Moveon.Org Backed By George Soros Warns More Protests Coming – Feel The Bern!


The progressive group is funded by billionaire Bilderberg member George Soros, and has endorsed Democratic candidate Vermont Sen. Bernard Sanders for president, and promises that more disruptions are on the way.

Latest email sent to their members:

“Last night, without consulting local police, Donald Trump abruptly cancelled a rally in Chicago in the face of massive and overwhelmingly peaceful student-led protests,” MoveOn.org wrote in an email Saturday to members. “We’re being flooded with aggressive emails and social media posts from Trump supporters. Some of them are threatening. We refuse to be intimidated by Donald Trump, Fox News, or anyone else.”

“We need to double down on our work, showing that America is better than Trump’s bullying, hate-baiting, and incitements to violence,” the email read. “We are committed to nonviolence, but we will not be silent. We will not be invisible.”

The group detailed its efforts in recent months, highlighting ads it has run against the real estate mogul and the advocacy its done on behalf of refugees, who it said are “under attack” from the GOP, and the support it gave to Trump protesters in Chicago.

“We’ve been ramping up our efforts for months — from the ‘We Are Better Than This’ ad we helped organize in The New York Times in December, to our collective advocacy for refugees under attack from the GOP, to the support we provided students in Chicago last night by printing signs and banners and recruiting MoveOn.org members to join their protest.”

Soros has spent or committed more than $13 million to support Hillary Clinton and other Democrats this election cycle, already more than his total disclosed spending in the last two presidential elections combined, although by vote of the organization their support will now be focused on Bernie Sanders.

Soros has expressed alarm over the past few months at the candidacies of Republicans Donald Trump and Ted Cruz. In a statement last week about a new group he’s funding to increase voting by Latinos and immigrants in the election, he again mentioned the two candidates by name. In his maneuvers against them, he is now backing John Kasich in the primaries.

Soros’s biggest contribution this year is a total of $7 million to Priorities USA, the main super-PAC supporting Clinton. Another $1 million went to American Bridge, an opposition-research group. And last week, he announced he was putting $5 million into a new super-PAC known as Immigrant Voters Win. The group is part of a coordinated $15 million voter-turnout effort, first reported in the New York Times, that is targeting Latinos and immigrants in Colorado, Nevada and Florida.

His idea of how to solve the world’s economic problems?

“Quantitative easing has worked. It has saved the world from deflation and a Great Depression,” Soros said. “And regions like Europe need another dose.”

“What you have to do is just print money.”

No wonder he backs Bernie Sanders!

If you want to know the evils lurking within the Bilderberg Group, look no further than the following quotes from Bilderberg insiders and those who’ve studied the secretive cabal.

You have been warned!  Let’s stand up to this evil plot!

Make America Great Again!

CLINTON, SANDERS, KASICH, Refused To Pledge Signing Of The First Amendment Defense Act (FADA)


American Principles Project has joined together with Heritage Action for America, the action arm of the Heritage Foundation, and FRC Action, the legislative affiliate of the Family Research Council, to ask each of the candidates running for President to sign the following pledge:

“If elected, I pledge to push for the passage of the First Amendment Defense Act (FADA) and sign it into law during the first 100 days of my term as President.”

FADA5

So far, four candidates have signed the pledge:

  • Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas)
  • Senator Marco Rubio (R-Florida)
  • Dr. Ben Carson
  • Carly Fiorina

Two candidates did not commit to first 100 days:

  • Former Governor Jeb Bush (R-Florida)
  • Donald Trump

Four candidates did not sign the pledge and did not respond to our request to indicate support for FADA:

  • Former Governor Jim Gilmore (R-Virginia)
  • Governor John Kasich (R-Ohio)
  • Former Senator Hillary Clinton (D-New York)
  • Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vermont)

The text of the letter sent to the candidates requesting support for FADA is below:

The gathering concern around whether or not the Left will succeed in its ongoing efforts to force those who disagree with the Supreme Court’s redefinition of marriage, prompts us to write to you and ask: will you commit to making it a top priority for you to ensure passage of the First Amendment Defense Act (FADA) in the first 100 days of your administration?

FADA protects supporters of natural marriage from punishment by the Federal government or its regulatory arms, including the IRS: “the Federal Government shall not take any discriminatory action against a person, wholly or partially on the basis that such person believes or acts in accordance with a religious belief or moral conviction that marriage is or should be recognized as the union of one man and one woman, or that sexual relations are properly reserved to such a marriage.”

It prevents the IRS from issuing regulations denying tax-exempt status to charities or schools that support natural marriage, and forbids the Federal government from discriminating against them in contracts, loans, licensing, accreditation or employment.

It prevents Federal discrimination against individuals, employers and other organizations that continue to act in accordance with a belief in natural marriage, while specifically guaranteeing conscience protections will not also be used to disrupt benefits to which people are legally entitled.

Serious scholars suggest religious schools should expect to be punished by the withholding of federal funds under current law if they do not treat same-sex unions as marriages. “It seems to me very likely that, in the coming years, schools and universities that accept public funds and support will be required—as a condition of those funds—to have nondiscrimination rules that forbid discrimination on sexual-orientation grounds,”

One such scholar, a professor who oversees the Program on Church, State & Society at Notre Dame’s law school, told The Atlantic. “And, these rules will not distinguish between sexual-orientation discrimination and non-recognition of same-sex marriages.”

The second most powerful Democratic Senator has publicly stated he’s not sure whether such schools should be stripped of their tax-exempt status. When theWeekly Standard asked, “should religious protections extend beyond houses of worship to, say, religious schools that require employees to affirm their faith’s teaching about marriage?” Senator Richard Durbin of Illinois responded: “Getting into a challenging area, and I don’t have a quick answer to you. I’ll have to think about it long and hard.”

Many Americans, particularly African-American Christians like Atlanta Fire Chief Kelvin Cochran, are losing their livelihoods, at least in part because they privately support natural marriage.

When no less a distinguished legal expert than the Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court, John Roberts, has pointed to the serious religious liberty consequences that may stem from the Court’s redefinition of marriage, it is time to take the need for new conscience protections seriously. “Today’s decision . . . creates serious questions about religious liberty . . . Indeed the Solicitor General candidly acknowledged that the tax exemptions of some religious institutions would be in question if they opposed same-sex marriage,” wrote Chief Justice Roberts.

Millions of Americans can disagree over the definition of marriage, however, it is essential that the millions of Americans who support natural marriage are not punished by the Federal government for their support for marriage as it has been understood for millennia.

We ask, therefore, for your public assurance that you would prioritize passing the First Amendment Defense Act in the first 100 days of your administration.

 

Source: American Principles Project

{Video} First Experiment With Socialism Was Almost The Death of America, Just Ask The Pilgrims…


On September 16, 1620, the Mayflower set sail from Plymouth, England with 102 souls on board.

The Pilgrims were initially organized as a Collectivist society.  Their contract with their European sponsoring businessmen stipulated that they would function as a Socialist group with each person contributing to the common good and in turn each receiving an equal share of the produce.  The Plymouth Colony, its buildings, and its lands would all be owned in common.

Since the Pilgrims did not have enough funds to outfit for the journey and establish a colony, they sought help from the Virginia Company of London and the Virginia Company of Plymouth, companies known as “adventurers,” which were organized to fund and equip colonial enterprises.

William Bradford, Governor of Plymouth Colony, composed the 1620 Mayflower Compact during the voyage.  Its purpose was to codify an agreement among the 102 settlers, including his 40 Pilgrims, to live together and to function as a group.  All were to be treated justly and equally no matter what their religious beliefs, a truly revolutionary concept for the time.

One of the key points of the contract between the Pilgrims and the Adventurers said that all colonists were to get their food, clothing, drink and provisions from the colony’s “common stock and goods.” In addition, during the first seven years, all profits earned by colonists would go into the “common stock” until they were divided.

“Today we would call this a socialist commune,” Patton wrote. “In other words, the Pilgrims accepted the socialist principle, ‘from each according to his ability, to each according to his need.’ Each person was to place his production into the common warehouse and receive back, through the Governor, only what he needed for himself or his family. The surplus after seven years was to be divided equally, along with the houses, lands, and chattels, ‘betwixt the Adventurers and Planters.’”

The Pilgrims actually wanted to own their own lands and homes and to work two days a week for their own gain, but the adventurers would not allow it.

Once the agreement was signed, two ships were outfitted for the journey, the Speedwell and theMayflower. But the Speedwell proved unseaworthy, so everyone still willing to make the journey—102 persons—crowded aboard the Mayflower and set sail.

Patton wrote that after landing on Dec 21, 1620, the Pilgrims suffered horribly their first winter, with around half the colonists perishing. Aid from the now-famous native, Squanto, helped them survive with new planting techniques, but the harvests of 1621 and 1622 were still small.

The colony’s governor, William Bradford, wrote that its socialist philosophy greatly hindered its growth: Young men resented working for the benefit of other men’s wives and children without compensation; healthy men who worked thought it unjust that they received no more food than weak men who could not; wives resented doing household chores for other men, considering it a kind of slavery.

Governor Bradford wrote that to avoid famine in 1623, the Pilgrims abandoned socialism, Patton said.

“At length, after much debate of things, the Governor (with the advice of the chiefest amongst them) gave way that they should set corn every man for his own particular, and in that regard trust to themselves; in all other things to go on in the general way as before. And so assigned to every family a parcel of land,” Bradford wrote.

The colonists, each of whom now had to grow their own food, suddenly became very industrious, with women and children who earlier claimed weakness now going into the fields to plant corn. Three times the amount of corn was planted that year under the new system.

When a drought threatened the year’s harvest, Governor Bradford called a day of fasting and prayer to “seek the Lord by humble and fervent prayer in this great distress.” God answered that same night with rain that continued in coming days, and the year brought a plentiful harvest.

Governor William Bradford realized Socialism was not going to work.  He wisely abolished the Socialist principles on which the Plymouth Colony had been founded.  Each family was then given a plot of land to farm and harvest for themselves.  The settlers kept what they produced for themselves.

The Colony quickly became prosperous with more than sufficient food for everyone.  They produced enough food and other goods to open a trading post where they traded with the local Indians.

“By the fall of 1624, the colonists were able to export a full boat load of corn!” Patton wrote. “And the Pilgrims settled with the Adventurers. They purchased the Adventurers stock in the colony and completed the transition to private property and free markets.”

With the profits they created, the settlers quickly paid off their sponsors.  News of their prosperity spread, encouraging others to brave the perils of the New World and to enjoy its early blessings of liberty and prosperity.

William Bradford wrote in his Journal,

“The experience that we had in this common course and condition, tried sundry years…that by taking away property, and bringing community into a common wealth, would make them happy and flourishing – as if they were wiser than God.”

“For this community (so far as it was) was found to breed much confusion and discontent, and retard much employment that would have been to their benefit and comfort. For young men that were most able and fit for labor and service did repine that they should spend their time and strength to work for other men’s wives and children without [being paid] that was thought injustice.”

“This [free enterprise] had very good success, for it made all hands industrious, so as much more corn was planted than otherwise would have been.”

Long before Karl Marx and Barack Obama, America’s early settlers quickly learned that the principles of Socialism resulted in economic disaster and extensive personal suffering.  These people at Plymouth Colony did not try to perfect Socialism.  They quickly and permanently eliminated Socialism.

William Bradford and his fellow settlers were out of reach of their European masters and their business sponsors.  They were the start of our great experiment in Liberty.  They were free to work for their own benefit without fear that their government would take liberally from what they produced.  They sowed the seeds of Liberty, religious freedom, and free enterprise that eventually led to the American Revolution, American Exceptionalism, and the achievement of the American Dream.

What would William Bradford think of the modern attempt to perfect Socialism over the past century?  What would he think of the attack by President Obama and other Socialists on American Exceptionalism and the pursuit of the American Dream?  What would William Bradford tell us to do as our government plans to take over, regulate, and socialize major amounts of our economy?

If we do not understand our history, we will fail greatly.  We are on the brink of wasting and destroying what generations of hard work and sacrifice have taken centuries to achieve.

It is time to recall that our Constitution preserves our right to work without a monarch or other despot taking that which we have gathered.  It is a time to remember that we are free people who are able to take care of our families and to do that which we believe will be of the greatest benefit for our families and for us.

Without Liberty there is no abundance.  Without Liberty the quality of life and goods deteriorates.  Only a free people can produce and maintain an abundant prosperity and a civilized culture.  Without Liberty common sense, common virtue, and common decency quickly become uncommon.

None realized better the value of Liberty than our Founding Fathers and those who labored and fought with them to gain our freedom from a monarchy.  Our new government was established to protect and serve We the People and to leave us otherwise alone.  The people did not serve the government.  As such, the people became citizens and not subjects.

The goal of our rulers now is to remove our Liberty and to purposely destroy our prosperity with mandated Socialism.  Our government cannot spend money better or more wisely than we can.  Wealth redistribution will not cure laziness nor will it promote national security, education, better health, happiness, or anything even vaguely representing prosperity.

Socialism is Evil and there is no refining it.

One Source & Google: Lubbock Avalanche-Journal

Bernie Sanders | Building Walls | A.F. Branco 


 

 

The Trump Wall has barbed wire keeping people from Mexico entering this country.

Bernie is a socialist, read that as “communist”. Communist countries are so oppressive they Must have walls to keep their citizens from fleeing. That is why Cubans will make rafts from car tires and float across more than 90 miles of shark infested waters. That’s why Mexican citizens with any gumption at all will cross miles of hostile territory to try to get here. Notice the Bernie wall has a man with a gun facing in, that man with a gun has a red star on his hat.

The Berlin Wall wasn’t to keep West Berliners out of East Berlin, it was to keep East Berliners from escaping to freedom. If you were shot by the East German guards while escaping that wall, shot but not killed, they would wait while you died before collecting your body.

For more A.F.Branco cartoons at Legal Insurrection click here

Source:  A.F. Branco 

“Welcome To The Jungle Denmark” or “Take This Meme and Shove It!”


DanishMeme

Yes, that’s correct: what the news in the U.S. tells you about Denmark’s population being so happy truly is a load of crap, and the answers to fixing the broken U.S. social and financial system cannot be found there.

Many Danes don’t often see polls with the claims mentioned here. Just like us, they read news articles detailing national political infighting, pollution from pesticide runoff, and work-related stress, along with the small victories around the country; and mentioning polls about how happy Danes are elicits a rolling of eyes and comments about the ridiculousness of such claims.

Let’s just look at some random facts as we troll the web that most liberals, especially Bernie Sanders, ignore (by choice)…

From the official Denmark website:

The basic principle of the Danish welfare system (economy), often referred to as the Scandinavian welfare model, is that all citizens have equal rights to social security. Within the Danish welfare system, a number of services are available to citizens, free of charge. This means that for instance the Danish health and educational systems are free. The Danish welfare model is subsidised by the state, and as a result Denmark has one of the highest taxation levels in the world.

From a Danish blogger…

The Danish tax burden is one of the most heated areas of politics that you can discuss here and honestly writing about it is like trying to eat an elephant at one sitting. With income tax averaging from 58 to 72 percent, car taxes more than 180 percent and a stiff 25 VAT (value added tax) added to all purchases – it can be sometimes difficult to bring home any bacon.

Danes have to pay more for just about everything. Books are a luxury item. Their equivalent of the George Washington Bridge costs $45 to cross. Health care is free, which means you pay in time instead of money. Services are distributed only after endless stays in waiting rooms.

They’re also world leaders in alcohol and anti-depressant use.

Visitors say Danes are joyless to be around. Denmark suffers from high rates of alcoholism. In its use of antidepressants it ranks fourth in the world.

Denmark’s productivity is in decline, its workers put in only 28 hours a week, and everybody you meet seems to have a government job.

Oh, and as The Telegraph put it, it’s “the cancer capital of the world.”

Denmark’s suicide rate has been about twice as high as the United States over the past five decades.

According to the INTERPOL data, for murder, the rate in 2000 was 4.03 for Denmark, 1.10 for Japan, and 5.51 for USA.

So how happy can these drunk, depressed, lazy, tumor-ridden, pig-bonking bureaucrats really be?

 

What do they do with that free education?

Too many pursue “fulfilment” and too few the science and engineering degrees needed in well-paid growth sectors critical for the nation’s future.

Typical is 23-year-old Ali Badreldin, who is enrolled at the Royal Danish Academy of Music to become a saxophone player. “Music was always part of my life growing up so it was a natural choice,” he said.

His courses are free and he gets a monthly stipend of 5,839 DKK ($1,074 USD) in a system where class sizes are rarely limited.

The result has Denmark spending more proportionally on education than any other country in the OECD club of 34 advanced nations and getting less return..

Yet biotech firms like Novozymes say they cannot find enough engineers.

Engineering opportunities have soared in recent years in Denmark, but its youth have shunned the sector, with only one-third the OECD average contemplating an engineering career amid top-heavy enrolment in arts and humanities programmes.

With one of the highest tax rates in the world, big salaries mean mostly bigger taxes to sustain the welfare state. Many young Danes just don’t see the point of putting in years of effort into studying for a bigger salary eaten up by taxes

For example, “Lazy Robert”, or Robert Nielsen, an erstwhile student of social sciences, philosophy and Chinese, now 45, who shot to notoriety after proudly stating on TV that he prefers living off social benefits than taking a job he didn’t find “meaningful”

 

Unemployment Rate in Denmark remained unchanged at 4.50 percent in December from 4.50 percent in November of 2015, however official Denmark rates include those actively seeking employment, The more realistic rate is closer to 7.50 percent to 9.50 percent.

As opposed to all other forms of social security in Denmark, unemployment insurance is voluntary. This means you are not automatically insured against unemployment.

You can take out unemployment insurance with an unemployment insurance fund (a-kasse), which are private associations related to the trade unions and other professional organisations.

 

$20 Minimum Wage

Believe it or not, the minimum wage in Denmark really is $20 per hour. Many minimum wage increase opposers will say that it makes everything else more expensive. In a nutshell, yes, it can. However, it’s not always an immediate spark of inflation. Either way, it’s important to note that Denmark actually is an expensive country. In fact, Copenhagen is among the five most expensive cities in the world.

A meal at McDonalds in Denmark is around 65 DKK, which is $11.89 . In the United States, the same meal is $6.50.

The price of regular gasoline gallon/$USD as of today is $5.93 a new low due to the world market.

A Volkswagen Golf will run you $45,747.33! That will buy you a real car here.

Pair of Levi 501 jeans, or equivalent, $134.46.

Single parenting is common in Denmark. The country has the fourth highest divorce rate in Europe, far outstripping the UK, and the latest figures from Statistics Denmark show that 42.7 per cent of marriages ended in divorce. Like so many things in Denmark that is escalating, According to Statistics Denmark, the national divorce rate jumped by 23 percent last year when compared to the previous ten-year average.

 

Healthcare is becoming too expensive for even their extortionate tax rate to subsidize.

New rules are coming into effect which will apply to people who wish to use private hospitals versus the state run ones for certain operations. It has been a growing trend to use private hospitals for operations when the waiting times were too long at state run hospitals.

Instead of waiting up to a year for a hip operation, you could get it at a private hospital within a month. You paid the fee and got reimbursed the cost from the health service. Well that is changing.

Now many operations will not be paid for at private hospitals. There is talk of operations for knees, shoulder, eyebrows, back and weight problems. This list will probably grow as the government tries to reduce costs more and more.

Denmark’s low cancer survival rates of 50.9% are a double-edged sword, as the nation has the highest cancer rate in the world. According to the World Cancer Research Fund, Denmark has 338 cancer patients for every 100,000 residents.

Head of the Danish Cancer Society, Leif Vestergaard Pedersen, said “Some of the the most terrible stories are those about patients who have been to four or five hospitals before they come to a hospital that can make the diagnosis. By then an incredible amount of time has passed and the likelihood of effective treatment is reduced.”

 

So, why are they so happy there? I read it in a meme!

Those sky-high happiness surveys, it turns out, are mostly bunk. Asking people “Are you happy?” means different things in different cultures. In Japan, for instance, answering “Yes” seems like boasting, Booth points out. Whereas in Denmark, it’s considered “shameful to be unhappy,” newspaper editor Anne Knudsen says in the book.

Moreover, there is a group of people that believes the Danes are lying when they say they’re the happiest people on the planet. This group is known as “Danes.”

“Over the years I have asked many Danes about these happiness surveys — whether they really believe that they are the global happiness champions — and I have yet to meet a single one of them who seriously believes it’s true,” Booth writes. “They tend to approach the subject of their much-vaunted happiness like the victims of a practical joke waiting to discover who the perpetrator is.”

The glorious Denmark meme MAY have been somewhat true it the past, but it is rapidly declining in the current days. Partially due to the flaws inherant in the socialist dreamscape, but also now an added factor that the rest of the world has been facing.

Refugee immigration.

It’s off the charts and Demark is risking heading down the drain.

Some “experts” and pro-immigration politicians – like the UN chief of Migration (who is also chairman at Goldman-Sachs bank) claim that the influx of Syrian refugees and migrants from the Muslim world will benefit European economy. That is a very bold statement when you look at the statistics.

Muslim refugees (in this case from Lebanon) are the most criminal group of all. Syrians, whom the European elite wants us to believe is highly educated refugees eager to work and contribuite, is the group that is most unemployed.

Important research by the Danish state (Danish Statistics) on a very debated topic – feel free to translate and spread.

Translated from Altinget:

“Male immigrants and descendants from Lebanon have the highest crime rate of all ethnic groups in Denmark. According to the latest available figures (from 2013) the Lebanese male crime rate is index 254 – even when adjusted for age and socioeconomic status. If you do not adjust for this, the figure would be even higher. Danish men’s crime rate is index 98.

Lebanese also perform poorly on the labor market. The employment rate for 30-59-year-old Lebanese immigrants is 30.4 percent, while the employment rate for ethnic Danes is 82.3 percent.

The figures for the employment rate cover both men and women. In turn, their descendants are not included in these figures, but also when you look at the group of descendants of Lebanese immigrants, there is a significant under-employment.

Refugees and immigrants from Lebanon are a special group, since many are stateless Palestinians with growing up in refugee camps. This is not the case for the Iraqi immigrants, but the crime index for Iraqis is also high.

Among the Iraqi immigrants (and refugees), only 32.8 percent of 30-59-year-olds had a job in 2013. It is only marginally better than the Lebanese.

The crime index for male Iraqi immigrants and their descendants is as high as for the Lebanese, but with an index of 166, when adjusted for age and socio-economic conditions, the crime index for Iraqi refugees and migrants is still well above average.

 

What are they doing about it?

Danish lawmakers, this last session, passed a controversial bill aiming to make the Scandinavian country a less attractive destination for refugees and migrants.

Main points:

– New, more difficult citizenship requirements approved by the government earlier this week.

– Police will be able to search migrants’ luggage and seize cash exceeding 10,000 kroner (1,340 euros, $1,450), as well as any individual items valued at more than that amount. Wedding rings and other items of sentimental value will be exempt.

– Refugees granted a lower form of protection status under Danish law, meaning people fleeing indiscriminate violence rather than individual persecution, have to wait three years instead of one year before applying for family reunifications. Once the application has been filed, the process can take years.

– New family reunification rules that will include tougher restrictions for “foreigners who have poorer preconditions for becoming integrated into Danish society” and easier rules for “foreigners who are consider to be suitable for integration”.

– Tighter rules for obtaining permanent residency that will require foreigners to “meet a string of fixed conditions and some supplementary integration-relevant criteria” in order to obtain permanent residency. Additionally, the proposal calls for scrapping the “particularly easy access” to permanent residency for refugees.

– For permanent residency applications, Danish language requirements have been raised from Danish 1 to Danish 2, and the person must have been employed for 2.5 of the past three years rather than three out of five years.

– Tougher citizenship criteria for children who were born in Denmark to foreign parents. The proposal entails scrapping more lax requirements that were implemented by the previous government in 2014.

– More focus on a refugee’s ability “to contribute” when Denmark chooses its 500 UN quota refugees each year. These changes were introduced by Integration Minister Inger Støjberg in August.

– A proposal to apply the newly-created ‘integration benefit’, a sharp reduction in the benefits given to refugees, to even more foreigners.

– A proposal to implement recommendations from the Criminal Code Council (Straffelovrådet) to change Denmark’s current laws on treason so they can be applied to Danes or foreigners who engage in armed conflict abroad.

 

This has turned into a longer thought rant that I had anticipated, so if you want more information, Google it yourself, just avoid the “warm fuzzy” liberal sites and seek the truth.

Oh, yeah. Shove that stupid meme!

And fear this flake, fear him very much!

 

Source: Denmark vs United States Background Stats Compared and around the web.

 

Follow me on Facebook for more unfilted truth!