Showing posts with label conservatives. Show all posts
Showing posts with label conservatives. Show all posts

Monday, July 06, 2026

The young Catholic elite poised to take over MAGA




Source images: Getty© Source images: Getty




Story by Nate Weisberg

On a muggy Saturday evening in May, 30 young men and a few women, all Christian and mostly Catholic, filed into a 19th-century redbrick building on Capitol Hill, part of Hillsdale College’s Washington, D.C., campus. The occasion was the monthly meeting of the Cicero Society, a parliamentary debating club committed, according to its terse website, to “developing excellence, preserving the Western intellectual tradition, and forming young leaders” — which in Washington is usually code for conservative job placement.

Despite the oppressive humidity, tweed jackets were the outfit of choice. The young men carried themselves like people twice their age or perhaps from a different era. One even had a cane, though it was hard to tell whether this was an accessory or a necessity. The setting was equally fusty. The debate was held beneath a large painting of the signing of the Constitution. Nearby were relics from the days of the Founding Fathers: an original copy of Thomas Paine’s American Crisis No. 1, a first edition of The Federalist.

Some of the society’s formal members, several of whom are political appointees in the Trump administration, wore pins on their jackets depicting the society’s crest, a quill pen crossing a sword. Others, pinless, worked the room, hoping to make a good impression. Some would later give floor speeches responding to the evening’s resolution, the main route to being accepted as a full member. The few women present weren’t auditioning quite as strenuously, perhaps because they were less eager to be admitted to what is, in essence, a fraternity.

After cocktails, guests settled into their chairs. I was handed a laminated guide: no one to speak unless recognized by the chairman; members to refer to one another as “the gentleman” or “the lady”; approval and disapproval to be expressed through “pounding of feet and hisses,” which, the guide explained, promoted “a lively atmosphere.” The session then began with a recounting of the minutes of the previous month’s debate, “Did William F. Buckley Jr. Fail?” Buckley, the founder of National Review, is best understood here as a stand-in for the kind of overpolite, free-market conservatism the Ciceronians reject. The chairman recalled that a young man of Indian descent had earlier “confessed to the society that, in many ways, Buckley was the reason he was there.” (An internship at National Review brought him to the U.S. from Canada.)

The room hissed.

It would be easy, from this alone, to mistake Cicero for a bunch of nativist trolls. But the society is more interesting than its casual cruelties, which did not, in any case, seem to offend the Indian immigrant in question, who is one of the members. Founded in 2020 by Ivy League conservative Christians, Cicero once attracted a more mixed crowd. A woman involved with the society since its early years told me that, at its height in 2021, the gender ratio was more balanced. Then, she said, “the normal people left and the weirder people came.” Talk about Groypers and incels spooked the women. Late last year, the Harvard Crimson reported that a Harvard debate society called the John Adams Society, a feeder for Cicero, had stopped allowing women to participate altogether; Cicero has not gone that far, she told me, but some members would like it to. The rules hardened. “The people who really love Robert’s Rules started having a little too much fun,” she added. The group’s politics also shifted, becoming a magnet for young New Right devotees who felt history moving their way as Donald Trump returned to the White House. Some members, another woman involved with the society told me, are hoping for it to become a staffing network-in-waiting for a future J.D. Vance administration.

Saturday, November 08, 2025

A small Jesuit school in Denver has quietly become a pipeline for powerful Republicans surrounding Trump


By Dave Smith
October 3, 2025 at 6:03 AM EDT




Regis University in Denver
Faina Gurevich—Getty Images


A Catholic university nestled in the Rocky Mountains has quietly produced a surprising number of figures who now occupy influential positions within President Donald Trump’s political sphere and the broader conservative movement.

Regis University, a 148-year-old Jesuit institution in Denver, has become an unexpected common denominator among conservative leaders who have shaped American politics for decades.

The connection includes two women in Trump’s orbit currently making headlines: Erika Kirk, the new CEO of Turning Point USA following her husband Charlie Kirk’s assassination, and Lindsey Halligan, Trump’s nominee for U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia; both earned degrees from Regis.

But their alma mater has produced a much broader network of conservative power brokers who have shaped American politics for generations.

Regis University, which serves about 2,700 students, was able to confirm to Fortune that Erika Kirk was a student there from fall 2007 through the end of fall 2009, and Lindsey Halligan did graduate from the school in 2011, but offered no further comment.

Sunday, September 21, 2025

Trump says he will award the Presidential Medal of Freedom to Ben Carson


President Donald Trump speaks during the American Cornerstone Institute’s Founder’s Dinner at George Washington’s Mount Vernon estate in Mount Vernon, Va., Saturday, Sept. 20, 2025. (AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana)


Updated 10:13 PM EDT, September 20, 2025

President Donald Trump said Saturday that he will award Ben Carson the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the nation’s highest civilian honor, the third such award he’s announced this month.

“Congratulations, Ben. He didn’t know this,” Trump said in a speech during an event at Mount Vernon for American Cornerstone Institute, founded by Carson. “He didn’t know it. I hope he’s happy.”

A former neurosurgeon who ran against Trump for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination, Carson, 74, went on to serve as Housing and Urban Development secretary during Trump’s first administration.

The one-time rivals developed a strong bond, and Carson — seen at one point as among the top contenders for Trump’s running mate in the 2024 campaign — served as Trump’s national faith chairman during last year’s race.

A staunch social conservative who has opposed abortion rights and same-sex marriage, Carson has become a popular conservative speaker and author.

The Medal of Freedom, established in 1963, is awarded to individuals who have made especially meritorious contributions to the security or national interests of the United States, world peace, or cultural or other significant public endeavors.


Sunday, May 18, 2025

The Group Behind Project 2025 Has a Plan to Crush the Pro-Palestinian Movement


Even before President Trump was re-elected, the Heritage Foundation, best known for Project 2025, set out to destroy pro-Palestinian activism in the United States.


  The Heritage Foundation headquarters in Washington, D.C.Credit...Jared Soares for The New York Times


By Katie J.M. Baker
May 18, 2025, 5:00 a.m. ET

In late April, the Heritage Foundation dispatched a team to Israel to meet with power players in Israeli politics, including the country’s foreign and defense secretaries and the U.S. ambassador, Mike Huckabee.

The conservative Washington-based think tank is best known for spearheading Project 2025, a proposed blueprint for President Trump’s second term that called for reshaping the federal government and an extreme expansion of presidential power.

Now the Heritage contingent was in Israel, in part, to discuss another contentious policy paper: Project Esther, the foundation’s proposal to rapidly dismantle the pro-Palestinian movement in the United States, along with its support at schools and universities, at progressive organizations and in Congress.

Drafted in the wake of Hamas’s attack on Israel in 2023 and the mounting protests against the war in Gaza, Project Esther outlined an ambitious plan to fight antisemitism by branding a broad range of critics of Israel as “effectively a terrorist support network,” so that they could be deported, defunded, sued, fired, expelled, ostracized and otherwise excluded from what it considered “open society.”

Project Esther’s architects envisioned outcomes that at the time might have seemed far-fetched. Curriculum it believed to be sympathetic to a “Hamas support” narrative would be taken out of schools and universities, and “supporting faculty” would be removed. Social media would be purged of content deemed to be antisemitic. Institutions would lose public funding. Foreign students who pushed for Palestinian rights would have their visas revoked, or be deported.


Victoria Coates, a former deputy national security adviser and the vice president at the Heritage Foundation who oversees Project Esther.
Credit...Jared Soares for The New York Times

Sunday, May 19, 2024

Pope: US Catholic Conservatives Have 'Suicidal Attitude'


Sunday, 19 May 2024 12:44 PM EDT


Pope Francis said his conservative critics within the Roman Catholic Church in the United States are trapped in a "suicidal attitude," according to an interview with CBS.

During the April 24 interview with "60 Minutes" that aired Sunday, Francis was asked his thoughts on the conservative backlash against his papacy, with many of his critics being American clergy members.

Francis responded by saying a conservative is someone who "clings to something and does not want to see beyond that."

"It is a suicidal attitude," the pontiff said.

"Because one thing is to take tradition into account, to consider situations from the past, but quite another is to be closed up inside a dogmatic box."

Francis has clashed with the conservative wing almost since he was elected as head of the church in 2013.

Moves conservatives have opposed include papal attempts to make the church more welcoming to the LGBT community and to give lay people more responsibility in the church.

When asked during the interview about his decision to allow priests to bless same-sex couples, the pope replied that the church cannot actually bless the union, as it is against church teaching, but they can bless the individual.

"The blessing is for everyone — for everyone. To bless a homosexual-type union, however, goes against the given rite, against the law of the church. But to bless each person, why not? The blessing is for all. Some people were scandalized by this, but why? Everyone, everyone."

Francis replied when asked about his being more open and accepting than his predecessors that "you have to be open to everything. The church is like that. Everyone, everyone, everyone. That so-and-so is a sinner. Me, too. I am a sinner. Everyone.

"The gospel is for everyone. If the church places a customs officer at the door, that is no longer the church of Christ. Everyone."

Francis last year dismissed a conservative U.S. bishop who was a withering critic of his papacy and said the conservative wing in the U.S. church was "reactionary." He also stripped a conservative American cardinal of some Vatican privileges.

When asked about the state of Texas potentially shutting down a Catholic charity on the U.S.-Mexico border that gives humanitarian aid to migrants, Francis replied that it is "sheer madness."

"To close the border and leave them there, that is madness. The migrant has to be received. Thereafter you see how you're going to deal with them. Maybe you have to send them back. I don't know. But each case ought to be considered humanely, right?"

Regarding surrogacy, Pope Francis said that "in each case, the situation should be carefully and clearly considered, consulting medically and then morally as well. I think there is a general rule in these cases, but you have to go into each case in particular to assess the situation — as long as the moral principle is not skirted."

Newsmax staffer Jeremy Frankel contributed to this report.


© 2024 Thomson/Reuters. All rights reserved.



Saturday, July 28, 2018

Catholic and Conservative: A Conversation with Ramesh Ponnuru

25 May 2016


 


Ramesh Ponnuru is a senior editor for National Review, the venerable magazine of conservative politics founded by William F. Buckley, Jr., in 1955.

Ponnuru grew up in Kansas City and graduated summa cum laude from Princeton’s history department. He has published articles in numerous newspapers including the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, the Financial Times, Newsday, and the New York Post. He has also written for First Things, Policy Review, The Weekly Standard, The New Republic, Reason, and other publications.

He is a regular guest on television programs, including CNN’s "Inside Politics," NBC’s "The McLaughlin Group," MSNBC’s "Buchanan & Press" and "Donahue," CNBC’s "Kudlow & Cramer," PBS’s "The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer," CSPAN’s "Washington Journal," Comedy Central’s "Politically Incorrect," Fox News, and NPR’s "Morning Edition."

Ponnuru lives in Washington D.C. with his wife April, a policy adviser to the Majority Whip in the U.S. House of Representatives.

IgnatiusInsight.com spoke with Ponnuru about his recent conversion to Catholicism, the current state of politics in the United States, and the upcoming presidential election.


IgnatiusInsight.com: You recently entered the Catholic Church. What was your religious background and what led you to become Catholic? Were you surprised by anything as you journeyed toward becoming Catholic?

Ponnuru: My father is Hindu, my mother Lutheran. I was raised without much religious instruction, except that of example. The process by which the Church drew me to her was long. It would be presumptuous for me to say that I myself entirely understood how the Holy Spirit worked here. To summarize the intellectual aspect of the process: I first came to see that many of the virtues the Church inculcates were good for people, and then to see that they were good for people because this was the way we were meant to live--and so forth until I saw that I now believed the Church’s claims for itself to be true.

Sunday, February 25, 2018

'I Pray for Him Daily.' Why Socially Conservative Women Stand by Trump



By Elizabeth Dias
February 20, 2018



Socially conservative women in politics remain wary but generally supportive of President Donald Trump despite recent allegations of adultery and hush money.

Many white evangelical Christian women leaders see the president as an ally thanks to his conservative judicial appointments, anti-abortion policy changes and decision to move the U.S. embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, among other actions.

Still, they’re not enthusiastic about other recent developments. In recent weeks, allegations surfaced that Trump had affairs with porn star Stormy Daniels and Playboy model Karen McDougal after his wife gave birth, that his personal attorney paid Daniels $130,000 shortly before the election and that an ally at the National Enquirer helped keep McDougal quiet. And then there was his defense of top aide Rob Porter in light of accusations of domestic violence.

“Detractors of President Trump would only be satisfied by my complete disavowal and call for his immediate resignation because that’s what they really want,” says Penny Nance, president of the Concerned Women for America, which has half a million members. “We won’t be their little pawns.”

“Though this president’s personal life is alien to us,” she says, “there are things that made us vote for him.”

For Nance, a major reason is that Trump vowed to fight for the causes they believe in, and he has followed through on his promises.

“I’m not surprised by any of this,” she says. “What I was surprised was that American conservative women, primary voters, said it doesn’t matter. The reason they said this is they wanted a champion, who would take the gloves off and punch the bully in the nose.”

Many social conservative women see Trump’s relationship with women as more complicated than just vulgar comments and alleged payouts to porn stars. They are quick to cite his relationship with his daughter Ivanka, how Kellyanne Conway was the first woman to lead a winning presidential campaign and how Sarah Huckabee Sanders is the first mother to serve as White House press secretary. “I do believe on a personal level that the president supports women,” Nance says.


Tuesday, March 07, 2017

Francis and the revival of the Right




by Michael Davis
posted Thursday, 2 Mar 2017



Alternative für Deutschland’s Wiebke Muhsal, right, with colleague Björn Höcke


A year ago you would have been forgiven for thinking that, following a successful Brexit referendum, Ukip would begin its slow decline into obscurity. And you would have been quite wrong. “Ukip is a radical party, or it is nothing,” Nigel Farage wrote in the Daily Telegraph last week. His successor as leader, Paul Nuttall, will see to it that Ukip remains radical indeed. An advocate for stricter abortion laws, capital punishment and a burka ban, Nuttall is a sort of Tory’s Tory – a viable alternative for conservatives unimpressed by Cameronism.

But what really drives Nuttall? According to him, his Catholic faith. “On moral issues, we [Ukip], more than any other political party, are more in line with Catholic thought,” he declared back in 2015.

He’s far from an outlier. Radical right-wing movements are cropping up all over the Western world. And, almost to a man, they’re led by Catholics.

In the United States, there’s Stephen Bannon, former publisher of Breitbart and now White House chief strategist. Late last year Buzzfeed published a talk Bannon gave at the Vatican in 2014 in which he extolled an “enlightened”, “Judeo-Christian” capitalism against a “libertarian” capitalism that “looks to make people commodities, and to objectify people, and to use them”. The whole thing was lifted straight out of Catholic social teaching. (Think more Leo XIII than Francis.)

In France, it’s François Fillon, presidential candidate for Les Républicains. He sent shockwaves through the secular establishment when, during last year’s primary, he claimed a nearly two-to-one victory over his rival, Alain Juppé. Like Trump’s, Fillon’s victory was a huge upset. He won by reanimating catholiques zombies: non-practising Catholics who nevertheless hold strongly to the Church’s teachings on education, marriage, abortion and euthanasia. Even though Fillon is struggling now, his primary blowout was a startling reminder that France hasn’t entirely forgotten her place of pride as the Church’s eldest daughter.

Read more of the article @




Friday, June 21, 2013

Goldwater on Religious Right



Written by hortulanus94 on August 23, 2012


“There is no position on which people are so immovable as their religious beliefs. There is no more powerful ally one can claim in a debate than Jesus Christ, or God, or Allah, or whatever one calls this supreme being. But like any powerful weapon, the use of God’s name on one’s behalf should be used sparingly. The religious factions that are growing throughout our land are not using their religious clout with wisdom. They are trying to force government leaders into following their position 100 percent. If you disagree with these religious groups on a particular moral issue, they complain, they threaten you with the loss of money or votes or both.

I’m frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in A, B, C, and D. Just who do they think they are? And from where do they presume to claim the right to dictate their moral beliefs to me? And I am even more angry as a legislator who must endure the threats of every religious group who thinks it has some God-granted right to control my vote on every roll call in the Senate.

I am warning them today: I will fight them every step of the way if they try to dictate their moral convictions to all Americans in the name of conservatism.”

-Senator Barry Goldwater


.

Friday, May 17, 2013

Ways and Means to Hold Hearing on Internal Revenue Service Targeting Conservative Groups



1100 Longworth House Office Building at 9:00 AM
Monday, May 13, 2013


Congressman Dave Camp, (R-MI), Chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means, and Congressman Sander Levin (D-MI), Ranking Member of the Ways and Means Committee, today announced that the Committee will hold a hearing on the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) practice of targeting applicants for tax-exempt status based on political leanings. The hearing will take place on Friday, May 17, 2013, in Room 1100 of the Longworth House Office Building, beginning at 9:00 A.M.

Acting Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service, Mr. Steve Miller, and the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration, J. Russell George, will be the only witnesses at the hearing. However, any individual or organization not scheduled for an oral appearance may submit a written statement for consideration by the Committee and for inclusion in the printed record of the hearing.

BACKGROUND:

Since June 2011, the Committee on Ways and Means has been investigating whether the Internal Revenue Service discriminated against taxpayers based on political opinions. News reports indicate that the agency is now admitting this past practice.

In announcing the hearing, Chairman Camp said, “The American public expects the Internal Revenue Service to be apolitical in its enforcement of our tax laws. News that the agency admits it targeted American taxpayers based on politics is both astounding and appalling. The Committee on Ways and Means will get to the bottom of this practice and ensure it never takes place again.”

In announcing the hearing, Ranking Member Sander Levin said, “The American people must have the fullest confidence that organizations requesting tax exemption receive completely unbiased treatment from the Internal Revenue Service and are never singled out by name or political views. The nation deserves a complete understanding of this matter, and as Chairman Camp and I discussed this morning, it is essential that there be a thorough and bipartisan investigation and effective remedial action.”

FOCUS OF THE HEARING:

The hearing will focus on the Internal Revenue Service’s practice of discriminating against applicants for tax-exempt status based on the political leanings of the applicants.

DETAILS FOR SUBMISSION OF WRITTEN COMMENTS:

Please Note: Any person(s) and/or organization(s) wishing to submit written comments for the hearing record must follow the appropriate link on the hearing page of the Committee website and complete the informational forms. From the Committee homepage, http://waysandmeans.house.gov, select “Hearings.” Select the hearing for which you would like to submit, and click on the link entitled, “Click here to provide a submission for the record.” Once you have followed the online instructions, submit all requested information. ATTACH your submission as a Word document, in compliance with the formatting requirements listed below, by the close of business on Thursday, May 30, 2013. Finally, please note that due to the change in House mail policy, the U.S. Capitol Police will refuse sealed-package deliveries to all House Office Buildings. For questions, or if you encounter technical problems, please call (202) 225-3625 or (202) 225-5522.

FORMATTING REQUIREMENTS:

The Committee relies on electronic submissions for printing the official hearing record. As always, submissions will be included in the record according to the discretion of the Committee. The Committee will not alter the content of your submission, but we reserve the right to format it according to our guidelines. Any submission provided to the Committee by a witness, any supplementary materials submitted for the printed record, and any written comments in response to a request for written comments must conform to the guidelines listed below. Any submission or supplementary item not in compliance with these guidelines will not be printed, but will be maintained in the Committee files for review and use by the Committee.

1. All submissions and supplementary materials must be provided in Word format and MUST NOT exceed a total of 10 pages, including attachments. Witnesses and submitters are advised that the Committee relies on electronic submissions for printing the official hearing record.

2. Copies of whole documents submitted as exhibit material will not be accepted for printing. Instead, exhibit material should be referenced and quoted or paraphrased. All exhibit material not meeting these specifications will be maintained in the Committee files for review and use by the Committee.

3. All submissions must include a list of all clients, persons and/or organizations on whose behalf the witness appears. A supplemental sheet must accompany each submission listing the name, company, address, telephone, and fax numbers of each witness.

The Committee seeks to make its facilities accessible to persons with disabilities. If you are in need of special accommodations, please call 202-225-1721 or 202-226-3411 TTD/TTY in advance of the event (four business days notice is requested). Questions with regard to special accommodation needs in general (including availability of Committee materials in alternative formats) may be directed to the Committee as noted above.

Note: All Committee advisories and news releases are available on the World Wide Web at http://www.waysandmeans.house.gov/.




.Update: Hearings ended at 12:52 PM ET 

Beginning @ 8:00PM ET, the whole hearings will be available at C-Span.
.
.

Thursday, May 16, 2013

Conservative Hispanic Groups Targeted In IRS Scandal



By Andrew O'Reilly

Published May 16, 2013

Fox News Latino



The Internal Revenue Service scandal involving the apparently unjustified targeting of Tea Party and other conservative groups has also hit home with the Hispanic community.

George Rodriguez, former president of the San Antonio Tea Party, said that when the organization applied for non-profit status, leaders were intimidated by IRS workers with excessive paperwork and meddling questions.

“They asked us all sorts of things that were out of the norm,” Rodriguez, now head of the conservative South Texas Alliance, told Fox News Latino. “We knew these questions were not the norm and we had our suspicions about them.”

SUMMARY

The complaint from the San Antonio group is just one of many nationwide leveled against the federal agency, which surfaced last Friday when Lois G. Lerner director of the IRS’s exempt-organizations division, let slip that low-level IRS staffers had given extra scrutiny to conservative groups with words such as “tea party” or “patriot” in their names.

The public slip started a furor among conservative groups and pundits and forced U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder to announce that the Justice Department would open a criminal investigation into the matter.

Rodriguez said the group received a questionnaire from the IRS with “well over 50 questions,” including inquiries into who the group met with, where they held their meetings, who was in attendance and what the subject of their internal emails were.

“They should have been worried about the numbers, not who we were meeting with,” he added. “It was flat-out dirty politics.”

The complaint from the San Antonio group is one of many nationwide leveled against the embattled federal agency, in the escalating case that surfaced last week when Lois G. Lerner, director of the IRS’ exempt-organizations division, let slip that low-level IRS staffers had given extra scrutiny to conservative groups with words such as “tea party” or “patriot” in their names.

Republicans have pressed the Obama administration for heads to roll. On Wednesday, Obama asked for and received the resignation of the agency's acting commissioner, Steve Miller.

The scandal sparked a furor among conservative groups and pundits, forcing U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder to announce that the Justice Department would open a criminal investigation into the matter.

Holder followed the announcement by adding Wednesday that the FBI’s criminal investigation could include charges of civil rights violations, false statements and potential violations of the Hatch Act, which prohibits federal employees from engaging in some partisan political activities.

“I can assure you and the American people that we will take a dispassionate view of this,” Holder said. “This will not be about parties, this will not be about ideological persuasions. Anybody who has broken the law will be held accountable.”

The revelations also spurred calls for investigations into the practices of the administration of President Barack Obama and allegations of a potential cover-up operation.

“It’s an abuse of power and it smells of Watergate,” said Bob Quasius, the president of the conservative Latino group Café con Leche, referring to the political scandal that led to the impeachment of President Richard Nixon.


“I think it goes to the top levels of his administration,” Quasius added. “If it doesn’t directly connect to him it at least connects to someone close to him.”

So far, however, there has been no evidence directly linking the Obama administration to the IRS mess-up. For its part, the administration has tried to portray the scandal as something done independently of the federal government in Washington by the IRS field office in Cincinnati.

The federal government enacted strict measures following the Watergate scandal to keep the executive branch of government away from the IRS, making it very difficult for the president to interfere in the agency’s affairs.

Of the 296 applications for nonprofit status the inspector general reviewed, the San Antonio Tea Party was one of the 108 that were approved. Of the others, 28 were withdrawn by the applicants and 160 were still open.

Despite the approval of the group’s application, which Rodriguez said required the help of the American Center for Law and Justice, he still believes that the hoops it had to jump through were indicative of the “shenanigans” that were going on in the IRS.

“We understand we need to show we’re a nonprofit,” Rodriguez said. “But these questions were way beyond what the norm is and were way out of line.”


Source
.

Monday, May 13, 2013

IRS admits targeting conservatives for tax scrutiny in 2012 election




Video: Asked about reports that the IRS unfairly targeted the tax-exempt status of conservative groups during the 2012 election, White House press secretary Jay Carney said the actions were inappropriate.


By Zachary A. Goldfarb and Karen Tumulty, Published: May 10


The Internal Revenue Service on Friday apologized for targeting groups with “tea party” or “patriot” in their names, confirming long-standing accusations by some conservatives that their applications for tax-exempt status were being improperly delayed and scrutinized.


.

Monday, May 06, 2013

Study: Immigration overhaul will cost $6.3 trillion


Alan Gomez, USA TODAY5:30 p.m. EDT May 6, 2013

Shunning criticism that its report is politically motivated, Heritage Foundation President Jim DeMint says the "Gang of Eight" amnesty plan would not bring in enough tax revenue to make economic sense.



(Photo: Evan Vucci, AP)

STORY HIGHLIGHTS
Report was panned by Democrats
Critics say the federal deficit could be reduced by $2.5 trillion if 11 million gain legal status
Senate's "Gang of Eight" is set for a week of committee hearings analyzing its immigration bill



The conservative Heritage Foundation estimates that a sweeping immigration plan being pushed by a bipartisan group of senators will cost the country $6.3 trillion over the next 50 years, a figure they hope persuades Republicans to oppose the effort.

Through their use of government services, their reliance on welfare benefits and their eventual use of Social Security, Medicare and benefits through President Obama's health care law, the report found that the nation's 11 million unauthorized immigrants would receive $9.4 trillion in benefits and services, but pay only $3.1 trillion in taxes.

"Amnesty consists of a very, very large burden that will be placed on the U.S. taxpayer and huge deficits at a point that the country is already going bankrupt," said Robert Rector, a Heritage Foundation researcher who co-authored the report.

The report, released Monday, was panned by Democrats and others who say it did not factor in the many economic benefits that will come with legalizing the nation's unauthorized immigrants.

Douglas Holtz-Eakin, former director of the Congressional Budget Office who served as the chief economic policy adviser to Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., during his 2008 presidential run, said the study gives a "narrow, incomplete" look at the economic picture for immigrants. McCain is among the "Gang of Eight" senators who are supporting the immigration legislation.

Holtz-Eakin said the Heritage study does not consider the ability of unauthorized immigrants to advance in the workplace and earn more money — in turn, paying more taxes — if they are placed in a legal status.

He said high rates of entrepreneurship among immigrant communities result in new businesses and new job opportunities for themselves and American workers. When that is taken into consideration, legalizing the people living here illegally would lead to a $2.5 trillionreduction in the federal deficit, an April report by Holtz-Eakin said.

Alex Nowrasteh, an immigration policy analyst at the Cato Institute, said the Heritage report also does not consider that legalizing unauthorized immigrants would lead to increases in how much they're paid, which in turn would raise the wage rates of American workers. He also said the work of low-skilled immigrants boosts productivity of American businesses.

Jim DeMint, former South Carolina senator and Heritage's president, said Monday that only a small percentage of the 11 million people slated for legalization have the education or work skills to become a net addition to the tax rolls. He compared the immigration bill to the 2010 Affordable Care Act, which he said was supposed to reduce the federal deficit by $132 billion over 10 years but will increase health care costs instead.

DeMint dismissed criticism of the report as politically motivated. He said the report clearly illustrates that the government would have to increase its debt, or taxes, to cover the massive economic losses of the Senate's immigration plan and would further lower wages of low-skilled American workers.

"It's clear a number of people in Washington who might benefit from an amnesty, as well as a number of people in Congress, do not want to consider the cost," DeMint said Monday. "No sensible-thinking person could read this study and conclude that over 50 years that this could possibly have a positive economic impact."

The report comes as the Senate's "Gang of Eight" prepares for a week of Senate committee hearings analyzing its immigration bill. The Congressional Joint Economic Committee will begin hearings on the economic impact of immigration on Tuesday, and the Senate's Commerce Committee will hold a similar hearing on Wednesday.

The study is an update of a 2007 Heritage Foundation study by Rector that estimated the cost then of legalizing unauthorized immigrants at $2.6 trillion. At that time, it was used as part of a successful effort by conservatives to strike down attempts to overhaul the nation's immigration efforts.

Haley Barbour, the Republican former governor of Mississippi, described the report as a "political document."

"This study is designed to try to scare conservative Republicans into thinking the cost here is going to be so gigantic that you can't possibly be for it," said Barbour, a member of a task force with the Bipartisan Policy Center that supports the bill.

But Sen. David Vitter, R-La., said the $6.3 trillion price tag should disqualify the "Gang of Eight" proposal from passage.

"Our federal debt severely threatens our economy as it is now," he said. "The last thing we should be doing is granting amnesty to illegal immigrants, giving them all the taxpayer funded benefits and advantages of citizenship, while completely turning our back on enforcement."


Source
.

Monday, January 28, 2013

West Point center cites dangers of ‘far right’ in U.S.


By Rowan Scarborough


The Washington Times

Thursday, January 17, 2013

**FILE**
A U.S. flag flies July 3, 2012, over a field during

Audio

Audio Clip: 01-18-13 Rowan Scarborough with Andy Parks



A West Point think tank has issued a paper warning America about “far right” groups such as the “anti-federalist” movement, which supports “civil activism, individual freedoms and self-government.”

The report issued this week by the Combating Terrorism Center at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, N.Y., is titled “Challengers from the Sidelines: Understanding America’s Violent Far-Right.”

The center — part of the institution where men and women are molded into Army officers — posted the report Tuesday. It lumps limited government activists with three movements it identifies as “a racist/white supremacy movement, an anti-federalist movement and a fundamentalist movement.”

The West Point center typically focuses reports on al Qaeda and other Islamic extremists attempting to gain power in Asia, the Middle East and Africa through violence.

But its latest study turns inward and paints a broad brush of people it considers “far right.”

It says anti-federalists “espouse strong convictions regarding the federal government, believing it to be corrupt and tyrannical, with a natural tendency to intrude on individuals’ civil and constitutional rights. Finally, they support civil activism, individual freedoms, and self government. Extremists in the anti-federalist movement direct most their violence against the federal government and its proxies in law enforcement.”

The report also draws a link between the mainstream conservative movement and the violent “far right,” and describes liberals as “future oriented” and conservatives as living in the past.

“While liberal worldviews are future- or progressive -oriented, conservative perspectives are more past-oriented, and in general, are interested in preserving the status quo.” the report says. “The far right represents a more extreme version of conservatism, as its political vision is usually justified by the aspiration to restore or preserve values and practices that are part of the idealized historical heritage of the nation or ethnic community.”

The report adds: “While far-right groups’ ideology is designed to exclude minorities and foreigners, the liberal-democratic system is designed to emphasize civil rights, minority rights and the balance of power.”

The report says there were 350 “attacks initiated by far-right groups/individuals” in 2011.

Details about what makes an attack a “far right” action are not clear in the report, which was written by Arie Perliger, who directs the center’s terrorism studies and teaches social sciences at West Point.

A Republican congressional staffer who served in the military told The Washington Times: “If [the Defense Department] is looking for places to cut spending, this junk study is ground zero.

“Shouldn’t the Combating Terrorism Center be combating radical Islam around the globe instead of perpetuating the left’s myth that right-wingers are terrorists?” the staffer said. “The $64,000 dollar question is when will the Combating Terrorism Center publish their study on real left-wing terrorists like the Animal Liberation Front, Earth Liberation Front, and the Weather Underground?”



Source: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jan/17/west-point-center-cites-dangers-far-right-us/#ixzz2JIMIG9Mv

.

Sunday, October 14, 2012

Evangelical Support for Romney Tops Out

Winning mainline Protestants and Catholics now key for both presidential campaigns.
Tobin Grant
[ posted 10/11/2012 9:46AM ]


GAGE SKIDMORE / FLICKR


Governor Mitt Romney is gaining on President Barack Obama in national polls. Following last week's presidential debate, public opinion shifted. The polls now show the race as a tie. Among evangelicals, however, support for Romney appears to have reached its ceiling. The battle for votes now lies elsewhere.

The Pew Research Center for the People & the Press released its latest political poll Monday. The poll, taken after last week's debate, found Romney ahead of Obama among likely voters 49 to 47 percent. This was a significant shift from Pew's September poll, which had Obama ahead 51 to 43. Both polls show white evangelicals solidly behind Romney. Three-quarters of evangelical likely voters said they will support the GOP ticket. At the other end of the religious-political spectrum, both polls showed those unaffiliated with any religion remaining two-to-one in Obama's camp.

As the race moves forward, both campaigns are unlikely to seek out votes from voters so unlikely to change their minds. Instead, the focus will be on those who can still be persuaded.

If evangelicals and seculars are no longer voting blocs worth fighting over, then they are also unlikely to receive much media attention. Evangelicals mattered in the run-up to the Republican convention, but in the home stretch of the general election, they are no longer newsworthy.

Mainline Protestants and Catholics are now the key religious groups for both campaigns. In September, only 46 percent of mainline Protestants supported Romney. Today, 60 percent say they support the Republican candidate. Catholics have also shifted their support, from 40 percent supporting Romney last month to a dead heat this month. The Romney campaign will want to solidify this new support; the Obama campaign will want to recapture it.

Today's political environment is flush with data. Journalists and pundits, candidates and parties can home in on those voters most likely to fluctuate over the final four weeks of the campaign. Red states and blue states are ignored in favor of swing states whose outcomes cannot be so easily predicted.

Indeed, the major news outlets are no longer willing to shell out the money needed to survey voters in many states. The National Election Pool (NEP; a project of the major television networks and the Associated Press) will not include detailed exit poll results for much of the country. For the past two decades, NEP has surveyed voters in each of the fifty states and the District of Columbia on election day. The result is both a national picture of the electorate and detailed analysis of each state's voters. This year, NEP is scrapping 19 statewide polls because they do not have any competitive races whose outcomes are worth analyzing. Predicting the outcomes of these states is no longer worth the cost of conducting statewide exit polls.

Most of the states are so-called red states that will almost certainly break for the GOP in the presidential race (Alaska, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Kentucky, Louisiana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, West Virginia, and Wyoming). Also on the list are smaller electorates that will go Democratic (Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, and Rhode Island). Without a competitive Senate or gubernatorial race, solidly red or blue states are not worth surveying. Each of these states will have some pollsters asking questions for the nationwide poll, but there will not be enough people surveyed to provide a picture of each state's electorate. (See, for example, CT's map of evangelical voting trends in the 2008 election, based on that year's exit poll data.)

The lack of exit polls will limit what can be said about these states, but NEP has decided it would be better to focus its resources elsewhere than to spend them on predicting how states like Utah or Delaware will vote. Predictable is not newsworthy.

Which is why we are unlikely to hear much more about evangelical voters until the GOP primaries in 2016.

.

Thursday, June 30, 2011

..Glenn Beck signs off from Fox News: ‘This show has become a movement; it doesn’t belong on TV’

By Dylan Stableford The Cutline – 4 hrs ago
..


GBTV/Mercury Radio Arts

Glenn Beck began his final show on Fox News where he'll be for the foreseeable future: outside the building--and not on TV.

"We've done some amazing things together," Beck, flanked by at least one bodyguard, told viewers as he showed them the view of the set from the street, noting the bulletproof glass that was installed "for a myriad of reasons."

Beck then rolled a four-minute highlight reel of his greatest hits spanning his two-and-a-half years on the air: Acorn, the 9/12 Project, his Restoring Honor rally in Washington, D.C., last summer. (The montage also included testimonials from viewers found on the street.)

"It's been an amazing ride," he said backstage, surrounded by some of the show's familiar props, including chalk ("We buy by the case," he said). "I've made some amazing friends, namely, you."

Beck spent most of the hour looking back. "We made a lot of enemies on this program," he said, from "the president to the Republicans to George Soros."

"We have not only survived," he said. "We have thrived."

He dismissed his frequent critics, like Jon Stewart, who Beck mocked for having a team of writers to produce a six-minute monologue on "The Daily Show." Beck boasted his two-man writing team helps him craft his 42-minutes a night. "It's easy to speak from the heart," he said.

Beck also mocked the criticism itself. "I'm the first Anti-Semitic Jew lover," he said. "I don't know how that's even possible."

While his relationship with some in the News Corp. building has frayed, Beck took time out to thank Fox News chief Roger Ailes ("I won't work with a smarter person ever"), News Corp. chairman Rupert Murdoch and primetime star Bill O'Reilly "for their trust."

Beck didn't mention Fox News' plan--announced today--to replace him with a roundtable show, "The Five." But he frequently plugged his website, GlennBeck.com, directing viewers wanting to follow his post-Fox career there. (The site redirects to GBTV.com, where Beck was due to host a webcast a half hour after his Fox News show ended.)

Beck is leaving, he said, because his show has outgrown the medium.

"This show has become a movement," Beck said. "It doesn't belong on television. It belongs in your homes, in your neighborhoods--not on TV."

Beck has been known to cry on the air with John Boehner-like frequency. But tonight, there were no tears.

"From New York," he said signing off, "Goodnight America."

..

Source