An experimental influence. The post ‘The Name of the Next Song’: Courtney Barnett’s favourite Arthur Russell song first appeared on Far Out Magazine.

As a libertarian‚ I accept that any relatively free society will tolerate certain disreputable business models and inadvisable personal choices. As a general principle‚ adults should largely be free to make their own decisions‚ even if they’re unwise. And prohibitionist policies just send destructive behaviors — drug use‚ prostitution‚ loan sharking — onto the black market. READ MORE from Steven Greenhut: Progressives Want to Destroy Work Ethic With ‘Free Money’ We tolerate such things even though we understand these practices usually harm those who willingly engage in them. Consider it one price we pay for relative freedom. But what should we do when these practices destroy the lives of innocent bystanders? In particular‚ I’ve been thinking about payday lenders — those less-than-ideal lending companies that offer short-term small loans and charge obscene interest rates. It’s not unusual for annualized percentage rates to exceed 400 percent or even 600 percent in some places. No one in their right mind — or who isn’t in desperate financial straits — would consider loans at these terms. It’s legal usury. Lenders collect absurdly high levels of interest‚ taking advantage of the predicament of the borrower. Those who take out these loans can quickly find themselves in a deep pit of unpayable debt. The lenders obviously know they are lending to the highest credit risks‚ so they charge sky-high interest rates and fees to cover the risks. It’s the ugly underbelly of the financial world. Hitting up payday lenders for a few hundred bucks to make rent probably is better than losing one’s apartment. It’s certainly better than seeking the services of the neighborhood loan shark‚ who comes to collect with a crowbar rather than a regulated debt-collection agency. That it serves a need is its best defense‚ although far from any kind of endorsement. California places lending limits and interest caps on payday lenders to protect borrowers. But none of that protects the rest of us. Payday lenders generally don’t run credit through major credit bureaus. Therefore‚ they are susceptible to identity thieves‚ and victims don’t get notice of fraudulent new loan apps because these lenders don’t use the bureaus. Their lax standards leave everyone — even those of us who would never do business with such firms — vulnerable. Last year‚ my health care provider was the target of a massive data breach. I’ve since been victimized by fraudsters who have repeatedly applied for credit cards‚ loans‚ and bank accounts in my name. It’s been stressful‚ unsettling‚ costly‚ and time consuming. Alert emails from financial institutions have ruined many a nice evening. It just doesn’t stop. Identity theft is a sad reality of modern life. The U.S. Department of Justice reports that nearly 24 million Americans have been victims in the past year. That’s not payday lenders’ fault‚ of course‚ but they are the weak link in the financial chain. After I learned of the breach‚ I locked my credit at the three major credit bureaus so that no one could open a loan. But fraudsters are clever. I then started receiving applications for accounts with the online financial services company Chime — the same company recently hit with a $2.5 million fine from the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation for its customer-complaint handling. (Based on my repeated calls to their customer-service department‚ I’d say that fine isn’t nearly enough.) Chime is not a lender‚ but fake accounts can abet money laundering and other financial crimes. Then fraudsters started applying for online payday loans in my name. It started as a trickle. I’ve since been inundated with perhaps 150 emails and numerous calls from cheesy loan companies asking me to complete my loan application. I tracked down a pending fraudulent loan‚ but now it’s Whac-A-Mole. Regularly‚ dozens more come into my inbox. I’m not sure which are actual fraudulent loan paperwork‚ phishing expeditions‚ or low-rent marketing emails. I thought my credit was secure because of my credit freezes‚ but because payday lenders don’t rely on credit apps with the bureaus‚ there’s virtually nothing I can do to stop it. “The easiest way to stand out from the crowd for payday loan companies? Offering fast‚ frictionless lending‚” wrote Bence Jendruszak of SEON Technologies. “As you can imagine‚ this is the perfect opportunity for fraudsters. Faster credit scoring means fewer verifications.” Identity theft victims in these cases are at the mercy of whatever standards these lenders do or don’t have. I’ll no doubt have to spend months trying to clamp down on applications‚ lest I be stuck with payday loans in my name at interest rates that can pile up in a hurry — and the resulting legal battles. There’s no government agency or private credit bureau that can help. I can’t possibly track down all the potential loan apps. Because one sector of the lending industry doesn’t seem to follow responsible practices‚ the identity theft epidemic will continue unabated. Again‚ as a libertarian‚ I wouldn’t ban payday lenders no matter how distasteful I find them. But the California Legislature could‚ say‚ require them to run applicants through a major credit bureau (thus providing an alert if someone applied for a fraudulent loan). This would at least protect the rest of us from becoming collateral damage to this shady business model. Steven Greenhut is Western region director for the R Street Institute. Write to him at sgreenhut@rstreet.org. The post No One Is Safe: Payday Lenders’ Shady Practices Make Identity Theft Easy appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Amid the myriad challenges that confront us in the coming months‚ it’s easy to simply pigeonhole African issues under the heading of: “We’ll get around to it‚ someday‚ maybe.” That‚ as I’ve noted previously in writing about Africa‚ has been our customary way of approaching such issues‚ at least until they become too big and pressing to ignore‚ by which time they also have become much harder to address and less possible to solve. READ MORE from James H. McGee: The Continuing Assault on Nigeria’s Christian Farmers Consider the way in which African problems now present themselves at our southern border. Officials in Tijuana‚ Mexico‚ express themselves as “baffled” at a recent surge in Africans arriving trying to enter the U.S.‚ by some reckoning a fourfold increase in 2023 alone‚ or more. Mexico’s Interior Department recently offered year-end figures showing that from 2022 to 2023‚ the number of African migrants arriving in Mexico increased from 6‚672 to 59‚834. And there is little indication that most of these migrants view Mexico as their final destination. Why this dramatic increase in such a short period of time? Some analysts contend that‚ as the overall profitably of people smuggling increases‚ traffickers have worked hard to make the hitherto daunting passage through the Darién Gap‚ the infamously horrifying jungle region at the Isthmus of Panama. But in many instances Africans are responding to a now widely advertised workaround by paying a premium to fly into Nicaragua‚ thus avoiding the Darién Gap altogether. It’s worth noting‚ in this connection‚ that the Nicaraguan regime is notably unfriendly with the U.S. and little inclined to discourage this‚ instead choosing to profit. How do the migrants afford it? One Senegalese migrant testified that “relatives in New York had paid for his passage.” Considering the massive volume of remittances flowing from migrants already in the U.S. to their home countries‚ one can only suspect that this is quite common. Why the drastic increase in the flow from Africa? The New York Times predictably suggests that it’s the result of those nasty European countries showing more hostility toward African migrants and erecting more effective barriers. Anyone who pays even the slightest interest to Europe’s ongoing inability to deal with the migrant flood will quickly recognize this as the usual progressive misdirection. No one‚ after all‚ should suggest in any way that Biden’s open borders regime is to blame for any fresh aspect of the crisis at our border. A better explanation lies in the aforementioned “pull effect‚” that is‚ once members of a given community become established‚ legally or illegally‚ in the U.S.‚ it becomes more attractive — and affordable — for their friends and relatives to afford the journey. This is‚ unfortunately‚ almost impossible to measure‚ but remittances to Africa may rise into the billions annually. In some respects‚ of course‚ one could count this as a good thing‚ a form of foreign aid paid by migrants rather than out of the U.S. Treasury. But when the money flows to countries beset by serious problems‚ it’s unsurprising that it becomes the means for financing the rising tide of illegal immigration. Sadly‚ the problems appear to be growing rapidly‚ and the solutions that would encourage potential immigrants to stay home appear to be diminishing. Consider the case of Mauritania. Although slavery was officially abolished in Mauritania in 1981‚ in practice it remains widespread (would that Nikole Hannah-Jones might have paid attention to this reality rather than indulging in performative fantasies about the past). Although formally illegal‚ the Arab element that controls the government of Mauritania still treats black Mauritanians as little better than slaves. Black Mauritanians fleeing Mauritania for the U.S. are among those who’ve discovered the route through Nicaragua. Last August‚ I wrote of how the then-recent coup in Niger had comprehensively undermined efforts by the U.S. and France to prevent Niger from returning to its previous role as an entrepot for illegal immigration. As of just this month‚ relations between the U.S. and Niger have gone from bad to worse‚ as the Niger junta has revoked a military accord with the U.S. that not only was designed to help deal with Islamist terrorists in the region but also remained the last foundation for rebuilding cooperation in the area of illegal immigration. Without such cooperation‚ cutting off illegal immigration at the source becomes immeasurably more difficult. The deteriorating situation in the eastern portion of the Democratic Republic of Congo (a name‚ sadly‚ that reeks of irony) also promises to push yet another surge in migration. A long-simmering pattern of violence involving the Congo and Rwanda — and‚ somewhat tangentially‚ a variety of different African “peacekeepers” — now has become open warfare. In a region where the memories of the 1994 genocide of more than 800‚000 Tutsis is still fresh‚ the prospects for total destabilization‚ mass killings‚ and a refugee disaster grow more urgent every day. It’s tempting to just simply dismiss all this amid all the other crises we face‚ but we do so at our own peril. Not only are African problems showing up on our border in ever more dramatically increased numbers‚ but we also must contend with how our enemies exploit African instability to our international disadvantage. We’ve already seen how South Africa has placed itself most firmly in Putin’s camp and developed warmer relations with China and Iran‚ recently lending itself to pro-Hamas maneuvering at the U.N. When South Africa participates in war games with the Russian navy‚ we should take notice. Think losing free passage in the Red Sea to the Houthis is to our disadvantage? Try compounding that if shipping also has to give the Cape of Good Hope a wide berth. And the Chinese navy also chose to participate in these war games. Wherever Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping work in concert‚ we have every reason to be concerned. (RELATED from James H. McGee: We Should Stop Exploiting Africa — And Start Caring) China‚ of course‚ has used its “Belt and Road” initiative to achieve economic penetration in a number of African countries. And‚ despite Putin’s recent public disavowal‚ the takeover by Russian military intelligence of the former Wagner Group’s widespread assets and influence in Africa provides multiple avenues for leverage at a time of retreat by U.S. allies and indifference on the part of the administration in Washington. There are those who contend that our declining position in sub-Saharan Africa is of little moment‚ and that arguments in favor of maintaining our (surpassingly small) military presence in the region are little more than another example of Pentagon empire building. They are wrong — not least because‚ in spite of recent token efforts‚ no element in this administration‚ not the Defense or the State Department‚ certainly not the office of the president‚ has shown the slightest genuinely consistent interest in Africa. We can comfort ourselves with the notion that none of this matters‚ but the evidence suggests it does. It’s already bad enough that our open border has meant access for Chinese and Venezuelan special operators‚ Hamas and Hezbollah terrorists‚ and a lethal flood of fentanyl and the gang-related violence it promotes. Should we then also turn a blind eye to an increasing flow of illegal immigrants for various African conflict regions? One of the signature efforts of the previous administration lay in working with the countries that were the sources of illegal immigration to stem the flow — should we just abdicate these profitable influence operations when it comes to Africa? Should we simply yield to the Russians and the Chinese control of the immense natural resources found across the African continent? The good news is that the Chinese have‚ in a number of cases‚ already overplayed their hand‚ leaving African governments more wary even as they try to navigate away from Chinese clientelism. The Russians have a knack for making themselves unloved — the “Ugly Russian” bears more than a passing kinship to the once notorious “Ugly American” of the early Vietnam era. At this juncture‚ we still have the means to rebuild our influence in Africa‚ and we can do so without massive effort or expense. Many African countries would still prefer working with us‚ and these are relationships we can build on. Moreover‚ many Africans‚ in contemplating the long journey to our border‚ are still daunted by the danger or the expense. Making the journey more unappealing involves finally‚ and decisively‚ implementing measures to physically secure our border. It necessitates making it harder for illegals to remain in this country. It means rooting out the people traffickers‚ directly attacking their operations‚ and making their business unprofitable. Finally‚ it involves working closely with source countries to address the drivers for immigration. In some instances‚ this will simply be a bridge too far — the cultural‚ political‚ and economic drivers will simply be too great‚ such as the legacy of slavery in Mauritania. But helping African initiatives‚ for example‚ to contain the war in the eastern Congo should scarcely be beyond our remit. We can’t do any of this‚ however‚ if we don’t take Africa seriously‚ if we don’t start paying attention. Right now‚ given our blinkered pundit class and our blind existing leadership‚ that simple first step seems like a very tall order indeed. James H. McGee retired in 2018 after nearly four decades as a national security and counter-terrorism professional‚ working primarily in the nuclear security field. Since retiring‚ he’s begun a second career as a thriller writer. His 2022 novel‚ Letter of Reprisal‚ tells the tale of a desperate mission to destroy a Chinese bioweapon facility hidden in the heart of the central African conflict region‚ and a forthcoming sequel carries the Reprisal team from the hills of West Virginia to the forests of Belarus. You can find it on Amazon in both Kindle and paperback editions‚ and on Kindle Unlimited. The post We Ignore Africa at Our Own Peril appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

The slate of “parent’s rights” bills that swept through red-state legislatures over the past three years may have seemed innocuous enough to the average observer; in fact‚ even the most controversial of the bills proved to be broadly popular with the American public. But left-wing writers saw more malign motives lurking under the hood. Jamelle Bouie was one such writer. Her March 2023 New York Times column‚ ominously titled “What the Republican Push for ‘Parents’ Rights’ is Really All About‚” warned readers of the movement’s nefarious intent to undo progress‚ empower reactionaries‚ and “undermine public education‚” among numerous other evils — an argument that was almost indistinguishable from the hundreds of other columns to the same effect. But in between a recitation of the conventional progressive script‚ Bouie briefly happened upon a kernel of truth: “‘Parents’ rights‚’ like ‘states’ rights‚’ is quite particular. It’s not about all parents and all children and all the rights they might have.” This was‚ of course‚ exactly right. But it wasn’t liberal readers who needed to hear it. The fact is that neither the parents’ rights movement nor the conservatives who support it are really devoted to parents’ rights‚ at least as abstract concepts‚ even if they may be personally convinced that they are. In truth‚ they are devoted to certain parental rights in certain contexts and staunchly opposed in many others. This is good and just; only an ideological fanatic would support the unmitigated and absolute exercise of a particular right in every time‚ place and venue. “Circumstances‚” Burke wrote‚ “give in reality to every political principle its distinguishing color and discriminating effect.” (READ MORE from Nate Hochman: The Censorship Lobby Is Worried About … Censorship?) Bouie’s argument comes to mind in light of a recent piece from Brad Polumbo‚ a libertarian writer at the Washington Examiner: “Ron DeSantis just betrayed his promise to champion parental rights.” This betrayal‚ according to Polumbo‚ revolves around the Florida governor’s decision to sign a commonsensical — and‚ in many ways‚ long overdue — bill restricting children’s social media usage: Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-FL) has long positioned himself as a champion of “parents’ rights‚” and that pitch is a huge part of his broad appeal to the public. But the Florida Republican just signed a bill into law that betrays those promises. The new law is supposed to protect children from the alleged harms of social media. It does this in two major ways: by outright prohibiting Floridians under age 14 from having social media accounts and requiring that 14- and 15-year-olds obtain parental permission before they can have a social media account.  Polumbo’s argument‚ in and of itself‚ is largely unremarkable‚ following the same essential logic as every other libertarian argument: “It is not the government’s job to [X]” — without any further consideration of exactly what [X] is‚ or what the government’s intervention would really do‚ or what the material effect of either intervening or not intervening would be on the collective (a word that raises every true-believing libertarian’s hackles) well-being of the nation. But while entirely unconvincing on the merits‚ the attempt to hoist DeSantis with his own “parents’ rights” petard helps to illustrate an important contradiction written into the so-called parental rights movement. On the left‚ similar allegations of conservative hypocrisy are a common affair. Bouie’s column was one such example‚ pointing out that parents’ rights “never seems to involve parents who want schools to be more open and accommodating toward gender-nonconforming students‚” nor “parents who want their students to learn more about race‚ identity and the darker parts of American history‚” nor “parents who want schools to offer a wide library of books and materials to their children.” Analogous arguments have been mounted in regard to GOP bans on youth sex changes: “The rule does seem to be that we are for parental rights when parents make decisions we agree with‚ and when they make decisions we don’t agree with‚ we outlaw them‚” said Georgia state Sen. Elena Parent‚ a Democrat‚ in response to her state’s ban on gender transition surgeries and drugs for children. In this case‚ both Polumbo and his left-wing counterparts have a point. No one‚ least of all conservatives‚ truly believes in absolute “parental rights”; in fact‚ in the abstract‚ many of the initiatives championed by the parents’ movement — i.e.‚ bans on sex-change surgeries — actually restrict parental freedom. What we’re debating‚ in these contexts‚ is not really parents’ rights at all‚ but rather a vision of what society is and should be. The disagreement is over not the scope and reach of parental rights but to what end those rights are used. (READ MORE from Nate Hochman: The Melting Pot Myth Is Destroying America) Conservatives would be well-served to understand and embrace this rather than to retreat into the warm‚ comfortable fog of abstraction. We have a vision of what a good society looks like‚ and we would like our laws to both reflect and encourage that which we think is good — and discourage that which we think is bad. Our vision includes the parental right to object to obscene material in classrooms; it does not include the parental right to mutilate children’s bodies. That’s because we are for good things and against bad things — preserving childhood innocence is good‚ and mutilating children is bad. Too often‚ conservatives are loath to speak the language of morality at all‚ opting instead for amoral frameworks that‚ in turn‚ corrupt their political understanding. This is visible in the facially absurd concept of “cancel culture‚” as I noted in the American Mind back in 2021: [T]he problem with cancel culture is not simply that some opinions are seen as socially unacceptable‚ but that our standards for what those opinions are have shifted radically to the left. Conservatives should be seeking to move those standards rightward‚ not seeking to abolish them altogether in favor of a libertarian “live and let live” morality. The idea that the right can only ever be intellectually consistent in its critiques of cancel culture if it never enforces its own standard of social morality is a gross perversion of the “liberty” that is often invoked as the basis of such arguments. It is true‚ to be sure‚ that there is an inextricable (though by no means absolute or all-encompassing) link between freedom‚ properly understood‚ and virtue — not least in the realm of the family. As the conservative sociologist Robert Nisbet wrote‚ a hostility to the traditional family — and an ensuing intervention against it on behalf of the state — is a consistent feature of totalitarian societies: “The shrewd totalitarian mentality knows well the powers of intimate kinship and religious devotion for keeping alive in a population values and incentives which might well‚ in the future‚ serve as the basis of resistance.” What was “essential” for totalitarian‚ Nisbet argued‚ “was the atomization of the family and of every other type of grouping that intervened between the people as society and the people as a mindless‚ soulless‚ traditionless mass. What the totalitarian must have for the realization of his design is a spiritual and cultural vacuum.” As Nisbet alludes to‚ the “mediating institutions” that sit in the space between the state and the individual — the family‚ the church‚ the community centers‚ parochial schools‚ and so on — are the basis of civic virtue. For those institutions to flourish‚ the political regime must allow them a wide sphere of freedom. In this sense‚ parental freedom is a cornerstone of a good society. But the “freedom” is the means; the “good” is the end. The post DeSantis’ Latest Bill Exposes the Limits of Parents’ Rights appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

I’ve discussed the “hero’s journey of Donald Trump” here in this column multiple times — and it turns out I couldn’t get away from it even if I wanted to. Every day we hear a drumbeat of evidence that the Left — the media-governmental-intelligence Deep State complex that has declared war on the entire world‚ with the free American people its primary enemy — has gone absolutely off the deep end. RELATED from Scott McKay: Behold‚ the Villains: Biden Family Defenders Make the Case for a Hero Villains gonna villain‚ y’all. And these villains are villaining like the clock is running out on them. I’ll get the destruction of the Francis Scott Key Bridge over Baltimore Harbor out of the way first because I expect that some of the ubiquitous Democrat trolls in the comments will want to assume it’s part of this discussion. It isn’t really‚ at least not yet‚ though there are some manifestations of the theme in the reaction to the bridge going down thanks to a rogue container ship crashing directly into one of its uprights early Tuesday. For example‚ there is Joe Biden‚ who could not help himself but to lie about his personal connection to that bridge: At about 1:30‚ a container ship struck the Francis Scott Key Bridge‚ which I’ve been over many‚ many times commuting from the state of Delaware either on a train or by car. I’ve been to Baltimore Harbor many times. And the bridge collapsed‚ sending several people and vehicles into the water — into the river. What marks the lie here? How about the fact that you can’t take a train over that bridge. It has no railroad tracks; it’s just a four-lane roadway. (RELATED: Biden’s Strange Story Collapses in Bridge Collapse Presser) Why is it necessary for this quintessential political troglodyte to force himself onto every news hook possible as though each were somebody’s kid whose hair he just had to dig in and get a snootful of? Biden promised that the federal government would pay to rebuild the bridge. Why would you make that statement before we even know the actual cause of its destruction‚ Dirty Joe? The official word is that the ship hitting that bridge and knocking it down was an accident. Perhaps so‚ but video of the incident appears to show the ship losing power‚ regaining it‚ and then losing power again before smacking directly into that stanchion: We don’t know anywhere near enough about why that ship lost power‚ and‚ until we do‚ nobody ought to say much of anything about responses or consequences. It could be that someone out there owes a lot of money to rebuild that bridge. Like the shipping line or … whoever had a hand in that ship losing power. Why put the world’s largest debtor on the hook for the bridge before any of those ground balls have been run out? It’s a little suspicious. It makes one think of Victoria Nuland‚ another one of our Deep State villains‚ and her little speech about how funding Ukraine makes “asymmetrical warfare” against Russia — meaning Russian economic and industrial infrastructure — more possible. It also makes one think about the Netflix movie Barack and Michelle Obama executive-produced back in December. The first scene in Leave the World Behind that indicates something has gone horribly wrong has an oil tanker bizarrely go to ground directly on a beach in the Hamptons. At least in the movie the ship didn’t knock down a major bridge and close one of America’s biggest ports indefinitely. (RELATED from Scott McKay: Leave the Obamas Behind‚ Please) There are suspicious things‚ and then there are terrible things. Speaking of which‚ let’s get this one out of the way as well‚ because I just … can’t. I didn’t think it was possible to be more awful than Michelle Obama‚ but then Jill Biden is the very definition of an AWFL‚ isn’t she?: Jill Biden equates banning gay porn in schools to Nazi Germany‚ claiming Berlin was the center of LGBTQ culture in Europe. pic.twitter.com/fACn9IbkBS — MRCTV (@mrctv) March 26‚ 2024 Another terrible thing is this: President Joe Biden is currently considering granting amnesty to illegal migrants in a bid to act on the worsening immigration crisis‚ according to Politico. Biden and his administration are weighing several ideas to take a tougher stance on the southern border crisis and illegal immigration amid criticisms he has thus far failed to act on either. The administration could start dolling out green cards to illegal immigrants who have long stayed inside the United States‚ thereby giving them amnesty to stay in the country‚ three people familiar with the planning told Politico. The plan would grant migrants who have been in the country for more than 10 years access to the cancellation of removal program provided that they have relatives who would suffer if they were deported‚ according to Politico. Migrants could then receive a green card — a permanent residency grant — if they meet the cancellation of removal requirements and an immigration judge rules in their favor. Ace of Spades had the correct take on this when he noted the blistering bad faith inherent in these unilateral amnesties: Everytime Biden or Democrats talk about “fixing the border‚” they immediately talk about simply making it legal to illegally cross the border. There. It’s fixed. They’re not illegals anymore. And they act as if they have responded to our demands in good faith‚ and offered us a real solution which we are just rejecting out of partisan spite. But the contempt isn’t just for regular Americans‚ though we are undoubtedly the Great Satan to the Deep State mullahs. Just like the other cheerleaders for the apocalypse that today’s Left can’t get enough of‚ Israel is the Little Satan. Yesterday here at The American Spectator‚ Shmuel Klatzkin covered the latest example of this — Biden’s unsuccessful (thanks to the clearer heads from Russia and China) U.N. security resolution seeking a demand for a ceasefire in Gaza: Biden’s gang — the Obamaites who run the government — really would like to keep Israel unable to defend itself and unable to bring about a real peace‚ as the resolute Israel–America alliance achieved with the Abraham Accords. The Obama infatuation with the mullahs of Iran would be over. Can’t happen. We really love people who hate America and Israel and plot for their utter destruction. Perhaps they revere them as the prophets of wokeism? In their policy‚ Israel should not defeat the perpetrators of the mass rape and murder — even though Hamas is the criminal party for using its citizens as shields‚ and for causing starvation by taking the food that has been shipped into Gaza for itself and then getting rich by selling what it doesn’t eat on the black market to desperate Gazans. And as the figurehead‚ Biden spouts out before the world nearly every lie issued by the Hamas mass rapists‚ from delusional casualty figures to accusations of Israel’s complicity in starving the population that Hamas wants dead as part of its war strategy. The Bidenites are trying to make sure that that strategy is successful. It’s mind-boggling to think that Joe Biden and his handlers are trying to use the U.N. to force Israel into surrendering when Hamas is still holding American hostages. One would think those Americans‚ or their corpses‚ would have to be turned over before there could be any discussion of our involvement in creating peace talks. And why are we demanding ceasefires in Gaza but not in Ukraine? Interesting question‚ that. Oh‚ but there is more. For example‚ this: Two groups are running a “misleading‚ unsolicited mass mailing of pre-filled voter registration forms targeting Alabama mailboxes‚” according to an alert from Alabama Secretary of State Wes Allen. In his warning‚ Allen says his office has “officially discouraged” the mailer‚ which is in no way affiliated with the state. Perhaps it’s no surprise that left-wing groups founded by an old Clinton family friend are behind the effort. According to the secretary of state’s office‚ the Voter Participation Center and Center for Voter Information have said they intend at least two rounds of mass mailings. “On two occasions‚ this Office was contacted on behalf of Voter Participation Center and Center for Voter Information regarding a mailer they planned to send to Alabama citizens‚” Allen said in the alert. “In response‚ I strongly discouraged the group’s plan to mass mail our citizens.” According to activist tracker InfluenceWatch‚ the Voter Participation Center (VPC) was launched in 2003 as Women’s Voices Women Vote‚ before expanding its mission and changing its name nearly a decade later. Why Alabama? Democrats aren’t winning any elections there. It’s because they can‚ that’s why. And if this villainy has to be defended in Alabama‚ that fight eats up resources that would be better used in swing states. Back to Team Biden‚ because it still represents the most concentrated villainy on the planet. Remember how Dirty Joe likes to say it’s Republicans who want to “defund the police” because there are calls‚ and rightly so‚ to break up the corrupt FBI? Here’s how much the Biden gang likes cops: Karine Jean-Pierre reads a prepared statement from her binder when asked if Biden has plans to "acknowledge" fallen NYPD Officer Jonathan Diller during Biden's visit to NYC. She won't even say the fallen officer's name. pic.twitter.com/qIMOTNDqVU — RNC Research (@RNCResearch) March 27‚ 2024 Oh‚ wait — we’re not done with presidential spokeslesbian Karine Jean-Pierre: LISTEN: KJP hangs up on a Charlotte‚ North Carolina radio host after being asked if Joe Biden has dementia and about high gas prices and high grocery prices. pic.twitter.com/eu69qAQhVH — Conservative War Machine (@WarMachineRR) March 26‚ 2024 But perhaps we are done cataloguing the villainy of the Left for one day. There is only so much outrage one can stand‚ after all. And they know this. They count on it. They push more aggressively on more fronts than any political entity since the Chinese Cultural Revolution. That’s why it’s necessary to turn them out of power as thoroughly as possible this fall‚ even if the Republicans are woefully inadequate to the task of rolling back this black cloud of villainy covering the fruited plain. The post The Ever-Continuous Villaining of Joe Biden and His Minions appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.