives do not exist for the sole purpose of making white conservatives feel good—and the arguments from solution-oriented black conservatives are often too logical for leftists to refute.

There is a tendency on the right to unwaveringly support every person who claims to be a conservative. It is almost as though a good conservative has the duty to be less critical of other conservatives’ shortcomings and only focus on attacking people who hold different ideologies. This is incredibly damaging, inasmuch as it allows people to go under the radar and use the cloak of conservatism for all sorts of nefarious goals. Solution-oriented black conservatives need to understand that the fame-oriented black conservatives are not on our side. Whenever and wherever possible, we must expose them in order to protect the intellectual health and reputation of the black conservative movement.

Fame-oriented black conservatives will win the intellectual civil war if they are not exposed for their use of black conservatism as a means of personal enrichment. They are the people who allow the leftist caricature of black conservatives to have believability. Creating an unmistakable distinction between solution- and fame-oriented black conservatives is an important step to improving the image of conservatism among black people. Once this occurs, black people will be more receptive to hearing about the superiority of conservative ideas to the dull liberal ideas that have failed black America for many decades.

Chidike Okeem is a writer. Born in Nigeria, raised in London, England, and now living in California, he writes about race, culture, religion, and politics. You can find contact information and read more of his writings at

Friday, February 17, 2017

The Hidden Black Iraq

Basra's more than the center of Iraq's oil industry; it's the center of a centuries-old history of African influence.

Image source: The New York Times

There has been a black presence in Basra -- present-day Southern Iraq -- as early as the 7th century, when Abu Bakra, an Ethiopian soldier who had been manumitted by the prophet Muhammad himself, settled in the city. His descendants became prominent members of Basran society. A century later, the writer Jahiz of Basra wrote an impassioned defense of black Africans -- referred to in Arabic as the Zanj -- against accusations of inferiority which had begun to take root even then.

The Zanj, who were primarily persons of East African descent, were to have a significant impact upon Iraqi history. They had been traded from ports along the African coast (Zanzibar, which is derived from the term "Zanj," was a major slave exporting center during the era) to clear salt marshes. Laboring in miserable, humid conditions, the Zanj workers dug up layers of topsoil and dragged away tons of earth to plant labor-intensive crops like sugarcane on the less saline soil below. Fed scant portions of flour, semolina and dates, they were constantly in conflict with the Iraqi slave system. Between the 7th and 9th centuries, the Zanj staged three rebellions, the largest of which occurred between 868 and 883 AD.

Read more:

Also, check out this article in the New York Times about Iraq's current black population, and how color-blind policies play a part in their suffering. 

Thursday, February 2, 2017

Lift Every Voice And Sing by Former representative Barbara Jordan (D-Tex.)


Dr. Kiron Skinner - The Polio Vaccine, the GI Bill, and National Security


Dr. Kiron is Associate Professor of International Relations and Politics and Director of the Center for International Relations and Politics at Carnegie Mellon University. She is a Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution and a member of the Shultz-Stephenson Task Force on Energy Policy, the U.S. Defense Department's Defense Policy Board, the Pacific Council on International Policy, and the Council on Foreign Relations. She serves on the board of the Atlantic Council of the United States, has coauthored several books with Serhiy Kudelia, Bruce Bueno de Mesquita, and Condoleezza Rice, and is a frequent contributor to, National Review Online, the New York Times, and The Wall Street Journal. Kiron holds undergraduate degrees from Spellman College and Sacramento City College and M.A. and Ph.D. degrees in Political Science and International Relations from Harvard University.

Monday, January 23, 2017

CeCe Winans and Terrence Blanchard – “Blessed Assurance” Cicely Tyson Kennedy Center Honors

John McWhorter — How to Listen to Donald Trump Every Day for Years

NYT piece on Trump's inaugural, his linguistic style and how it's easier to listen to him if you pretend he's twelve.

  (The New York Times)

Donald J. Trump’s Inaugural Address had moments of what we could call rhetoric. The bit about the kid in Detroit and the kid on the “windswept plains of Nebraska” — black and white, get it? — looking up at the same night sky. Overall, though, there was the air of a diligent adolescent trying to put something down on paper but not quite hitting the mark. “America is totally unstoppable” sounds like a schoolyard brag. “We will bring back our borders” — where did they go? The “very sad depletion of our military” — it’s impossible to imagine Barack Obama, or even George W. Bush, phrasing it that way in a written speech.

His audience liked the applause lines, as they always do. But it’s hard to resist laughing at Trumpian syntax. I am given to indulging in it with a finger of bourbon after long days. My favorite so far is this insight from a South Carolina rally in 2015:

Read more:

Peter Wehner — Why I Cannot Fall in Line Behind Trump

"For Mr. Trump, nothing is sacred. The truth is malleable, instrumental, subjective. It is all about him."

(The New York Times)

A year ago, I declared on these pages that despite being a Republican my whole life, I would not under any circumstances vote for Donald J. Trump for president. Since then, I’ve been asked by other Republicans if I kept that promise (I did) and whether I regret it (I don’t).

Republicans who disagree with my stance make the following argument: Mr. Trump, while flawed, is preferable to Hillary Clinton. His cabinet appointments, they say, have been reassuring, and it’s true that several of them are. In addition, the nominee to replace Antonin Scalia on the Supreme Court is certain to be more of an originalist than a Clinton appointment would be. On top of that, Republicans are in control of Congress, meaning they are likely to drive much of the agenda, particularly given Mr. Trump’s notable lack of interest in policy. Whatever misgivings anti-Trump conservatives might have had about him, he’ll undo much of the agenda of his liberal predecessor while Mrs. Clinton would have built on it.

This case is hardly irrational, and over time it may be proved right. President Trump may govern well and in a conservative manner, and my concerns about him may eventually look misguided and silly.

But I doubt it.

To understand why, it’s worth keeping in mind that my chief worries about Mr. Trump were never strictly ideological; they had to do with temperament and character.

Read more:

Reginald Kaigler — President Elect Donald J Trump

My reaction to the election of Donald Trump and why I decided to vote in 2016.

Akil Alleyne — Discussion & Debate: Defunding Planned Parenthood

A pro-life friend of mine makes the case for defunding Planned Parenthood from a libertarian perspective (and no, that's not self-contradictory, partly for reasons you'll hear in the video).

Support me on Patreon!

For an article about the Ohio state representative who couldn't name any reasons why women have abortions, see

Chidike Okeem — Capitalism, White Supremacy, and Black Entrepreneurship

Despite capitalism’s many blemishes and imperfections, it is the only system of economic development that has the proven power to lift people out of poverty. Given the state of the American economy and the fact that African Americans are consistently on the lower end of the socioeconomic totem pole, it is imperative that black people embrace capitalism and skillfully utilize the power of entrepreneurship.

Capitalism is unwisely pilloried and attacked because it was used in the service of white supremacy. In American history, not only was black slave labor stolen, but black slaves were also sold and bought as commodities. However, it is logically sloppy to think that capitalism is inherently evil and possesses zero benefits just because it can be thwarted and used as an artifice of evil and oppression. Christianity, too, was thwarted and used as a tool of mass control and oppression. To argue that Christianity has done no good for the world just because evil manipulators misused it for their invidious goals would be absurd.

It is important to note that capitalism and white supremacy are not conjoined twins. Capitalism and white supremacy are not a package deal. One does not have to endorse white supremacy just because one endorses a proven economic system of development and growth. The most serious of black thinkers understand the importance of entrepreneurship and capitalism. However, black radicals irresponsibly conflate capitalism and white supremacy because they are more interested in fomenting victimhood than ending economic malaise.

In his indispensable 1933 book The Mis-Education of the Negro, Dr. Carter G. Woodson eloquently pointed out the absurdity of black people rejecting markets.

To say that the Negro cannot develop sufficiently in the business world to measure arms with present-day capitalists is to deny actual facts, refute history, and discredit the Negro as a capable competitor in the economic battle field of life. … Properly awakened, the Negro can do the so-called impossible in the business world and thus help to govern rather than merely be governed.

Saturday, December 17, 2016

Anthony Rek LeCounte ― 2016: The End of All Things

“Not everything is a god that failed.” –Tristyn K. Bloom

As the votes keep rolling in from Donald Trump’s election, I wound up in an argument with a dear friend about slavery and the Electoral College. Like many of my intelligent and thoughtful liberal friends, this New York transplant has developed a deep frustration a number of established institutions and contemporary trends that underscore substantial partisan divisions in the ways different sets of Americans understand the world we share.

A lot of anti-Trump people from underprivileged backgrounds feel particularly exasperated at the insistence of an notion they consider an insult to injury. Namely, after suffering the indignity of a Trump electoral upset, they are now being pushed (by people like me) to empathize with the plight of voters within the coalition that won control of everything without them. Their irritation is probably quite similar to that of conservatives who chafed at the 2012 autopsy and the perceived defeatism and collaborationism that spawned it and a litany of harsher criticisms.

I hear them, and conservatives certainly ought to do better to reach out and engage the concerns of Blue America, as I hope we will. (I confess he’s not yet off to a great start.) But for today, perhaps the most pertinent takeaway from 2012 is that people really are going crazy, but the world is less crazy and hopeless than it seems to those in despair.

Read more:

Dr. Dambisa Moyo — Why Africa can't depend on aid forever

The 2009 Munk Debates: Be it resolved, foreign aid does more harm than good Dambisa Moyo and Hernando De Soto argue in favour of the motion.

Michael David Cobb Bowen — Is the Axis Still Evil? Thinking of the Bush Doctrine

The Bush Doctrine, whatever it may have been cannot be considered absent the Powell Doctrine which was the military strategy of Desert Storm. The Powell Doctrine was the reaction to the Vietnam Syndrome. In short, the army we had was led by the generals working under the Shock and Awe doctrine of Colin Powell, whose principle was to use overwhelming force, crush the opposition and leave. NOT to hang around and try to rebuild a country you just destroyed.

Saddam Hussein had a million man army, and Powell was insistent, in a voice we haven’t heard since that state actors supporting terrorist networks were a greater threat than mere terrorist cells. It didn’t matter, thus, if Iraq were actually at war with the US, Al Qaeda would inevitably seek support in Iraq against the US.
So when I think of the Bush Doctrine, I think of his declaration of America’s top three enemies ‘The Axis of Evil’ in Iran, Iraq and North Korea, three regimes who were clearly American enemies and who would use their state’s resources to fund terror networks in asymmetrical warfare against the US.
Was Iraq closer than Iran in their race for an Islamic Bomb? I say demonstrably yes, and the Bush Administration, in cooperation with the UN and every nation did its best to keep nuclear inspectors engaged to a degree much higher and much more intrusively than we do today in Iran or North Korea.

John McWhorter — We need an old-school approach to Richard Spencer

No protest, however "inclusive," should wall itself off from what it's arguing against.

(CNN) When I was in college in the early 1980s, one of the more peculiar events in the fall was a visit from "Brother Jed Smock." Smock, a self-styled "confrontational evangelist," would plant himself at some central outdoor location and confidently preach against, well, you name it.

With his wife Cindy and assorted assistants standing nearby as a kind of Greek chorus, Jed would rail against not just alcohol, drugs, fornication and rock 'n' roll (seemingly just about anything that made life truly enjoyable) but also against homosexuals. I recall the old "Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve" line, and apparently he's still at it today, using the "we can pray the gay away" canard.
To be sure, it was a sport among many students to circle Smock and jeer at him, get into goofy exchanges with him, and even interrupt him as much as possible. I, in fact, learned a lot from watching this -- such as that people like Smock existed, for one thing, but more importantly what the handy arguments against them were. The Gay Alliance, at a time when such organizations were new to college campuses, was memorably articulate, I recall. They didn't tell Smock to shut up or circulate petitions to bar him from campus. His being able to air his views to an extent was part of the educational process, in providing something to respond to amid the lively give and take of actual exchange. There was no notion that human dignity required the campus grounds be a space "safe" from the likes of his speech.
They argued back -- eloquently.

Stephen L. Carter — Christmas in America Means the Usual Lawsuits


Christmas is right around the corner, meaning that the time has come for the usual passel of lawsuits and threats of lawsuits, of bitter division over words and symbols -- in short, of all the usual trimmings of the season.

Let’s do a quick roundup.

In New York City, on the Upper East Side, a lawyer has filed suit against a wealthy neighbor for playing Christmas music too loud outside her townhouse. The music apparently runs from 7 a.m. until midnight, and the plaintiff says he is not against Christmas music as such -- he just wants a break from his neighbor’s loudspeakers.

Read more:

Shirley Bassey - Diamonds Are Forever (HM The Queen's 90th Birthday)

In 2000, Shirley Bassey was made a Dame by Queen Elizabeth II for services to the performing arts. In 1977 she received the Brit Award for Best British Female Solo Artist in the previous 25 years. Her father is Nigerian, and her mother is English.  Source:

Dr. CHE Sadaphal — Justice and Scripture

                                                 Justice, and only justice, you shall pursue,
that you may live and possess the land
which the Lord your God is giving you.[1]
For I, the Lord, love justice.[2]
Justice is a concern that permeates the entire Bible. This concern is found, for example, in the history of Israel being liberated from Egyptian bondage; it is found in the proclamations of the prophets; it is found in the poetry and wisdom literature of the Old Testament; Jesus begins His public ministry by announcing that He is the one to fulfill the prophetic longing to liberate those who are victims of oppression.[3] Justice is integral to God’s character and His resultant plan for civil order and government.[4] Hence, talking about justice is never a social, political, or an economic matter. Rather, justice is primarily a theological concern—the Bible informs us that because God is just, He requires us to do justice.[5] And eschatologically speaking, The Lord will be the one to deliver final and ultimate justice.
Our discussion of justice is highly relevant to the topic at hand for one simple reason … Continue reading.

Dr. Elaina George — The Fix For Our Ailing Healthcare System

The stated intention behind Obamacare was to improve the healthcare system. However, it has become apparent that the changes implemented were based on incorrect assumptions: first, that having health insurance equals access to quality affordable healthcare; second, that central planning via government regulations and mandates could be used to control costs; and third, that the behavior of doctors and patients could be controlled by implementing rigid practice guidelines (i.e., value based medicine, care driven by algorithms instead of physician judgement) and increasingly shifting the cost of healthcare to patients leading them to self-ration by pricing them out respectively.

The end result has been an increase in healthcare costs, decreased competition among insurance companies with monopolies in some states, and a decrease in both primary care and specialist physicians. Whether you like Obamacare or not, an honest assessment would conclude that it is simply not sustainable.

There is a solution which would provide a solution for everyone.
  1. If you like Obamacare you can keep it.
Expand Medicaid and Medicare – Block grant money to the states so they can figure out a solution that works best for their unique needs. This would allow people who can’t afford it to have insurance.
  1. Free everyone from the mandate with the associated fines.
This would allow people who want to buy private insurance to become healthcare consumers and would encourage insurance companies to once again offer insurance products that people actually want and would buy (for example affordable catastrophic high deductible plans). You would likely get young healthy people to buy insurance increasing the pool of healthy people lowering the cost for everyone.

Read more:

Monday, November 28, 2016

John McWhorter —The Evolution of 'Like'

How the ubiquitous, often-reviled word associated with young people and slackers represents the ever-changing English language.

(Atlantic Monthly)

In our mouths or in print, in villages or in cities, in buildings or in caves, a language doesn’t sit still. It can’t. Language change has preceded apace even in places known for preserving a language in amber. You may have heard that Icelanders can still read the ancient sagas written almost a thousand years ago in Old Norse. It is true that written Icelandic is quite similar to Old Norse, but the spoken language is quite different—Old Norse speakers would sound a tad extraterrestrial to modern Icelanders. There have been assorted changes in the grammar, but language has moved on, on that distant isle as everywhere else.

It’s under this view of language—as something becoming rather than being, a film rather than a photo, in motion rather than at rest—that we should consider the way young people use (drum roll, please) like. So deeply reviled, so hard on the ears of so many, so new, and with such an air of the unfinished, of insecurity and even dimness, the new like is hard to, well, love. But it takes on a different aspect when you consider it within this context of language being ever-evolving.

Read more:

Thursday, November 17, 2016

Akil Alleyne — Lesson #1 of Trump's Win: Pride Goeth Before a Fall

The morals of the story: Obama's legacy is more or less finished; Ruth Bader Ginsburg had better live at least another 4 years; Democrats are about to fall back in love with the filibuster; and the American voter giveth, and the voter taketh away.

Anthony Rek LeCounte ― It’s Not Racist To Want Respect

The 2016 cycle turned out to be a change election, and the
Clinton campaign did not reflect that.

I watched the cold open for Saturday Night Live’s first post-election show almost on loop. Kate McKinnon’s rendition of Hallelujah is a moving tribute to the recently departed Leonard Cohen, but also a haunting ode simultaneously reflective of Hillary Clinton’s stunning political collapse and evocative of many millennials’ happy, golden college days. In that last capacity, it inspired some of the greatest sadness I’ve felt after the Election Day surprise, and for that moment I suspect I could appreciate the immense sorrow of decent, honest people who voted for Clinton and honestly believed, for whatever reasons, that she would have made a good president.

Going into this cycle, I wanted Hillary Clinton to be defeated, and I wanted Barack Obama’s legacy largely undone. I’m not sorry that such a result came about. But as much as I opposed them politically, I’m compelled to admit I didn’t want them to lose like this—humiliated and broken by a candidate of such marvelous deficiencies that his own voters acknowledged him unfit for the office. I didn’t want that for my friends, whom I dearly love, who invested their hopes and dreams in what they hoped was an election that would be a catalyst for a better world. Clinton and Obama deserved to lose, and their Democratic Party deserved to fall, but in a mildly less cruel world, the falling could have been a softer note of optimism and new hope reminiscent more of 2008 than 2000. But alas, here we are.

Continue reading

Ayo Sogunro ― Hello President Buhari, listen to the judiciary

Last week, in his Independence anniversary speech, President Muhammadu Buhari threw a jab at the Nigerian judiciary. The president said: “In fighting corruption, however, the government would adhere strictly by the rule of law. Not for the first time I am appealing to the judiciary to join the fight against corruption”. These words not only imply that the judiciary supports corruption, it also suggests that the judiciary has been acting outside due process. This is worrisome. Not just because the president’s words demean judicial institutions, but because they also damage the legitimacy of the judiciary.

This type of statement is the usual preface to executive interference in judicial matters.
It is no secret that the president blames the judiciary for the inefficiency of his anti-corruption crusade. He has touted the establishment of tribunals or special courts (likely under executive supervision) to try corruption cases. In fact, the Presidential Advisory Committee Against Corruption has gone as far as organising a seminar to “guide” judges on sentencing. These may seem proper to a layperson but, frankly, the president’s thinking on these matters is pedestrian at best, malicious at worst. It betrays ignorance of jurisprudence and judicial best practices.

Continue reading

Crystal Wright ― Deplorable liberal media glorify anti-Trump rioters

By far the most grotesque display of the liberal media’s entrenched hatred of the right and our Constitution’s first amendment right, is their collective post-election coverage of Trump protesters.
First published November 11, 2016 in the Toronto Sun

Someone should tell the New York Times that Donald Trump won the election, not Hillary Clinton.

Rather than reporting Trump’s stunning victory and upset, the rigged liberal media machine glorifies the anti-Trump rioters. Emblazoned on the front-page of the New York Times on Thursday was this incendiary headline: “DEMOCRATS, STUDENTS AND FOREIGN ALLIES FACE THE REALITY OF A TRUMP PRESIDENCY.”

Below this the sub headline of the lead article written by Patrick Healy and Jeremy W. Peters was even worse: “Grief and Glee as an Administration Once Unthinkable Takes Shape.” Notice the liberal propaganda is in full effect, referring to a Trump presidency as “unthinkable.” To many conservatives and Democrats, particularly blue-collar union workers who never voted Republican until they voted for Trump, the prospect of a Clinton corrupt presidency was unthinkable.

But the broader point is that in the face of Trump’s historic win, the elite liberal media is shamelessly doubling down on the very bias that helped elect Trump. In brazen fashion, the Times has become a rag of anti-American, leftist trash, ripping Trump in a way that looks like the publication isn’t honoring the results of the election.

Read the full article HERE.

Chidike Okeem ― Donald Trump and the Opening of the Gates of Hades

Checks and balances do sometimes curb basic corruption, but the idea that they have been an impediment to sheer wickedness and evil requires a phantasmagoric rewriting of American political history.

Donald Trump being elected as the 45th President of the United States is one of the most monumental calamities in modern world history. The pretense that Trump — despite being the next Leader of the Free World and Commander-in-Chief of the world’s foremost military — is powerless due to “checks and balances” is wholly insufferable. To hold this absurdist position is to willfully ignore the lion’s share of the American historical record. Donald Trump’s presidency, whether people like it or not, has opened the gates of Hades. White supremacist ideology is ascendant worldwide, and a Donald Trump presidency will likely be some of the darkest years in world history.
The notion that checks and balances can fully constrain Trump’s bigotry is erroneous. When politicians run in democratic elections, they are usually constrained by the fact that they are trying to get as many people as possible to vote for them. During this period, Trump engaged in some of the most overtly xenophobic rhetoric in the modern history of American politics. He launched his campaign with xenophobia and it is the defining element of his political identity. This overtly hateful rhetoric led to over 60 million Americans choosing him to become the next president. If the electoral process could not constrain Trump’s rhetoric, what makes people think attaining the most powerful office in the land will? Even if it is the case that Trump’s rhetoric becomes more measured, it will only be because his actions will speak markedly louder than his words.
Read the full article HERE.