Radio America Online News Bureau

Guns & Midterms, Comey’s Endless Vanity, Lower the Voting Age?

by


Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America welcome a new poll showing that the edge for Democrats is shrinking ahead of the midterm elections and that support for the GOP among gun rights supporters is ahead of support for Democrats among gun control activists.  They also roll their eyes as former Clinton staffer George Stephanopoulos interviews James Comey for ABC News and Comey sanctimoniously concludes he always did the right things for the right reasons and never got obsessed with his own virtue.  And they reject a Washington Post editorial calling for the voting age to be lowered to 16 years old, but they do offer some creative tips for tweaking the voting age.

Share

Basic Beliefs Under Assault

by

Traditional marriage is in the cross hairs of the progressive left again this week, as a sitting U.S. senator suggested Secretary of State nominee Mike Pompeo was unfit for office because he opposes gay marriage, and a New Yorker column expressed horror about the successful expansion of Chick-fil-A in New York City.

On Thursday, Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., questioned Pompeo as part of the confirmation process and used part of his time to pepper Pompeo about his views on tradition marriage and whether be believes “gay sex is a perversion.”  He refused to accept Pompeo’s contention that he did not believe in same-sex marriage but would all subordinates equally.

National Organization for Marriage Communications Director Joseph Grabowski says this is the latest sign of a troubling litmus test on the left.

“I think this is a demonstration of an ideological purity test that unfortunately is becoming common in the Democratic Party.  We’ve already seen it on the life issue and a woman’s so-called right to have an abortion.  Now we’re seeing it also with respect to beliefs about marriage that people can hold personally,” said Grabowski, noting that as recently as 2008, neither Barack Obama nor Hillary Clinton publicly backed same-sex marriage.

Booker couched his comments as being in the interest of State Department employees who might have same-sex spouses, but Grabowski says the implication was clear that “somehow this view that Mr. Pompeo holds as a matter of personal belief, as a matter of religious conviction, disqualifies him from public service.”

Grabowski says Booker could simply look into Pompeo’s record at the CIA, in Congress, or in the military if he really wanted to know if Pompeo has had any problems on these issues.

“It’s clear to be that Sen. Booker doesn’t have any such evidence and that’s why he’s pursuing this line of questioning,” said Grabowski, noting that the National Organization for Marriage has launched a website to call attention to Booker’s questioning and to gather petition signatures in condemnation of it.

Grabowski adds that this sort of badgering by Booker puts the lie to the LGBT’s longstanding public relations efforts.

“The adage of ‘live and let live’ which was claimed as the policy that was underlying the effort to allow for same-sex marriage.  It’s clearly not the intent here,” said Grabowski.

He says this movement was never just about changing the law but about changing the culture and marginalizing anyone with a traditional view of marriage as the union of one man and one woman.  According to Grabowski, the goal is “to make that the equivalent in the civic discourse of what racists in the Jim Crow South years ago believed.”

The left dominates the public square on the issue.  Some polls now show a majority of Americans – or even a majority of Republicans – back same-sex marriage.  Grabowski says traditional marriage supporters keep quiet our of fear for the jobs or being ostracized in their social circles.

He also pushes back on the idea that traditional marriage is no longer the majority position in the U.S.  He says the societal pressure is so strong that people won’t even express their true beliefs to a pollster.

However, this is not only an issue in the halls of government.  On Friday, New Yorker columnist Dan Piepenbring vented about the success of Chick-fil-A restaurants in New York City.  Again, the faith-based foundation of the chain was at issue.

“[T]he brand’s arrival here feels like an infiltration, in no small part because of its pervasive Christian traditionalism. Its headquarters, in Atlanta, is adorned with Bible verses and a statue of Jesus washing a disciple’s feet. Its stores close on Sundays. Its C.E.O., Dan Cathy, has been accused of bigotry for using the company’s charitable wing to fund anti-gay causes, including groups that oppose same-sex marriage,” wrote Piepenbring.

“The restaurant’s corporate purpose still begins with the words “to glorify God,” and that proselytism thrums below the surface of the Fulton Street restaurant, which has the ersatz homespun ambiance of a megachurch,” he added.

“Still, there’s something especially distasteful about Chick-fil-A, which has sought to portray itself as better than other fast food: cleaner, gentler, and more ethical, with its poultry slightly healthier than the mystery meat of burgers. Its politics, its décor, and its commercial-evangelical messaging are inflected with this suburban piety,” added Piepenbring.

Grabowski says such a column only confirms what most of America thinks of liberal bastions like New York City.

“This is the kind of elitism we see every election cycle, when people complain sometimes about the values of certain coastal elites who miss out on the real values of the average American.

“This is a perfect example of that.  In a city like New York, where you can walk down any given street and see a several stories-high billboard portraying people barely clad in skimpy underwear and engaged in all kinds of weird poses.  To be offended by something like a homely restaurant is just completely absurd to me,” said Grabowski.

But with the LGBT movement enjoying strong alliances with the media, Hollywood and the rest of popular culture and traditional marriage advocates fearful of reprisals, is there any reason to think this momentum will change?

Grabowski says yes.

“There is a grassroots groundswell of support for this issue.  You don’t see it reported a lot.  You don’t see it reported a lot, but that doesn’t mean you’re along.  I would encourage people to take heart and  to know there is strength in numbers and to know that we have the truth on our side.  Ultimately, that will win out,” said Grabowski.

Standard Podcast [ 10:28 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share

Scooter Libby Pardon Coming? Comey & Trump Trade Insults, Comey’s 2016 Admission

by


Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America welcome the news that Scooter Libby, the chief of staff to Vice President Dick Cheney, may soon be pardoned by President Trump and have his convictions from the Valerie Plame fiasco scrubbed from the record.  Jim and Greg don’t excuse Libby’s conduct in the investigation but point out there never should have been an investigation since there was no underlying crime.  They also roll their eyes as excerpts from James Comey’s new book slam Trump as being shorter than expected, wearing his ties too long and using tanning goggles, while Trump tweets that Comey is an “untruthful slimeball.”  And they react to Comey’s admission that he revealed the re-opening of the Hillary Clinton email probe because he was sure she would win the election anyway and might not have done so if he thought Trump could actually win.

Share

McInerney: Russia Probe Makes Syria Policy Much Tougher

by

Retired U.S. Air Force Lt. General Tom McInerney suspects any response to apparent chemical attacks in Syria may be on hold while the Trump administration tries to build a coalition for any action and he says solving the problem in Syria is much more difficult because partisan sniping over Russia is hampering our ability to find common diplomatic ground with Moscow.

Earlier in the week, reports suggested a military response could come by the end of the week.  On Thursday, President Trump made it clear a more deliberate approach may be in the works.

“Never said when an attack on Syria would take place. Could be very soon or not so soon at all!” tweeted Trump.

McInerney says there is likely a very good reason for a delayed response.

“I think his national security advisers have advised him to get a coalition involved with this, to include the UK, French, perhaps the Jordanians, the Egyptians, Israelis, Saudis and Emirates – a coalition of the willing that can represent a very broad front,” said McInerney.

“When you have a coalition like this, it means they’re all in agreement and they’re willing to use their forces.  And you have Arab forces.  I believe it’s important to use Arab forces,” he said.  “It makes us define the problem more.”

McInerney says another critical element is to confirm the chemical attack actually came from the Syrian government.

“We’ve got to confirm with the most precise accuracy that it was the Assad regime that did this.  The reason I say that is because Al-Nusra was looking for chlorine stocks a number of months ago and it would be in their interest to want to keep the U.S. involved and for the U.S. to attack the Assad forces,” said McInerney.

He says there may be an easy way to determine blame in this case.

“Was it an airplane with barrel bombs or was it an IED?  Because we know the Al-Nusra forces do not have aircraft,” said McInerney, who adds that U.S.-led surveillance ought to provide critical evidence on whether the attack came from the air, although it may take time to comb through the intelligence.

If Assad is responsible, McInerney favors a big response?

“I think we need to eliminate his air force.  Is that difficult to do?  Yes, it is, because he has moved his forces on Russian bases with Iranians.  I’m not worried about killing Iranians.  I think they need to be pushed back and of course the Israelis are very concerned about this Shia Crescent that is sweeping across,” said McInerney.

In addition to the Syrians, Russians, and Iranians, U.S. policy must also consider how any action impacts the Kurds, ISIS, the Free Syrian Army and other groups in the area.

McInerney says the complexity of the issue is immense, and he says it’s now far more complicated because of the ongoing Russia probes here in the U.S.

“Because the Democratic Party laid out this false narrative, this fake news about Russian collusion, it has soured the diplomatic relations with the U.S. and Russia.  It’s difficult to communicate with them in a reasonable way.

“That’s why the Mueller investigation must be terminated as quickly as possible.  Clearly Russia is a great power.  Still, it’s got lots of nuclear weapons which concern us.  They are modernizing their nuclear forces, and we do not want to let this get out of control,” said McInerney.

McInerney says the region is also more complex as a result of the Obama administration pulling the U.S. out of Iraq entirely and failing to honor the red line it set for chemical weapon use in Syria.

“Unfortunately, because of Obama’s ineptness, he helped create the vacuum that the Russians were able to move in on,” said McInerney.

Standard Podcast [ 11:46 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share

Pompeo in Peril? Americans Clueless on Holocaust, RNC’s Lame Anti-Comey Campaign

by


Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America shake their heads as the Republican National Committee furiously tries to line up a few Democrats to push Mike Pompeo over the finish line as the next Secretary of State.  They also hang their heads as large percentages of Americans demonstrate very poor knowledge about the Holocaust, including 41 percent of Americans and 66 percent of millennials who have no idea what Auschwitz was.  And they throw up their hands, as the Republican National Committee tries to discredit the upcoming media blitz from former FBI Director James Comey by favorable quoting Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, and Maxine Waters.

Share

Cuccinelli: I’m Happy to See Ryan Go

by

House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wisc., announced Wednesday he will not seek re-election this year, a decision welcomed by conservatives who see Ryan as a great disappointment during his years running the House of Representatives.

“I’m happy to see him go,” said former Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, who now leads the Senate Conservatives Fund, which recruits conservative candidates to run against Senate Democrats and liberal Republicans.

“As establishmentarians go, he’s a very nice guy, but he has stabbed conservatives in the back.  He has made public promises that he hasn’t kept on very basic things like how he was going to run the House.  He has gone back on those promises,” said Cuccinelli.

Cuccinelli says in almost three years as House Speaker, Ryan has only managed to turn one major campaign promise into law when the tax reform bill was enacted late in 2017.

“They literally have one thing to show for his tenure in the House and that’s that tax reform bill.  There’s nothing else positive to point to except – look I’m really anti-regulation and I really appreciate them peeling out one regulation at a time – but in the big picture, that’s small potatoes,” said Cuccinelli.

The most recent example of Cuccinelli’s frustration is Ryan agreeing to the $1.3 trillion omnibus that jacks up domestic spending along with defense spending.  Ryan defenders say the House did pass individual spending bills at more responsible levels but the omnibus became necessary because the Senate could not find the votes to tackle the appropriations bills one at a time.

Cuccinelli says Ryan should have rejected any idea of an omnibus bill and insisted that the Senate approach the bills one at a time, negotiating only when the Senate passed something.

“That’s all he should have done.  This whole complaining schtick about the Senate doesn’t go anywhere when they can actually stick the Senate with the work they’ve done and they refuse to do it,” said Cuccinelli, who also blames President Trump for the massive spending increases.

“This is weak-kneed stuff and the president shouldn’t have signed the bill.  ‘Oh gosh, this is a terrible bill and I’m going to sign it but I’m never going to sign one again.’  How outrageous is that?  That’s a real failure on the part of the president,” said Cuccinelli.

Ryan also managed to get a health care bill through the House, although the idea fizzled in the Senate.  Cuccinelli says the House bill was no triumph of conservatism.

“It’s the biggest promise in yours and my political lifetime.  Not only did Mitch McConnell betray us on that but if you look at what Paul Ryan put through, you will see that it would basically leave us with the outer structure of Obamacare.  They liked to call it ‘skinny repeal.’  What that means is this is not repeal,” said Cuccinelli.

Cuccinelli also blasts Ryan for reneging on a vow to the House Freedom Caucus to restore then-Rep. Tim Huelskamp, R-Kansas, to the House Agriculture Committee as a way to win caucus support for his candidacy for Speaker of the House.  But after pressure from the Chamber of Commerce and others, Ryan refused to return Huelskamp from the panel.

So who should be the House GOP leader now?  The names most commonly mentioned are House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., and House Majority Whip Steve Scalise, R-La.

McCarthy is next in line in leadership but Scalise is likely to be a sentimental favorite after his comeback from last year’s congressional baseball shooting.

Cuccinelli says Scalise is the perfect example of who conservatives should not want in leadership.

“Scalise used to be a conservative.  What he would tell you is you can’t do that and be in leadership.  Let’s reinterpret that.  So you can’t keep your principles if you take this particular job, and when you had to choose between the two you had to abandon your principles for this title.  OK, and now you want us to make you speaker?” asked Cuccinelli.

However, Cuccinelli says McCarthy is worse.

“McCarthy is going to claim a closer relationship with Trump, but McCarthy really is unacceptable to a broad swath of the caucus,” said Cuccinelli.

Cuccinelli wants to see Re. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, a co-founder of the House Freedom Caucus ascend to lead House Republicans.

“Jordan is the kind of person who can gather up that kind of support because he has been such a professional.  You can’t cast him as a firebrand, but he has stood for principles and sought to use the power of the House to advance the principles they all campaigned on.  What a concept,” said Cuccinelli.

If someone like McCarthy or Scalise emerges as leader, Cuccinelli suspects the intense GOP friction will continue.

“As long as [Ryan] and the rest of that leadership make war on the conservative base that elects them, we will not have peace in the Republican Party,” said Cuccinelli.

He also believes the Republicans are headed to a bloodbath in the midterm elections unless they get a lot done on spending, immigration, and more in the next few months.

“If all you have to show to your entire base is one bill, you’re going to get wiped out.  They’ve got to get work done in the next six months, or they’re going to be arguing about (who becomes) minority leader, not speaker,” said Cuccinelli.

Standard Podcast [ 11:13 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download
Share

Zuckerberg Gets Grilled, Ryan to Retire, London’s Anti-Knife Nonsense

by


Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America are happy to Republicans senators like Ted Cruz, Ben Sasse, and John Kennedy pin down Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg on critical issues like censorship, free speech, and user policies that actually benefit Facebook members.  They also react to House Speaker Paul Ryan announcing his retirement, looking both at his record and the increased likelihood that Democrats will take back the House this year.  And they have fun with London’s ridiculous new knife control push after 50 stabbing deaths in the city this year, including police confiscating scissors and pliers as deadly weapons.

Share

‘Dumbfounded by the Dumbness’ of London Knife Control

by

Officials in London are responding to 50 stabbing deaths this year by declaring war on knives and pleading with people never to carry one in public, decisions one second amendment expert calls “silly” and says is proof that taking away people’s guns doesn’t remove the desire of criminals to harm people.

London Mayor Sadiq Khan tweeted “No excuses: there is never a reason to carry a knife.  Anyone who does will be caught, and they will feel the full force of the law.”  There is also an aggressive #knifefree campaign featuring teenagers discussing their dreams and their intention to never carry knives so they have a chance of achieving their goals.

Local police are tweeting images of items they’ve confiscated as possible weapons, including scissors, screwdrivers, pliers and gardening tools and declaring relief that such implements were now in police custody.

TheGunMag.com Senior Editor Dave Workman is shaking his head in disbelief.

“The mayor of London is acting silly , frankly, because bad guys who use knives to commit crimes are not going to turn those knives in.  It’s just that simple, just like bad guys aren’t going to turn their guns in,” said Workman, who is also affiliated with the Second Amendment Foundation.

“I think this is an example of government run amok.  They think they’re going to solve a problem by disarming the wrong people,” said Workman.  “They’ve already disarmed the wrong people by taking their guns away from them and that makes them vulnerable to knife attack.  I’m dumbfounded by the dumbness of the people in London under this mayor.”

One of the stabbing deaths this year came when a 78-year-old British man stabbed the upper body of a home intruder, who later died.  Police arrested the man on suspicion of murder and appalled citizens erected a memorial to the deceased criminal across the street until neighbors tore it down.

“This 78-year-old man was simply defending himself inside the confines of his home from this criminal.  For the Brits to even suggest that they might put him on trial for murder is just abysmal,” said Workman.

“At least in the United States, we still recognize that the individual citizen has the right to defend himself or herself from violent crime.  In Great Britain, apparently it’s not that way anymore,” said Workman.

So how might the London story impact the U.S. gun debate?  For starters, Workman suspects Britain will not be held up as the gold standard of gun control anymore.

“The next time a gun prohibitionist brings up the British example or the London example, he’s going to get laughed right off the stage,” said Workman.

He says the murders in London demonstrate why we need a robust second amendment.

“We’re boiling it down to the question of should you bring a knife to a gunfight.  In the United States, where we’ve got more than sixteen-and-a-half million people licensed to carry, that’s a very real problem for the recidivist criminal who may want to bring a knife,” said Workman.

Gun control activists could point to the fact that the rash of stabbing deaths still do not equal the number killed in the Las Vegas shooting.  Workman says that argument misses the point.

“Dead is dead.  Whether you get stabbed to death with a knife or shot by some lunatic with a firearm, who shouldn’t have had it in the first place and sent all kinds of warning signals about his intentions, I’m not sure it makes all that much difference,” said Workman.

He says one thing that’s become clear in the wake of the Parkland shooting is that gun control advocates, including former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, are openly calling for a repeal of the second amendment.  A federal judge has also ruled that the second amendment does not protect the right to own semi-automatic weapons.

“I think where this is going is that it’s still feeding this monster of civilian disarmament.  For the gun control people to continue claiming that nobody’s coming to take your guns and nobody wants to take your guns is just a flat-out lie,” said Workman.

Share

China Blinks on Trade, Feds vs. Cohen, FBI Vets Sour on Comey

by


Jim Geraghty of National Review and Greg Corombos of Radio America are glad to see China made some minor concessions on auto tariffs and intellectual property issues in the wake of tariff battles with the U.S.  They also discuss the FBI raid on Trump lawyer Michael Cohen and what it means, if anything, for the larger Mueller probe.  And Jim discusses his new column, which reveals that former FBI personnel who once thought well of former director James Comey are now very critical of Comey’s embrace of a political role that casts him as a hero and a martyr.

Share

Abortion Reversal Treatment Proves Successful

by

Women who begin a chemically-induced abortion but then have second thoughts now have hope of saving their unborn children thanks to a new study showing a great success rate in reversing the early effects of abortafacients through hormone treatments, a discovery that could save some 30,000 babies per year.

The treatments also appear to add no additional risk of birth defects.

In the latest edition of the journal “Issues in Law and Medicine,” Dr. George Delgado and his six colleagues published a study entitled “A Case Series Detailing the
Successful Reversal of the Effects of Mifepristone Using Progesterone.”

Delgado teaches medicine at the University of California-San Diego and is also medical director at Culture of Life Family Services, a pro-life medical facility in southern California.  He says the success of this study is great news for women.

“It’s empowering to them.  It gives them a second choice and I think it really helps them to heal and to go forward in their lives in a really positive fashion,” said Delgado, in an interview following the publishing of the study.

The effort focuses on chemically-induced abortions.

“We’re talking about 300,000 cases a year.  In some percentage of these cases, we know that women have second thoughts and change their minds and may want a second chance at choice.  We know this because they call the hotline of their own volition because they’ve searched us out,” said Delgado.

And how many actually have second thoughts when beginning an abortion through abortafacients?

“I think a conservative estimate would be ten percent of women want to consider reversal.  I even base that on studies that are touted by abortion advocates,” said Delgado.

“They call it a very small number, which you might say ten percent is pretty small, who have second thoughts.  When you look at the number of medical abortions per year – 300,000 – ten percent of that is 30,000 women.  If 30,000 women a year would be interested in this treatment, I think we should do everything we can to educate them so they know that it is available,” said Delgado.

Delgado also stresses that ten percent is a conservative estimate and believes the number who reconsider chemical abortion is higher because “having an abortion fundamentally goes against the hard wiring of a woman, who is hard-wired to be nurturing and to protect her young, including her unborn,”said Delgado.

Delgado says his research led to very encouraging conclusions.

“This is very exciting.  This new article effectively proves that the use of progesterone to reverse the effects of mifepristone medical abortions is safe and it’s effective,” said Delgado.

He is equally excited that the progesterone infusion does not appear to increase the likelihood of birth defects.  His success rate was 64-68 percent of healthy live births, while the percentage of unborn babies who survive mifepristone is just 25 percent.

So what are progesterone and mifepristone and how does this reversal work?

“[Progesterone] is a hormone that is essential for the health of a pregnancy.  Without progesterone, every pregnancy would miscarry, so we know that progesterone is extremely important.  That’s why they started using mifepristone to cause medical abortions.  They discovered that mifepristone blocks the effects of progesterone by blocking the receptors where the progesterone needs to land in the cells in order to cause its effects.

“So what we’ve devised is a strategy, whereby we give supplemental progesterone so there is more progesterone in the system and it out-competes the mifepristone at the receptor sites until the mifepristone washes out of the system,” said Delgado.

Pro-choice experts argue that not enough research has been done to declare the work definitive.  Nonetheless, Delgado says those same skeptics gave confirmed important details, such as unborn babies only surviving 25 percent of the time if a chemical abortion is stopped after taking mifepristone.  They also confirm that infusion of progesterone is a logical strategy to counteract mifepristone.

Delgado is quick to point out that a chemically-induced abortion begins with mifepristone and is usuall followed up with doses of misoprostol, which expels the baby from the womb.  There is no counter to that at this time.

Delgado says the next step is to refine the treatment by comparing the modes and doses of progesterone to determine what is most effective.

Already he says the women who changed their minds after beginning a chemical abortion are powerful.

“Almost unanimously their comments are of great relief and great gratitude that they had this opportunity to reverse their medical abortions,” said Delgado.

Share