Overturning DACA Would Be a Win for the Constitution

The notion that a Democratic president should be able to unilaterally implement a policy like DACA but that it should be unlawful for a Republican president to undo the same policy in the same way really reflects the contemporary progressive view of American governance. Democrats these days seem to believe the use of power is justified by the strength of intentions and outcomes. Process is an afterthought.


The Supreme Court heard arguments on Tuesday on the administration’s decision to end DACA. Democrat AGs maintained that the asserted rationale of the Trump administration wasn’t good enough. Then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions had argued that the program had exceeded the president’s statutory authority, which is the most persuasive argument there is for rolling back a program that, even by Obama’s admission, was implemented to circumvent Congress. The deadlock over immigration reform — or any other issue, for that matter — reflects the position of the elected legislative branch; it’s not a signal for the president to act like a monarch. After all, we still have a deadlock on immigration, and Democrats surely don’t believe Trump should be dictating policy by pen and phone.


‘Reverse Pol Pot’: Berkeley philosophy lecturer slammed after saying rural Americans made ‘bad life decisions’ and should be shamed

A Harvard-educated UC Berkeley philosophy lecturer is catching flak for bashing rural Americans as parasites on more “efficient” city-dwellers. He has since apologized for the tone of the original tweets, but not their substance.

Disdain for “flyover country” by the coastal elites is a trope of American politics and culture wars at this point, but Jackson Kernion apparently sought to embody it with a series of tweets this week, declaring that Americans living in the countryside should not be “subsidized by those who choose a more efficient way of life.”


Agrochemical Apocalypse

An Interview with Environmental Campaigner Dr Rosemary Mason

Colin Todhunter

The renowned author and whistleblower Evaggelos Vallianatos describes British environmentalist and campaigner Dr Rosemary Mason as a “defender of the natural world and public health.”

I first came across her work a few years ago. It was in the form of an open letter she had sent to an official about the devastating environmental and human health impacts of glyphosate-based weed killers. What had impressed me was the document she had sent to accompany the letter. It was over 20 pages long and contained official data and referred to a plethora of scientific papers to support the case she was making.

For almost a decade, Rosemary Mason has been writing open letters and sending reports she has compiled to media outlets and prominent officials and agencies in the US, the UK and Europe to question their decisions and/or to inform them of the dangers of pesticides. She has been relentless in exposing conflicts of interest, fraudulent science and institutionalised corruption in regulatory processes surrounding glyphosate and other agrochemicals.

Her quest has been fired by a passion to protect the natural world and the public but there is also a personal aspect: she is affected by a serious health condition which she attributes directly to the reckless use of pesticides in South Wales where she resides. And her assertion here is not based on idle speculation. In her reports, she has presented a great deal of evidence about the deterioration of the health of the British public and how agrochemicals play a major contributory role.

She recently sent me a report ‘How glyphosate-based herbicides poisoned our nature reserve and the world‘. It focuses on how she had set up a nature reserve in South Wales. What she and her husband (who has a professional background in conservation and nature) had achieved on that reserve was impressive. But thanks to the local council’s indiscriminate spraying of glyphosate-based herbicides, it was subsequently transformed from a piece of land teeming with flora and fauna into a barren wasteland.


The Metamorphosis of the Deep State

The Military Intelligence Complex Has Been Redefined as Career Bureaucrats Doing Their Patriotic Duty

Edward Curtin

Linguistic mind-control is insidious like the slow drip of a water faucet. After a while you don’t hear it and just go about your business, even as your mind, like a rotting rubber washer, keeps disintegrating under propaganda’s endless reiterations.

To think that the deep state is government employees just doing their patriotic duty is plain idiocy and plainer propaganda.

It is a trick, not the treat it is made to seem.


Exclusive Excerpt–Sebastian Gorka’s ‘The War for America’s Soul’: The Plotters and Their Plan to Destroy America

Consider this: today in America, one of the two parties which divide power between themselves is most often represented by a group of freshman congresswomen, the so-called “Squad”—although I prefer “The Four Horsewomen of the Democrat Apocalypse”—made up of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, and Ayanna Pressley.

Two of these women are actually members of the Democratic Socialists of America and were elected to office as such. Together these four—who have within the space of less than six months managed to box the establishment Democrats, including their titular leader, Nancy Pelosi, into an irrelevant corner—have openly, either individually or as a group, espoused the following extreme stances:

  • Demanded the dissolution of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency and the Department of Homeland Security
  • Advocated open, unsecured borders with Mexico
  • Supported taxpayer-funded health insurance for illegal aliens
  • Called the Department of Homeland Security’s holding facilities for illegal immigrants “concentration camps”
  • Denounced Israel as an “evil” nation that has hypnotized the West
  • Accused Jewish-American lawmakers of having dual loyalties
  • Stated that “brown and black faces” must have “brown and black voices” and that all homosexuals must have one “queer voice,” and that none of these voices can dissent from their socialist agenda
  • Described the horrendous attacks of September 11, 2001, as “some people did something”
  • Refused to denounce the violent acts of Antifa, al Qaeda, and ISIS
  • Proposed a gargantuan overhaul of the United States economy under the banner of a “Green New Deal” that would cost $90 trillion dollars to implement and would lead to the banning of gasoline-powered engines and private air travel, as well as the demolition and reconstruction of any building deemed “environmentally unsound”

And this is just a fraction of the outrageous things that Ocasio-Cortez, Omar, Tlaib, and Pressley have said since the 2018 elections.


Angela Merkel: “Multiculturalism in Germany has utterly failed”

German Chancellor Angela Merkel said that her attempt to create a multicultural society has “utterly failed,” leaving some wondering if she’s moving the party to the right in an attempt to keep conservatives from defecting to the AfD. 

While speaking at a meeting of young members of her Christian Democratic Union (CDU) last Saturday, Markel said that allowing hundreds of thousands of people from different cultural backgrounds to live alongside Germans without properly integrating into the society was a mistake, Reuters reports.

“This (multicultural) approach has failed, utterly failed,” Merkel said at a meeting in Potsdam.


Mexican Drug Cartel Fights and Defeats Mexican Army In The Streets To Defend El Chapo’s Son

Zuckerberg lays out grand vision of Facebook-fueled utopia – too bad it bears no resemblance to the platform he’s actually built

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg gave an impassioned (for him) speech defending his platform as a tool of empowerment with the potential to give everyone in society a voice. Apparently he hasn’t spent much time there lately.

The billionaire rhapsodized about the liberating potential of Facebook before an audience at Georgetown University on Thursday in a “conversation on free expression,” an event that undermined its own purpose before Zuckerberg even opened his mouth. Reporters were barred from asking questions or even filming the proceedings, while students’ inquiries were subject to a moderator. But such matter-of-fact hypocrisy set the stage for a speech that described an enticing vision for the platform’s future – one that would require a 180 degree turn on everything Facebook is doing now.