The Democrat Party Today

My friends, I did not write this, but I could have – it’s all true and clearly articulated. I reprint it here so you can share with friends who have had their heads in the sand. Help them get those heads up and smell the smoking guns. The Wikipedia article says 30,000 trained activists but I hear estimates of more than 30,000 in training now. The goal is much more. Young people love revolutions – they do not think “what will we put in place when we overturn the existing order?” They have not studied economics or history; they don’t know that the only “fair” societies ever, were (1) very small, voluntary socialistic communes, like the Shakers (who died out) and monasteries and (2) ethical societies based on free market economics. Capitalism works well to make money, but it is an ugly system without ethics and morality.

From my friend Lois:

“This is what the Democrat party has become and it only gets worse from here.

It looks as if it is working already……
What You Should Know about the OFA (ORGANIZING FOR ACTION)”

If you had an army some 30,000 strong and a court system stacked over the decades with judges who would allow you to break the laws, how much damage could you do to a country? We are about to find out in America.

The ex-president said he was going to stay involved through community organizing and speak out on the issues, and that appears to be one post-administration promise he intends to keep. He has moved many of his administration’s top dogs over to an organization called Organizing for Action (OFA). ”

OFA is dedicated to organizing communities for progressive change. Issues are gun control, socialist healthcare, abortion, sexual equality, climate change, and of course, immigration reform. OFA members were propped up by the ex-“president’s” message from the shadows: “Organizing is the building block of everything great we’ve accomplished. Organizers around the country are organizing in their communities and OFA is one of the groups on the front lines. Commit to this work in 2016 and beyond.”

The OFA website says it obtained its “digital” assets from the ex-president’s re-election effort and that he inspired the movement. In short it’s the shadow government organization aimed at resisting and tearing down the Constitutional Republic.”

Paul Sperry, writing for the New York Post, says OFA is an army of agitators 30,000 strong who will fight President Donald Trump at every turn of his presidency and the ex-president “will command them from a bunker less than two miles from the White House. Sperry writes that the ex-president is setting up a shadow government to sabotage the incoming administration through a network of leftist nonprofits led by OFA, which is growing its war chest (currently more than $40 million) and has some 250 offices nationwide. OFA’s IRS filings, according to Sperry, indicate OFA has 32,525 volunteers nationwide. The ex-president and his wife will oversee the operation from their foundation office near the White House.”

Think about how this works. Trump issues an immigration executive order; OFA signals for protests and statements from Islamic and pro-immigrant leftist groups; ACLU lawyers file lawsuits in jurisdictions where activist judges obstruct the laws; volunteers are called to protest at airports and Congressional town hall meetings; the leftist media springs to action; the twittersphere lights up with revolutionary social media; violence ala University of California follows. All of this emanates from the ex-president’s signal that he is heartened by the protests. Sad times are ahead.”
Don’t believe there is an OFA?”
From Wikipedia:
“Organizing for Action (OFA) is a nonprofit 501(c)4 organization and community organizing project that advocates for the agenda of former U.S. President Barack Obama.[2][3] The organization is officially non-partisan,[3] but its agenda and policies are strongly allied with the Democratic Party.[4] It is the successor of Obama’s 2012 re-election campaign and of Organizing for America, which itself succeeded Obama’s 2008 campaign.[5]
Founded after Obama’s re-election, the group seeks to mobilize supporters in favor of Obama’s legislative priorities. OFA is registered as a 501(c)(4) organization,[6] which may advocate for legislation but is prohibited from specifically supporting political candidates.[7]”

Organizing for the overthrow of America!  To see footnotes – check out:

Dean Allen on Yellow Journalism

This just in…gotta love Dean Allen…


Arguing with the media is a waste of time.
The good news is, they are rapidly becoming irrelevant.

Fussing over an “all white” club is sort of silly too.
It is an obvious snipe at Gov. McMaster to just
gratuitously throw that in – imputing racial intolerance
to a man who clearly has non, nor has he ever.

All white club huh?
There have been lots of those:

The 66 Jews who wrote the books of the Bible
(actually fewer, because several authors like
Moses & Paul each wrote several.)

The Lord and his 12 Disciples.

The 56 men who signed the Declaration of Independence.

King John & all the Barons who placed their seals
on the Magna Charta. (There were no “signatures”
affixed to documents in the 1200’s)

The original Seven Mercury Astronauts.

The seventy scholars who translated the Latin Vulgate
into the King James Bible.

All the Kings of England.

All the General officers in the Union Army, during the
War Between the States. (Can’t say the same for the
Confederate army, because they had one Indian,
Stand Waite, a Cherokee from Oklahoma.)

All the presidents of the FORD Motor Company.

Every Prime Minister of Israel.

The folks who signed the Mayflower Compact.

Every athlete who ever won Olympic gold for swimming.

The folks on the far left of the political spectrum
want to make a big deal about any group of white
people and pretend they are bigoted.

By the way, listing clubs of all white men? Those on the
left have plenty of those too. How about the
Politburo, of the Central Committee, of the Communist Party,
of the Soviet Union? White as the driven snow!

All cows have four legs.
Lassie has four legs.
Therefore; Lassie is a cow?

Best Wishes,



What they really don’t like about Henry is the fact
he is a Republican, and was an early Trump supporter.
They teach them in yellow journalism 101, it is OK
to take cheap shots at folks like us (You, me, Henry.)

CNN has VD?

From a friend: ” I just watched a clip of some strange woman on CIA front…CNN…say they need to stop using the term “fake news”. It’s backfired onto the MSM. She prefers viral distortions or something and quite proud that it would now be VD, since it was a transmittable disease. That one isn’t going well either, I hear. Trending on Twitter is: “CNN has VD. ” LOL

Yes, it does look like WikiLeaks made my case yesterday and the MSM is backpedaling like crazy. All this Russian hacking stuff information they have been repeating in the pages of the NYT, on CNN, etc., was based on rumors.

We are in a world of hurt – spies spying on spies and all our personal conversations for the last 2,4, 6, 8? years may be recorded somewhere? Maybe the ACLU will file suit and the Supreme Court with Grouch on it will  order everything gathered without a FISA order destroyed.

What I said when I was called a “Nazi”

Half of the U.S. is busy calling the other half names because after eight years of Democrat rule, a Republican has won the presidency – not just any Republican, not an easy going Republican like George Bush or George W. Bush, but a mouthy, fire eating Republican like Newt Gingrich!

So what do you think it was like in Washington when, after scores of years of Democrat control, mouthy, fire-eating Newt Gingrich took over the Congress in 1995?

I can tell you, because I was there and I was the first person attacked by the Left. The press was not so bold then; instead of attacking Newt, it attacked one of his first appointees, me! I was called a racist anti-Semite because of some volunteer work I had done for the U.S. Dept. of Education some 9 years earlier. The foundation, Facing History and Ourselves, applied for a $57,000 grant proposal to share their curriculum for preparing teachers of middle school children to role-play Nazis and Jews and then use values clarification to decide who was wrong and who was right.

My review was the only grant review out of 15 reviews that passed the FHAO grant proposal for funding. I did so because it met all the criteria – none of which addressed the actual content. But in the small space I was given to express my opinion, I criticized the curriculum because it was appallingly inappropriate for 11 – 14 year old children.

Newt said I had to resign because otherwise the Democrats would use me to raise money to “get the Nazi out of the House of Representatives.”  I did not resign because it would have been an admission of wrong doing. Ten days later I was retroactively removed from the payroll. Before that, Newt told half the press I had been fired and the other half that I had resigned.

Here’s what I said in the Washington Post as soon as I had a chance:

January 24, 1995
In a Jan. 11 Style section article, Marc Fisher discusses my purported views on Holocaust education, yet he never talked with me about whether his suppositions were correct. Allow me to correct the record.

I reviewed a much earlier version of the “Facing History” curriculum than the one now in use and have been told that later versions were improved. Indeed, Margaret Strom told me in a radio conversation back in 1989 that my review had helped to improve the program. I have not seen the curriculum since the day I last reviewed it, but as I best recall there was no treatment of Nazi ideology in that earlier version. Hence my suggestion.

I do not know how Mr. Fisher can reasonably conclude, even from the fragmentary quotations he uses from eight years ago, that I oppose Holocaust education. As the article itself makes clear, “Facing History” was not simply Holocaust education, but treated various kinds of genocide. One might argue that the enormity of the evil of the Holocaust was reduced in significance by comparing it to lynchings in the South and America in Vietnam, as I recall the program did.

It is true that the program I reviewed betrayed a left-wing political bias that I thought inappropriate. But, contra Irene Shur, I also objected to the educational pedagogy it employed. This is something on which reasonable people can differ, but I believe it is better to teach young students, as I understand the Israelis do, that “you can never be a Nazi, and you can never be hurt by a Nazi,” rather than to suggest the possibility that the student could be like the Nazis, as Deborah Lipstadt concedes the program does.

I also believe students should be taught the truth about human nature, “that all men are created equal” and have natural rights that others are bound to respect, in contradiction to the evil and errant views of National Socialism and other ideologies of tyranny, as a way of inoculating them against evil.
Mr. Fisher says that the reference to “balance” in my review meant that I would give equal moral weight to the Nazis. The truth is the use of this word was generated by the Education Department’s review instrument, which required reviewers to rate programs for balance. How, indeed, do you balance the Holocaust, I was intending to say. Bring in the Nazis, the KKK? But I have found that due weight is not given in Washington to sleight of academic hand.

Deborah Lipstadt interprets my unfortunately phrased remarks in the way I am afraid many have: as suggesting that the Holocaust deniers’ view of the Holocaust be given a hearing. At the time I was asked to review “Facing History” by the Department of Education, I did not know what “Holocaust revisionism” was nor even that it existed. This whole pathology was outside my experience. I was a lay reviewer, which meant I was asked to review it as a mother and a citizen rather than as a scholar in the field. My review presupposes the existence and the evil of the Holocaust, an assumption universal in academic discourse. The reference to the “Nazi point of view,” unfortunately couched in the value-free jargon of social science that I have since abandoned, was meant to refer only to Nazi ideology.

I apologize, especially to Holocaust survivors and their families, for any aid and comfort that my leaked remarks and the publicity attending them unintentionally might have given to the deluded crazies of revisionism and for any anxiety that one of their ilk might possibly have been appointed as House historian, howev\er preposterous it is on its face.

I also, however, believe that apologies are due to these same survivors, and to me, by those who used the Holocaust, and fears of the Holocaust, to cheapen it in a dirty political game. I do not believe that any of the chief players in the events that smeared me really believed I was antisemitic or even a Holocaust revisionist. Indeed, these attacks only conceal the fact that the serious antisemitism in our day is on the left, and the left does not dare acknowledge it. I intend to seek these apologies, either through reconciliation or political pressure.

To summarize: How best to teach about the Holocaust so that it never happens again? Apart from reading and viewing the outstanding mainstream histories, novels and movies, I agree with the late Lucy Davidowicz: in a nonpolitical way, the most absolute way, by appealing to the highest authority, by teaching the commandment of God: Thou shalt not murder. CHRISTINA F. JEFFREY Arlington




My 2002 Immigration Article

I just ran across an article I originally wrote in 2002:

Immigration policy has long interested me, but I had forgotten this particular piece. In 2002 I became involved in helping a foreign student at Wofford College where my husband was a professor. It was I who brought the student’s plight to the attention of Congressman Joe Wilson who was able to help him gain legal status to stay in college and finish his degree. The article was written as an academic exercise for graduate students of public administration at North Georgia State College and University.

The Most Ethical Administration in History? NOT!

Thanks to Education warrior Donna Garner for this find. I have not read all 633 scandals, I am guessing a few of them might be ambivalently scandalous – but if Donna has vetted the list, I am pretty sure I’ll agree with her!  Read now if you can, or save it as she suggests for posterity. Someday you will be glad you did because the MSM, the “progressive” academy, and some churches will remember only the good he did and maybe even manufacture some since the corpus of good deeds by this administration for the majority of people over the last eight years is pretty thin. I also expect negative stories in the press to become harder to find. Just sayin….

[This is an amazing document to keep for posterity because it clearly shows the unbelievable number of scandals (633) of the Obama Administration. – Donna Garner]

“A Complete Guide to the 633 Scandals of the Obama Administration” —

The Sessions Confirmation Hearing #2

More Commentary on yesterday’s Judiciary Hearing examining Senator Jeff Sessions’ fitness to be Attorney General.

Most important testimony came from Ted Cruz who responded to the super sanctimonious questioning and lecturing of Jeff Sessions by Democrat members, he responded by calling them out on their silence over the past 8 years as the Department of Justice failed over and over to enforce the rule of law and in fact to distort it with little pushback from Congress, and most important, with no pushback Democrat Judiciary Committee members with responsibility for oversight. See this 12 minute takedown here:

This testimony needs no comment except to say that his focus on the most ignorant and most unfair of the Senators questioning Sessions,  Minn. Senator Al Franken. You need to hear this for yourself.

Senator Durbin, D-Ill. (Minority Whip) was the third most annoying of the Democrats (second was Patrick Leahy). Durbin ragged Sessions about Sessions’ position on Amnesty. Sessions pointed out that it will be Durbin’s and the rest of the Congress’ laws that the Attorney General will be enforcing.  Sessions said the cycle of amnesty laws that end up being ignored undermine the nation’s faith in the government. He said Americans have a right to have their laws enforced and that is not happening now.

Durbin didn’t stop until he got Sessions  to stray from his usual message about immigration to say, “We will not end the refugee program.”  Actually, that will not be the Attorney General’s call, but is merely his prediction. I hope we do end the UN/State Dept. program as it exists today.

Second most obnoxious Democrat, Patrick Leahy asked this question. Can religion ever be a reason for not hiring someone? Sessions responded with this example: Suppose a person’s religious beliefs are so strong when it comes to abortion that they feel forced to use their position in the DOJ to try to prevent women from obtaining legal abortions – that person would have to be dismissed. The gotcha effort failed.

Then Leahy went down a very ugly path questioning Sessions about Trump’s recorded crude remarks using the word “pussy.”  Sen. Leahy asked this: “Is grabbing a women by her genitals sexual assault? Sessions answered “yes.” Leahy came across silly, vindictive and irrelevant.

Sen. Mike Lee asked a great question; what about agency “guidance documents” will AG prosecute based on these?” Personal note: one of the worst of these “guidance documents” was circulated as a “Dear Colleagues” letter as a U.S. Department of Education threatening loss of funds if colleges and universities didn’t crack down on alleged sexual assaults using approaches favored by the DOE, such as guilt based on flimsy evidence and absence of legal assistance for the accused.  Males are the usual “accused” persons and the goal of the hearings seem to be expulsion of the accused with no recourse or provisions for appeal.

Senator Crapo, R-Idaho – wanted to discuss Regularity overreach. Sessions agreed and lamented that  agencies failed to consult the Office of Legal Counsel before over-reaching.
Crapo compared  Operation Chokehold with the movie “Minority Report.”

Fourth most annoying Democrat, Richard Blumenthal tried to browbeat Sessions into giving up his vote on the Judiciary committee when other nominees come before the committee. That would be foolish and Sessions didn’t fall for it.