Humor is the Best Medicine

By Rich Kozlovich

As most readers know my friend publishes a weekly newsletter, Patriot Neighbor, and each week she has a list of jokes or humorous sayings to lighten things up.  This week there was some I really liked, and as in the past I decided to organize and paraphrasing them below with what I think a few cartoons enhances.    Enjoy!

 

The Democrats are now claiming election interference because cemeteries lock their gates at night.  Barack Obama, who was born in Kenya and raised by a white mother in Hawaii, now urges Chicago’s black men to vote for an Indian woman who was raised in Canada.

It's been speculated that while Oprah was interviewing Kamala Harris, who can use 100 words to answer yes or no and you still don’t know her answer, was actually thinking, OMG, Joe was the smart one!   However, Kamala has a fall back logic she believes is "fool" proof.  Simply call conservatives, whites, Christians, and Republicans racists, Nazis, sexists, homophobes, fascists, and white supremacists.  What could possibly go wrong with insulting over 50 percent of the voting population? 

 

Well, how's this.  There are five forms of headaches: Migraine, tension, sinus, stress, and listening to Kamala Harris, and the "deplorable garbage" can't wait to be unburdened by what has been the last 3.5 years.  

For the last time, Kamala Harris never worked at McDonalds, however it turns out Donald Trump is being indicted by Letitia James for serving a McDonald’s customer 7th nugget in six-piece order.  

Nah, that last part was part of the humor.  Sometimes I tell people, “I hope your day is as pleasant as you are” and then watch their face as they try to figure out if that was a compliment or insult.

DOJ Was Warned About Obama’s Fake Social Security Number in 2011

And refuses to do anything about it 

By Susan Daniels Oct 31, 2024 @ Susan Daniels Newsletter

Democrats knew Obama was unfit to be their candidate in 2008. That point was driven home when the Hawaiian Board of Election refused to put him on their ballot because he could not produce a birth certificate. There was none at the Hawaii Department of Health, as attested to in an affidavit by Tim Adams, who worked at the Board of Elections then. He was told be his superiors that employees should stop asking about Obama’s birth certificate because none existed.

Obama made a hasty trip to Hawaii in late October 2007 under the pretense of visiting his sick grandmother, Madelyn Dunham, who raised him. He actually went to meet with the Board of Elections. (His grandmother died on November 2, 2008, and Obama did not attend her funeral.)

The Board of Elections relented and included Obama when Nancy Pelosi did a workaround by faking a Certificate of Nomination that substituted for the required: “legally qualified to serve under the provision of the United States Constitution” and replaced it with “legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the national” Democratic party.

Every other Certificate of Nomination for the Office of the President, before and after Obama, has contained the provision about the Constitution.

Every action and every dollar spent that was approved by Barack Obama was done illegally. He was elected fraudulently using a Connecticut Social Security number assigned to someone living in Connecticut on March 28, 1977. On that date Obama was fifteen years old and living in Hawaii.

He would have been assigned a Hawaiian number, as was his half-sister, Maya Soetoro. Her number started with 476, and the one he used to run as a candidate and on his tax filings started with 042. He began using that stolen number in his mid-20s, likely to hide his past discretions or illegal travels.  On March 32, 2011 I sent a letter to the Department of Justice [showing how it was impossible for that SSN could belong to Barack Obama] and I am still waiting for a response.

It is time the country learned about the fraud with the stolen Social Security Number, the forged birth certificate, and who failed to sign up for Selection Service as required in 1980.

Failing to register with the Selective Service System can have serious consequences, including:

• Criminal penalties: A fine of up to $250,000 and/or up to five years in prison 
• Ineligibility for benefits: You may not be eligible for federal jobs, state-funded student financial aid, or federal job training. You may also be ineligible for citizenship proceedings for up to five years. 
• Referral to the Department of Justice: If you don't provide proof of exemption, you may be referred to the Department of Justice for investigation and prosecution. 
• Additional consequences: Some states have additional consequences for men who don't register. 

Men must register with Selective Service within 30 days of their 18th birthday, but late registrations are accepted until a man turns 26. Men who serve in the military on full-time active duty from age 18 to 26, or who attend the service academies, do not need to register.

Obama was guilty of breaking the law. It is now time for lawfare to go after him. He has made millions off a lie about who he was and it is now time for the government to make him forfeit all his ill-gotten gains. Everyone who helped him along the path to steal from the American taxpayers should be punished with him.

Susan Daniels is a private investigator and the author of The Rubbish Hauler’s Wife versus Barack Obama: A True Story which is available on Amazon.com.

Politics like we have never seen.  Recommend Susan’s Newsletter to your friends. 

Fiscal Dishonesty or Fiscal Insanity?

October 31, 2024 by Dan Mitchell @ International Liberty

I realize the election is just a few days away and there are many bad ideas to analyze from both candidates, but I can’t resist sharing this preposterous soundbite from a woman at the (horribly misnamed) International Growth Centre at the London School of Economics.

I have the video set to begin at the start of the soundbite and the relevant part only lasts about 10 seconds. For those who don’t want to bother clicking on a video, she says, “The big issue is that developing countries don’t collect enough tax. For example, in Zambia, where I’m from, we only collect a third of the revenue that we need.”

Those are two of the most absurd sentences ever uttered.

Let’s start with her second sentence about Zambia only collecting “a third of the revenue that we need.”

I went to the IMF’s World Economic Outlook database and found that government revenues are about 21.4 percent of GDP in Zambia. At which point three things came to mind.

• The tax burden is already far higher than it was when North American and Western European nations became rich in the 1800s and early 1900s (when fiscal burdens averaged about 10 percent of GDP).
• The very successful Asian Tigers of Taiwan, Singapore, and Hong Kong show that a government easily can finance things such as roads, education, and health care with revenues of less than 20 percent of GDP.
• If Zambia tripled its tax burden, as the woman favors, the tax burden would be the highest in the world, diverting nearly 65 percent of the economy into the hands of politicians. Which is worse even than France.

Here’s a chart showing the numbers.

I realize that most readers don’t spend any time thinking about Zambian fiscal policy, so now let’s shift to the more important issues, which is her assertion the first sentence that “developing countries don’t collect enough tax.” 

Sadly, the woman is not alone. International bureaucracies such as the International Monetary Fund, United Nations, and Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development have also latched onto the bizarre theory that poor nations can grow faster if they raise taxes and increase the burden of government spending.

This isn’t April 1. I’m not joking.

To understand why this is nonsense, here’s a video from the Center for Freedom and Prosperity.

I highlighted two absurd sentences from the first video.

Here’s the sentence I want to highlight from the second video: “There’s no nation anywhere in the world that has become rich with big government.”

Indeed, when I debate folks on the left, I give them my “never-answered question.” I ask them to identify a country in recorded history that has successfully used higher taxes and more spending as a route to prosperity.

Not surprisingly, they never have a good response (they sometimes give bad responses because they misinterpret Wagner’s Law).

Do the American People want Communism?

By Victor Mezhinsky 

Editor's Note:  This is one of the commentaries selected from Robin's weekly newsletter Patriot Neighbors. Any cartoons appearing will have been added by me.  If you wish to get the full edition, E-mail her at PatriotNeighbors@yahoo.com to get on her list, it's free. RK

 There are members of our current and past governments that deemed to be Socialists by declaration (such as Bernie Sanders) or by their actions (such as AOC, Harris, and Obama). The term “progressive” basically means Socialist. They dream and act to “fundamentally transform” our country. Whether they will succeed depends on who we elect this year as president. So, should American people keep the free-market economic system where “high tide lifts all boats” or should we become a Socialist nation? That is a fundamental question to be answered during this year elections.

But what is Socialism or Communism after all? Let us dig into it.

Socialism is a first stage of a socio-economic society development towards Communism, a complete and final “prosperity” socio-economic model for all humans. That is what Karl Marx and Vladimir Lenin promised in their speeches and books. All private enterprises to be expropriated by the state. All people work for the state and receive salaries determined by the state bureaucrats. The state owns means of production, meaning the factories, its machinery and other equipment are government property. The output of the production is retained and distributed by the state. The local and federal governments control the prices of all goods, regardless of the supply and demand.

From the beginning, the dictatorial and oppressive Bolshevik (Socialist) government of Russia has confiscated all guns from the citizens, and since they declared there was no God, the government closed all the churches and synagogues, except for a few in Moscow for foreign propaganda purposes.

Most people lived in the state apartments. Some families had to rent a room in one multi-room apartment with one kitchen and bathroom. No traveling abroad was allowed unless one is a part of the elite hierarchy, exceptional athlete or a famous ballet dancer or singer.

How about the cost of groceries? Let’s compare. In 1979, the loaf of bread in Russia cost 14 kopeks (cents). My engineering salary at that time there was 120 rubles (dollars) a month. So, the cost of bread was .116% of the monthly salary. In 1979, in the United States the loaf of bread was 20 cents, and my engineering monthly salary was $1,500. So, the cost of bread then was .013% of my monthly salary. It was almost 10 times cheaper than in Russia.

There was a shortage of everything under Socialism. Because all necessities, living places, medical care, quotas on university admissions were created and controlled by the state central planners, most of whom were members of the Communist party. There were no incentives to work hard and produce more. As the Soviet workers used to say: “We pretend to work, and they pretend to pay”. That is why the standard of living in Socialist counties was and is low.

But these described living conditions may be just fine for some people in America. However, for the most individuals, the practice indicates, the Socialist lifestyle would not be good enough. People want to have a better and more prosperous life for themselves and their families.

What about people of great wealth in America? Are they not worried that all their wealth will be taken away once the country turns Socialist? No, they are not. They think they are immune from any political and economic changes. These people have never studied Marxism and Leninism. Their wealth and property will be transferred to the state. This is how it was in Soviet Union/Russia, East Germany, it is in Cuba, North Korea and mostly in Venezuela. China has achieved economic success by allowing major corporations operate in a limited free market capitalist fashion. But the ultimate control is still held by the oppressive Communist government, that can remove the owner and/or change its development course. For example, in 2020, the Chinese government stopped plans for an IPO of the company Ant Group, a company that Daniel Zhang has founded, after he delivered a speech that criticized Chinese government financial regulators.

What about individuals who resist the oppression? They would be convicted of a “crime” against the state and be put in Gulags, prisons, and often eliminated.

So, I think the question in the title should not be difficult to answer now. Do the American people want communism? 

Victor Mezhinsky was born and grew up in Minsk, Belarus, a former Soviet Union republic. After graduating from Polytechnic University with engineering degree Victor worked for a local manufacturing plant as an engineer. In 1979, Victor, his wife and 5 year old daughter emigrated to the USA, where he worked as a senior engineer for medical device industry companies until his retirement in 2017.

 

Scary ‘Nuclear Challenges’ Faced by United States

The Defense Intelligence Agency just released a new assessment, and it’s chilling. 

By  Dave Patterson | Oct 31, 2024 @ Liberty Nation News, Tags Articles, Military Affairs, Opinion

If you aren’t worried about America’s nuclear deterrence, you should be. The Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) just released its latest assessment of the nuclear capabilities of America’s most dangerous enemies: Nuclear Challenges: The Growing Capabilities of Strategic Competitors and Regional Rivals. Replace the word “challenges” with “threats,” and you get a better picture of the dire situation. China, Russia, North Korea, and Iran continue to grow larger on America’s nuclear threat windscreen.

Nuclear Challenges

Over the past four years, America’s nuclear posture has been deemed inadequate. In this presidential election, leadership choices becomes even more significant. The DIA report executive summary opens with a sobering analysis:

“Russia, China, and North Korea are modernizing their legacy stockpiles by incorporating advanced technologies to penetrate or avoid missile defense systems. Countries are also developing nuclear weapons with smaller yields, improved precision, and increased range for military of coercive use … Beijing has far surpassed earlier growth estimates assessed in 2018 and is currently exceeding 500 deliverable nuclear warheads in its stockpile.”

The report estimates that China will reach 1,000 warheads by the year 2030. Perhaps more troubling from a deterrence perspective is that the People’s Republic of China (PRC) emphasizes lower yield, more tactical atomic weapons. Moving away from high yield in the mega-ton category gives the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) more flexibility and makes the use of nuclear weapons more suitable for a “proportional” response, as the report suggests. However, the PLA’s more “appealing” choice of tactical nuclear weapons makes the US deterrence calculus more difficult. Furthermore, the DIA analysis asserts, “The PLA is implementing a launch-on-warning posture where it would be able to, upon warning of [a] missile strike, launch a counterstrike before an enemy first strike can detonate.” Russian President Vladimir Putin announced Russia is assisting China to establish a ballistic missile “early warning system.”

There seems to be little desire on the part of Beijing to engage in nuclear disarmament talks as China’s nuclear capability is in ascendancy. The Biden-Harris administration’s first attempts to create a mutual accommodation relationship with the PRC set the stage for a geopolitical mismatch that has continued until this day. 

 

The Chinese gained the negotiation’s upper hand and have not let go. Despite the Biden-Harris administration’s entreaties to Chinese leadership to cease aggressive activities against Taiwan, the intensity has increased. In addition, the military collaboration between the PLA and Russia’s armed forces has grown.

Russia sustains its stockpile of 1,550 strategic nuclear warheads with a bomber force, submarine fleet, and ground-launched intercontinental ballistic missiles to deliver the warheads. Additionally, Russia claims to have nuclear weapons capable of avoiding US countermeasures. Sino-Russian military exercises have increased in frequency and magnitude. “Russia launched its largest navy drills of the post-Soviet era … alongside Chinese warships, the latest sign of deepening military cooperation between the two global powers. The drills will continue until September 16 and will involve more than 400 warships, submarines, and other maritime vessels,” France 24 reported.

Other Global Actors Present Threats

North Korea presents a unique problem for the United States. According to the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Pyongyang’s missile testing became less frequent, around 50 for nearly three years, during the Trump administration (no tests in 2018). North Korean tests began again in earnest with the Biden-Harris national security team in position. Between January 2021 and April 2023, there were more than 130 test firings by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK). The DIA assessment of North Korea’s nuclear capability concludes: 

“North Korea has demonstrated the capability to produce plutonium and highly enriched uranium, has conducted nuclear tests, and has developed new ballistic missiles systems intended to strike regional and CONUS [Continental United States] targets.” 

The DPRK’s recent military agreement with Russia makes North Korea a more formidable threat than in the past.

Give Cable TV the Boot – Check This Out!

The Middle East teeters on the brink of an Iran armed with nuclear weapons. Recent attacks on Israel by Iran are testimony to Tehran’s missile capability for launching a nuclear warhead. The failure of Barack Obama’s Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action to limit the development of ballistic missile technology is one of the reasons the Trump administration withdrew from the agreement. As a result, “The Iranian missile force is the largest in the Middle East and can strike targets up to 2,000 km (over 1,200 miles) from Iran’s borders.” Numerous recent assessments reveal Iran may be on the cusp of having the wherewithal to develop a nuclear weapon. The Biden-Harris administration has failed to check Iran’s aggression through its proxies or Tehran’s direct attacks on Israel.

There have been few times in America’s recent history when the threat to the US homeland has been as significant. As Election Day looms, voters must consider the US position in a dangerous world. It is not growing less perilous. The DIA report is a call to action.

The views expressed are those of the author and not of any other affiliate.

~

Liberty Nation does not endorse candidates, campaigns, or legislation, and this presentation is no endorsement.

 

Read More From Dave Patterson

How the British Gov’t is Working to Elect Kamala

By Daniel Greenfield @ Sultan Knish Blog

The British government’s chief of staff, head of communications, director of policy and director of strategy have allied with the Kamala campaign while the British government’s ruling Labour Party is working with the Democrats to send staffers to work for her in key swing states.

The ‘British invasion’ first began over the summer when top figures in the British government and the Labour party, including Prime Minister Starmer’s Chief of Staff and the heads of the Labour Party headed to the Democratic National Convention with a view, as one put it, to “ensuring we get on the right road to getting a second term”.

In October, the British Labour Party’s Head of Operations announced that nearly 100 Labour Party staffers were “heading to North Carolina, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Virginia” as part of a campaign by ‘Labour for Kamala’.

The British Labour Party building a coordinated campaign operation with the Democrat Party and setting up operations in Pennsylvania and Virginia is an unprecedented level of foreign interference. Russians merely taking out Facebook ads led to widespread conspiracy theories, investigations and censorship by Democrats now actively courting foreign interference.

While both the Democrat Party and the British government have denied there was any official coordination, the Daily Telegraphrevealed that the ‘Labour for Kamala’ activists dispatched to work for Kamala’s election in swing states were to be housed bythe Democrat Party.

Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Foreign Secretary David Lammy, a close Obama ally, falsely claimed that the Labour party and its faltering government were taking no position on the American election, but they forgot to inform its Under-Secretary of State for Scotland who is hosting a ‘Come on Kamala’ Election Night party complete with ‘Labour for Kamala’ badges.

The level of foreign interference by the radical socialist ruling party goes beyond the 100 staffers dispatched to swing states. A British Labour delegation to the Democratic National Convention was led by Starmer’s Chief of Staff Morgan McSweeney who headed his campaign and had created the Center for Countering Digital Hate to censor conservatives in the UK and America.

PM Starmer initially lied, falsely claiming that “they’re doing it in their spare time, they’re doing it as volunteers, they’re staying I think with other volunteers over there. That’s what they’ve done in previous elections, that’s what they’re doing in this election and that’s really straight forward.”

Labour was then forced to admit that it had funded McSweeney’s trip to the DNC. The DNC delegation also included Matthew Doyle, Starmer’s head of communications, while being hosted by the Progressive Policy Institute: a Democrat Party think tank that is also currently employing Claire Ainsley who had served as Starmer’s Executive Director of Policy.

PPI, the Democrat think tank, also announced that it’s also hosting British Labour “strategist Deborah Mattinson” to share “campaign lessons from Labour’s victory with Democrats.”

Mattison’s bio still lists her as Starmer’s “Director of Strategy” though her status is unclear.

The Starmer government has tried to dismiss the close coordination between top Labour leaders and government advisers with the Democrat Party as mere “individual volunteers” there “on their own time”, but they’re not volunteers and they’re not there on their own time.

The British government’s chief of staff, head of communications, director of policy and director of strategy aiding an American presidential campaign is not a matter of “individual volunteers”. Nor is it a matter of volunteers when the British Labour Party’s Head of Operations is also dispatching staffers to swing states to campaign for that same presidential candidate.

What it is, is a nearly unprecedented level of foreign interference in an American election.

While the impact of the British Labour Party setting up shop in American swing states remains unknown, the impact of Starmer’s advisors on Kamala appears to be far more clear.

British observers of American politics first noted that the Kamala campaign appeared to have borrowed her baffling “turn the page” and “end the chaos” slogans from the Labour Party which had campaigned on a promise to “stop the chaos, turn the page, start to rebuild”. But the Labour Party had been running as challengers while Kamala is running for reelection as an incumbent.

In September, British Labor strategists had advised Kamala to focus on winning back Democrats who were preparing to vote for Trump based on economic issues. Her campaign appeared to pursue that approach, emphasizing economic issues and avoiding ideological messages. Then, as her polling numbers began to collapse, the campaign pivoted back to the old “protecting democracy” message while accusing Trump of being another Hitler.

After the 2016 election, Democrats mobilized to battle what they claimed was “foreign election interference” by Russia based on false claims about its mostly post-election Facebook ads. Since then much more blatant forms of foreign election interference have emerged. Iran hacking the Trump presidential campaign and passing on the materials to the Kamala campaign and the media occasioned little commentary and less outrage. And a foreign government advising and dispatching its own personnel to campaign for Kamala has been dismissed as a trivial matter.

More disturbingly, British government officials have claimed that it should be treated as normal.

According to British Labour Secretary of Defense John Healy, “this happens in every election. It’s commonplace. It is very different to the determination of a Labour Government to work with whoever the American people elect next month as their president.”

The notion that the British government intervening in an American election is “commonplace” or should be treated as such says more about the mindset of the Labour government than anything else. And it also highlights the comfort level of the Democrat Party allying with a foreign government for foreign election interference in an American presidential election.

Racist pastor. Radical parents. Extremist views.

Find out the truth about Kamala in the Center's new ebook, 'The Truth About Kamala'

Daniel Greenfield is a columnist, an investigative journalist and a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.