Joe Biden opposes:
- The sanctity of life, supporting abortion
- criminal penalties for harming a pre-born child by persons committing a crime against the mother
- notifying the parents of minors who obtain out of state abortions
- the nomination of Robert Bork, Samuel Alito and John Roberts for the U.S. Supreme Court justice
- Effective border security
- School vouchers for children trapped in failing public schools
- Voluntary prayer in schools
- Photo ID for voting
- Second Amendment and citizens’ right of self protection
- federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, which treats humans as disposable and which has never resulted in the treatment of a single disease, yet he wants federal funding expanded
- human cloning
- hate crime laws
- the Equal Rights Amendment
- free college tuition for all
- gun control
- sanctuary cities
- social security for illegal aliens
Biden flip-flopped on:
- Death penalty
- Crime, was tough on it in 1990s, now considers it racist
- No Child Left Behind
- Exposed as plagiarist in college
- Strongly supported by radical NEA
- has an anti-family values voting record
- agrees that Tea Parties are not “terrorists”
For more, read:
Dr. James Dobson:
“In the history of our nation, there have been times when evil was so apparent—and so heinous—that they stand in infamy decades later. They include the Dred Scott Decision on slavery in 1857, and the Roe v. Wade ruling that legalized abortion in 1973. Now, we are faced with another such tragic moment in American history.
A few days ago, May 17th, Democrats in the House of Representatives passed what they call The Equality Act of 2019, which is breathtaking in its scope. If it survives a vote in the Senate, this legislation will represent one of the most egregious assaults on religious liberty ever foisted on the people of this great nation. It therein imposes a thinly veiled death sentence to the First Amendment of the Constitution, and takes away the protections against tyranny handed down to us by our founding fathers. It was this unyielding commitment to religious liberty that led to the American Revolution in 1776. The pastors and the patriots of that day died to free themselves from British imperialism. Thank God for the men who stood courageously against the most powerful military in the world, because freedom meant more to them than their own lives.
Let me speak candidly and passionately to people of faith throughout these United States of America. We must not remain silent as our historic liberties are gutted by Democrats and their friends in the LGBT movement. They will enslave us if they prevail! We must let our voices be heard, first in the U.S. Senate, and then to the world.
Viva liberty! Viva the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. Viva biblical values and beliefs. And woe to those who would take them from us.”
By Victor Riches, The Goldwater Institute
April 18, 2019
Way too many of today’s college students have an alarmingly deficient understanding of the U.S. Constitution. This is particularly true of the First Amendment. Rather than appreciate the inherent beauty and value of free speech, including speech they find disagreeable, many students think they should be perennially shielded from dissenting opinions. Some go so far as to shout down speakers and even resort to violence in order to avoid being subjected to new ideas, much like a baby being weaned off its bottle. However, all is not lost. A recent incident at the University of Arizona shows that there is still hope in the effort to defend the First Amendment.
Until this week, the storyline has largely been the same. Right-leaning speaker is invited to college campus. Student protestors shout the speaker down, depriving him or her of their freedom of speech. University administrators cower. Student protestors face no consequences. Ideas are not heard, public debate is squelched, and the First Amendment is weakened.
One of the most egregious examples occurred in March 2017 at Vermont’s Middlebury College. Charles Murray, a well-known political scientist, was invited by a conservative student group to speak on campus. Rather than listen to his lecture before forming an opinion, more than 100 students instead opted to shout down Murray, pulled fire alarms to stop his speech and violently pushed Murray and his faculty interviewer, causing her to suffer a concussion. The consequences for this violent silencing of speech? A slap on the wrist for 67 students. At the University of Michigan, a debate on Black Lives Matter was effectively shut down when 100 protesters forced their way into the already-at-capacity room, shouting obscenity-laced tirades. And on the other side of the country, UC Berkeley canceled a talkby political provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos following riots by “150 masked agitators,” giving in to the anti-speech activists.
Kowtowing to the mob and denying free speech is never the appropriate course of action. After all, universities exist in large part to prepare young adults for the “real world” – a world of work, bills, responsibilities and, of course, disagreements. When university administrators and faculty cater to the juvenile desire to not have to hear words with which one disagrees, they are doing a monumental disservice to the students themselves as well as the taxpayers who will soon be employing those very same students.
Fortunately, common sense can still prevail on campus. For example, University of Arizona students recently invited two border-patrol agents to speak at a Career Day presentation about their careers in law enforcement. A group of students who claimed to be offended by the agents’ presence set out to disrupt the event and began yelling low-brow insults such as “murderers,” the “murder patrol,” and an “extension of the KKK.” Several protesters even followed the agents to their cars, continuing the chant of “murder patrol” and “We won’t stop until you get off our campus.” The protestors succeeded in thwarting speech. (Stanley Kurtz details the event at National Review Online here.)
What happened next, however, just might be a turning point in today’s campus free speech crisis, as Kurtz explains. “Instead of rolling over, UA campus police filed criminal misdemeanor charges of ‘interference with the peaceful conduct of an educational institution’ against three of the students, while a third was also charged with “threats and intimidation.” UA President Robert Robbins also took a strong stand for the First Amendment by saying, “Student protest is protected by our support for free speech but disruption is not.”
The U of A followed campus free speech legislation developed by the Goldwater Institute and passed into law last year. Our measure is simple: it ensures free expression at public universities and establishes consequences for those individuals who forcibly inhibit the free speech rights of others. Just like in the real world.
It is this defense of free speech by the U of A that could help turn the tide back in favor of the preservation of First Amendment freedoms on college campuses. But if not, if other universities continue to cave to the whims of anti-free speech zealots, the value of our universities as institutions of higher learning will surely die a slow death. And the constitutional rights we all hold so dear will diminish with them.
Victor Riches is President and CEO of the Goldwater Institute.
Socialist and U.S. Senate candidate Kyrsten Sinema is riding the rails trying to fool the public. She won answer questions on whether or not she would vote to confirm Judge Brett Kavanaugh of the Supreme Court. She’s trying to tiptoe on the fence and fool voters into thinking she’s a reasonable moderate candidate. She is anything but! If voters make the mistake of electing her, she’ll be another Schumer, another Sanders. Radical and far left to the bone; that’s what she is and what she doesn’t want you to know. Beware the bait and switch from this pre-election chameleon!
When Sinema’s been in front of press this week she hasn’t answered the question on whether she’d vote to confirm the judge. When providing statements to the press, she buttons her lips and plays it safe. She’s really playing the voters.
When asked on Tuesday during a Fox 10 Phoenix interview, Republican Martha McSally was asked whether she’d voted to confirm Judge Kavanaugh. She answered the question.
When asked on Wednesday during an interview with the AP, McSally was asked whether she’d vote to confirm Judge Kavanaugh. She answered the question.
When asked on Wednesday during an interview with Mac and Gaydos, McSally was asked whether she’d vote to confirm Judge Kavanaugh. She answered the question.
When asked on Wednesday during an interview with ABC 15, McSally was asked whether she’d vote to confirm Judge Kavanaugh. She answered the question.
Why won’t Kyrsten Sinema be honest with Arizonans and let them know where she stands? Why is she trying to tiptoe through the tulips and deceive the voters? When there’s no way in heck she will ever vote to confirm a constitutionalist judicial candidate? She prefers judicial activists who will circumvent the legislative process and write radical, new laws from the bench — taking away your freedom.
“Kyrsten is running to be the next Senator from Arizona, and confirming judges is one of the greatest responsibilities given to members of the Senate,” said McSally Spokeswoman Torunn Sinclair. “Arizonans deserve to know where Kyrsten Sinema stands on confirming Judge Kavanaugh. Why won’t Kyrsten answer the question? Because she’s a liberal extremist trying to fool Arizona voters into thinking she’s a moderate.”
This post by Fellow of the Minds is must-read and share.