Hugh Hewitt and Oklahoma Senator James Lankford talk about the Senate’s role in any impeachment effort.Read More »
With her proclamation of an impeachment inquiry, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told the American people that the 2020 election will be about Democrats’ past political failures and not their future quality of life.
House Democrats will not move to protect private health insurance for 175 million Americans; nor will they take up the U.S-Mexico-Canada trade agreement.
House Democrats will not forge a compromise on border security that would provide permanent legal status to DREAMers or participate in a tax relief 2.0 discussion.
House Democrats will not work to improve the quality of public education, public housing or public infrastructure.
They’ll be too busy talking Ukraine and Russia and impeachment, holding hearings, issuing subpoenas and looking for sound bites to feed a willing media.
Pelosi and company have proven to be fanatical partisans in perpetual tantrum mode over losing the 2016 election. Ironically, by choosing to be so, they are guaranteeing a rerun of the election they lost.Read More »
It was a landmark day for the English Language.
Last week, Merriam Webster added the singular, genderless word “they” to their online dictionary—a change that will be reflected in subsequent editions of the hard copies of their dictionary as well.
Merriam Webster is the oldest publisher of dictionaries in the United States. It’s had wide influence. This is more than a simply symbolic act—and Merriam-Webster understands that.
But here’s the question: How long will this current definition or this newly added definition last? How long will it be before ‘he’ and ‘she’ or ‘his’ and ‘hers’ are re-spelled—or simply disappear?
I’m going to make a prediction right now. The gender and sexual revolutionaries will not be satisfied with the singular “they.”
And that’s why this is so important: If you can control the language, if you can change the language … you will control and you will change the direction of the culture.Read More »
The New York Times recently launched a major propaganda campaign under the guise of journalism. What they call “The 1619 Project” begins with this claim: “In order to understand the brutality of American capitalism, you have to start on the plantation.”
Two problems right there in that first sentence: First: Slavery is not the foundation of American capitalism.
Second: Slavery is the opposite of capitalism. Pro-slavery writers attacked capitalist economics because they recognized that capitalism is the enemy of slavery—calling it the “dismal science.”
Simply put: American wealth is not based on slavery. Quite the opposite.
Slavery slowed innovation to the degree that that slave states were much poorer than non-slave states in the North.
Capitalism starts with the idea that human beings create property, not that they are property. Only when we ended slavery did we surpass China as the largest economy in the world.
Don’t be fooled. Socialism equals slavery. Capitalism equals Freedom.Read More »
USA Today trumpeted the good news about abortion with a big frontpage headline, proclaiming: “Abortion Rate at Its Lowest Rate Since Roe.” New figures from the Allen Guttmacher Institute show that the number of abortions continued to trend sharply downward—representing just half the number tabulated in 1990, despite population growth of some 80 million!
Yes, this reflects more women using birth control effectively, but it also reveals the influence of the pro-life movement in its efforts to discourage abortion and to save as many babies as possible. Whatever your political or religious affiliation, nearly everybody acknowledges that a sharp decline in abortions is great news. So why do Democrats persist in pushing policies to encourage more abortions—including taxpayer funding? That question exposes the lack of logic in what has become the increasingly strident, pro-abortion position of the American left.Read More »