STEVEN MOSHER: I WITNESSED IN CHINA THE POPULATION CONTROL POLICIES BERNIE SANDERS WANTS FOR AMERICA

Steven Mosher: I Witnessed in China the Population Control Policies Bernie Sanders Wants for America

Bernie should watch this documentary before proposing population control as a “solution” to global warming–or anything else, for that matter

Breitbart – SEPTEMBER 16, 2019

Democrat presidential candidate and avowed socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont has aligned himself with those who think that babies are nasty little carbon emitters and need to be eliminated in large numbers to save the planet.  He has endorsed taxpayer funding of abortions around the world as part of a plan to combat overpopulation and fight climate change.

His startling proposal came in response to a questioner at CNN’s seven-hour climate town hall, who suggested that “the need to curb population growth”–that is, population control–was a way “to address climate catastrophe.”

He jumped up out of his seat and practically shouted, “Yes!”  He went on to claim that poor women around the world were having lots of babies they didn’t want.

Actually, women in poor countries, like women everywhere, pretty much have the number of children they want. Unless of course they live in a country which practices population control.  Take China, for example, which for decades has dictated to women how many children they can have–one–and when they can have it.

A new documentary called One Child Nation explains how this worked in practice in China. Bernie should watch it before proposing population control as a “solution” to global warming–or anything else, for that matter.

The documentary details the 35 years of suffering that Chinese women and girls endured under the policy, which ended in 2015.

Read more

 

‘SAVE THE TREES, KILL THE CHILDREN’: AUSTIN, TEXAS CITY COUNCIL GIVES $150,000 TO FUND ABORTIONS

‘Save the Trees, Kill the Children’: Austin, Texas City Council Gives $150,000 to Fund Abortions

Measure will invariably lead to deaths of more unborn babies

SEPTEMBER 11, 2019

The Austin, Texas, city council this week passed a measure giving $150,000 of taxpayer money to fund abortions.

On Tuesday, the council announced a budget package allocating the cash to the city’s Public Health Department, which in turn will distribute the money to groups helping poor women secure abortions.

“Pro-choice” Austin City Councilman Greg Casar praised the bill for increasing “access to abortion,” a move that will invariably lead to the death of unborn babies.

“Every day the anti-abortion elements in Texas, in Washington, D.C., and elsewhere, wake up and think, ‘How can we restrict access to abortion today,’” Casar told NBC. “That makes it our job, every day, to work to expand access to abortion and health care and other basic services related to abortion.”

Texas pro-life groups, however, lamented the fact the city passes resolutions to protect the environment and not the unborn.

“It is appalling the city of Austin doubled-down on its policies to ‘save the trees, kill the children,’” said Nicole Hudgins with the pro-life group Texas Values. “This budget amendment is a political stunt attempting to circumvent the law. If the city really wants to help women, they should lower their taxes and stop killing innocent children.”

LifeNews.com’s Micaiah Bilger notes Texas Gov. Greg Abbott passed a resolution this year preventing local governments from funding organizations which perform abortions, however, the city’s new measure appears to be an attempt to skirt that law by instead giving the money to groups that assist women in obtaining abortions.

Bilger writes the money could in effect fund late-term abortions by paying for women to travel to states where the practice is legal.

Pro-life group Texas Right to Life labeled the council’s measure “grotesque news.”

“This grotesque news is another example of the abortion industry exploiting taxpayers to profit off vulnerable women and kill preborn children,” they wrote.

FLASHBACK: On This Day in 2001, Bush Officials Announced That $2.3 Trillion Went Missing at the Pentagon

And then we all know what happened a day later…

By Shane Trejo

While the anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon are remembered every year with heavy hearts, the bizarre and inexplicable events that happened the day before are usually glossed over, lost down the memory hole due to the war on terror that has gripped the nation for nearly 18 years now.

On Sept. 10, 2001, then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld announced that $2.3 trillion had gone missing at the Pentagon. He made a statement blaming the corrupt and inefficient bureaucracy for these funds vanishing essentially into thin air.

CBS News issued a report as apart of their “Eye on America” series about the loss of funds, and how that scandal was conveniently lost in the shuffle only a day after it was made public:

While Rumsfeld’s announcement could have garnered widespread outrage and eventually sparked an impetus to reform the out-of-control Pentagon bureaucracy, that was made impossible after the attacks as the public suddenly supported even more national defense spending to defeat global terrorism.

Since the attacks, the problem of disappearing defense funds has gotten exponentially worse. It was widely reported earlier this year that the Pentagon can not account for $21 trillion in spending as the military-industrial complex has swelled to unforeseen proportions while endless wars continue throughout the Middle East.

Forbes published an analysis by top economists of the astronomical military waste at the Pentagon:

Mark Skidmore and Catherine Austin Fitts, former Assistant Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, conducted a search of government websites and found similar reports dating back to 1998. While the documents are incomplete, original government sources indicate $21 trillion in unsupported adjustments have been reported for the Department of Defense and the Department of Housing and Urban Development for the years 1998-2015.

While government budgets can be complex, our government, like any business, can track receipts and payments and share this information in ways that can be understood by the public. The ongoing occurrence and gargantuan nature of unsupported, i.e., undocumented, U.S. federal government expenditures as well as sources of funding for these expenditures should be a great concern to all tax payers.

Taken together these reports point to a failure to comply with basic Constitutional and legislative requirements for spending and disclosure. We urge the House and Senate Budget Committee to initiate immediate investigations of unaccounted federal expenditures as well as the source of their payment.

While the credible reports of unprecedented government waste are disheartening enough, new developments show that more than bureaucratic incompetence may have proceeded the 9/11 attacks. A recent academic study commissioned by the University of Alaska-Fairbanks has concluded that office fires could not have caused the fall of building seven of the World Trade Center, casting aspersions on the official story offered by federal investigators.

Until a new independent investigation is commissioned, serious and troubling questions will always remain about arguably the most consequential day in American history.

REPORT: Leaked Documents Show How Democrats Will Go After Trump In 2020

By Joseph Curl

The Democratic National Committee opposition research team has begun to set out how Democrats plan to go after President Trump in the 2020 election, according to a new report.

Democrats have collected piles of information laying out the president’s vulnerabilities, Axios reports. “The research includes roughly 7,000 lawsuits, as well an extensive document detailing every time then-candidate Trump told supporters at his 2016 campaign rallies that Mexico would pay for the wall.”

“The DNC research team has mined thousands of lawsuits from nearly 50 states as part of a massive new trove on President Trump that will be weaponized through pols and reporters in key battlegrounds,” Axios writes. Other details from Axios include:

  • A source familiar said this document will likely find its way to local reporters, groups and Democrats in battleground states as Trump diverts funds from the military to pay for his border wall.
  • The DNC has examples of what farmers and truckers say they feel about Trump’s tariffs, the way he’s “trashed American wheat,” and how the GOP tax law hurt truckers.
  • They’ve combed through local news articles and monitored local cable interviews with residents in states like Iowa, Minnesota, Michigan, Arizona, Colorado, Florida and Texas to find these folks who are being hurt by Trump’s policies.
  • And they’ve already filed “thousands” of Freedom of Information Act requests to get even more info on the president.

Axios says “using Trump’s specific actions and broken promises is how DNC chairman Tom Perez is advising party officials and surrogates to define him in states he won in 2016 that they think are crucial to their 2020 election efforts.”

Last week, some 20 Democratic operatives and strategists met, including Perez, who said the plan is to “make it about [Trump’s] performance as president, not his bigotry or awfulness,” according to one source in the room, Axios writes. “Prosecute the case that he is bad at his job and it is hurting people in real ways.”

  • Democrats can point to “so many ways his actual policies have really hurt people or how he’s been ineffective in fulfilling his promises,” said one Democrat familiar with the DNC’s plans to define Trump in 2020.
  • “Let’s say he goes to Youngstown, Ohio. We have everything he said, what he promised in 2016 to that community — maybe it’s ‘that bridge will be fixed’ — then we’ll show what’s actually happened since.”

See the full Axios report here

Elijah Cummings Probes Trump Officials over Pence’s Stay in Ireland

(INSET: Vice President Mike Pence in Ireland) WASHINGTON, DC - AUGUST 07: House Oversight ant Reform Chairman Rep. Elijah Cummings speaks at the National Press Club August 7, 2019 in Washington, DC. Cummings addressed members of the organization during a luncheon and touched on a number of issues including ongoing …

SEAN MORAN

Breitbart News has exclusively obtained letters House Oversight Committee Chairman Elijah Cummings (D-MD) sent to Donald Trump administration officials, as well as Trump Organization officials, regarding Vice President Mike Pence’s stay at a Trump hotel in Ireland.

Democrats quickly attacked Vice President Pence regarding his stay at Trump International Golf Links In Doonbeg, Ireland. Pence chief of staff Marc Short insisted that the VP’s office followed protocol and received State Department signoff on the trip. Short also said that Pence is personally covering the costs for his mother and his sister to stay at the Trump hotel. Pence’s office has insisted that President Trump did not “direct” the vice president to stay the Trump hotel in Ireland.

Breitbart News exclusively obtained letters that Chairman Cummings sent to White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney, U.S. Secret Service Director James Murray, Vice President chief of staff Short, and Trump Organization Chief Financial Officer Allen Weisselbergregarding Pence’s stay at the Trump hotel in Ireland.

Elijah Cummings Letter to Marc Short by Breitbart News on Scribd

Chairman Cummings said in the letters to the officials that the Democrat-led Oversight Committee “does not believe that U.S. taxpayer funds should be used to personally enrich President Trump, his family, and his companies.”

From these documents obtained by Breitbart News, Cummings wishes to know how much the trip cost the “American taxpayer–or benefited the Trump organization.” The Maryland congressman suggested that this trip might amount to a “conflict of interest” and “waste of taxpayer funds,” or even a violation of the Domestic Emoluments Clause of the Constitution.

Cummings cited that the Emoluments Clause stipulates that the president can receive a salary during his tenure in office but that “he shall not receive within that Period any other Emolument from the United States, or any of them.”

Cummings demanded that the White House hand over documents with “itemized costs” for Pence’s trip, as well as the costs for President Trump’s June 2019 trip to Trump Doonbeg.

Chairman Cummings’ inquiry into Pence’s trip to Ireland has incensed those close to the White House.

One source close to the White House told Breitbart News, “First they attack the President. If they can’t get the President, they attack the people closest to him. This is nothing more than political harassment to people closest to the President. Will House Democrats ever pass meaningful legislation, or will these witch hunts just never end?” 

OBAMA JUDGE RULES MEDICAID MUST PAY FOR TRANSGENDER SEX REASSIGNMENT SURGERY

Obama Judge Rules Medicaid Must Pay For Transgender Sex Reassignment Surgery

Federal judge is forcing Wisconsin taxpayers to provide costly sex reassignment surgery and hormonal procedures for low-income transgender residents

JudicialWatch.org – AUGUST 23, 2019

An Obama-appointed federal judge is forcing Wisconsin taxpayers to provide costly sex reassignment surgery and hormonal procedures for low-income transgender residents who get free medical care from the government.

In a recently issued ruling U.S. District Judge William M. Conley writes that Medicaid, the publicly funded insurance that covers 65.7 million poor people, cannot deny the medical treatment needs of those suffering from “gender dysphoria.” Officials estimate it will cost up to $1.2 million annually to provide transgender Medicaid recipients in the Badger State with treatments such as “gender confirmation” surgery, including elective mastectomies, hysterectomies, genital reconstruction and breast augmentation. The intricate operations are typically done by plastic surgeons.

The ruling culminates a lawsuit filed more than a year ago by two transgender Wisconsinites, who accuse the federal and state-funded insurance program of providing them with disparate and inferior health care on the basis of sex. Cody Flack of Green Bay and Sara Makenzie of Baraboo say they suffer from severe gender dysphoria that requires costly surgery. Flack, a woman, claims to be ashamed of her breasts and wants to have them surgically removed as she transitions into a man’s body. To make a case for the government to pay for her surgery, she claims that she engages in “binding,” which flattens her breasts and causes sores, skin irritation and respiratory distress. Flack also has difficulty binding her breasts due to a disability, according to court documents. Makenzie, a man who legally changed his name to Sara and wears women’s clothing, says his “male-appearing genitalia” causes him “great distress” and negatively affects his sexuality and social life. Showering and seeing his body in a mirror is “painful,” court records state, and Makenzie fears someone will be able to see his “male genitals” through his clothing.

Last summer Judge Conley issued a preliminary injunction ordering Wisconsin to cover sex reassignment surgery for Flack and Makenzie while state health officials appealed. The permanent ruling directing the state-federal insurance for the poor to pay for all gender confirmation operations in the state was issued last week. To lay the foundation, Conley writes in the injunction that gender dysphoria is a serious medical condition, which if left untreated can cause adverse symptoms. “As a group, transgender individuals have been subjected to harassment and discrimination in virtually every aspect of their lives, including in housing, employment, education, and health care,” according to the document. “Their own families, acquaintances and larger communities can be sources of harassment. For some transgender individuals, though certainly not all, the dissonance between their gender identity and their naturally assigned sex can manifest itself in the form of gender dysphoria, a serious medical condition recognized by both sides’ experts and the larger medical community as a whole.”

Though Medicaid initially denied Flack’s chest reconstructive surgery, it was eventually completed at taxpayer expense after the judge’s injunction. A plastic surgeon performed a double mastectomy and male chest construction last fall. “Following the surgery, Cody’s gender dysphoria was greatly diminished,” according to Conley’s final ruling, because his “outward appearance matched his male gender” and he “would no longer be misgendered because of his breasts.” Makenzie got a bilateral orchiectomy and vaginoplasty to create “female appearing external genitalia” after the judge determined that the surgeries are medically necessary. Because Medicaid refused to cover chest reconstruction surgery prior to the lawsuit, Makenzie obtained a personal loan to pay a plastic surgeon at the University of Wisconsin Hospital for the operation in 2016. Court documents say Makenzie contends that the surgery helped alleviate his gender dysphoria.

In his decision, Judge Conley cites guidelines issued by the World Professional Association of Transgender Health to treat transsexual, transgender and gender nonconforming people. Treatments include psychotherapy, hormone therapy and “a number of surgical procedures” to eliminate the development of unwanted secondary sex characteristics of the assigned sex, develop secondary sex characteristics of the sex associated with the patient’s gender identity and enhance the patient’s ability to “pass” as the sex associated with the patient’s gender identity to decrease harassment, mistreatment and other forms of discrimination.

Trump Ending Welfare-Dependent Immigration, Saving Taxpayers Billions

Screen Shot 2019-08-12 at 11.13.48 AM

By John Binder

President Trump is set to save American taxpayers billions of dollars as his administration announces a new rule on Monday that will essentially ban welfare-dependent legal immigrants from permanently resettling in the United States.

A new regulation set to be published by the Trump administration will ensure that legal immigrants would be less likely to secure a permanent residency in the U.S. if they have used any forms of welfare in the past, including using subsidized healthcare services, food stamps, and public housing.

The regulation will be a boon for American taxpayers in the form of an annual $57.4 billion tax cut — the amount taxpayers spend every year on paying for the welfare, crime, and schooling costs of the country’s mass importation of 1.5 million new, mostly low-skilled legal immigrants.

The National Academies of Science released a report two years ago, noting that state and local American taxpayers are billed about $1,600 each year per immigrant to pay for their welfare, where immigrant households consume 33 percent more cash welfare than American citizen households.

A recent Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) study notes that about 63 percent of noncitizen households in the U.S. use at least one form of taxpayer-funded welfare, while only about 35 percent of native-born American households are on welfare. This means that noncitizen households use nearly twice as much welfare as native-born American households.

In California — with the largest noncitizen population in the country at almost 11 million or nearly 30 percent of the state’s total population — more than seven-in-ten, or 72 percent, of households headed by noncitizens are on at least one form of welfare. Compare that to the findings that only about seven-in-twenty, or 35 percent, of native-born households in California are on welfare.

Screen Shot 2019-08-12 at 11.17.33 AM

Preventing Americans from being forced to foot the bill for welfare for newly arrived legal immigrants is hugely popular among U.S. voters. A Rasmussen Reports poll conducted in 2017 revealed that more than six-in-ten voters, or 62 percent, said they would support a plan that bans legal immigrants from receiving welfare for at least the first five years of their residency in the country. Roughly 67 percent of swing voters and nearly 60 percent of black Americans said they would support such a plan.

Another 76 percent of U.S. voters said welfare users should be mandated to prove that they are not in the country illegally before being allowed to obtain public benefits, including 74 percent of black Americans, 77 percent of swing voters, and 63 percent of Democrat voters.

Currently, there is an estimated record high of 44.5 million foreign-born residents living in the U.S. This is nearly quadruple the immigrant population in 2000. The vast majority of those arriving in the country every year are low-skilled legal immigrants who compete against working and middle-class Americans for jobs.

Five Of The Craziest Moments From The CNN Tuesday Night Democratic Debate (VIDEOS)

By Aleister – JULY 31, 2019

The first night of the second 2019 Democratic debate on CNN had some wild moments.

We’re not going to bother with the moments the candidates or the CNN audience liked.

We want to point out some of the crazier moments that will probably be overlooked by the media.

Here are five examples.

5. Marianne Williamson

While talking about Democrats taking corporate donations, Williamson invoked a joke from Seinfeld and suggested that voters are going to “yadda, yadda, yadda, right over them. Watch:

4. Pete Buttigieg

When the subject of the minimum wage came up, Pete Buttigieg, who frequently implies that he is more Christian than anyone else, suggested that you are not a decent Christian if you don’t support raising the minimum wage. Watch:

3. Don Lemon

CNN host Don Lemon was included as a moderator in this debate for some reason. He is not a journalist, he is an opinion guy and he absolutely hates Trump. He made that crystal clear with this question. Note the wording:

2. John King

John King, another CNN host, said something factual in his post-debate analysis. He suggested that this field of candidates is further left than any Democrat who has ever won the presidency, including Obama. Watch:

1. Elizabeth Warren

When asked a direct question about whether her healthcare plans would raise taxes on the middle class, Warren refused to give a straight answer. What a surprise. Watch:

Bonus: Bernie Sanders

Bernie got louder and louder as the night went on and Tim Ryan commented on it.

What a clown show.

Trump Administration Rule Proposal Will Cut 3 Million Undeserving People Off Food Stamps

Screen Shot 2019-07-25 at 11.04.02 AM

By Jeff Dunetz

The Trump administration is proposing a rule change that would cut up to 3.1 million people from the food stamp program, saving taxpayers $2.5 billion annually.

The revised regulation would require people who currently receive Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, or TANF, to undergo a separate income review to determine if they are eligible for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).

Currently, U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) officials say, 43 states automatically allow their reside

“Some states are taking advantage of loopholes that allow people to receive the SNAP benefits who would otherwise not qualify and for which they are not entitled,” Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue revealed in a conference call.

Screen Shot 2019-07-25 at 11.07.36 AM

“This proposal will save money and preserve the integrity of the program,” Perdue argued, adding that “SNAP should be a temporary safety net.”

Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) said the rule change is an attempt by the administration to “circumvent Congress and make harmful changes to nutrition assistance that have been repeatedly rejected on a bipartisan basis.”

The Trump administration has argued that a booming economy has helped lower the unemployment rate to full employment, making food stamp assistance less necessary.

When Barack Obama entered office in 2009, about 33 million Americans were enrolled in SNAP. By 2013, that number had shot upto 48 million, an indication of his awful economic programs.

On the other hand, because of his successful economic programs , two million Americans dropped from the food stamp program during Trump’s first year as President, which at that time was the lowest point in eight years.

The President announced earlier this month that “Food Stamp participation hits 10 year low,” a comment verified by left-leaning fact-checking website, Politifact.

During his State of the Union address, President Trump bragged about the roaring economy and its role in changing how more people are working instead of relying on food stamps.

“Wages are rising at the fastest pace if decades and growing for blue-collar workers who I promised to fight for, they’re growing faster than anyone else thought possible,” he said to uproarious applause. “Nearly five million Americans have been lifted off food stamps.”

Work is the most critical way to escape poverty. President Trump s proving that.

Cross-Posted with Mental Recession

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑