The Patriot Post Digest 5-10-2016

________________________________________
The Patriot Post Digest 5-10-2016
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
________________________________________

Mid-Day Digest

May 10, 2016

THE FOUNDATION

“Where an excess of power prevails, property of no sort is duly respected. No man is safe in his opinions, his person, his faculties, or his possessions.” —James Madison (1792)

TOP RIGHT HOOKS

Facebook Suppressed Conservative News1

According to former employees of Facebook, the world’s social media behemoth routinely downplayed conservative-sourced news whenever it started trending on the website. Millions of people turn to the site every day as a virtual watering hole, and it’s often the biggest driver of web traffic to news publications. In turn, that information affects Americans' opinions about government and policy. To help facilitate the discussion, Facebook keeps a running sidebar of subjects that are trending on the site. In the past, people assumed Facebook’s algorithm dispassionately highlighted stories with the most buzz and writers would create snappy descriptions of the event or video or subject. But according to former curators2, Facebook leans on the scale when it came to what’s trending.

“I believe it had a chilling effect on conservative news,” one said. For example, stories about the late SEAL sniper Chris Kyle3 were ignored while on slow news days, the Facebook curation team would push out stories about the Black Lives Matter movement or incessant and pointless speculation on Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 — even as interest in those stories waned. And when a conservative news site broke a story, Facebook curators would marginalize their efforts by looking for Leftmedia news sites that wrote about the same topic.

In responding to these accusations, Facebook said a statement: “We take allegations of bias very seriously. Facebook is a platform for people and perspectives from across the political spectrum. … There are rigorous guidelines in place for the review team to ensure consistency and neutrality.”

So that would be a non-denial. But make no mistake: Facebook wields real power in politics. In March, more than a few Facebook employees wanted a discussion with founder Mark Zuckerberg about the company’s “responsibility” for stopping Donald Trump’s candidacy. And if a down-to-the-wire election occurred like it did in 2000, Facebook could be a factor4 in boosting voter turnout — by using its algorithm to remind certain (read: pro-Hillary) voters to head to the polls. Or it could smother pro-Trump stories from the site. More important, how would we know Facebook is doing it?

More Welfare Going to Immigrants Than U.S. Citizens5

The average American household receives $4,431 a year in federal welfare, including food stamps and cash. That’s plenty of evidence for Barack Obama’s poor economic record, but it gets worse. Illegal immigrants take in an average $5,692 from the federal government a year. Who are the people paying taxes? The numbers6 were crunched by the Center for Immigration Studies, which last year also discovered7 that 51% of immigrant households take in some sort of federal aid compared to 30% of native households.

“It is difficult to imagine sitting down to craft an immigration policy that will benefit the American people and coming up with one in which immigrants consume more welfare than natives,” wrote8 Jason Richwine, the analyst who crunched the numbers. “It’s a strong indication that current policy is not working.” Immigrants — both legal and otherwise — take in more welfare because they often have more children and attained less education than people born here in the United States. America may be the land of opportunity, but it should present its opportunity through work and enterprise, not creating a whole class of people dependent on the government.

Obama to Successful Blacks: ‘You Didn’t Build That’9

Out of the myriad lectures commencement speeches Barack Obama has given, perhaps none was as disheartening as the one he gave Saturday at Howard University. The message was twofold: Obama’s presidency failed to bring racial healing, and when it comes to blacks who are living successful lives, it’s not really because of hard work so much as it is luck (i.e., they didn’t build that).

We begin with racial discord, of which Obama is washing his hands. “No, my election did not create a post-racial society,” he said. “I don’t know who was propagating that notion. That was not mine.” Uh, yeah it was.

Radio talk-show host Rush Limbaugh responds, “There are … white people who voted for Obama hoping to end [racial discord]. They think it’s tearing the country apart. … Nobody thought that meant more welfare or more benefits or more dependence, but that actual, quality standard of living improvements would take place. And there haven’t been any, at large.”

Next, recall these remarks spoken by Obama four years ago: “If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.” Now see if you if you can find a resemblance to Saturday’s second damning remark:

“We have to not only question the world as it is, and stand up for those African-Americans who haven’t been so lucky — because, yes, you’ve worked hard, but you’ve also been lucky. That’s a pet peeve of mine: People who have been successful and don’t realize they’ve been lucky.”

Hot Air’s Larry O'Conner says, “No, it’s more than a pet peeve of his, it’s an ideology.” Furthermore, Limbaugh opines: “That’s a hell of an inspirational message. I’d be really motivated. Okay, so I’ve spent four years or however many years here in this university trying to equip myself for success, and now I’m told that’s not a factor. I gotta go out and learn luck. Where do I go to study luck? Where do I go to get my degree in luck? And the unspoken message is: If you’re black, you aren’t gonna have it, ‘cause the people in charge of luck aren’t gonna pass it out to you.”

Besides, what does all that talk about luck say about Obama’s ascendance to the White House?

Don’t Miss Patriot Humor

Check out Pop Quiz10.

If you’d like to receive Patriot Humor by email, update your subscription here11.

BEST OF RIGHT OPINION

Tony Perkins: Objections Sustained! Alabama Suspends Chief Justice12
David Limbaugh: Trump Might Want to Rethink Snubbing the Base13
Thomas Sowell: Dry Rot in Academia14

For more, visit Right Opinion15.

FEATURED RIGHT ANALYSIS
A Candidate Divided Against Himself…16

By Nate Jackson

If Donald Trump wins in November, which Donald Trump will assume the Oval Office? By that question, we mean to point out how often the presumptive Republican nominee disagrees with himself on the issues.

To be sure, stubbornly sticking with bad policy doesn’t make it good policy (e.g., Barack Obama’s entire presidency), so the “flexibility” that Trump boasts of can be useful, especially when negotiating “great deals.”

But this is getting ridiculous. “As for the idea of unifying behind the Trump agenda,” Jim Geraghty muses, “that’s harder than it sounds because he keeps changing his positions. He’s already reversed positions on tax increases, the minimum wage, self-financing, and paying down the debt, and suggested the United States might tell its creditors it needs to renegotiate what it will pay back, despite contractual obligations.” And that’s just since he became the presumptive nominee last week.

During the primary, Trump made a big deal out of not raising money from other people (especially special-interest groups) in favor of paying his own way. That attracted people to his banner because he “couldn’t be bought,” while his opponents were “puppets.” Of course, he did more fundraising than he let on, but the image mattered.

Facing Hillary Clinton’s billion-dollar juggernaut, however, has necessitated Trump changing course. He is seeking to tap into the Republican National Committee’s fundraising structure in an effort to fund what he says may be a $1.5 billion campaign. Then again, if Trump is worth as much as he says he is17, continuing to self-fund shouldn’t be a problem. Easy for us to say, we suppose. Worse, Trump hired longtime Clinton donor and George Soros investment professional Steven Mnuchin to be his finance chairman. Trump has also given loads of cash to Democrats, so this was not a surprise.

________________________________________
The Patriot Post Digest 5-10-2016
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
________________________________________

On our national debt, Trump last week suggested a solution: “With the United States government there are times on occasion you can buy back debt at a discount, meaning the interest rate goes up and you buy back debt at a discount.” Yet doing so would require taking on new debt to pay off the old, and at higher interest to boot. Why this is a good idea is a mystery.

Except it’s quite simple, he said this week: “This is the United States government. The bonds are absolutely sacred. … People said I want to go and buy debt and default on debt, and I mean, these people are crazy. This is the United States government. First of all, you never have to default because you print the money, I hate to tell you, OK?”

So why not just print $19 trillion and pay off our debt now?

On taxes, Trump issued a plan18 last year that called for lowering rates, but now he’s backtracking. Soundbites from this week: “By the time it gets negotiated, it’s going to be a different plan. … In my plan [rates are] going down, but by the time it’s negotiated, they’ll go up. Look, when I’m negotiating with the Democrats, I’m putting in a plan. I’m putting in my optimum plan. It’s going to be negotiated. … It’s not going to stay there. They’re not going to say, 'There’s your plan, let’s approve it.’ They’re going to say, ‘Let’s see what we can do.’ … I always believe in flexibility and remaining flexible. … My core beliefs are I want a major tax cut. … I am willing to pay more, and you know what, the wealthy are willing to pay more. We’ve had a very good run.”

Charles C.W. Cooke for one is exasperated19: “The merits and demerits of Trump’s plan to one side, a question comes to mind: What the hell sort of negotiating tactic is this? Essentially, Trump was telegraphing not only that he expects to give ground, but that he expects to get the exact opposite of what he has asked for. It’s one thing for a neutral observer to predict that there will have to be some give and take in a negotiation between two parties; indeed, in the American system such predictions are invariably smart. But it is quite another for one of those parties to lead off by conceding that he’s going to lose. Trump conceded that he’s going to lose.”

James Pethokoukis asserts, “He really does seem to be saying different things on different days to different people. You can try to score, but you’re only scoring one version of his reality. And the reality changes on a daily, if not hourly, basis.”

And a question: Currently the House and Senate are controlled by Republicans. Why does Trump say he’ll be negotiating with Democrats, unless he assumes, as we all have, that his candidacy will turn Congress over to Democrats?

On the minimum wage, in November he said, “We have to leave it the way it is. People have to go out, they have to work really hard and have to get into that upper stratum. … We cannot [raise it] if we are going to compete with the rest of the world. We just can’t do it.”

But this week, Trump said, “I am open to doing something with it, because I don’t like that. Because I’m very different from most Republicans. … I mean, you have to have something that you can live on.”

This Donald vs. Trump debate is nothing new. There’s a reason Stephen Colbert got five minutes of comedy gold20 just playing one Donald soundbite against another from Trump. He has reversed himself on, just to name a few, ObamaCare21, Iraq22, 9/1123 and the pope24.

What issues are next up for a flip-flop? Amnesty? (As it is, he’s always pushed for “touchback amnesty.”) That wall Mexico is going to pay for?

Inexplicably, this constant contradiction also seems to be part of Trump’s appeal. He’s “unpredictable” and not “programmed.” He’s not a “polished politician.” And if Hillary attacks him on one position, he’ll just take a different one. So the question then becomes, how can Republicans unify around a candidate who’s so divided himself?

MORE ORIGINAL PERSPECTIVE

ANALYSIS: Resistance to Federal Overreach Overdue, but Growing25
Oregon’s Transgender Guidelines Embrace the Dysphoria26
Justice Roy Moore Might Lose His Job. Again.27
ObamaCare’s Retreat From Affordability28
The War on the Islamic State Is Far From Over29

TOP HEADLINES

Surprise! Clinton IT Director’s Emails ‘Missing’30
Ryan: I’d Step Down as RNC Chairman if Trump Asks31
Top Islamic State Leader Killed in Iraq32

For more, visit Patriot Headline Report33

OPINION IN BRIEF

Tony Perkins: “Alabama’s Chief Justice Roy Moore is probably one of the few judges who’s been cross-examined as much as his witnesses. The unapologetic constitutionalist has been under the microscope plenty of times in his long career — including a 2003 showdown over a Ten Commandments monument that he refused to remove from the court grounds. Now, the Left’s judicial target is back in their crosshairs, with another politically motivated smear campaign. What we know about the complaint is this: Southern Poverty Law Center is behind it. After the U.S. Supreme Court forced a radical redefinition of marriage on the entire country last summer, Justice Moore fought it with every legitimate judicial tool at his disposal. … Last Friday, the Judicial Inquiry Commission decided to suspend Justice Moore without pay until he himself is tried. ‘Chief Justice Moore flagrantly disregarded and abused his authority,’ the Commission insisted. ‘Moore knowingly ordered probate judges to commit violations… knowingly subjecting them to potential prosecution and removal from office.’ The record will show Chief Justice Moore has done no such thing. What he has done is defend and represent the actual state of the law. His opponents just don’t like the policy implications of his legal arguments!”

SHORT CUTS

Insight: “A State which dwarfs its men, in order that they may be more docile instruments in its hands — even for beneficial purposes — will find that with small men no great thing can really be accomplished.” —John Stuart Mill (1806-1873)

Upright: “When the two meet, Mr. Trump will be in a strong position — but not as strong as he imagines. He needs Mr. Ryan more than Mr. Ryan needs him. The speaker is the leader of a large bloc of Republicans that is assertive, influential and intellectually important. Mr. Trump would be wise to take Mr. Ryan’s concerns seriously. … Months ago, Mr. Trump said Mr. Ryan would ‘pay a big price’ if the speaker declined to endorse him. That was during the primaries, when Mr. Trump didn’t need Mr. Ryan. Now he does — or he’ll be the one who pays the big price.” —WSJ’s Fred Barnes

Most reluctant endorsement ever? “I think electing Donald Trump would be the second-worst thing we could do this November, better only than electing Hillary Clinton to serve as the third term for the Obama administration’s radical policies. I am not pretending that Mr. Trump has suddenly become a conservative champion or even a reliable Republican: He is completely unpredictable. The problem is that Hillary is predictably liberal.” —Bobby Jindal announcing he’ll vote for Trump

That’s exactly what the argument is about: “I always take classified material seriously. There’s no argument about that that I’m aware of.” —Hillary Clinton

Braying Jackass: “The future demands from us something more than a nostalgia for some rose-tinted version of the past that did not really exist in any case. You’re about to graduate into a complex and borderless world.” —John Kerry in a commencement address

And last… “The solution here might be that the North Carolina governor could say that we don’t identify as North Carolina anymore, and therefore your lawsuit against us is irrelevant.” —Rush Limbaugh

Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis!
Managing Editor Nate Jackson

Join us in daily prayer for our Patriots in uniform — Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen — standing in harm’s way in defense of Liberty, and for their families.