Can Cruz derail the Trump Train?

0

Can Cruz derail the Trump Train?

The last debate illustrated that Cruz is best at debate, Trump is best at campaigning, and Rubio best at speaking. In the end I believe it was a draw between Cruz and Trump, with Rubio placing not too far behind. I think Cruz could’ve solidified a victory had he not given Trump a lay up on the “New York values” argument that allowed Trump to show his caring side. He should’ve framed Trump as a “New York Republican” which would’ve made more sense and stuck. I wish Dr. Ben Carson could figure out how to place his initial reaction into a soundbite and then explain himself – he’d gain more traction. He should definitely be in someone’s cabinet.

The Asian-American Dream is Dems Nightmare

0

The American Dream is free for all who choose to take advantage of it. Fewer leftist believe that to be the case today, but legal immigrants know better. In fact, if the rest of the world thought the “American idea” was as horrible as so many Democrats claim, we wouldn’t need a border fence, would we?

It’s easy to shout “America sucks!” when you’ve been coddled by her liberties all of your life. However, for Asian parents and students in New York City who have seen the world beyond America’s borders and weren’t impressed, nothing less than success is acceptable in the “land of opportunity.” They’ve run into a small problem, however: School authorities and non-Asian parents in NYC are doing everything in their power to assure that these kids don’t succeed. It’s truly an authentic case of “misery loves company.” Let me explain.

In her column for the New York Post last week, entitled “From NYC to Harvard: the war on Asian success,” Betsy McCaughey explained that 2015 was a bad year for American public education. American teens ranked 28th in math and science, when compared with teens in other countries, including poor countries. But, guess who’s at the top of the list. You got it! While America’s teens race to scrape the bottom of the educational barrel, despite spending more money per student than most of the industrialized world, Asian countries, such as Singapore, Hong Kong, South Korea, Japan and Taiwan, top the chart – and no, I’m not talking about America’s Top 40 music chart for all of you liberals out there.

There’s no other way to put it: American students are becoming dumber! U.S. scores on the main test for elementary and middle school fell drastically last year. Furthermore, for those teens entering college, SAT scores are significantly down. Evidently, teaching racism, revolution, rioting, rhetoric, income-inequality, gender-equality and how to place a condom over a banana in our government-run schools is no longer enough to compete with the rest of the world. Improving on reading comprehension, writing, arithmetic and good old-fashioned studying is still the recipe for success. Who knew!? I’ll tell you who knew … foreigners!

The little commies in the Big Apple, however, are blaming some changes in the tests for the declining scores. Unfortunately for them, we know better. Despite coming from poor or immigrant families and being disadvantaged by language barriers, many of the Asian students are outscoring all other students by large margins on both tests. Additionally, their lead keeps widening. In NYC alone, Asians account for just 13 percent of the population, but they win half of the city’s coveted slots each year for “selective public high schools.”

So what’s the secret to Asian-American success? Larger brains? No. Asian privilege (akin to white privilege, but not quite as high on the racist-o-meter)? No. Wealth? No. Cheating? No. Avenger-like super powers? That one, I can neither confirm nor deny. Kidding! Of course not! It’s parenting! Betsy McCaughey noted in her column “a recent study by sociologists from City University of New York and the University of Michigan, which showed that parental oversight enabled Asian-American students to far outperform the others. They tend to oversee their children’s homework, stress the importance of earning high grades and instill the belief that hard work is the ticket to a better life.” This was common sense just 20 years ago!

Contrast that to American parents that are all hot and bothered in the West Windsor-Plainsboro Regional School District in New Jersey, which “routinely produces Asian seniors with perfect SAT scores, admissions to MIT and top prizes in international science competitions.” The non-Asian parents are “complaining there’s too much pressure and their kids can’t compete. Superintendent David Aderhold apologized that school had become a ‘perpetual achievement machine.’” Wow!

This also brings up a topic for another day: It may be time to tell Enrique, Claudia and Jermaine that the trade school down the street specializing in auto mechanics, welding and metal work, culinary arts, woodwork, plumbing, hair styling and cosmetics, etc., may be a better career path for them.

Can you imagine how quickly leftists would lose their monopoly on public education in America if more parents realized that government programs like “Race to the Top,” “No Child Left Behind,” and early daycare was not a recipe for their child’s success? Nowadays, so many parents rely totally on teachers for their kids’ success. Unfortunately, teachers and overpaid government bureaucrats will never be as invested in your child’s education as you.

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio knows this! So why deny Asian-American students the educational success they’ve earned? It’s simple, really. Asian-American success undermines the left-wing premise that “the odds are stacked against the little guy in America.” In other words, your child’s misery is job security for corrupt politicians.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2016/01/asian-american-dream-undermines-dem-nightmare/#o4yJOSWFxghrQAaF.99

 

Lifting Gay-Blood Ban: What About Science?

0

Although HIV/AIDS is no longer the automatic death sentence it once was due to advanced treatment, it doesn’t mean Uncle Sam has the right to play Russian roulette with our lives.

All people are equal in God’s eyes, but not all human relationships are. While it’s true that gay couples are capable of loving one another and expressing their love through sexual intimacy, just as heterosexual couples, it is not true that both relationships should enjoy equal status in society. This is not bigoted, but fact that has been nullified by political correctness to the detriment of our country. Science still matters.

Can gay couples conceive babies to build and sustain a society? No. Can gays produce new taxpayers to maintain a government? No. Does this mean that gays don’t deserve dignity, respect and equal rights – not “extra” rights? Of course not!

Now that we’re being honest, let’s talk about Obama’s Food and Drug Administration’s dangerous reversal of the lifetime ban on accepting blood donations from men who have had sex with men (MSM). If you watch TLC or HGTV, you may be surprised to know that gays only account for 2-3 percent of America’s population, not 50 percent as these networks like to portray. The networks want to normalize homosexuality. I get it! The FDA, on the other hand, wants to pretend as though HIV/AIDS is not primarily a gay male disease – it is! Not exclusively, to be fair, but primarily. To say otherwise is simply a lie.

In a press release last week, FDA Acting Commissioner Stephen Ostroff, M.D., said “the FDA is changing its recommendation that men who have sex with men (MSM) be indefinitely deferred – a policy that has been in place for approximately 30 years – to 12 months since the last sexual contact with another man. The FDA’s responsibility is to maintain a high level of blood product safety for people whose lives depend on it. We have taken great care to ensure this policy revision is backed by sound science and continues to protect our blood supply.” What!? I suppose the science is as “sound” as “man-made climate change.” Give me a break!

Why is the FDA into the blood donation business anyway? Don’t they have some Chipotle franchises they need to be concerned about right about now? If there’s no additional risk associated with blood donations from gay males than heterosexual couples, I wonder if the FDA can explain the following numbers by their homies at the Center for Disease Control (CDC)?

According to the CDC, although gay and bisexual men account for just 2 percent of the U.S. population, they make up 61 percent of all new HIV infections that occur annually. Approximately 50,000 new HIV infections are diagnosed annually in the U.S. Four percent of new infections in 2006 were a result of gay men with injection drug use (IDU), and virtually all of these numbers have remained stagnant up through 2014. Homosexual men “were 44 to 86 times as likely to be diagnosed with HIV compared with other men, and 40 to 77 times as likely as women.” Oh, and speaking of women, as of 2010 they made up 20 percent of new HIV infections in the U.S. More than 15,000 HIV patients died in 2010 alone, yet the FDA wants us to believe “there’s nothing to see here – move along!”

According to the FDA, blood donation policies have reduced HIV transmission rates from blood transfusions from 1 in 2,500 to 1 in 1.47 million. I know what you’re thinking. You’re thinking, why would the FDA change a policy that’s actually working? According to Newsmax, they wanted to “make that regulation equal to those that govern other people who have increased risk of HIV infection, including people who have had recent blood transfusions or who have been accidentally exposed to someone else’s blood.” How nice of them.

I, on the other hand, believe something more sinister is going on at Obama’s FDA. I’m convinced that the left believes they’ve won the moral battle in our culture when it comes to the normalization of homosexuality – the “spiritual” battle, if you will. Now they’re determined to win the “scientific” battle – all for the sake of transforming America from a Judeo-Christian nation to a secular one.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2016/01/lifting-gay-blood-ban-what-about-science/#J6WEuWxAtC4Iq11j.99

 

Video: Carl Jackson, Political Expert, weighs in on new poll and candidates

1

Carl Jackson, Political Expert, weighs in on new poll and candidates
VIDEO: Fox News called on Carl Jackson, Political Analyst and Talk Show Host, for commentary on the new political polls and candidates.

Ask Santa For A Gun This Christmas

0

If the media were to accurately report the number of times a gun was used to prevent a violent crime rather than to perpetrate one, they’d have to run more than 8,200 headlines per day.

Truth be told, it’s safer for you to have a gun inside of your home or on your person than not. Burglars and despots alike understand this fundamental truth: “Shotgun blasts are bad for your health!” If you say it like “Ice Cube” use to sing it, it sounds better.

According to CNS News, in January 2015 President Obama signed 23 executive orders – one of which commissioned a $10 million study by the Centers for Disease Control, or CDC. The study was titled, “Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence.” The goal of the White House was to “conduct research on the causes and prevention of gun violence.” The CDC concluded, “Self-defense can be an important crime deterrent.” To which I would say, no crap, Crimlock!

Lest you are inclined to feel vindicated as a conservative, let’s first examine the other conclusions stumbled upon by the CDC, as well as answer why the CDC is conducting firearm studies in the first place. The latter should be of grave concern to any Second Amendment-loving American.

You should know that the CDC also assessed that crime victims who use a gun for self-defense had consistently “lower injury rates” than victims that used other methods for defense. The study indicated that violent crimes, including homicides, had decreased in the last five years. Can you guess why? I attribute the declining numbers to skyrocketing gun sales resulting from President Obama’s genius marketing campaign for gun control. I’ve never seen a better NRA spokesman than President Obama!

Additionally, in 2010 alone, more than 105,000 Americans were either injured or killed by gun violence. What we don’t hear about in the media, however, is that more than 73,505 of those people didn’t die, leaving nearly 32,000 who did. It’s sad when anyone loses their life to violent criminals at the hand of a gun; however, when you consider a U.S. population of approximately 320 million people, you can see why the numbers don’t support gun-control advocates. Only .0001 percent of Americans are affected by gun crime. Sadly, black males in da ‘hood – aka Democrat districts – are disproportionately affected by gun violence. Thirty-two of 100,000 blacks are killed at the hands of a criminal with a gun.

Furthermore, it’s useful to know most gun deaths are due to suicide. In fact, in 2010, suicides accounted for 61 percent of the 335,600 deaths by gun.

Oh yes, and let us not forget about those feel good “gun turn-in programs” held by local law enforcement where someone’s grandma flashes her freshly permed hair out of the driver’s side window of her Toyota Corolla for a televised interview. Inevitably, what you’ll hear is, “It’s so dangerous on these streets nowadays for these young kids; I’m so glad someone is trying to make our community safer. I just want to do my part.” All the while granny is turning in her rusted .357 Magnum of .38 special that has never been and never will be used to stage a heist at 7-Eleven. Surprisingly, the CDC admitted that “gun turn-in programs are ineffective.” Someone needs to tell Granny, since she’s not a criminal, she probably won’t be using her gun to commit a crime. Hence, it is safer to keep it in case you need to aim it at someone who will.

With all of this overwhelming evidence that supports pro-gun advocates like myself, you might ask why we should be concerned about this particular CDC study – particularly, when it seems as though President Obama is losing his argument for gun-control. I wish that were the case! Let’s connect the dots.

The fact that the CDC conducted this study is indicative that President Obama intends to use health-care laws to reign in the Second Amendment. This is why we need a constitutional conservative in the White House who’s willing to completely dismantle Obamacare.

Using large bureaucracies to circumvent the will of the people is the modus operandi of leftists. With suggestions from the CDC, the federal government could potentially use Obamacare to determine who is fit to own a gun – mentally or otherwise.

When you consider that many of the organizations that conducted the CDC study have close ties to President Obama himself, we should be even more alarmed. Left-wing organizations like the California Endowment, which promoted Obamacare; Annie E. Casey Foundation; the Joyce Foundation, where Obama once served as a board member; and Kaiser Permanente, which contributed $500,000 to Obama’s presidential campaign, all participated in the study.

While conservatives count on election cycles to persuade voters, leftists rely on compliance through coercion, mostly by way of regulatory agencies such as the EPA. Bottom line: Buy yourself a gun and plenty of ammo today!

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2015/12/ask-santa-for-a-gun-this-christmas/#DoWDlpSgvOzs2mDI.99

 

Can Carly Get Her Groove Back

0

Say what you will about Sarah Palin, but when she became Sen. John McCain’s vice presidential running mate in 2008, when she spoke, conservatives were inspired. Her speeches were substantive and energetic. Her words made you feel proud to be an American – a Republican even. With Carly Fiorina, despite being one of the most informed and substantive candidates in the GOP race today, I feel like somehow I’m in trouble when she speaks. Based on her, declining poll numbers, I’m not alone.

Unless Carly Fiorina makes major stylistic changes to her campaign before the two upcoming GOP debates that precede the Iowa Caucus, it’s unlikely she’ll make a resurgence. So where did her campaign go wrong? Let me remind you of three words: “dropped the mic.” Those words were uttered to the press by Fiorina’s campaign after she won the JV debate that propelled her onto the main stage. Big mistake!

Can you imagine Donald Trump turning down an opportunity to gain more exposure? Oh, I’m sure it happens, but surely not often, particularly for good press. Carly Fiorina can “drop the mic” if she’s leading the entire GOP field by double digits! Not before. I understand that candidates want to be cautious in a social media, sound-bite age. However, this political year has been uniquely favorable to “outsiders.”

Candidates can afford to take risk that were inconceivable four short years ago, as long as they’re in tune with their base and have the ability to communicate policy effectively. Whether we’re talking about Trump, Cruz or even Dr. Ben Carson before his recent decline in the polls, these candidates work just as hard between the debates to keep their media exposure high. Trump is constantly in front of cameras sounding off on headlines; Ben Carson takes time daily to respond to his followers on Facebook; I can’t go more than a few days without receiving a text alert or email on my smartphone from the Cruz campaign. Simply stated, these guys don’t “drop the mic.”

Secondly, when Donald Trump commented on Carly Fiorina’s face, he wasn’t talking about her looks. She’s an attractive woman. He was, however, talking about “the look” – as in the permanent look of disdain affixed to her face. If you want voters to invite their president into their home via television, you have to be inviting! There’s no way to get around that with today’s media. She of all people should know that! I’m certain Carly would say something like “serious times call for a serious candidate,” and she’d be right – just not likeable. Her campaign told her to smile more; I wish she’d listen! When headlines hit the press that she can capitalize on, she needs to be in front of a camera with serious answers and an inviting tone.

Thirdly, stop wasting valuable air time, television or otherwise, attacking Donald Trump! Who cares what Donald Trump has to say! Your supporters want to hear what you have to say! If you can get past Carly’s campaign foibles, she’s a very substantive candidate to be reckoned with – particularly on issues concerning technology, the economy and jobs, as well as foreign policy. She needs to stop telling us why we should hate Trump and begin telling us why we should love her!

Lastly, we’re conservatives! Stop playing the gender card except for personal interviews where you’re asked to recant specific circumstances where your gender affected you in life – good or bad. Obviously, being a successful businesswoman brings a unique experience to the race, but I don’t want to hear about it in every debate. Serious conservative voters don’t care to hear jokes about how a woman can do things better than a man. They want to know how you’d make a better president than the man standing next to you.

Having said that, a whole lot can change in the course of two debates. Carly did it once. She can do it again.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2015/12/can-carly-get-her-groove-back/#SkCDIZTgJc8C6kr3.99