It was bloody; it was awful; it was an operation of stupendous courage and shocking sacrifice.
75 years ago in Normandy, Operation Neptune—better known as “D-Day”—commenced. The Allied troops stormed the French beaches in order to overcome Nazi tyranny. The fighting was ferocious, with 4,000 confirmed dead on the Allied side on that one day alone.
The tone of the conflict had been set long before by British Prime Minister Winston Churchill. In an age of capitulation, Churchill dared to defy Nazi tyranny. He rallied England to defend the homeland and later rejoiced when America joined the campaign in 1941.
Churchill is famous for his leadership in World War II, and justly so. But Churchill is only the best known of the heroes of this era. Countless forgotten soldiers fought, bled, and died for the cause of freedom.
On the anniversary of D-Day, we remember their heroism—and hear them call us to the same.Read More »
More than a half-dozen Democrats running for president officially endorse the misguided notion of paying “reparations” to those whose distant ancestors were enslaved more than 150 years ago.
The New York Times recently explained that of 47 million Americans who identify as “African American,” only 30 million would receive payments—based on proof that an ancestor had lived in the pre-emancipation South.
This means Barack Obama would not receive reparations, because his father was born in Kenya, and his ancestors hadn’t been enslaved. But because Michelle Obama did have slave ancestors, the President’s daughters would qualify for payoffs.
Does this make any sense? Sasha and Malia grew up in wealth and luxury—why should they get compensation when their father, raised in much harsher circumstances, would not?
Obama, by the way, opposes reparations. He’s right. It’s an un-American idea that judges people on ancestry, not achievement, and will doom the Dems if they keep backing the concept.Read More »
Democrats, angry about losing the presidency twice in the Electoral College since 2000, are quietly taking action. The National Popular Vote Bill passed in three more states—Colorado, Delaware and New Mexico—this Spring and recently passed state senates in two more.
I call it the Constitutional End-Run Voting Bill because it would eliminate the Electoral College without passing a proper constitutional amendment. States agree to cast their electoral votes not for the winner in their state but for the winner of the national popular vote. Think of it: Your state votes for Candidate A, but your vote goes to Candidate B. Talk about your vote not counting.
The Constitution says votes are counted in state capitals and then electors make the final choice. Beware of trick plays that undermine both the Constitution and the states.Read More »